What Adam Curry is reading

Chinese pour into Cyprus
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: the tap
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 12:44
  MORE than 1,000 Chinese investors have bought houses in Cyprus in the past year, taking advantage of a visa deal that grants the right to roam the European Union.The struggling island nation has overhauled its visa process for wealthy immigrants in an attempt to encourage investment, pledging to turn around applications in two to three months.Anyone buying a house worth '‚¬300,000 (£260,000) or more can gain a ''Permanent Residency Permit'' in Cyprus if they can prove they have no criminal record and deposit '‚¬30,000 for a minimum of three years in a local bank.About 80% of the Chinese immigrants have clustered in Paphos, a tourist town on the southwest coast, where last month China Glory National Investment, based in Hong Kong, committed itself to investing '‚¬290m in a '‚¬1.5bn golf resort. The business has set up offices in Nicosia, the capital.
Edward Snowden granted temporary asylum in Russia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: DEBKAFile
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 12:44
  Edward Snowden granted temporary asylum in RussiaDEBKAfileAugust 1, 2013, 3:08 PM (GMT+02:00)
  The US whistleblower Edward Snowden, who is accused of exposing US and British eavesdropping activities, has quit the transit area of Moscow airport after being holed up there for weeks. He entered the city after receiving Russian documents granting him one year's temporary asylum with ''fugitive status'' - and then dropped out of sight.
Living in America will drive you insane '-- literally - Salon.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 12:42
  In ''The Epidemic of Mental Illness: Why?'' (New York Review of Books, 2011), Marcia Angell, former editor-in-chief of the New England Journal of Medicine, discusses over-diagnosis of psychiatric disorders, pathologizing of normal behaviors, Big Pharma corruption of psychiatry, and the adverse effects of psychiatric medications. While diagnostic expansionism and Big Pharma certainly deserve a large share of the blame for this epidemic, there is another reason.
  A June 2013 Gallup poll revealed that 70% of Americans hate their jobs or have ''checked out'' of them. Life may or may not suck any more than it did a generation ago, but our belief in ''progress'' has increased expectations that life should be more satisfying, resulting in mass disappointment. For many of us, society has become increasingly alienating, isolating and insane, and earning a buck means more degrees, compliance, ass-kissing, shit-eating, and inauthenticity. So, we want to rebel. However, many of us feel hopeless about the possibility of either our own escape from societal oppression or that political activism can create societal change. So, many of us, especially young Americans, rebel by what is commonly called mental illness.
  While historically some Americans have consciously faked mental illness to rebel from oppressive societal demands (e.g., a young Malcolm X acted crazy to successfully avoid military service), today, the vast majority of Americans who are diagnosed and treated for mental illness are in no way proud malingerers in the fashion of Malcolm X. Many of us, sadly, are ashamed of our inefficiency and nonproductivity and desperately try to fit in. However, try as we might to pay attention, adapt, adjust, and comply with our alienating jobs, boring schools, and sterile society, our humanity gets in the way, and we become anxious, depressed and dysfunctional.
  Severe, disabling mental illness has dramatically increased in the Untied States. Marcia Angell, in her 2011 New York Review of Bookspiece, summarizes: ''The tally of those who are so disabled by mental disorders that they qualify for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) increased nearly two and a half times between 1987 and 2007'--from 1 in 184 Americans to 1 in 76. For children, the rise is even more startling'--a thirty-five-fold increase in the same two decades.''
  Angell also reports that a large survey of adults conducted between 2001 and 2003 sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health found that at some point in their lives, 46% of Americans met the criteria established by the American Psychiatric Association for at least one mental illness.
  In 1998, Martin Seligman, then president of the American Psychological Association, spoke to the National Press Club about an American depression epidemic: ''We discovered two astonishing things about the rate of depression across the century. The first was there is now between ten and twenty times as much of it as there was fifty years ago. And the second is that it has become a young person's problem. When I first started working in depression thirty years ago. . . the average age of which the first onset of depression occurred was 29.5. . . .Now the average age is between 14 and 15.''
  In 2011, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported that antidepressant use in the United States has increased nearly 400% in the last two decades, making antidepressants the most frequently used class of medications by Americans ages 18-44 years. By 2008, 23% of women ages 40''59 years were taking antidepressants.
  The CDC, on May 3, 2013, reported that the suicide rate among Americans ages 35''64 years increased 28.4% between 1999 and 2010 (from 13.7 suicides per 100,000 population in 1999 to 17.6 per 100,000 in 2010).
  The New York Times reported in 2007 that the number of American children and adolescents treated for bipolar disorder had increased 40-fold between 1994 and 2003. In May 2013, CDC reported in ''Mental Health Surveillance Among Children'--United States, 2005''2011,'' the following: ''A total of 13%''20% of children living in the United States experience a mental disorder in a given year, and surveillance during 1994''2011 has shown the prevalence of these conditions to be increasing.''
  Over-Diagnosis, Pathologizing the Normal and Psychiatric Drug Adverse Effects
  Even within mainstream psychiatry, few continue to argue that the increase in mental illness is due to previous under-diagnosis of mental disorders. The most common explanations for the mental illness epidemic include recent over-diagnosis of psychiatric disorders, diagnoses expansionism, and psychiatry's pathologizing normal behavior.
  The first DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), psychiatry's diagnostic bible, was published by the American Psychiatric Association in 1952 and listed 106 disorders (initially called ''reactions''). DSM-2 was published in 1968, and the number of disorders increased to 182. DSM-3 was published in 1980, and though homosexuality was dropped from it, diagnoses were expanded to 265, with several child disorders added that would soon become popular, including oppositional defiant disorder (ODD). DSM-4, published in 1994, contained 365 diagnoses.
  DSM-5 was published in May, 2013. The journal PLOS Medicine reported in 2012, ''69% of the DSM-5 task force members report having ties to the pharmaceutical industry.'' DSM-5 did not add as many new diagnoses as had previous revisions. However, DSM-5 has been criticized even by some mainstream psychiatrists such as Allen Frances, the former chair of the DSM-4 taskforce, for creating more mental patients by making it easier to qualify for a mental illness, especially for depression. (See Frances' ''Last Plea To DSM-5: Save Grief From the Drug Companies.'')
  In the last two decades, there have been a slew of books written by journalists and mental health professionals about the lack of science behind the DSM, the over-diagnosis of psychiatric disorders, and the pathologizing of normal behaviors. A sample of these books includes: Paula Caplan's They Say You're Crazy (1995), Herb Kutchins and Stuart Kirk's Making Us Crazy (1997), Allan Horwitz and Jerome Wakefield's The Loss of Sadness: How Psychiatry Transformed Normal Sorrow into Depressive Disorder (2007), Christopher Lane's Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness (2008), Stuart Kirk, Tomi Gomory, and David Cohen's Mad Science: Psychiatric Coercion, Diagnosis, and Drugs (2013), Gary Greenberg's The Book of Woe: The DSM and the Unmaking of Psychiatry (2013), and Allen Frances' Saving Normal (2013).
  Even more remarkable than former chair of the DSM-4 taskforce, Allen Frances, jumping on the DSM-trashing bandwagon has been the harsh critique of DSM-5 by Thomas Insel, director of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). Insel recently announced that the DSM's diagnostic categories lack validity, and that ''NIMH will be re-orienting its research away from DSM categories.'' And psychiatrist Robert Spitzer, former chair of the DSM-3 task force, wrote the foreword to Horwitz and Wakefield's The Loss of Sadness and is now critical of DSM's inattention to context in which the symptoms occur which, he points out, can medicalize normal experiences.
  So, in just two decades, pointing out the pseudoscience of the DSM has gone from being an ''extremist slur of radical anti-psychiatrists'' to a mainstream proposition from the former chairs of both the DSM-3 and DSM-4 taskforces and the director of NIMH.
  Yet another explanation for the epidemic may also be evolving from radical to mainstream, thanks primarily to the efforts of investigative journalist Robert Whitaker and his book Anatomy of An Epidemic (2010). Whitaker argues that the adverse effects of psychiatric medications are the primary cause of the epidemic. He reports that these drugs, for many patients, cause episodic and moderate emotional and behavioral problems to become severe, chronic and disabling ones.
  Examining the scientific literature that now extends over 50 years, Whitaker discovered that while some psychiatric medications for some people may be effective over the short term, these drugs increase the likelihood that a person will become chronically ill over the long term. Whitaker reports, ''The scientific literature shows that many patients treated for a milder problem will worsen in response to a drug'--say have a manic episode after taking an antidepressant'--and that can lead to a new and more severe diagnosis like bipolar disorder.''
  With respect to the dramatic increase of pediatric bipolar disorder, Whitaker points out that, ''Once psychiatrists started putting 'hyperactive' children on Ritalin, they started to see prepubertal children with manic symptoms. Same thing happened when psychiatrists started prescribing antidepressants to children and teenagers. A significant percentage had manic or hypomanic reactions to the antidepressants.'' And then these children and teenagers are put on heavier duty drugs, including drug cocktails, often do not respond favorably to treatment and deteriorate. And that, for Whitaker, is a major reason for the 35-fold increase between 1987 and 2007 of children classified as being disabled by mental disorders. (See my 2010 interview with him, ''Are Prozac and Other Psychiatric Drugs Causing the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America?'')
  Whitaker's explanation for the epidemic has now, even within mainstream psychiatric institutions, entered into the debate; for example, Whitaker was invited by the National Alliance for the Mentally Ill (NAMI) to speak at their 2013 annual convention that took place last June While Whitaker concludes that psychiatry's drug-based paradigm of care is the primary cause of the epidemic, he does not rule out the possibility that various cultural factors may also be contributing to the increase in the number of mentally ill.
  Mental Illness as Rebellion Against Society
  ''The most deadly criticism one could make of modern civilization is that apart from its man-made crises and catastrophes, is not humanly interesting. . . . In the end, such a civilization can produce only a mass man: incapable of spontaneous, self-directed activities: at best patient, docile, disciplined to monotonous work to an almost pathetic degree. . . . Ultimately such a society produces only two groups of men: the conditioners and the conditioned, the active and passive barbarians.'' '--Lewis Mumford, 1951
  Once it was routine for many respected social critics such as Lewis Mumford and Erich Fromm to express concern about the impact of modern civilization on our mental health. But today the idea that the mental illness epidemic is also being caused by a peculiar rebellion against a dehumanizing society has been, for the most part, removed from the mainstream map. When a societal problem grows to become all encompassing, we often no longer even notice it.
  We are today disengaged from our jobs and our schooling. Young people are pressured to accrue increasingly large student-loan debt so as to acquire the credentials to get a job, often one which they will have little enthusiasm about. And increasing numbers of us are completely socially isolated, having nobody who cares about us.
  Returning to that June 2013 Gallup survey, ''The State of the American Workplace: Employee Engagement,'' only 30% of workers ''were engaged, or involved in, enthusiastic about, and committed to their workplace.'' In contrast to this ''actively engaged group,'' 50% were ''not engaged,'' simply going through the motions to get a paycheck, while 20% were classified as ''actively disengaged,'' hating going to work and putting energy into undermining their workplace. Those with higher education levels reported more discontent with their workplace.
  How engaged are we with our schooling? Another Gallup poll ''The School Cliff: Student Engagement Drops With Each School Year'' (released in January 2013), reported that the longer students stay in school, the less engaged they become. The poll surveyed nearly 500,000 students in 37 states in 2012, and found nearly 80% of elementary students reported being engaged with school, but by high school, only 40% reported being engaged. As the pollsters point out, ''If we were doing right by our students and our future, these numbers would be the absolute opposite. For each year a student progresses in school, they should be more engaged, not less.''
  Life clearly sucks more than it did a generation ago when it comes to student loan debt. According to American Student Assistance's ''Student Debt Loan Statistics,'' approximately 37 million Americans have student loan debt. The majority of borrowers still paying back their loans are in their 30s or older. Approximately two-thirds of students graduate college with some education debt. Nearly 30% of college students who take out loans drop out of school, and students who drop out of college before earning a degree struggle most with student loans. As of October 2012, the average amount of student loan debt for the Class of 2011 was $26,600, a 5% increase from 2010. Only about 37% of federal student-loan borrowers between 2004 and 2009 managed to make timely payments without postponing payments or becoming delinquent.
  In addition to the pain of jobs, school, and debt, there is increasingly more pain of social isolation. A major study reported in the American Sociological Review in 2006, ''Social Isolation in America: Changes in Core Discussion Networks Over Two Decades,'' examined Americans' core network of confidants (those people in our lives we consider close enough to trust with personal information and whom we rely on as a sounding board). Authors reported that in 1985, 10% of Americans said that they had no confidants in their lives; but by 2004, 25% of Americans stated they had no confidants in their lives. This study confirmed the continuation of trends that came to public attention in sociologist Robert Putnam's 2000 book Bowling Alone.
  Underlying many of psychiatry's nearly 400 diagnoses is the experience of helplessness, hopelessness, passivity, boredom, fear, isolation, and dehumanization'--culminating in a loss of autonomy and community-connectedness. Do our societal institutions promote:
  Enthusiasm'--or passivity?Respectful personal relationships'--or manipulative impersonal ones?Community, trust, and confidence'--or isolation, fear and paranoia?Empowerment'--or helplessness?Autonomy (self-direction)'--or heteronomy (institutional-direction)?Participatory democracy'--or authoritarian hierarchies?Diversity and stimulation'--or homogeneity and boredom?Research (that I documented in Commonsense Rebellion) shows that those labeled with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) do worst in environments that are boring, repetitive, and externally controlled; and that ADHD-labeled children are indistinguishable from ''normals'' when they have chosen their learning activities and are interested in them. Thus, the standard classroom could not be more imperfectly designed to meet the learning needs of young people who are labeled with ADHD.
  As I discussed last year in AlterNet in ''Would We Have Drugged Up Einstein? How Anti-Authoritarianism Is Deemed a Mental Health Problem,'' there is a fundamental bias in mental health professionals for interpreting inattention and noncompliance as a mental disorder. Those with extended schooling have lived for many years in a world where all pay attention to much that is unstimulating. In this world, one routinely complies with the demands of authorities. Thus for many M.D.s and Ph.D.s, people who rebel against this attentional and behavioral compliance appear to be from another world'--a diagnosable one.
  The reality is that with enough helplessness, hopelessness, passivity, boredom, fear, isolation, and dehumanization, we rebel and refuse to comply. Some of us rebel by becoming inattentive. Others become aggressive. In large numbers we eat, drink and gamble too much. Still others become addicted to drugs, illicit and prescription. Millions work slavishly at dissatisfying jobs, become depressed and passive aggressive, while no small number of us can't cut it and become homeless and appear crazy. Feeling misunderstood and uncared about, millions of us ultimately rebel against societal demands, however, given our wherewithal, our rebellions are often passive and disorganized, and routinely futile and self-destructive.
  When we have hope, energy and friends, we can choose to rebel against societal oppression with, for example, a wildcat strike or a back-to-the-land commune. But when we lack hope, energy and friends, we routinely rebel without consciousness of rebellion and in a manner in which we today commonly call mental illness.
  For some Americans, no doubt, the conscious goal is to get classified as mentally disabled so as to receive disability payments (averaging $700 to 1,400 per month). But isn't that too a withdrawal of cooperation with society and a rebellion of sorts, based on the judgment that this is the best paying and least miserable financial option?
SEEK II - Secure Electronic Enrollment Kit, Cross Match Technologies
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 11:23
  AdvantagesAutomatic capture and formatting of flat and rolled fingerprints, iris and facial imagesQWERTY keyboard with tactile keys and backlightingCaptured data that conforms to the EBTS standardsEnrollment of biometric data into AFIS databases and comparison against watch listsEmbedded 3G communications support and built-in wireless networking capability that allows field personnel to access remote databases, such as ABISEasy-to-use portable option for field-based identity verificationAvailable with optional latent image capture
Hackers Expose How Connected Toilets, Heaters and Lightbulbs Are at Risk
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 11:22
  ' Invalid email address.
  ' You can't enter more than 20 emails.
  ' Seperate multiple addresses with Commas.
  ' Must enter an email address.
  ' You must enter the verification code below to send.
  ' Invalid entry: Please type the verification code again.
VIDEO-End Your Diabesity in 6 weeks - Doctor OZ TV Show - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:31
VIDEO-Catherine Austin Fitts-The Big Question is How Violent will Things Get? - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 09:06
XKeyscore and NSA surveillance leaks '' expert reaction
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Conversation
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:43
  What are the implications of the latest leaks by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden? Pigstick1XKeyscore is an online surveillance tool run by America's National Security Agency (NSA) that allows analysts to search contents of chats, emails and browsing histories without warrants, according to leaked slides from CIA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
  The slides, published in The Guardian today, seem to support claims XKeyscore can search ''nearly everything a typical user does on the internet'' and in one 30-day period in 2012, collected and stored nearly 42 billion records.
  The NSA slides declare some 300 terrorists were caught using XKeystroke technology by 2008.
  Our experts respond below.
  Philip Branch, Senior Lecturer in Telecommunications at Swinburne University of Technology
  The program appears to be a datamining tool especially designed for intelligence gathering. In the same way as businesses are getting into ''big data'' in order to understand their customers, consumer trends and the like, the US intelligence community appear to have been doing much the same thing.
  We know that they see a big chunk of the world's internet traffic. They have access points around the world to access other forms of electronic communication.
  This program seems to be a system for scanning for markers that may identify potential terrorists. If, as they claim, it has identified 300 or more potential terrorists it would seem to have been a success.
  The way it appears to work is similar to other datamining techniques. It looks at content, probably for keywords, and at metadata such as source and destination addresses, or phone numbers.
  To identify potential threats it looks for anomalies. Examples given are language unusual for that region, looking for dubious material on the internet, and, very intriguingly, the use of encryption.
  It appears that they have taken to heart the saying that ''if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about'' and reinterpreted it as ''if you have something to hide, perhaps you do have something we should worry about''.
  One of the very interesting things is that they can identify individual devices. This is perhaps not as dramatic as might appear at first. It's well known that financial institutions have been tracking individuals for a long time. Even though IP addresses change, there is enough other information to identify most machines.
  If you are using a browser, there's a lot of information about how it is configured. Often the configuration is unusual enough to identify uniquely the individual. The browser you use, the plug-ins, the cookies that are set, are all able to identify a user, in the sense that it is the same user we saw before.
  So, again, the latest revelations are interesting but not necessarily unexpected. We know businesses have been using these techniques for some time. It would be remarkable if the intelligence agencies weren't.
  Sean Rintel, Lecturer in Strategic Communication at University of Queensland and board member of Electronic Frontiers Australia
  It is clearer now than ever that, since we can't retrospectively change these surveillance technologies, and indeed there may be valid uses of them, citizens of all countries need to stand together to demand three new kinds of digital rights.
  We must have rights to personal data control. Knowing what, when, and how much of our personal data has been collected, and which agencies have access it to it.
  We must have rights to transparent security institution oversight. Parliamentary and legal procedures must be in place to ensure that all searches of such data require strictly evidenced belief that a search is necessary, that searches are narrowly targeted, and that citizens have methods to access the details of such proceedings.
  We must have rights to meaningful checks and responses to abuses. If there is any kind of problem with the use or integrity of data in such systems (such as overreach of searches, searches for non-security/law-enforcement purposes, data breaches) then citizens must have the right to meaningful civil and legal recourse. News website Mashable is currently running a campaign to crowdsource a digital bill of rights.
  Australians should be involved in that because some of our traffic relies on US services and, as such, US laws. Australians should also engage with their political parties and civil society groups, such as Electronic Frontiers Australia (of which I am a board member) and its Citizens Not Suspects campaign.
  With an election looming, now is the time for meaningful action. Whether or not one trusts our government or others, trusts security services/law enforcement or not, or believes that it is or is not reasonable to trade privacy for security, new digital rights to choice, control, and transparency will ensure our civil security.
  John Lenarcic, Lecturer in Business IT and Logistics at RMIT University
  The genie may already be out of the bottle with respect to privacy. Way back in 1999, the then-CEO of Sun Microsystems Scott McNealy infamously proclaimed:
  You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it.
  The social media revolution, while diminishing privacy in some respect to users, made it the salient issue of our era. And the NSA deployment of systems such as XKeyscore has once again brought the security versus privacy debate to the fore.
  But security and privacy are needs that co-exist at times in an inverse relationship to each other. If eavesdropping on telecommunications leads to terrorists being nabbed then what's the hassle, according to the NSA?
  This is a NSA-brand of utilitarianism whereby the ends justifies the means. The strict (or even not so rigid) Kantians among us, though, may gasp in horror at the antics of the NSA if we believe in protecting privacy.
  Indeed, this is a moral dilemma that is rapidly unfurling before our very eyes. As they say in the classics, life wasn't meant to be easy '...
  James Hamlyn-Harris, Lecturer in Information & Communication Technologies at Swinburne University of Technology
  We can infer from the name and the terminology used in the slides that XKeyscore is a search engine which uses search terms and filters to narrow the search field.
  The more information you give it, the fewer (and more relevant) hits will be returned.
  Rather than returning a specific result, it will return a ranked list of results (ranked by ''keyscore'') depending on how many search terms and filters matched each searched entry.
  This means that searching for an email address (mostly unique) will return a very relevant list of entries, but searching a set of vague search terms or filters (such as traffic on this domain, between these dates, containing these words send by this user agent, or browser, with these plug-ins) will return a big list of hits ranked by relevance.
  A human will look at the results and make judgements about which results are useful or actionable.
  Further reading:For The Conversation's coverage on the NSA leaks and their aftermath, click here.
  Sign in to Favourite2 CommentsTagsSurveillance, Cyber culture, NSA leaks
  Related articles 15 July 2013 US 'choke-points' for Australian telecoms data are no surprise 7 July 2013 Why do so many American 'journalists' appear to hate actual journalism? 5 July 2013 Patriot games: the odds are stacked against whistleblower Snowden 2 July 2013 Ten ways you can avoid being caught in the PRISM net 26 June 2013 Edward Snowden's flight shows the limits of US power
Apple power adapter security flaw to be patched in iOS 7
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: CNET News
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:41
  Security hole in current versions of the mobile operating system could allow malware to be uploaded to iOS devices via a malicious USB charger.
  A security flaw in Apple's iOS 6 that could theoretically allow malware to be uploaded to iOS devices via a malicious power adapter will be patched in the next version of Apple's mobile operating system, Apple said Wednesday.
  The hack, dubbed Mactrans by the three researchers from the Georgia Institute of Technology who discovered the flaw, was demonstrated Wednesday at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas. The trio announced in June that they had developed a proof-of-concept that showed how a malicious iPhone charger lets them hack into the mobile device running the latest version of Apple's iOS in less than one minute -- no jailbreaking required.
  An Apple representative told Reuters today that the vulnerability had been repaired in the latest iOS 7 beta, which is already in developers' hands.
  "We would like to thank the researchers for their valuable input," Apple spokesman Tom Neumayr said.
  The researchers' custom-built charger, which was built in about a week for about $45, contains a tiny Linux-based computer programmed to attack iOS devices, according to Wednesday's presentation by Billy Lau, the researcher who constructed the device. Malware uploaded to iOS devices could give access to passwords and sensitive financial information as well as communications and the device's location, Lau said.
  "It can become a spying tool," Lau said.
  Lau said the vulnerability doesn't affect Android devices because that operating system warns users when their device is plugged into a computer.
Hillary Clinton Receives the American Patriot Award'...No, Really
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Activist Post
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:40
  Kimberly PaxtonActivist PostIn a move that could only be topped in irony by President Barack ''Drone-the-Children'' Obama's Nobel Peace Prize, Hillary Rodham Clinton has been honored with the American Patriot Award from the National Defense University Foundation. Lest you think that this is a joke, please check your calendars and note that the date is NOT April 1. This is for real.
  Clinton was chosen . . . take a deep breath . . . for her defense of our nation.
  The former Secretary of State, who resigned in a flurry of scandal after her alleged involvement in the massacre at the American Embassy in Benghazi, managed to dodge her appearance at a Congressional hearing to answer for her part in the death of four Americans by a rather conveniently timed illness, immediately followed by a fall that resulted in a concussion.
  Warning: if you have a weak stomach, reader discretion is advised. Clinton was lauded in a press release:
  As First Lady, Senator, and Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton tirelessly worked to support and defend our nation and our allies around the world, said Al Zimmerman, chairman of the NDU Foundation Board of Directors, in the release.
  Secretary Clinton will be the first woman to receive this award and in doing so joins an outstanding group of Americans who have been honored with the American Patriot Award, our very highest recognition, Zimmerman continued in the release. By honoring Secretary Clinton's exemplary career in public service the NDU Foundation celebrates not only the American spirit of patriotism, but the leadership qualities necessary to preserve and protect that spirit. (source)
  Just so we are on the same page, this is the same Hillary Clinton who'...'...asked the grieving families of the Benghazi victims ''What difference does it make?'' why they were killed
  '...commented ''we think it's worth it'' when asked about the half million children who died in response to the sanctions against Iran
  '...was investigated for abusing off-shore tax shelters to the tune of millions of dollars
  '...recommended that Europeans ''never waste a good crisis'' in response to the economic collapse there
  '...is a member of the one-world government organizations such as the Trilateral Group, the Bilderberg Group, and the Council on Foreign Relations
  The list could go on and on.
  Of course, there is an old saying that ''You are judged by the company you keep.'' If you consider previous stellar recipients of this American Patriot Award, you'll see that the character of former recipients is just as loathsome as Clinton's. Most would not consider it an honor to be added to a group whose members include:
  George H.W. BushHenry KissingerDavid PatraeusJohn McCain Caspar WeinbergerJoe LiebermanColin PowellRobert M. GatesIn this case, it looks like Clinton is definitely the right person for this dubious award.Kimberly Paxton, a staff writer for the Daily Sheeple, where this article first appeared, is based out of upstate New York.
  BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW
'Jan heeft geen kans gehad'
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Telegraaf.nl - prive
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:39
  click here to continue to articlecliquez ici pour lire l'articleweiter zum Artikelclicca qui per visualizzare l'articoloweiter zum Artikelir a la noticiaklik hier om door te gaan naar het artikelYazÄ±ya devam etmek i§in tÄ±klayÄ±n>>ÐŸÐµÑÐµÐ¹Ñ‚Ð¸ Ðº ÑÑ‚Ð°Ñ‚ÑŒÐµ>>ç>>§ç>>­é…è¯>>æ–‡ç ¼Œè¯·ç‚¹å‡>>èé‡ŒTovbb a cikkre
FDA Issues ''Black Box'' Warning on Drug Linked to Mass Killings
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dprogram.net
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:34
  July 31st, 2013
  (DailySheeple) '' The FDA has issued a public safety announcement for mefloquine, an anti-malarial drug also known by the band name Lariam. The drug will now carry a ''black box'' warning '' the most serious warning the FDA issues.
  Mefloquine has been used by U.S. troops for years, and is also available to civilians traveling to ''hot spots''. It was developed by the US Army and became available on the commercial market in 1989. It is one of the most commonly prescribed anti-malarial drugs in the U.S., with about 119,000 prescriptions written in the first half of 2013.
  The FDA warning about the mefloquine was issued on July 29, 2013 in a public safety announcement, which states:
  FDA is advising the public about strengthened and updated warnings regarding neurologic and psychiatric side effects associated with the antimalarial drug mefloquine hydrochloride. A boxed warning, the most serious kind of warning about these potential problems, has been added to the drug label.
  FDA has revised the patient Medication Guide dispensed with each prescription and wallet card to include this information and the possibility that the neurologic side effects may persist or become permanent. The neurologic side effects can include dizziness, loss of balance, or ringing in the ears. The psychiatric side effects can include feeling anxious, mistrustful, depressed, or having hallucinations.
  Neurologic side effects can occur at any time during drug use, and can last for months to years after the drug is stopped or can be permanent.
  Mefloquine has been implicated in cases of violence among military personnel, with the most notable case being that of Staff Sergeant Robert Bales, who pleaded guilty in June to killing 16 Afghan citizens in 2012. His sentencing trial begins in August 2013.
  The possibility that Sgt. Bales was given mefloquine while in Afghanistan and Iraq was raised earlier this month when the FDA released an adverse event notification filed by an anonymous pharmacist in 2012. The notification states that an unnamed soldier who took the drug murdered 17 Afghan citizens '' the same number included in Bales' initial charging documents.
  The adverse event notification report was obtained by Military Times on July 5 via the Freedom of Information Act. It states:
  It was reported that this patient was administered mefloquine in direct contradiction to US military rules that mefloquine should not be given to soldiers who had suffered traumatic brain injury due to its propensity to cross blood-brain barriers inciting psychotic, homicidal, or suicidal behavior.
  An FDA adverse event report means that a patient developed symptoms while using a drug, but does not necessarily mean the medication caused any specific health problems. However, the medically confirmed report does suggest that either the source of the notification was someone who was directly involved with the patient's medical care or that the drug manufacturer received documentation verifying the information, according to Dr. Remington Nevin, a leading mefloquine researcher who has also filed a FOIA request for the information.
  Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple, where this article first appeared. Her goal is to help people to ''Wake the Flock Up!''
  Tags: black box, drug linked to mass killings, FDA, warningThis entry was posted on Wednesday, July 31st, 2013 at 10:44 pm and is filed under Big Pharma, Dictatorship, Drugs, Education/Mind Control, Fascism, Neuro/Bio/Chem Warfare, NWO, Science/Health. 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.
TSA employee misconduct up 26% in 3 years
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dprogram.net
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:34
  July 31st, 2013
  (CNN) '' July 31st, 2013 ''
  Related posts:
  Government Report: TSA Corruption, Misconduct SoaringMcDonald's Sued by Employee Over Debit Card Wage FeesFAA puts no-fly zone over Arkansas oil spill with Exxon employee in chargeAlex Jones Calls for Gun Control on Oathbreakers to the Constitutional Republic!Teenager Faces 20 Years in Prison for Rap Video #N3Employee Bonus: Teens Working For Monsanto Sprayed by Crop DusterDown The Rabbit Hole with Popeye '' Iraq '' 10 Years of War and Bloodshed''He Was Controlled By FBI For 3 To 5 Years! They Were Controlling EVERY STEP OF HIM!'' MotherTags: TSA employeeThis entry was posted on Wednesday, July 31st, 2013 at 10:35 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.
'Nigger', 'mietje' of 'manke' mag niet meer in stadion Liverpool
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: VK: Home
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:32
  Door: Patrick van IJzendoorn '' 01/08/13, 06:40
  (C) epa. Liverpool-speler Suarez na een gewonnen oefenwedstrijd tegen het nationale elftal van Thailand.
  'Mietje!', 'manke!' en 'je speelt als een wijf!'. Dat soort verwensingen zijn voortaan taboe in het voetbalstadion van Liverpool. Ze staan op een lijst van ongewenst taalgebruik die de club naar aanleiding van het racisme-incident omtrent spits Luis Suarez heeft opgesteld.
  Verboden woorden in het stadion van Liverpool FCYid, coon, coloured, gypsy, nigger, raghead, paki, wog, chink, nip, fag, that's gay, you're gay, rent-boy, queer, lady-boy, knob-jockey, poof, she-man, play like a girl, don't be a woman, queen, princess, spaz, downy, midget, cripple, retard
  Terwijl de club uit Merseyside in spanning afwacht of Suarez wel of niet blijft, is de ploeg druk bezig het imago op te poetsen. Het is alweer bijna twee jaar geleden dat de ex-ajacied het woord 'negro' bezigde in de richting van Manchester United-verdediger Patrice Evra. Sindsdien is er kritiek geweest op het gebrek aan schuldbesef bij zowel de Uruguayaan als de clubleiding.
  In samenwerking met drie anti-racismeorganisaties heeft de 'social inclusion officer' van The Reds nu een handleiding geschreven met als orgelpunt een zwarte lijst voor eenieder die Anfield Road met een bezoek vereert. Het document is primair bedoeld voor supporters, want de spelers zelf krijgen nog een soortgelijke handleiding van de Engelse voetbalbond.
  Het zwaarst wegen woorden die betrekking hebben op iemands huidskleur en afkomst, zoals 'yid', 'coon', 'coloured', 'gypsy' en 'nigger'.
  RacismeOpmerkingen over geaardheid, geslacht, ziekte en aandoeningen zijn voortaan eveneens een waarschuwing waard. Het gaat daarbij onder meer over verwensingen als 'that's gay', 'queer', 'queen', 'retard', 'lady-boy', 'poof', 'princess', 'downy' en 'don't be a woman'.
  Er is de laatste jaren veel aandacht geweest voor racisme op de voetbalvelden, zowel in Engeland als elders in Europa. Racisme komt minder voor dan vroeger, maar door het grote aantal camera's en microfoons is elk incident zicht- of hoorbaar. Er is in Engeland een lobby gaande voor een minimumstraf van tien wedstrijden voor spelers die zich bezondigen aan discriminatie.
  Naast het uitdelen van de handleiding houdt Liverpool ook workshops over gelijkheid en discriminatie. Vorig jaar was het de eerste voetbalclub die een speciaal evenement voor homoseksuelen organiseerde. Op de woordenlijst, die onder Liverpool-fans reeds het mikpunt van spot is geworden, ontbreekt opvallend genoeg de term 'negro'.
The Most Important Number In The Entire U.S. Economy
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:25
  The Economic Collapseby Michael Snyder
  There is one vitally important number that everyone needs to be watching right now, and it doesn't have anything to do with unemployment, inflation or housing. If this number gets too high, it will collapse the entire U.S. financial system. The number that I am talking about is the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries. When that number goes up, long-term interest rates all across the financial system start increasing. When long-term interest rates rise, it becomes more expensive for the federal government to borrow money, it becomes more expensive for state and local governments to borrow money, existing bonds lose value and bond investors lose a lot of money, mortgage rates go up and monthly payments on new mortgages rise, and interest rates throughout the entire economy go up and this causes economic activity to slow down. On top of everything else, there are more than 440 trillion dollars worth of interest rate derivatives sitting out there, and rapidly rising interest rates could cause that gigantic time bomb to go off and implode our entire financial system. We are living in the midst of the greatest debt bubble in the history of the world, and the only way that the game can continue is for interest rates to stay super low. Unfortunately, the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries has started to rise, and many experts are projecting that it is going to continue to rise.
  On August 2nd of last year, the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries was just 1.48%, and our entire debt-based economy was basking in the glow of ultra-low interest rates. But now things are rapidly changing. On Wednesday, the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries hit 2.70% before falling back to 2.58% on ''good news'' from the Federal Reserve.
  Historically speaking, rates are still super low, but what is alarming is that it looks like we hit a ''bottom'' last year and that interest rates are only going to go up from here. In fact, according to CNBC many experts believe that we will soon be pushing up toward the 3 percent mark'...
  Round numbers like 1,700 on the S&P 500 are well and good, but savvy traders have their minds on another integer: 2.75 percent
  That was the high for the 10-year yield this year, and traders say yields are bound to go back to that level. The one overhanging question is how stocks will react when they see that number.
  ''If we start to push up to new highs on the 10-year yield so that's the 2.75 level'--I think you'd probably see a bit of anxiety creep back into the marketplace,'' Bank of America Merrill Lynch's head of global technical strategy, MacNeil Curry, told ''Futures Now'' on Tuesday.
  And Curry sees yields getting back to that level in the short term, and then some. ''In the next couple of weeks to two months or so I think we've got a push coming up to the 2.85, 2.95 zone,'' he said.
  This rise in interest rates has been expected for a very long time '' it is just that nobody knew exactly when it would happen. Now that it has begun, nobody is quite sure how high interest rates will eventually go. For some very interesting technical analysis, I encourage everyone to check out an article by Peter Brandt that you can find right here.
  And all of this is very bad news for stocks. The chart below was created by Chartist Friend from Pittsburgh, and it shows that stock prices have generally risen as the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries has steadily declined over the past 30 years'...
  When interest rates go down, that spurs economic activity, and that is good for stock prices.
  So when interest rates start going up rapidly, that is not a good thing for the stock market at all.
  The Federal Reserve has tried to keep long-term interest rates down by wildly printing money and buying bonds, and even the suggestion that the Fed may eventually ''taper'' quantitative easing caused the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries to absolutely soar a few weeks ago.
  So the Fed has backed off on the ''taper'' talk for now, but what happens if the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries continues to rise even with the wild money printing that the Fed has been doing?
  At that point, the Fed would begin to totally lose control over the situation. And if that happens, Bill Fleckenstein told King World News the other day that he believes that we could see the stock market suddenly plunge by 25 percent'...
  Let's say Ben (Bernanke) comes out tomorrow and says, 'We are not going to taper.' But let's just say the bond market trades down anyway, and the next thing you know we go through the recent highs and a month from now the 10-Year is at 3%. And people start to realize they are not even tapering and the bond market is backed up'....
  They will say, 'Why is this happening?' Then they may realize the bond market is discounting the inflation we already have.
  At some point the bond markets are going to say, 'We are not comfortable with these policies.' Obviously you can't print money forever or no emerging country would ever have gone broke. So the bond market starts to back up and the economy gets worse than it is now because rates are rising. So the Fed says, 'We can't have this,' and they decide to print more (money) and the bond market backs up (even more).
  All of the sudden it becomes clear that money printing not only isn't the solution, but it's the problem. Well, with rates going from where they are to 3%+ on the 10-Year, one of these days the S&P futures are going to get destroyed. And if the computers ever get loose on the downside the market could break 25% in three days.
  And as I have written about previously, we have seen a huge spike in margin debt in recent months, and this could make it even easier for a stock market collapse to happen. A recent note from Deutsche Bank explained precisely why margin debt is so dangerous'...
  Margin debt can be described as a tool used by stock speculators to borrow money from brokerages to buy more stock than they could otherwise afford on their own. These loans are collateralized by stock holdings, so when the market goes south, investors are either required to inject more cash/assets or become forced to sell immediately to pay off their loans '' sometimes leading to mass pullouts or crashes.
  But of much greater concern than a stock market crash is the 441 trillion dollar interest rate derivatives bubble that could implode if interest rates continue to rise rapidly.
  Deutsche Bank is the largest bank in Europe, and at this point they have 55.6 trillion euros of total exposure to derivatives.
  But the GDP of the entire nation of Germany is only about 2.7 trillion euros for a whole year.
  We are facing a similar situation in the United States. Our GDP for 2013 will be somewhere between 15 and 16 trillion dollars, but many of our big banks have exposure to derivatives that absolutely dwarfs our GDP. The following numbers come from one of my previous articles entitled ''The Coming Derivatives Panic That Will Destroy Global Financial Markets'''...
  JPMorgan Chase
  Total Assets: $1,812,837,000,000 (just over 1.8 trillion dollars)
  Total Exposure To Derivatives: $69,238,349,000,000 (more than 69 trillion dollars)
  Citibank
  Total Assets: $1,347,841,000,000 (a bit more than 1.3 trillion dollars)
  Total Exposure To Derivatives: $52,150,970,000,000 (more than 52 trillion dollars)
  Bank Of America
  Total Assets: $1,445,093,000,000 (a bit more than 1.4 trillion dollars)
  Total Exposure To Derivatives: $44,405,372,000,000 (more than 44 trillion dollars)
  Goldman Sachs
  Total Assets: $114,693,000,000 (a bit more than 114 billion dollars '' yes, you read that correctly)
  Total Exposure To Derivatives: $41,580,395,000,000 (more than 41 trillion dollars)
  That means that the total exposure that Goldman Sachs has to derivatives contracts is more than 362 times greater than their total assets.
  And remember, the biggest chunk of those derivatives contracts is made up of interest rate derivatives.
  Just imagine what would happen if a life insurance company wrote millions upon millions of life insurance contracts and then everyone suddenly died.
  What would happen to that life insurance company?
  It would go completely broke of course.
  Well, that is what our major banks are facing today.
  They have written trillions upon trillions of dollars worth of interest rate derivatives contracts, and they are betting that interest rates will not go up rapidly.
  But what if they do?
  And the truth is that interest rates have a whole lot of room to go up. The chart below shows how the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries has moved over the past couple of decades'...
  As you can see, the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries was hovering around the 6 percent mark back in the year 2000.
  Back in 1990, the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries hovered between 8 and 9 percent.
  If we return to ''normal'' levels, our financial system will implode. There is no way that our debt-addicted system would be able to handle it.
  So watch the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries very carefully. It is the most important number in the entire U.S. economy.
  If that number gets too high, the game is over.
  Via The Economic Collapse
Kickstarter Should Do More to Protect Backers
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Hacker News
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:16
  A Portland-based board game project raised $122,000, but its creator says the funds are all gone and there will be no game. Who's to blame?
  Late last week, one of the creators behind a Portland-based Kickstarter campaign announced to his 1,246 backers that, despite his best efforts to produce the project he raised $122,000 to create -- a Vaudeville-esque board game called The Doom That Came To Atlantic City! -- he had failed. No game would ever be shipped.
  "The short version," Erik Chevalier wrote, is that "the project is over, the game is canceled."
  Naturally, several backers were furious -- a handful had kicked in over $1,000 in exchange for 'special' rewards -- but first it's important to get some context.
  Plenty of Kickstarter campaigns dissapoint their backers.
  Of the 44% of projects that are successfully funded, most projects end up getting delayed and plenty of others fail to meet the quality expectations of their backers. Certainly, this latest Kickstarter campaign was particularly egregious, considering the sum of money raised and the promises broken. ("All things are on schedule," Chevalier wrote in March 2013. "Still on the same schedule," he wrote in May 2013. "The project is moving along," he wrote in June 2013.) But it's hardly an anomaly.
  Failure to Launch
  I won't speculate on what Erik Chevalier did or did not do with the $122,000. Plenty of his backers have alleged fraud, and some have even claimed to file official complaints with the Oregon Department of Justice. On the other hand, it's very possible that Chevalier made a legitimate run at getting this thing off the ground, but encountered unforeseen costs. There are few hard facts at this point.
  I reached out to Chevalier via e-mail, but he declined to speak over the phone. "Unfortunately I've decided to postpone any interviews or further public statements until after I've secured new, specialized legal counsel," he wrote late last night. "I have many meetings with firms scheduled this week and will hopefully have one selected in the next few days."
  I'm not really sure what "specialized legal counsel" means (are there actual Kickstarter lawyers?), but it wouldn't be surprising if he ends up getting sued.
  Last year, I wrote about Seth Quest, another Kickstarter project creator who raised $35,000 from backers to create the "Hanfree," a quirky iPad holder. Quest, a product designer, had no experience as an entrepreneur, and quickly ran out of money before any product could be created. One of his backers decided to take him to court.
  "When you fail on Kickstarter, it's a very public failure," Quest said at the time. "It definitely derailed my career substantially. Your backers can give you massive support, but they can also tear you down if you fail."
  Quest went bankrupt and decided to move to Costa Rica.
  Satisfaction Not Guaranteed
  Kickstarter, itself, has made it very clear that it has no legal liability in any dealings between backers and project creators. Their view essentially boils down to this: Backers must recognize that there are risks of supporting a project creator and backing any project. And Kickstarter will do its best police outright fraudsters, as they did last month with a phony beef jerky project. But there's no "satisfaction guaranteed" on the end-result of any particular project.
  If you're unhappy with the "reward," or if the project never gets created, well, tough. Take it up with the project creator.
  From the company's FAQ section:
  Kickstarter does not investigate a creator's ability to complete their project. Backers ultimately decide the validity and worthiness of a project by whether they decide to fund it.
  And from its Terms of Service:
  Kickstarter does not offer refunds. A Project Creator is not required to grant a Backer's request for a refund unless the Project Creator is unable or unwilling to fulfill the reward.Kickstarter's Worst Nightmare
  The problem, as I see it, is that despite the company's best efforts, many backers simply don't understand the risks involved in backing a project. Kickstarter knows this is a problem. Last year, they announced they had "allocated more staff to trust and safety." They issued a blog post titled "Kickstarter is Not a Store" and added a "Risks and Challenges" section to every single project page on the site. The Risks and Challenges section forced the project creator to list out all the potential risks the project may encounter, sort of an S-1 for crowdfunders. The section also linked directly to the company's accountability section.
  This morning, I spoke with a Kickstarter representative who said the company has a policy against commenting directly on failed campaigns or disputes between users. He acknowledged the company's continuing efforts to educate the user base about potential pitfalls of supporting a backer. And he hinted at future blog posts down the road, but no structural changes in how Kickstarter vets project creators. Which is somewhat concerning.
  Kickstarter is at a critical moment. Four years after their official launch, there is no doubt that Kickstarter has gone mainstream. It's become a trusted brand for launching new products. The OUYA, for instance, was backed by more than 63,000 people and raised close to $8.6 million.
  There is no doubt in my mind that more entrepreneurs and more companies -- some with little-to-no experience -- will be attracted to Kickstarter to raise money and launch their projects. Besides the money, it's a fantastic vehicle for pre-promotion and marketing. At the same time, there will be more and more backers that see the site as a place not only to back "creative projects," but essentially as a market to pre-order cool products.
  Of course, that should be Kickstarter's greatest dream, to become the defacto launchpad for new projects -- but I also wonder if it might quickly become their worst nightmare. So far, the Kickstarter failures --like The Doom That Came To Atlantic City! -- have been relatively modest in scale.
  But imagine if the OUYA failed to deliver and closed up shop. There would be 63,000 outraged "customers."
  It makes you wonder: Can Kickstarter keep up with its own success?
  Eric Markowitz reports on start-ups, entrepreneurs, and issues that affect small businesses. Previously, he worked at Vanity Fair. He lives in New York City. @EricMarkowitz
Japanse vicepremier: nazi's voorbeeld voor moderniseren grondwet
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: VK: Home
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:15
  Bewerkt door: redactie '' 01/08/13, 07:39 '' bron: ANP, DPA
  (C) afp. De Japanse vicepremier Taro Aso.
  De Japanse vicepremier Taro Aso heeft internationaal ophef veroorzaakt met de opmerking dat Japan een voorbeeld zou kunnen nemen aan de nazi's bij het moderniseren van de grondwet. Hij heeft zijn opmerking donderdag ingetrokken en een 'misverstand' genoemd maar Japanse media hebben de zaak breed opgepikt.
  Tijdens een toespraak in een hotel in Tokio memoreerde Aso dat de grondwet van de Weimarrepubliek (Duitsland) 'zonder dat iemand het bemerkte, zonder dat het opviel' in 1933 door de grondwet van de nazi's werd vervangen. 'Waarom leren wij niet van deze tactiek?' vroeg Aso zich vervolgens af.
  Het Simon Wiesenthalcentrum in Los Angeles reageerde verontwaardigd op de opmerking van Aso en vroeg hem om uitleg. 'Welke technieken van de nazi-heren zijn het waard om van te leren? Hoe men heimelijk een democratie kapot maakt?' De oppositie in Japan heeft het aftreden van Aso geist.
  De Japanse regering is op dit moment bezig met het moderniseren van de pacifistische grondwet die na de door Japan verloren Tweede Wereldoorlog werd ingevoerd en die volgens de regering van Shinzo Abe door de toenmalige bezettingsmacht van de VS werd 'opgedrongen'. Door een nieuwe wet wil de regering meer militaire armslag krijgen in de conflicten met China en Noord-Korea.
Heroizing a Traitor
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: FrontPage Magazine Â» FrontPage
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:10
  After 16 hours of deliberation, military judge Army Col. Denise Lind convicted pfd. Bradley Manning on 19 of 21 charges for his participation in the largest leak of classified information in U.S. history. Manning was acquitted of the most serious charge, aiding the enemy, but his conviction on six counts of violating the Espionage Act, five counts of theft, one count of computer fraud, and other lesser infractions, has him facing a maximum sentence of 136 years in prison. With the sentencing phase of the trial now underway, Manning is expected to be sent to prison for the rest of his life. That prospect should disappoint no one, save those who have spent the last few years casting Manning as a ''hero.''
  Despite how his apologists characterize him, Manning, a mentally disturbed individual, was on the verge of being discharged from the military after only six weeks of basic training when he perpetrated his crime. He did so in order to attack his country before it showed him the door. While stationed in his first post at Fort Drum, NY, Manning was referred for mental health counseling following a number of outbursts, and an email he sent one of his superiors containing a photo of himself dressed as a woman. After being sent to Iraq, Manning's behavior remained erratic, and he was eventually demoted a rank after throwing a temper tantrum and striking a fellow soldier. After that he was sent to work in a supply room, but the damage resulting from the inexplicable maintenance of his security clearance throughout this tumultuous period had already been done. He had already sent more than 700,000 classified documents that included State Department cables, combat videos, and terror detainee assessments to the secret-sharing site, WikiLeaks.
  In a series of email exchanges with California computer hacker Adrian Lamo, who eventually turned Manning over to authorities ''because it seemed incomprehensible that someone could leak that massive amount of data and not have it endanger human life,'' Manning reveled in his crime. He was less concerned with exposing alleged wrong doing than with the level of chaos he was at liberty to unleash. He attempted to impress Lamo regarding his access to a ''database of half a million events during the iraq war'' and promised him that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ''and several thousand diplomats around the world are going to have a heart attack when they wake up one morning, and finds an entire repository of classified foreign policy is available, in searchable format to the public[.]''
  Manning also boasted about how easy it was to steal the classified information. ''I would come in with music on a CD-RW labelled with something like 'Lady Gaga' '... erase the music '... then write a compressed split file. No one suspected a thing '... [I] listened and lip-synched to Lady Gaga's Telephone while exfiltrating possibly the largest data spillage in American history.''
  In the courtroom, however, it was a different story. Manning's defense team, led by attorney David Coombs, made every effort to present his client as a victim. Manning was portrayed as a small-town Oklahoma boy who joined the Army with the best intentions, only to become disillusioned by alleged government misconduct that he felt compelled to share with the world. Coombs also insisted Manning was consumed by the emotional turmoil of being a gay soldier who couldn't serve openly due to the military's former ''don't ask, don't tell'' policy. Even when Manning pleaded guilty to 10 of the 21 charges leveled against him earlier this year, he spoke about the need to release the classified information because the war in Iraq ''depressed'' him.
  Manning's courtroom portrayal was preformed in tandem with a long campaign perpetrated primarily by the anti-military, anti-American left, for whom Manning's status as a victim of American ''evil'' made him a hero. Glenn Greenwald, who has championed a similar effort on behalf of NSA leaker Edward Snowden, referred to Manning as ''a whistle-blower acting with the noblest of motives,'' and a ''national hero.'' The city of Berkeley, CA considered passing a resolution declaring him a hero until it was tabled. The Nation's Chase Madar referred to Manning as ''patriot'' who has ''done his duty'' and ''complied with it to the letter.'' The New Statesman's Peter Tatchell called him a ''humanist and a man with a conscience.''
  Manning was also the beneficiary of celebrity solidarity campaigns and an attempt to name him as the grand marshal of San Francisco's gay pride parade. A week before his conviction, the New York Times ran a full-page ad headlined, ''WE ARE BRADLEY MANNING'' that included the signatures of several well-known leftists, including Alice Walker, Noam Chomsky, Joan Baez, and Pentagon Papers leaker Daniel Ellsberg. And in a testament to leftist delusion, the man who endangered countless numbers of his fellow Americans, out of sheer self-absorbed vindictiveness, was nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
  These supporters, like Manning himself, couldn't care less about the enormous damage Manning has done. His release disclosed the names of U.S. intelligence assets, military tactics and operations, secret and sensitive diplomatic exchanges, combat videos, and terror detainee assessments, every one of which has gravely damaged America's national security. Writing for the National Review, jurist John Yoo warns that in the ''covert war against al Qaeda, a stateless enemy which conceals itself as civilians to attack innocents by surprise, intelligence is the most important weapon.'' It is a weapon Manning was more than willing to provide them.
  The desire to instigate this kind of grand-scale destruction is undoubtedly what led Manning to a website whose founder, Julian Assange, has stated goal his to ''bring down many administrations that rely on concealing reality '-- including the US administration.'' Manning admitted to ''regularly monitoring'' Wikileaks beginning in November or December of 2009 and was aware that it had published hundreds of thousands of messages. It stands to reason Manning knew exactly with whom he was dealing, and what would occur with the material he sent to them.
  What resulted was that America's enemies were fed precisely the kind of ammunition they need to do us harm. We will never know how many people have been put in danger because of Manning's actions. If we are lucky, we will find out after the fact, such as when Navy SEALs recovered some of the classified documents leaked by Manning when they raided Osama bin Laden's compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan in 2011. This is to say nothing of the informants who might have otherwise stepped forward to help America prevent the next terrorist atrocity, but now will not do so because of the prospect that our nation's security apparatus can be so easily compromised.
  And make no mistake, Manning is extremely lucky. Section 2 of Article 104, ''Aiding the Enemy'' states that anyone who knowingly gives the nation's enemies information ''directly or ''indirectly; shall suffer death or such other punishment as a court-martial or military commission may direct.'' Lind should take that reality into consideration when Manning is sentenced. He deserves nothing less than the maximum allowed by law for his perfidy.
  Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
Don't Remind Me!
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Fabulous Geezersistersâ€™ Weblog
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:07
  Funny how quickly it all comes back to you.
  I am reclining on my back as the technician slowly moves the ultrasound along the vein in my leg. The ultrasound has been hurriedly scheduled to find out why my left foot has been swollen recently.
  Since my husband and I are leaving on a long plane trip tomorrow, it would be good to find out whether I have a blood clot in my leg today, my doctor said. I could see his point.
  So I'm here, but my mind is spinning backwards. You get ultrasounds on happy occasions (like pregnancy) and you get them to make sure you're not running out of time (like cancer and the aforementioned blood clot). In Texas, I should add, you're required to get a transvaginal ultrasound before you can get an abortion; this has nothing to do with my current situation, but it still pisses me off.
  Mentally, though, I've gone back in time. There's something about being tested in a medical facility, about being the subject of space-age machines prying secrets out of your body, that never fails to rattle me.
  I am whipped back to almost 18 years ago, when a doctor ran an ultrasound over my abdomen to see whether my breast cancer had spread. My own naive belief in myself as a healthy person had already been shattered by my diagnosis. I hardly breathed as the doctor intently looked at the screen, tracing the ultrasound over my skin.
  That's what I hated the most '-- desperately trying to read another person's face. I lay there as the minutes passed, certain the doctor was viewing a lethal panorama of metastases. Otherwise, why was she so silent, why was she taking so long?
  ''What do you see?'' I finally asked her. I might as well hear the worst, I figured.
  ''Oh, nothing,'' she said. ''But I haven't had such a clear view of someone's organs in years!''
  Good grief. I was so relieved, I almost vomited.
  Today is different '-- less threatening, but still unsettling. There are two worlds, you see: The Healthy and the Sick. You never realize that until you join the Sick or someone you love does. In that world, you wear hospital gowns that gape in the back, you creep along long, dim corridors, moving from machine to machine. Your insurance card and your pathology report are your ticket to this new world, where people wear white and seafoam green. These people and their machines have taken over ownership and superior knowledge of your body. Or maybe, since your body has already betrayed you, you never knew it as well or really owned it the way you thought you did.
  You get released into the world of the Healthy, where it's bright and normal and people don't realize how lucky they are not to be sick. But you know you don't belong there. Other people know it, too; you can see them flinch with pity and a little horror when they see you. Isn't bad luck contagious?
  But again, today is different. The technician sees no clots. I put my street clothes back on and traipse down the dim corridor into the outside world of the Healthy. This is where I belong.
  This is where I belong '-- for the moment. But I am astounded at how completely I have forgotten the world of the Sick, how I've banished it from my mind as if it no longer existed.
  Don't you ever learn anything? I ask myself. I mean, not just temporarily '-- but for good? Are we all doomed to forget?
  Around me, the heat is stifling, the traffic impatient. The world of the Healthy moves on relentlessly, lingers for no one, ignores the unpleasant. Maybe that's the only thing you truly learn and never quite forget once you've lived in the world of the Sick: When you're in the world of the Healthy, your admission is always temporary. Like everyone else, you're only passing through.
  (Copyright 2013 by Ruth Pennebaker)
  Read more about when things fall apart
  Tagged as: aging, blood clot, cancer, health, hospital, medical tests, ultrasound
Who Needs Ham Radio
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: SPARKY's Blog
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 07:02
  What is a ham radio
  Over the years amateur radio, or ham radio has become a big part of my everyday life. I like learning how radio equipment works and repairing my own equipment. I also enjoy operating older tube radio transmitters and receivers from the post war era up into the late 70'²s. Radio has changed tremendously over the years but one thing remains the same. Radio is still the most reliable form of communications that we have.
  Back in the day.
  Back in ham radios glory days the work that was being done by ham radio operators was at the forefront of technology. When you pick up that cell phone and make a call that is nothing more than a miniature transceiver that was made possible by ham radio. When you talk to a friend on the internet you are basically talking computer to computer which was being done 30 years before the internet became accessible to the general public.
  Filling gaps in communications.
  Ham radio is still a very important piece of the communications puzzle and yet amateur radio operators and ham radio is still basically unheard of in everyday circles. I wish I had a dime for every time I had to explain to someone what a ham radio operator was and what they do. Amateur radio operators also provide important communications to fill the gaps when natural disasters occur. When the cell towers come down and the internet is broken groups like ARES (Amateur Radio Emergency Services) can provide communications between government agencies as well as police, fire department, transportation and hospitals.
  What is a ham radio operator.
  A ham radio operator is anyone that is licensed to operate on certain frequencies withing his license class. Ham radio currently has 3 classes of license. Technician which is the entry level class, General which is an advanced class and an extra class which is the highest class available and gives you the most privileges on the most frequencies. A ham may build or modify any radio from any other service to use on the ham bands. it is common to hear modified CB (Citizens Band) radio equipment used on the 10M (28-29.7 MHZ) band. It is NOT legal to take a ham radio and use it on another service though.
  What is a ham radio exam.
  A ham radio exam is a test given by a team of VE (Volunteer Examiners) issued by the FCC to get your ham radio license. These are usually a 35 question exam out of a pool of 350 questions. You must get at least 27 out of the 35 to get your technician license. As you upgrade your license the test gets more difficult. The Technician class license gives you privileges on all the VHF (Very High Frequency) and UHF (Ultra High frequencies) as well as voice and Morse code on the HF (High Frequency) bands 10M and Morse code on 80M 40M 15M and 10M. On the HF bands you can expect worldwide communications on a daily basis.
  What is a ham radio band.
  A ham radio band is a set of predetermined frequencies that are used by ham radio operators. These sets of frequencies or bands, is determined by the F.C.C here in the United States and are agreed upon by other countries as well. Each country has its own government office that controls the amateur radio frequencies.
  Well, I hope that helps to answer some of your question. I hope to write more what is a ham radio articles in the near future covering each term.
Worth Reading
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: aangirfan
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 06:53
  "Protestants are more creative than Catholics and Jews, new research has found.
  "Researchers from the University of Illinois wanted to test a previously-held theory that introverted people who suppress emotions about sex and depravity are more creative than people who are more open and extroverted."
  Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.
  The ''chemtrails'' we are all too familiar with after a 15-year dose continue to inflict eye infections, nosebleeds, skin sores, muscle pain, chronic exhaustion, weakened immunity, acute asthma and allergies, short-term memory loss and heart attacks on people in more than a dozen countries. [*Chemtrails Confirmed 2010* by William Thomas] Aluminum oxide impacts more than the atmosphere. The BBC reported a furor among Italians complaining of illness after allied warplanes dropped radar-scattering aluminum chaff upwind over nearby Yugoslavia during intense Depleted Uranium air st... more >>Approved Drugs Kill over 100,000 People AnnuallyFukushima '' Cover It UpUS's Syria policy at crossroads as 'rebels' near collapse
'The future left Detroit behind': How a prophetic note scribbled on the Robocop film script by its screenwriter in 1987 came true | Mail Online
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 06:43
  Futuristic film Robocop was set in a crime-ridden and dangerous DetroitWriter Ed Neumeirer scribbled 'the future left Detroit behind' on the scriptHis note proved to be an accurate depiction of modern-day DetroitCity has filed the biggest municipal bankruptcy in American history with debts of around $18 billion earlier this monthBy Suzannah Hills
  PUBLISHED: 04:04 EST, 26 July 2013 | UPDATED: 09:34 EST, 26 July 2013
  184shares
  4
  Viewcomments
  In the futuristic 1987 film Robocop it was depicted as a crime-ridden city left in ruins after years of financial decline.
  The film's writer Ed Neumeirer scribbled 'the future left Detroit behind' on the first page of the script to sum up the city where the story is set.
  Little did he know, his prophetic note would become an apt description of modern-day Detroit after the city filed the biggest municipal bankruptcy in American history with debts of around $18 billion earlier this month.
  Scroll down for video
  On the brink: The 1987 film Robocop, pictured, written by Ed Neumeirer is set in a futuristic crime-ridden Detroit on the verge of financial collapse
  Modern-day Detroit: Graffiti decorates the ruins of the Packard Automotive Plant - a 35 acre site where luxury cars were manufactured until the 1950s
  Robocop trailer: Did film predict the fall of Detroit?
  Mr Neumeier says Robocop, the story of a terminally-wounded officer who returns to the force as a powerful cyborg to police the city's crime-ridden streets, is a metaphor showing the 'industrial decline in America'.
  He insisted on Detroit being the setting for the film as it has always been very dependent on a single industry - car manufacturing which led to the city being dubbed 'Motor City' or 'Motown' because of this.
  But the decline of the industry in the 1980s, when Japan emerged as new rival in the automotive world, started to have a major impact on the city's prosperity.
  Mr Neumeier told CNN: 'The reason Detroit is important is because it's facing an economic blight that you can imagine happening in a lot of places.
  Decline: Buildings in what was once Detroit's prime business district sit largely abandoned after the city's population shrunk to 700,000
  The abandoned Fisher Body Plant in Detroit - the cradle of the automobile assembly line and a symbol of industrial might - after the city filed the biggest municipal bankruptcy in American history after decades of decline
  'In retrospect, the idea of "RoboCop" really goes back to the car industry. The sculpture of it is very much Detroit road-iron. Having grown up in the sixties when the muscle car was so prominent, the notion of cars was very important to me then and ultimately to the formation of RoboCop.'
  Looking to the future: Writer Ed Neumeier wrote 'the future left Detroit behind' on the first page of the Robocop script - which proved to be an accurate prediction of what would happen to the city
  The U.S. government bailed out the automotive industry to the tune of $80 billion between 2008 and 2010 but that has done little to stop the financial decline in Detroit.
  It has an unemployment rate of 16 per cent of its 700,000 population as the number of jobs in the automotive industry continue to decline.
  Detroit was also been named the most dangerous city in America in 2012 by Forbes magazine and the most miserable in 2013.
  Those living in the city face major cuts to public services under debt restructuring proposals.
  The city's current plight shares striking similarities with the future Detroit portrayed in Robocop.
  In the film, Detroit is reliant upon a multinational corporation, called Omni Consumer Products (OCP), which runs everything from hospitals to its police force.
  Mr Neumeier believes that private companies are playing an ever increasing role in all areas of our lives - just like in Robocop.
  He said: 'We are now living in the world that I was proposing in RoboCop. We are increasingly asking corporations to do these things for us... to provide human services. But their objectives are different to public service needs.'
  Ironically, with a cheap and educated labour force, Mr Neumeier adds that Detroit is in need of a modernisation and advancement - making it the ideal place to start a robotics company.
  He added: 'There is a cheap and educated labor force. Some kind of high-tech would be good for them... I would say with the industrial and mechanical legacy there, somebody should start a robotics company.'
  Ruins: There are believed to be around 30,000 homes that need to be demolished in Detroit after decades of decline left it too poor to pay billions of dollars owed bondholders, retired cops and current city workers
  Run down: A 'Neighborhood Watch' sign stands in front of dilapidated houses on Mackay Street in Detroit
  Similarities: Robocop, about a wounded officer who is brought back as a cyborg to police Detroit's streets, proved to be an accurate prediction of the financial future of the city
  Share or comment on this article
Life imitating fiction: Robocop movie predicts eventual Detroit bankruptcy
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 06:39
  "Once the very symbol of American industrial might, Detroit became the biggest U.S. city to file for bankruptcy... its finances ravaged and its neighborhoods hollowed out by a long, slow decline...Homicide rate in the city of Detroit continued a grim upward trend ... hitting its highest peak in nearly two decades... Detroit's high crime rate is spurring 40 percent of the city's residents to plan to leave within the next five years, ... The Detroit Police Department has made national headlines as it combats a growing murder rate, pay cuts ..."
  The above was not taken from the movie. They're from actual news articles on the web. The plot of the movie was "In the near future, Detroit, Michigan is on the verge of collapse due to financial ruin and unchecked crime."
  Now check this out,Here's a picture of Kevyn Orr, the actual emergency manager for Detroit's bankruptcy:http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/im...0717164009.jpg
  And here's a picture of the mayor of Detroit from the movie who dealt with the city's debt: http://images.wikia.com/robocop/imag...arvinKuzak.jpg
  Now, unlike the movie, I don't see some 1980's Mega-corporation (like Omni-Consumer Products in the film) purchasing Detroit at a bargain basement price and privatizing the municipal services like the police department, etc.
  But, you may see public employees with no pensions, benefits, etc. going on strike
  robo-4.jpg
  So, residents of Detroit: Get out your .50 Cal Barretts and settle in for the long period of lawlessness
  Clarence_demonstration.jpgrobo1-20.jpg
  Well, I'm going to sit down and watch my favorite show...robocop-dollar.jpg
George Clooney tastes sustainability in Nespresso coffee | Lucy Siegle
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 06:33
  George Clooney in Nespresso advertisement. Photograph: Nespresso PR
  George Clooney is the face of Nespresso, the Nestle capsule coffee company, and makes no bones about it. "I'm very comfortable with commercials. I've done them most of my life," he said on Tuesday in Paris, as he provided star power to the newly unveiled Nespresso Sustainability Advisory Board (NSAB). "But I would find myself at a press conference, or perhaps at a film festival and suddenly there'd be some people challenging me about Nespresso's sustainability. I thought if I was going to be involved on a long-term basis with this company, and I like them very much, I should find out what they're doing and what they should and could be held responsible for." Three years ago Clooney headed out with Nespresso to Costa Rica to see the company's coffee farmers for himself.
  If you're not familiar with the Nespresso brand, there are usually two main sustainability beefs. A small tray was dropped off at my hotel room ahead of the unveiling of the NSAB, reminding me of the first. The tray held four shimmering jewels, sealed aluminium pods of espresso magic that pop into a machine. Each is a single use canister and an estimated 186m are used in the UK each year alone. Nespresso says that it has collection points (and will pick up) for empties in the UK and Ireland and that they can be successfully recycled in Crewe.
  The second major point of contention is that Nespresso is owned by Nestle, and its baby milk scandal has still not been forgotten by campaigners. Nestle is also a mammoth buyer of commodities, and thus not perceived as distributing social value along its supply chain in the same way as, say, Fairtrade.
  Clooney's Nespresso ads poke fun at himself by being turned down by a series of beautiful women who are more interested in the coffee machine and its bejewelled single-use pods than him. The knowing ads riff off his public persona: uber suave and a little bit smug.
  George Clooney's new Nespresso commercial But there are critical differences between advert Clooney and NSAB Clooney '' the former doesn't talk about farming, whereas the latter said:
  I'm the grandson of tobacco farmers and I grew up on a farm and I really felt that when I went to Costa Rica. I spent time with one amazing family who have changed everything, made it more efficient made it better. They were so proud! Pig crap powers their entire home!
  The family, it turns out, are in the room (they stand up bashfully for a round of applause). They are one family of 56,000 coffee farmers who are part of Nespresso's environmental and quality assurance system that means they can attract around 30-40% above market price. On Tuesday, Nespresso announced it'd be extending this scheme into Africa, and said it expects to double the amount of coffee sourced from Ethiopia and Kenya to 10,000 tons by 2020.
  But the big story here is Sudan. Were Clooney not in attendance I'd probably have been reporting on the fact that Nespresso is planning on leveraging South Sudan as a high quality coffee producer (as it was 40 years ago). Clooney said:
  "Yesterday we got to drink coffee of South Sudan, and this is the only export to have come out of South Sudan besides oil since the war. The problem with oil being of course that a company takes the oil from beneath the feet of the people living there via a pipeline, back of a truck and a dock in Khartoum. Oftentimes the government gets a small proportion and it doesn't seem to trickle down.
  But if Clooney wasn't there, then arguably there wouldn't be a drive to source coffee from Sudan. The country is an all-consuming passion for the actor, who was arrested at the Sudanese embassy in Washington last year:
  "Most of the money I make on the [Nespresso] commercials I spend keeping a satellite over the border of North and South Sudan to keep an eye on Omar al-Bashir [the Sudanese dictator charged with war crimes at The Hague]. Then he puts out a statement saying that I'm spying on him and how would I like it if a camera was following me everywhere I went and I go 'well welcome to my life Mr War Criminal'. I want the war criminal to have the same amount of attention that I get. I think that's fair."
  On his own green credentials, Clooney is coy. He likes electric cars, he thinks the issues are important, "but I've been in a private jet [I imagine more than once] and once you do that you pretty much undo any good" but he certainly gets it. He also has a noticeably good rapport with Harriet Lamb, CEO of Fairtrade International, a fellow NSAB panellist.
  She said farmers associations welcomed Nespresso's initiatives and big companies could play an important role:
  'You need dedicated pioneer brands but you also need the big boys who can drive the whole sector. We're all at the start of creating the sort of change we want to see. There's a strong message here [with Nespresso's suite of sustainability measures]. One of the problems is the pace of return that shareholders are demanding and this drives them to make snap decisions on important factors for profit. When the public comes in, it gives companies the time to make that long-term change. It takes time to plant coffee, it takes time for farmer organisations to build and to protect the environment.'
  Nestle is also planning to source Fairtrade-certified coffee from an additional 7,000 small scale farmers in Colombia. It may be '' nobody from Fairtrade International would be drawn '' that Nespresso is asked or persuaded to contribute to a Fairtrade fund at some point in the way that Starbucks has contributed EURO1 million to the Fairtrade Access Fund, a provider of midscale loans. It seem likely that eventually there will be a Fairtrade-branded Nespresso product. That might be the moment NSAB Clooney finally gets his day in one of those commercials.
VIDEO-NSA Director Heckled At Conference As He Asks For Security Community's Understanding - Forbes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 06:19
  Log in with your social account:Or, you can log in or sign up using Forbes.New Posts+2 posts this hourMost PopularWhat 20-Year-Olds Don't GetListsAmerica's Top CollegesVideoDigital CarjackersGet 2 FREE Issues of ForbesHelp|Connect
  |Sign up|Log in
VIDEO-With 3 'hops,' NSA gets millions of phone records :: WRAL.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 01 Aug 2013 06:15
  WASHINGTON '-- President Barack Obama's national security team acknowledged for the first time Wednesday that, when investigating one suspected terrorist, it can read and store the phone records of millions of Americans.
  Since it was revealed recently that the National Security Agency puts the phone records of every American into a database, the Obama administration has assured the nation that such records are rarely searched and, when they are, officials target only suspected international terrorists.
  Meanwhile, at a hacker convention in Las Vegas on Wednesday, the head of the NSA said government methods used to collect telephone and email data helped foil 54 terror plots '-- a figure that drew open skepticism from lawmakers back in Washington. "Not by any stretch can you get 54 terrorist plots," said the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt.
  More than a decade after the terror attacks of 2001, the phone-record surveillance program has stirred deep privacy concerns on Capitol Hill, where Leahy said Wednesday during an oversight hearing: "If this program is not effective, it has to end," adding that, "So far I'm not convinced by what I've seen."
  In the House earlier this month, lawmakers said they never intended to allow the NSA to build a database of every phone call in America, and they threatened to curtail the government's surveillance authority. "You've got a problem," Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., told top intelligence officials weeks ago.
  Sensing a looming shift in the privacy-versus-security cultural calculus, the White House responded: It has ordered the director of national intelligence to recommend changes that could be made to the phone-surveillance program, and President Barack Obama invited a bipartisan group of lawmakers to the White House on Thursday to discuss their concerns about the National Security Agency's surveillance programs.
  A White House official says the top Democrats and Republicans on the House and Senate intelligence panels will attend. So will Democratic Sens. Mark Udall of Colorado and Ron Wyden of Oregon, two lawmakers who raised the alarm about the NSA's sweeping domestic programs. Two others calling for more NSA oversight, Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois and Sensenbrenner, will also attend.
  The administration has emphasized what it describes as oversight of its activities by the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, by congressional committees and by internal auditors. It has said, for example, that under rules approved by the court, only 22 people at NSA were allowed to approve searches of the phone database, and only seven positions at NSA, a total of 11 people, were authorized to disclose any results believed to be associated with persons in the United States.
  Testimony before Congress on Wednesday showed how easy it is for Americans with no connection to terrorism to unwittingly have their calling patterns analyzed by the government.
  It hinges on what's known as "hop" or "chain" analysis. When the NSA identifies a suspect, it can look not just at his phone records, but also the records of everyone he calls, everyone who calls those people and everyone who calls those people.
  If the average person called 40 unique people, three-hop analysis would allow the government to mine the records of 2.5 million Americans when investigating one suspected terrorist.
  The NSA has said it conducted 300 searches of its telephone database last year. Left unsaid until Wednesday was that three-hop analysis off those searches could mean scrutinizing the phone records of tens or even hundreds of millions of people.
  "So what has been described as a discrete program, to go after people who would cause us harm, when you look at the reach of this program, it envelopes a substantial number of Americans," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate.
  John Inglis, the NSA's deputy director, conceded the point but said NSA officials "try to be judicious" about conducting hop analysis.
  "And so while, theoretically, 40 times 40 times 40 gets you to a large number, that's not typically what takes place," he said. "We have to compare the theory to the practice."
  Such reassurances have done little to quell the sharp criticism from both parties over the once-secret program. Last week saw a close vote in the House on a measure that aimed to kill the phone surveillance program.
  On Wednesday, the administration acknowledged some limitations to its sweeping surveillance powers are inevitable.
  "We are open to re-evaluating this program in ways that can perhaps provide greater confidence and public trust that this is in fact a program that achieves both privacy protections and national security," Robert Litt, counsel to the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, told skeptical members of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
  This newest privacy-vs.-security debate was touched off when former government contract systems analyst Edward Snowden leaked classified documents exposing NSA programs that store years of phone records on every American. That revelation prompted the most significant reconsideration yet of the vast surveillance powers Congress granted the president after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
  The administration intended to keep the telephone program a secret, and for more than a decade few in Congress showed any interest in limiting the surveillance. Snowden's leaks abruptly changed the calculus on Capitol Hill.
  "We have a lot of good information out there that helps the American public understand these programs, but it all came out late," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said in a rebuke of government secrecy. "It all came out in response to a leaker. There was no organized plan for how we rationally declassify this so that the American people can participate in the debate."
  The telephone program is authorized under a provision of the USA Patriot Act, which Congress hurriedly passed after 9/11. President George W. Bush's administration said then what Obama's administration says now: that in order to connect the dots, it needs to collect lots of dots.
  Leahy was skeptical.
  "There's always going to be dots to collect, analyze and try to connect," he said. "Government is already collecting data on millions of innocent Americans on a daily basis based on a secret legal interpretation of a statute that does not on its face appear to authorize this kind of bulk collection. So what's going to be next? When is enough enough?"
  Several Democrats promised bills that would provide tighter controls or more transparency. Proposals include eliminating the FBI's ability to seize data without a court order, changing the way judges are appointed to the surveillance court and appointing an attorney to argue against the government in secret proceedings before that court. Another measure would force the government to reveal how many Americans have had their information swept up in surveillance.
  Inglis said the NSA was willing to reconsider whether it needed to keep phone data for five years. And Deputy Attorney General James Cole said the Justice Department was considering whether and how to allow an outside attorney into the secret court to argue against the government.
  Last week's House vote of 217-205 defeating an attempt to dismantle the program was significant not only because of the narrowness of the victory for the Obama administration, but also because it created unusual political coalitions. Libertarian-leaning conservatives and liberal Democrats pressed for change against establishment Republicans and Congress' pro-security lawmakers.
  Backing the NSA program were 134 Republicans and 83 Democrats, including House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, who typically does not vote, and Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi. Rejecting the administration's last-minute pleas to spare the surveillance operation were 94 Republicans and 111 Democrats.
  NSA Director Keith Alexander did not attend Wednesday's hearing. Instead he addressed the Black Hat hackers conference in Las Vegas, where he remained unapologetic even in the face of heckling from the audience.
  Alexander drew laughter when a voice in the overflow crowd shouted that he should read the Constitution. Alexander said he had, and the heckler should, too.
  Copyright 2013 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
XKeyscore presentation from 2008 '' read in full | World news | theguardian.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 31 Jul 2013 21:53
  Training materials for the XKeyscore program detail how analysts can use it and other systems to mine enormous agency databases and develop intelligence from the web
  ' Revealed: NSA program that collects 'nearly everything a user does on the internet'
Human origins: Are we hybrids?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:47
  Chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes)"The scientist has a lot of experience with ignorance and doubt and uncertainty, and this experience is of very great importance, I think. When a scientist doesn't know the answer to a problem, he is ignorant. When he has a hunch as to what the result is, he is uncertain. And when he is pretty darn sure of what the result is going to be, he is in some doubt. We have found it of paramount importance that in order to progress we must recognize the ignorance and leave room for doubt. Scientific knowledge is a body of statements of varying degrees of certainty '-- some most unsure, some nearly sure, none absolutely certain."'-- Richard Feynman
  BY EUGENE M. MCCARTHY, PHD GENETICS '-- This article is a little different from others on this site, because it's about the findings of my own research. I'm a geneticist whose work focuses on hybrids and, particularly, the role of hybridization in the evolutionary process. Here, I report certain facts, which seem to indicate that human origins can be traced to hybridization, specifically to hybridization involving the chimpanzee (but not the kind of hybridization you might suppose!). You can access detailed and documented discussions supporting this claim from links on this page. But I'll summarize the basic reasoning here, without a lot of citations and footnotes. (If you would like to read an even briefer summary, click here; read about some objections to the theory here; also, a recent news story)Rationale
  So why do I think humans are hybrids? Well, first of all, I've had a different experience from most people. I've spent most of my life (the last thirty years) studying hybrids, particularly avian and mammalian hybrids. I've read thousands, really tens of thousands, of reports describing them. And this experience has dispelled some mistaken ideas I once had about hybrids, notions that I think many other people continue to take for granted.
  For example, one widespread, but erroneous, belief is that all hybrids are sterile. This idea keeps a lot of people from even considering the possibility that humans might be of hybrid origin. This assertion is absolutely false '-- though I have in fact heard lots of people make it. For instance, in reviewing the reports I collected for my book on hybridization in birds (Handbook of Avian Hybrids of the World, Oxford University Press, 2006), which documents some 4,000 different kinds of hybrid crosses among birds, I found that those crosses producing partially fertile hybrids are about eight times as common as crosses known to produce sterile ones. The usual result is a reduction in fertility, not absolute sterility. My current work documenting hybridization among mammals shows that partially fertile natural hybrids are common, too, in Class Mammalia. And yet, it seems most people base their ideas of hybrids on the common mule (horse x ass), which is an exceptionally sterile hybrid, and not at all representative of hybrids as a whole.
  I should, perhaps, also mention that differences in parental chromosome counts, even rather large ones, do not preclude the production of fertile hybrids. While differences of this sort do bode ill for the fertility of the resulting progeny, it is only a rule of thumb. For example, female geeps, the products of hybridization between sheep (2n=54) and goats (2n=60), can produce offspring in backcrosses. Likewise, female zeedonks (Burchell's Zebra, 2n=44 x Ass, 2n=62) have also been fertile in backcrosses. There are many other examples of this sort among mammalian hybrids. Therefore, such differences between the parents in a cross do not in any way guarantee an absolute sterility in the hybrid offspring. (For those readers who do not know, backcross hybrids are produced when hybrids from a first cross mate with either of the two types of parents that produced them. When the resulting progeny mate again with the same parental type, the result is the second backcross generation, and so forth.)
  A second so-called fact, which might make it seem impossible for humans to have had a hybrid origin, is the equally erroneous notion that hybrids, especially successful hybrids, do not occur in a state of nature. A third is the mistaken idea that only plants hybridize, and never animals. In fact, however, natural, viable, fertile animal hybrids are abundant. A wide variety of such hybrids occur on an ongoing basis (read a detailed discussion documenting these facts). For example, of the 5,000 different types of hybrid crosses listed in my book on hybridization in birds, approximately half are known to occur in a natural setting (download a PowerPoint presentation summarizing data on hybridization in birds). My current research indicates a comparable rate for mammals.
  Sequence data. And I must now emphasize a fact that I, as a geneticist, find somewhat disappointing: With nucleotide sequence data, it can be very difficult to identify later-generation backcross hybrids derived from several repeated generations of backcrossing (for a full explanation of this fact, see the green sidebar at far right). Instead, as is the case with other later-generation backcross hybrids, the most revealing data is of an anatomical and/or physiological nature. And this is exactly the kind of hybrid that it looks like we are -- that is, it appears that humans are the result of multiple generations of backcrossing to the chimpanzee.
  Human infertility. Another observation that appears significant in connection with the hypothesis under consideration is that it has been well known for decades that human sperm is abnormal in comparison with that of the typical mammal. Human spermatozoa are not of one uniform type as in the vast majority of all other types of animals. Moreover, human sperm is not merely abnormal in appearance '-- a high percentage of human spermatozoa are actually dysfunctional. These and other facts demonstrate that human fertility is low in comparison with that of other mammals (for detailed documentation of this fact see the article Evidence of Human Infertility). Infertility and sperm abnormalities are characteristic of hybrids. So this finding suggests that it's reasonable to suppose, at least for the sake of argument, that humans might be of hybrid origin. It is also consistent with the idea that the hybridization in question was between two rather distinct and genetically incompatible types of animals, that is, it was a distant cross.
  A personal endorsement:"As a clinician and scientist with medical training it is a joy to find a theory so carefully and elegantly presented. My interest in the hybrid nature of modern man led me to Eugene McCarthy's website and lifework. What a revelation! Surprising and shocking. Such is the nature of truth sometimes. Life will never be seen in the same way after reading this work."Dr Chris MillarBallarat, Victoria, Australia
  Methodology. The chimpanzee is plausible in the role of one of the parents that crossed to produce the human race because they are generally recognized as being closest to humans in terms of their genetics (here, I use the term chimpanzee loosely to refer to either the common chimpanzee or to the bonobo, also known as the pygmy chimpanzee; the specific roles of these two rather similar apes within the context of the present hypothesis will be explained in a subsequent section). But then the question arises: If an ancient cross between the chimpanzee and some parental form "X" produced the first humans, then what was that parent? Does it still exist? What was it like?
  As the reader might imagine, if the assumption is correct that one of our parents is the chimpanzee, then it should be possible actually to identify the other parent as well. A hybrid combines traits otherwise seen only separately in the two parental forms from which it is derived, and it is typically intermediate to those parents with respect to a wide range of characters. Naturalists routinely use these facts to identify the parents of hybrids of unknown origin, even backcross hybrids.
  A reader's comment:"Hi, I'm stunned, amazed, and converted."First they posit a particular type of organism as similar to the putative hybrid (in the present case, this organism is the chimpanzee). They then list traits distinguishing the hybrid from the hypothesized parent, and this list of distinguishing traits will describe the second parent. A detailed analysis of such a triad will often establish the parentage of the hybrid. The traits in question in such studies are generally anatomical, not genetic. DNA evidence is used in only a very small percentage of such identifications (and even then, rarely in efforts to identify backcross hybrids), and yet firm conclusions can generally be reached.
  So in the specific case of humans, if the two assumptions made thus far are correct (i.e., (1) that humans actually are hybrids, and (2) that the chimpanzee actually is one of our two parents), then a list of traits distinguishing human beings from chimpanzees should describe the other parent involved in the cross. And by applying this sort of methodology, I have in fact succeeded in narrowing things down to a particular candidate. That is, I looked up every human distinction that I could find and, so long as it was cited by an expert (physical anthropologist, anatomist, etc), I put it on a list. And that list, which includes many, many traits (see the lengthy table on the right-hand side of the next page), consistently describes a particular animal. Keep reading and I'll explain. Next page >>
  A recent tweet about this article:Questions or comments about this theory are welcome. Simply send a message to the author through the contact page of this website. He'll be happy to respond!Why it may not be easy to evaluate this hypothesis with genetic dataIn connection with the hypothesis that human origins can be traced to a hybrid cross, it's important to realize that in most mammalian hybrid crosses, the male hybrids are usually more sterile than are the females. This fact means that breeders working with hybrids typically mate fertile females with one of the two parents (that is they "backcross" them). They do not, as a rule, produce new breeds by breeding the first-cross hybrids among themselves.
  Often, even after a backcross, the resulting hybrids are still fertile in only one sex. So repeated backcrossing typically occurs. However, after a sufficient number of backcrosses, fertile hybrids of both sexes are often obtained and the new breed can thenceforth be maintained via matings among the hybrids themselves. Repeated backcrossing tends to be more necessary in cases where the parents participating in the original cross are more distantly related and genetically incompatible. So one expects also, in the case of new types of organisms arising via natural hybridization, for backcrossing to be the usual route to fertility and reproductive stability. And the same would hold in the specific case of humans arising via hybridization.
  However, consider the effect of such repeated backcrossing on the human genome. The reader may not be familiar with the phenomenon of gene conversion, but its effect on hybrids during backcrossing is to quickly homogenize gene sequences. To understand why this is the case, consider the effects of backcrossing on hybrid DNA.
  In the figure above, note that in either of the parental (incoming) double strands each nucleotide in one strand is properly paired with its complementary nucleotide in the other strand, A is always paired with T, and C is always paired with G. So the paired double DNA strand from one parent might look like this:
  AGTTCCGACGCG
  TCAAGGCTGCGC
  while the strand from the other parent might look like this:
  AGCTCCGACGCG
  TCGAGGCTGCGC
  In each of these two double strands all nucleotides are paired with the complementary nucleotide (A always with T, and C always with G). But when one double strand is compared with the other it's clear that they differ at the third nucleotide base position. In the first double strand the nucleotide base pair is T-A, while in the second it is C-G.
  Thus, when these strands associate with their new partner strands after passing through the Holliday junction in meiosis, the two resulting double strands will be:
  AGTTCCGACGCG
  TCGAGGCTGCGC
  and
  AGCTCCGACGCG
  TCAAGGCTGCGC
  So T is paired with G in the first outgoing strand and C is paired with A in the second outgoing strand. Gene conversion converts each such mismatched pair into a matched one by replacing one of the two nucleotides with the complement of the other nucleotide (which remains unchanged). Experimental results suggest that the mechanism chooses at random which of the two nucleotides to replace so that the nucleotides derived from either parent survive at equal rates.
  So, in an given case of backcrossing, suppose the genomes of the original parents A and B, which produced the first-cross hybrids, differed at one nucleotide position in five (20%). Then the DNA in gametes of the hybrids would differ from A at one position in ten and from B at one position in ten. That is, the first cross hybrid's gametes would be right in the middle between A and B with respect to gene sequence.
  However, after one backcross to A, and the resulting gene conversion during meiosis in the backcross hybrids, the gametes produced by backcross individuals would differ from A at only one position in twenty (5%). And gametes produced by second backcross hybrids would differ at only one position in forty (97.5% similarity). It's clear then that it rapidly becomes quite difficult to distinguish, on the basis of nucleotide sequence data, the backcross hybrids from the pure parent A to which backcrossing has occurred. Chimpanzees and humans are about 98% similar in terms of their nucleotide sequences.
  The specific genetic underpinnings of the many traits that distinguish humans from chimpanzees are explained, in terms of the present theory, in a separate section entitled Why are Humans Different from Chimpanzees?
Inventiefste Human Abedin
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 31 Jul 2013 16:46
  Why Won't the Media Cover Huma Abedin's Ties to Global Jihad Movement?by DIANA WESTJuly 31, 2013Nationalized health care was one of the first programs enacted by the Bolsheviks after they seized power in 1917. Nearly a century later, the U.S. enacted "Obamacare."
  Who won the Cold War again? This is one of the questions I work over in my new book, "American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation's Character" (St. Martin's Press). Can we realistically claim liberty and free markets triumphed over collectivism when today there is only a thin Senate line trying to fend off Obamacare's totalitarian intrusions into citizens' lives? We see perhaps a dozen or so patriots led by conservative ace Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah, gallantly mustering forces to defund further enforcement of this government behemoth aborning. (Call your senators and ask them to join - or tell you why they didn't at the next town hall.) How can we maintain that the republic endured when a centralized super-state has taken its place?
  So, once more, who really won the Cold War? The question is better framed when we realize that the battleground where the Free World met Marx was also psychological. Consciously or not, we struggled against an insidious Marxist ideology that was always, at root, an assault on our nation's character.
  The most recent manifestation of victory over the American character shows through the Anthony Weiner-Huma Abedin scandal. This scandal is a paradoxical double whammy of both exposure and cover-up.
  Everyone knows (too much) about the exposure part: Anthony Weiner, candidate for mayor of New York City, turns out to be a recidivist pervert. The fatuous conversation that has followed this "news" has turned on the decision of Weiner's wife, Huma Abedin, to step forward to try to salvage her husband's bid for public office. The Wall Street Journal's response to Abedin's decision was typical: "Watching the elegant Huma Abedin stand next to her man Tuesday as he explained his latest sexually charged online exchanges was painful for a normal human being to watch."
  The media want to know why the "elegant Huma" - Hillary Clinton's longtime aide and former deputy chief of staff - would do such an inelegant thing. Was this couple's therapy writ large? Was it for their child? Was it ... love?
  True, the barbs of Huma's ambition - as naked as her husband's dirty pics - have broken through the gauzy chatter. But cut off from context, they, too, end up perpetuating what is, in fact, the great Huma Abedin cover-up.
  It is not enough to analyze Huma Abedin as a "political wife." Abedin is also a veritable Muslim Brotherhood princess. As such, the ideological implications of her actions - plus her long and privileged access to U.S. policy-making through Hillary Clinton - must be considered, particularly in the context of national security.
  But talk about paradoxes. In an era when the most minute and lurid descriptions of her husband's anatomical and sexual details are common talk, Huma Abedin's familial and professional connections to the world of jihad are unspeakable.
  In a nutshell - quoting former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy writing at National Review this week - Huma Abedin "worked for many years at a journal that promotes Islamic supremacist ideology that was founded by a top al-Qaida financier, Abdullah Omar Naseef." That would be for at least seven years (1996-2003), by the way, during which Abedin also worked for Hillary Clinton.
  Let this sink in for just a moment. The journal Huma worked for - which promotes Islamic supremacism and was founded by al-Qaida financer Naseef, who also headed the Muslim World League, a leading Muslim Brotherhood organization - is called the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. It was edited first by Huma's father, Syed Abedin, and now by her mother, Saleha Abedin. Saleha is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood. Mother Abedin also directs an organization (the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child) that comes under the umbrella of the Union for Good, another U.S.-designated terrorist organization. As McCarthy reminds us, "the Union for Good is led by Sheikh Yusef al-Qaradawi, the notorious Muslim Brotherhood jurist who has issued fatwas calling for the killing of American military and support personnel in Iraq as well as suicide bombings in Israel."
  Given these alarming professional and family associations, it is hard to imagine how Huma Abedin ever received the security clearance necessary to work closely with the secretary of state. But she did, and from her powerful post, she undoubtedly exerted influence over U.S. policy-making. (In his National Review piece, McCarthy lists specific actions that bespeak a shift in U.S. foreign policy to favor the Muslim Brotherhood.)
  Isn't the Abedin-Clinton national security story at least as newsworthy as Weiner's private parts?
  At this point, only McCarthy's National Review piece reprises these well-documented facts. In other words, it is not only CNN and the New York Times that draw blanks for their readers. Most "conservative" outlets, including Fox News, the New York Post, The Blaze, Breitbart.com and Rush Limbaugh, are ignoring this story, too.
  If the Abedin-Muslim Brotherhood story rings any bells, it is probably because of Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn. Last summer, Bachmann, along with four other House Republicans, raised the issue of Huma Abedin among other examples of possible Muslim Brotherhood penetration of the federal policy-making chain. They asked inspectors general at five departments, including the State Department, to investigate their concerns, but nothing happened - nothing, that is, except that Bachmann was crucified, by Democrats and Republicans alike for asking urgently important questions about national security.
  This made the entire subject, already taboo, positively radioactive - with Huma Abedin becoming the poster victim of this supposed "McCarthyism" redux. End of story. Never mind facts. Never mind also that in his day, Sen. Joseph McCarthy was asking urgently important questions about national security, too.
  But don't worry. We "won" the Cold War. Obamacare, here we come. At this rate, we'll declare "victory" in the so-called war on terror and, before you know it, become a leading outpost of the caliphate.
  Follow me @diana_west_
  Diana West is a journalist and columnist whose writing appears in several high profile outlets. She also has a website: DianaWest.net.
Google: We can ban servers on Fiber without violating net neutrality | Ars Technica
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 23:48
  Tucked away in Google Fiber's terms of service is one clause that might annoy some technically included users. "Unless you have a written agreement with Google Fiber permitting you do so, you should not host any type of server using your Google Fiber connection," Google tells subscribers to its Gigabit Internet service.
  A man in Kansas named Douglas McClendon complained that this clause violates the Federal Communication Commission's Open Internet Order, which states that "Fixed broadband providers may not block lawful content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices."
  The FCC ordered Google to respond, and the company did so yesterday in a letter to the FCC that Wired obtained from McClendon. Google says its terms of service do not violate the FCC's Open Internet Order:
  Google Fiber's server policy is an aspect of ''reasonable network management'' that the Open Internet Order and Rules specifically permit. Mr. McClendon appears to allege that Google Fiber's server policy violates the prohibitions against ''blocking'' and/or ''unreasonable discrimination." The Order, however, provides an exception in both instances for ''reasonable network management.'' As the Order explains, ''[a] network management practice is reasonable if it is appropriate and tailored to achieving a legitimate network management purpose, taking into account the particular network architecture and technology of the broadband Internet access service.''
  Google Fiber's server policy is prototypical ''reasonable network management,'' with no discriminatory impact on any content, application, or service provider. The server policy has been established to account for the congestion management and network security needs of Google Fiber's network architecture, particularly given that Google Fiber does not impose data caps on its users.
  Google isn't alone in imposing these sorts of rules. Comcast restricts use of servers including "e-mail, Web hosting, file sharing, and proxy services and servers."
  A "server" can be any type of computer if it runs server software, regardless of whether it's one of the expensive machines that are used in data centers and usually associated with the word.
  As Wired reporter Ryan Singel notes, Google's terms of service would technically ban things like Minecraft servers and Slingbox. "But in the Google Fiber forums, employees assure subscribers the rules aren't meant to apply to Minecraft servers," Singel wrote. "And, in reality, Google Fiber probably won't notice, let alone kick you off, for using a Slingbox or peer-to-peer software."
44 Facts About The Death Of The Middle Class That Every American Should Know
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Wed, 31 Jul 2013 06:13
  The Economic Collapseby Michael Snyder
  What is America going to look like when the middle class is dead? Once upon a time, the United States has the largest and most vibrant middle class in the history of the world. When I was growing up, it seemed like almost everyone was ''middle class'' and it was very rare to hear of someone that was out of work. Of course life wasn't perfect, but most families owned a home, most families had more than one vehicle, and most families could afford nice vacations and save for retirement at the same time. Sadly, things have dramatically changed in America since that time. There just aren't as many ''middle class jobs'' as there used to be. In fact, just six years ago there were about six million more full-time jobs in our economy than there are right now. Those jobs are being replaced by part-time jobs and temp jobs. The number one employer in America today is Wal-Mart and the number two employer in America today is a temp agency (Kelly Services). But you can't support a family on those kinds of jobs. We live at a time when incomes are going down but the cost of living just keeps going up. As a result, the middle class in America is being absolutely shredded and the ranks of the poor are steadily growing. The following are 44 facts about the death of the middle class that every American should know'...
  1. According to one recent survey, ''four out of five U.S. adults struggle with joblessness, near poverty or reliance on welfare for at least parts of their lives''.
  2. The growth rate of real disposable personal income is the lowest that it has been in decades.
  3. Median household income (adjusted for inflation) has fallen by 7.8 percent since the year 2000.
  4. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the middle class is taking home a smaller share of the overall income pie than has ever been recorded before.
  5. The home ownership rate in the United States is the lowest that it has been in 18 years.
  6. It is more expensive to rent a home in America than ever before. In fact, median asking rent for vacant rental units just hit a brand new all-time record high.
  7. According to one recent survey, 76 percent of all Americans are living paycheck to paycheck.
  8. The U.S. economy actually lost 240,000 full-time jobs last month, and the number of full-time workers in the United States is now about 6 million below the old record that was set back in 2007.
  9. The largest employer in the United States right now is Wal-Mart. The second largest employer in the United States right now is a temp agency (Kelly Services).
  10.One out of every ten jobs in the United States is now filled through a temp agency.
  11. According to the Social Security Administration, 40 percent of all workers in the United States make less than $20,000 a year.
  12. The ratio of wages and salaries to GDP is near an all-time record low.
  13. The U.S. economy continues to trade good paying jobs for low paying jobs. 60 percent of the jobs lost during the last recession were mid-wage jobs, but 58 percent of the jobs created since then have been low wage jobs.
  14. Back in 1980, less than 30% of all jobs in the United States were low income jobs. Today, more than 40% of all jobs in the United States are low income jobs.
  15. At this point, one out of every four American workers has a job that pays $10 an hour or less.
  16. According to one study, between 1969 and 2009 the median wages earned by American men between the ages of 30 and 50 declined by 27 percent after you account for inflation.
  17. In the year 2000, about 17 million Americans were employed in manufacturing. Today, only about 12 million Americans are employed in manufacturing.
  18. The United States has lost more than 56,000 manufacturing facilities since 2001.
  19. The average number of hours worked per employed person per year has fallen by about 100 since the year 2000.
  20. Back in the year 2000, more than 64 percent of all working age Americans had a job. Today, only 58.7 percent of all working age Americans have a job.
  21. When you total up all working age Americans that do not have a job, it comes to more than 100 million.
  22. The average duration of unemployment in the United States is nearly three times as long as it was back in the year 2000.
  23. The percentage of Americans that are self-employed has steadily declined over the past decade and is now at an all-time low.
  24. Right now there are 20.2 million Americans that spend more than half of their incomes on housing. That represents a 46 percent increase from 2001.
  25. In 1989, the debt to income ratio of the average American family was about 58 percent. Today it is up to 154 percent.
  26. Total U.S. household debt grew from just 1.4 trillion dollars in 1980 to a whopping 13.7 trillion dollars in 2007. This played a huge role in the financial crisis of 2008, and the problem still has not been solved.
  27. The total amount of student loan debt in the United States recently surpassed the one trillion dollar mark.
  28. Total home mortgage debt in the United States is now about 5 times larger than it was just 20 years ago.
  29. Back in the year 2000, the mortgage delinquency rate was about 2 percent. Today, it is nearly 10 percent.
  30. Consumer debt in the United States has risen by a whopping 1700% since 1971, and 46% of all Americans carry a credit card balance from month to month.
  31. In 1999, 64.1 percent of all Americans were covered by employment-based health insurance. Today, only 55.1 percent are covered by employment-based health insurance.
  32. One study discovered that approximately 41 percent of all working age Americans either have medical bill problems or are currently paying off medical debt, and according to a report published in The American Journal of Medicine medical bills are a major factor in more than 60 percent of all personal bankruptcies in the United States.
  33. Each year, the average American must work 107 days just to make enough money to pay local, state and federal taxes.
  34. Today, approximately 46.2 million Americans are living in poverty.
  35. The number of Americans living in poverty has increased by more than 15 million since the year 2000.
  36. Families that have a head of household under the age of 30 have a poverty rate of 37 percent.
  37. At this point, approximately 25 million American adults are living with their parents.
  38. In the year 2000, there were only 17 million Americans on food stamps. Today, there are more than 47 million Americans on food stamps.
  39. Back in the 1970s, about one out of every 50 Americans was on food stamps. Today, about one out of every 6.5 Americans is on food stamps.
  40. Right now, the number of Americans on food stamps exceeds the entire population of the nation of Spain.
  41. According to one calculation, the number of Americans on food stamps now exceeds the combined populations of ''Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming.''
  42. At this point, more than a million public school students in the United States are homeless. This is the first time that has ever happened in our history. That number has risen by 57 percent since the 2006-2007 school year.
  43. According to U.S. Census data, 57 percent of all American children live in a home that is either considered to be ''poor'' or ''low income''.
  44. In the year 2000, the ratio of social welfare benefits to salaries and wages was approximately 21 percent. Today, the ratio of social welfare benefits to salaries and wages is approximately 35 percent.
  And not only is the middle class being systematically destroyed right now, we are also destroying the bright economic future that our children and our grandchildren were supposed to have by accumulating gigantic mountains of debt in their names. The following is from a recent article by Bill Bonner'...
  Today, the U.S. lumbers into the future with total debt equal to about 350% of GDP. In Britain and Japan, the total is over 500%. Debt, remember, is the homage that the future pays to the past. It has to be carried, serviced'... and paid. It has to be reckoned with'... one way or another.
  And the cost of carrying debt is going up! Over the last few weeks, interest rates have moved up by about 15% '-- an astounding increase for the sluggish debt market. How long will it be before long-term borrowing rates are back to ''normal''?
  At 5% interest, a debt that measures 3.5 times your revenue will cost about one-sixth of your income. Before taxes. After tax, you will have to work about one day a week to keep up with it (to say nothing of paying it off!).
  That's a heavy burden. It is especially disagreeable when someone else ran up the debt. Then you are a debt slave. That is the situation of young people today. They must face their parents' debt. Even serfs in the Dark Ages had it better. They had to work only one day out of 10 for their lords and masters.
  We were handed the keys to the greatest economic machine in the history of the planet and we wrecked it.
  As young people realize that their futures have been destroyed, many of them are going to totally lose hope and give in to despair.
  And desperate people do desperate things. As our economy continues to crumble, we are going to see crime greatly increase as people do what they feel they need to do in order to survive. In fact, we are already starting to see this happen. Just this week, CNBC reported on the raging epidemic of copper theft that we are seeing all over the nation right now'...
  Copper is such a hot commodity that thieves are going after the metal anywhere they can find it: an electrical power station in Wichita, Kan., or half a dozen middle-class homes in Morris Township, N.J. Evenon a Utah highway construction site, crooks managed to abscond with six miles of copper wire.
  Those are just a handful of recent targets across the U.S. in the $1 billion business of copper theft.
  ''There's no question the theft has gotten much, much worse,'' said Mike Adelizzi, president of the American Supply Association, a nonprofit group representing distributors and suppliers in the plumbing, heating, cooling and industrial pipe industries.
  The United States once had the greatest middle class in the history of the world, but now it it dying.
  This is causing a tremendous amount of anger and frustration to build in this nation, and when the next major wave of the economic collapse strikes, a lot of that anger and frustration will likely be unleashed.
  The American people don't understand that these problems have taken decades to develop. They just want someone to fix things. They just want things to go back to the way that they used to be.
  Unfortunately, the great economic storm that is coming is not going to be averted.
  Get ready while you still can. Time is running out.
  Via The Economic Collapse
McDonalds Math, Or, Latest Lib Talking Points Fail
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: JustOneMinute
  Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:26
  The Huffington Postpopularizes some McDonalds level math:
  Doubling McDonald's Salaries Would Cause Your Big Mac To Cost Just 68 More: Study
  McDonald's can afford to pay its workers a living wage without sacrificing any of its low menu prices, according to a new study provided to The Huffington Post by a University of Kansas researcher.
  Doubling the salaries and benefits of all McDonald's employees -- from workers earning the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour to CEO Donald Thompson, whose 2012 compensation totaled $8.75 million -- would cause the price of a Big Mac to increase just 68 cents, from $3.99 to $4.67, University of Kansas research assistant Arnobio Morelix told HuffPost. In addition, every item on the Dollar Menu would go up by 17 cents.
  And how did he come to this conclusion?
  Morelix looked at McDonald's 2012 annual report and discovered that only 17.1 percent of the fast-food giant's revenue goes toward salaries and benefits. In other words, for every dollar McDonald's earns, a little more than 17 cents goes toward the income and benefits of its more than 500,000 U.S. employees.
  Thus, if McDonald's executives wanted to double the salaries of all of its employees and keep profits and other expenses the same, it would need to increase prices by just 17 cents per dollar, according to Morelix.
  I don't suppose we can expect Huffers to actually read the annual report in question, but here it is. And what do we glean?
  From the Consolidated Statement of Income (p. 30) we see that "Payroll and Employee Benefits" came to $4,710.3 (in millions, or $4,710,300,000, which is even past A-Rod territory.) Total Revenue was $27,567 (in millions). Dividing 4,710 by 27,567 yields 17.1%, which we take to be the 17% used by Morelix.
  However! McDonalds reports a net revenue from both the stores it operates and its franchise fees. The McDonalds franchisors are separate businesses which pay a fee to McDonalds Corp and are responsible for their own payroll, as is discussed in the annual report (p. 13).
  So Morelix has not included the payroll figure for the franchisees in this calculation. Is that a big problem? Huge, actually. From page 11 we see that their are 6,598 outlets run directly by McDonalds Corp and 27,882 franchised outlets. Sales from franchised outlets totalled $69,687 (in million) in 2012, which far exceeds the $18,602 (mm) revenue figure for company-operated stores. That $69 billion figure is condensed down to $8.9 billion of franchise revenue on the Consolidated Statement of Income (The rest of the $27,567 MM in total revenue comes from sales at McDonalds run stores).
  Which leaves us where? Doubling all the salaries at McDonalds headquarters and in their 6,598 stores would be offset by a total revenue increase of 17%, but the franchisees won't be agreeing to pay more in franchise fees and won't be raising their payroll (the size of which we haven't found in this report) in the 27,882 stores they operate.
  If I were inclined to press down this road I would compare the $18 billion of revenue from McDonalds run stores with the payroll figure of $4.7 billion; that ratio is 26%. By that calculation, McDonalds would need to raise all its prices by 26% at its own stores in order to double all of its direct payroll expenses, which presumably includes a lot of non-hamburger flippers at headquarters. Hey, 17%, 26%, de nada - that is only a 50% error and it's not my money anyway!
  Or from a different tack - the McDonalds-operated stores average $2.8 million in sales per store. The franchisees average $2.5 million per store, so they are on average a bit smaller but close enough that maybe we can wave our hands and pretend they are the same. That suggests that if the franchisees cost structure looks like the parent company then they can double their payroll and recoup the additional expense by raising prices by 26%.
  Of course, that is a big if. And it assumes that there are no elasticities - consumers don't switch to Wendy's, franchisees don't finally buy that expensive whiz-bang machine that eliminates two jobs, and so on. One might argue that if minimum wage legislation obliged Wendy's and other fast food chains to also raise payroll costs that all of them would be obliged to raise prices and some of the consumer substitution would be mitigated. One might also wonder why McDonalds and their franchisees have been so beneficient as to forebear a 26% price increase, taking all that new revenue straight to the bottom line. Have they forgotten to be greedy, or are they already charging as much as they think consumers will pay?
  Moreever, there is yet another problem. The fundamental premise is that McDonalds customers will pay more, thereby raising the living standard of the McDonalds employees. That would be fine if Mitt Romney and his sons were over-represented in the McDonalds demographic, but I bet they aren't. My guess is that working- and middle-class families make up the bulk of McDonalds customers, which means the working class and middle class will be reaching into their non-capacious pockets to elevate the lifestyle of McDonalds workers, not all of whom are themselves in the working class. I don't want to say "Voodoo economics", but a regressive 'tax' to help those with jobs may not be the path to prosperity.
  Get back to me when the workers are striking at Le Bernardin. And bring the real math.
  DIFFERING INTUITIONS:
  I adore this from Think Progress:
  Currently, a minimum wage McDonalds employee makes $7.25 per hour. The CEO makes $8.75 million. But if the former were raised to $15 and the latter to $17.5 million, the dollar menu would only have to become the $1.17 menu and the Big Mac would go from $3.99 to $4.67, Morelix found.
  If the CEO's pay remained the same but low-wage workers earned more, the price difference for customers would be negligible.
  We are talking about doubling a $4.7 billion payroll but in their estimation, saving $8.75 million by not raising the CEO pay would make room for negligible price hikes. Ok.
  Back in reality, if we double the CEO pay then the reported "Payroll and Employee Benefits" as shown in the annual report would rise from $4,710.3 MM to $4,719.0 MM. Not quite a rounding error.
  COLOR ME SHOCKED: A HuffPo correction:
  CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story misrepresented Arnobio Morelix as a researcher for the University of Kansas. Morelix is registered as a undergraduate student at the university, according to University of Kansas School of Business Communications Director Austin Falley.
  Yup, that is what they say at the Daily Kansan. Would it be fair to say that libs will believe anything and print anything that fits The Narrative?
Deadline.com >> Blog ArchiveFacebook Prepares To Insert Video Ads Into Users' News Feeds: Report - Deadline.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 31 Jul 2013 05:17
  BY DAVID LIEBERMAN, Financial Editor | Tuesday July 30, 2013 @ 6:59pm EDTEmail This
  Facebook had better be careful. A lot of users may find it creepy later this year when, Bloomberg reports, the social network plans to let marketers insert 15-second video ads directly into people's news feeds. Buyers could target the age and gender of the users who'd find the ads in their feeds the news service says, citing''two people familiar with the matter.'' Ads could sell for as much as $2.5M a day depending on how many people watch them. Execs appear to appreciate the possibility of a backlash: CEO Mark Zuckerberg has delayed the plan ''at least twice'' as he considers ways to minimize user ire over the ads, for example by offering them in high-def and ensuring that people won't see the same pitch more than three times a day. But the sales opportunity apparently is too lucrative to resist. Advertisers likely will spend nearly $64B in the U.S. this year on TV ads vs $36B on the Internet. That's why digital powers including Google, Yahoo, and AOL are gunning for TV advertising '-- including by staging their own NewFront sales pitches to ad buyers as they also gather for television networks' upfront presentations. Last week Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg told analysts that her company has ''a massive and engaged audience around the world that brands can use to build awareness and drive sales. Every night 88 million to 100 million people are actively using Facebook during primetime TV hours in United States alone.'' Nielsen has been working with Facebook to come up with ratings for online videos that would be similar to TV ratings.
  Email This
Washington Post
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 21:56
  By Rachel Weiner, Published: JULY 29, 2:24 PM ET Aa Huma Abedin and Hillary Clinton in 2011. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
  Allies of Hillary Clinton want you to know one thing: Anthony Weiner is not her husband.
  As Weiner continues his kamikaze campaign for mayor of New York City with the support of his wife, longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin, the couple is increasingly becoming a liability for the former Secretary of State and potential 2016 presidential candidate.
  "The Clintons are upset with the comparisons that the Weiners seem to be encouraging -- that Huma is 'standing by her man' the way Hillary did with Bill, which is not what she in fact did,'' one Democrat tells the New York Post. Another says that the Clintons are ''distancing themselves'' from this ''nonsense.''
  The Clintons, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd writes, ''are not happy about getting dragged into the lewd spectacle that is a low-budget movie version of their masterpiece.''
  At the outset of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, Clinton famously attributed the accusations against her husband to a ''vast right-wing conspiracy.'' When her husband confessed to the affair, Hillary Clinton did not join him, and her office told the public she had been ''misled.'' But she was ''committed to her marriage,'' the spokeswoman added, and Clinton traveled with the president to Martha's Vineyard a day later.
  Unlike Abedin, Clinton never brought her decision to forgive her husband into a political campaign. In a sense, she was saved from making the exact choice Abedin faced; Bill Clinton never ran for office again.
  The distinction may have more to do with political gifts than marital particulars. Despite his high media profile, Weiner is a former House member who was the the lead sponsor of only one bill that actually became law. Clinton was a successful two-term president of the United States, and he went on to be the head of a global philanthropic enterprise.
  And all that is far in the past for the Clintons; there has been no subsequent scandal or salacious revelation. The last thing Hillary Clinton wants as she considers a run for president herself is to be pulled into Weiner's sexting drama.
  But it might be too late. On Monday, CNN, citing a source close to the former first couple, reported that they are not ''livid'' with comparisons of Bill Clinton to candidate Weiner, as The New York Post reported, but that they are livid for personal, not political reasons, stemming from their close personal, not political, relationship with Abedin.
  One sees how this could get complicated for them.
  Weiner's run has been propelled in part by Abedin's connection to the Clintons. Huma has aggressively used her connections to garner support for her husband's bid. "The chatter was, if you wanted to stay in Hillary's good graces, you answer the call from Huma," one Clinton intimate told the Washington Post.
  In the gauzy New York Times Magazine profile that launched his campaign, Hillary Clinton appears as an instrumental player in their marriage: she encourages their (ultimately disastrous) first date and later gives Weiner an opportunity to show Abedin his better nature.
  The connection is real; Bill Clinton officiated the couple's wedding. But the Clintons, through their supporters, quietly made no secret of their disapproval of Weiner running, especially when he dropped the former president's name without permission early on. Now it's clearly a political disaster they need to get away from. The question is whether they want or even can take Abedin with them by keeping her in the 2016 orbit, or leave her to burn in the fire she helped start.
  Jason Horowitz contributed to this report.
  MORE
  My Account
  Sign InSubscribe(C) Copyright 1996-2013 The Washington Post
  View desktop site
Want to get through to a human quicker on Apple's support line? Drop an F-bomb - The Next Web
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 21:42
  Automated telephone systems '' don't you just love them?
  Like many other major technology companies, Apple employs an automated system to ask questions, identify issues and put callers through to the right person '' who might be able to help.
  Often, it can feel like you are taking part in the world's longest question and answer session '' but help is at hand.
  It turns out that the automated system that Apple uses (but isn't limited to just this company) is programmed to listen for signs of distress. If that additional menu option is one too many and you unleash a volley of terse language down the phone, it will immediately connect you with a real person.
  One Reddit user found this out when he dropped an F-bomb while on a call to Apple support. As soon as the phrase was registered, it ''cut itself off in mid-sentence, apologized, and in about 10 more seconds [he] was talking to an Apple tech.''
  This behaviour isn't new, Interactive Voice Response (IVR) systems are often programmed to listen out for certain keywords that might indicate they are about to lose a customer. By monitoring calls and immediately connecting a frustrated caller, the company may be able to reduce the number of complaints is receives and retain the caller's custom.
  Should you use this tactic every time you call Apple? It's not advisable, especially as it isn't likely to speed up the process.
  Replying to the original thread, another Reddit user '-- a person that said he had worked as a Quality Assurance representative for AppleCare '-- says that swearing or pressing zero will connect you with a real person, but he/she will only be a ''call director,'' who will apologise and the transfer you back to the correct queue.
  It's a tip that has been known to work with many telephone systems over the years, but it's the first time we've heard it works with Apple's automated system.
  The more you know.
  Image Credit: alanclarkdesign/Flickr
Recent deadly train accidents in Europe - Recent deadly train accidents in Europe | The Economic Times
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 21:38
  Recent deadly train accidents in Europe30 Jul, 2013
  Text: AP/Agencies
  Barely a week after the deadly train accident in Spain, that killed 79 people, two trains collided head-on in Switzerland on July 29, 2013. Europe, generally known for it's high standards of passenger safety, has seen a spate of high profile train accidents in last one year.
  A brief look at these recent train accidents show major anomalies and raises serious questions on the safety of train network in Europe. The accidents involve head-on collisions, train-derailments, level-crossing accidents, negligent driving, technical slags, possibly everything that can go wrong with Europe's train network.
  Here's a look on some recent deadly train accidents in Europe.
  Prev|Next
Two Are Accused in Canada of Plotting Train Derailment - NYTimes.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 21:38
  OTTAWA '-- The Royal Canadian Mounted Police on Monday announced the arrest of two men who are accused of planning to derail a passenger train in an Al Qaeda-linked plot.
  The police, saying the investigation was continuing, offered little in the way of details or evidence at a news conference in Toronto. Canadian politicians and government officials were similarly reticent.
  Assistant Commissioner James Malizia said that the two suspects had received ''direction and guidance'' from ''Al Qaeda elements living in Iran,'' but that there was no evidence that the effort had been sponsored by the government of Iran.
  He declined to explain how the link to Al Qaeda had been made.
  The suspects were identified as Chiheb Esseghaier, 35, who has been living in Montreal, and Raed Jaser, 30, of Toronto. The police said the men were not Canadian citizens, but declined to identify their nationalities or to describe their immigration status in Canada.
  Chief Superintendent Jennifer Strachan said the two men had studied train movements and rail lines in and around Toronto, and had been plotting to attack a train operated by Via Rail Canada, the government-owned rail system, within Canada.
  The police declined to identify what train or train line the men had planned to target or to describe how the derailment was to have occurred. Via Rail, in conjunction with Amtrak, runs a train from Toronto to New York's Penn Station.
  The police emphasized that the public had never been in ''imminent danger.'' Officials said that the suspects had been under constant observation and that contingency plans had been made.
  Little is known about the men. The Canadian Press news agency reported that Mr. Esseghaier studied at the University of Sherbrooke in Quebec in 2008 and 2009, and had recently been doing graduate work in biology at the Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique in Montreal.
  Both the police and David Jacobson, the United States ambassador to Canada, indicated that the F.B.I. and other American law enforcement and intelligence agencies were involved in the investigation. No one, however, offered any specifics about that involvement or indicated if the plot had a cross-border element.
  ''These arrests were the result of extensive cross-border cooperation, which is the hallmark of our relationship,'' Mr. Jacobson said in a statement. ''Dedicated professionals on both sides of the border brought these arrests to fruition.''
  During the news conference, senior officers of the Mounted Police were asked repeatedly about the link to Iran, which seemed unusual. Iran is dominated by Shiites while Al Qaeda is a Sunni organization. But the United States has accused Iran of aiding Al Qaeda in the past.
  The arrests were made shortly before Canada's House of Commons began a debate on legislation that would expand the powers of police and intelligence agencies in suspected terrorism cases.
  Early this month, the Mounted Police said two young Canadians from London, Ontario, had died in January while participating in an attack on a gas plant in Algeria. In 2006, the police arrested 18 people in and around Toronto who they said were part of a Qaeda-affiliated group that planned attacks in Canada. Eleven were convicted or pleaded guilty while charges against the remainder of the suspects were dropped.
  Correction: April 24, 2013
  An article on Tuesday about the arrest in Canada of two men who the Royal Canadian Mounted Police said had been planning to derail a passenger train in a plot linked to Al Qaeda reversed, in some editions, the cities in which the suspects, Chiheb Esseghaier and Raed Jaser, were living. Mr. Esseghaier has been living in Montreal, and Mr. Jaser in Toronto.
Trains terror threat
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 21:37
  Anyone who's flown in recent years has encountered the stepped-up security procedures at the airport. But one expert says the focus on the skies ignores a far bigger safety risk these days: Mass transit on the ground.According to Arnold Barnett, a professor of management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Sloan School, people who commute on subways and trains around the world face significantly greater security threats than air passengers. Speaking at the recent annual meeting of the Institute of Operations Research and the Management Sciences, Barnett presented statistics showing that rail and subway transit has become more dangerous
FACT SHEET: A Better Bargain for the Middle Class: Jobs
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 18:30
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 30, 2013
  One of the cornerstones of the President's plan to create a better bargain for the middle class is to ensure that every American who is willing to work for it will have the opportunity for a good job that pays good wages. In today's speech, the President laid out an idea that both parties should be able to support to create jobs: a plan that simplifies the tax code for our businesses and gives working families a better deal.
  Our current tax code is broken and too complex, with businesses that play by the rules paying a 35% tax rate while many corporations that can hire hundreds of lawyers pay virtually no taxes at all. That is why the President has called for a revenue-neutral simplification of our business tax code to eliminate loopholes that encourage companies to ship jobs overseas and establishes a top tax rate of 28%. Under the President's proposal, some businesses would pay less, some corporations would pay more, but everyone would pay their fair share. But if we're going to give businesses a better deal, we should give the people who work there a better deal too. Today, the President is calling for a pro-growth tax reform and jobs package that would be fully offset using one-time revenues raised as we transition to a new business tax system. The transition revenue would support much-needed investments such as modernizing our infrastructure; creating new manufacturing hubs; and training our workers with the skills they need for the jobs of today and tomorrow. At the same time, President Obama remains committed to pursuing a long-term deficit reduction deal that includes revenue-raising individual tax reform and a balanced approach to replacing the damaging sequester.
  The bottom line is that the President will work with Republicans on a package to simplify our business tax code so long as it includes real investments to help restore middle class security, create jobs and grow the economy.
  Summary of the Pro-Growth Tax Reform and Jobs Package
  Simplify the Tax Code for Businesses to Create Jobs and Economic Growth: The President has put forward a framework for simplifying the corporate tax code to encourage job creation here at home '' without adding a dime to the deficit:Eliminating Loopholes While Lowering the Top Rate to No Higher than 28%Simplifying Tax Filing and Increasing Incentives to Invest for Small BusinessesA Manufacturing Tax Rate No Higher Than 25%Removing Incentives to Locate OverseasA Broader Package to Support Middle Class Jobs: The President believes we can design a broader growth and jobs package without adding a penny to the deficit by, for example, using one-time funds raised as we transition to a new tax system to support investments like:Rebuilding American Infrastructure:Immediate Infrastructure Investments With a ''Fix It First'' FocusA ''Rebuild America Partnership'' to Leverage Private Sector Funds''America Fast Forward'' Bonds '' Including for Modernized SchoolsCreating 45 New Manufacturing Innovation Institutes Over 10 YearsInvesting in Community Colleges to Train Workers for Jobs of the FutureNew Executive Actions on Jobs: In addition to the package above, President Obama announced new executive actions to support jobs:Building A Competitive Edge for Foreign Investment Through An Expanded SelectUSACall to Action on Public-Private Efforts to Get the Long-Term Unemployed Back to Work Simplifying the Tax Code for Businesses to Create Jobs and Economic Growth
  The President has put forward a framework for revenue-neutral business tax reform that lowers corporate tax rates and simplifies the corporate tax code to encourage job creation here at home '' without adding a dime to the deficit '' by:
  Eliminating Loopholes that Send Jobs Overseas: President Obama has called for eliminating dozens of tax loopholes to ensure that every corporation pays their fair share, and reinvesting these savings to lower the top corporate tax rate from 35 percent to a globally competitive 28 percent. Simplifying Tax Filing and Increasing Incentives to Invest for Small Businesses: President Obama believes tax reform should make tax filing simpler for small businesses. As part of his framework, he has proposed to allow businesses to expense up to $1 million in investments, providing them with an incentive to invest in new plants and equipment and removing a source of complexity in the tax code. Creating Good Manufacturing Jobs Here at Home: The President has called for refocusing the manufacturing deduction and using the savings to reduce the effective rate on manufacturing to no more than 25 percent, while encouraging research and development and the production of clean energy. Ensuring Every Corporation Pays In: The President believes the tax system should not give companies incentives to locate production overseas or engage in accounting games to shift profits abroad '' which is why he has put forward a minimum tax on foreign earnings. Coupling Business Tax Reform With Investments in Middle Class Jobs
  President Obama believes that business tax reform is necessary to create jobs and spur investment, but that it should come as part of a broader effort to support job creation and competitiveness that benefits the middle class. By using one-time revenue raised in the transition to a new business tax system, we can support investments like modernizing our infrastructure that will make us more competitive at home. That's why the President is calling for business tax reform that is revenue-neutral over the long-term, and a one-time deficit-neutral growth package that includes measures such as:
  Rebuilding American Infrastructure: The President has called for significant investments to modernize our nation's infrastructure: Immediate Investments With a ''Fix It First'' Focus: The President's plan would invest immediately in our nation's infrastructure, with an emphasis on reducing the backlog of deferred maintenance on highways, bridges, transit systems, and airports nationwide. A ''Rebuild America Partnership'' to Leverage Private Sector Investment: Combined with his plan for immediate investments, President Obama has called for new efforts to leverage private funds to rebuild our infrastructure. The President has proposed a National Infrastructure Bank, expanding the successful TIFIA program and changes to tax rules to encourage greater private investment. Encouraging Private Investment Through ''America Fast Forward'' Bonds '' Including for Modernized Schools: The President's new America Fast Forward (AFF) bonds program would build upon and expand a successful program created in the Recovery Act to attract private capital for infrastructure investments '' including additional support for bonds that finance school construction and modernization. Creating Up to 45 New Manufacturing Innovation Institutes: To support investment in U.S. manufacturers' competitiveness and accelerate innovation in manufacturing, the President has put forward an expanded proposal to create a network of manufacturing innovation institutes across the country that bring together companies, universities and community colleges, and government. Following on the initial success of a pilot institute in Youngstown, Ohio and efforts under way to launch three new institutes this year, the President is calling for Congress to create up to 45 new manufacturing innovation institutes over 10 years, tripling that number from the 15 institutes originally proposed. Investing in Community Colleges to Train Workers for Jobs of the Future: The Community College to Career Fund would invest in the nation's community colleges to train workers for good-paying jobs in high-growth and high-demand industries. The fund would help create a more skilled workforce by linking community colleges with the private sector, supporting programs that invest in apprenticeships, entrepreneurial training and on-the-job training opportunities as well as industry skill consortia that help identify and respond to pressing workforce needs. New Executive Actions to Spur Middle Class Job Growth
  In addition to the items above, President Obama is calling in Chattanooga today for two executive actions to support job growth:
  Building the United States Competitive Edge for Foreign Investment Through An Expanded SelectUSA: In 2011, the President launched SelectUSA, creating the first federal program to promote and facilitate U.S. investment in partnership with our states. Today, President Obama is directing his economic team and Cabinet '' particularly the Commerce and State Departments '' to put forward an unprecedented, coordinated Administration-wide effort at using our resources at home and abroad to bring new job creation to the U.S., with the goal of raising the United States to the top of the world in investment promotion efforts. The President will also host a summit bringing together business leaders from around the world on October 31st and November 1st to showcase investing in the U.S. and connecting them with state and local officials to make real progress on making the U.S. a magnet for jobs. Call to Action for the Private Sector to Work With Government on Getting the Long-Term Unemployed Back to Work: With evidence that the long-term unemployed face particular barriers in getting hired, President Obama is challenging the private sector, non-profits and government to join together in efforts to help these workers build their skills and find jobs. Later this fall, President Obama will convene CEOs and others who are joining together to put in place best practices for training, recruiting and hiring the long-term unemployed. Additional Efforts to Support Middle Class Jobs
  Increasing the Minimum Wage So That No Family Who Works Full-Time Has to Raise Their Family in Poverty: After decades in which the minimum wage has eroded in value, President Obama is calling on Congress to raise the minimum wage to the level it was at the beginning of the Reagan Administration in 1981, while indexing it for inflation and raising the tipped minimum wage. Supporting U.S. Exports While Protecting Workers and Investing in Skills: As part of his commitment to increase exports and the good-paying jobs supported by exports, President Obama will work with Congress to secure Trade Promotion Authority as part of a package that ensures American workers have the support and skills they need to compete in the global economy, including through the Trade Adjustment Assistance program. Strengthening America's Manufacturing Communities: To both prevent downward spirals and strengthen the ability of communities hardest hit by the recession to attract investment, the President has called for a $6 billion credit over three years so that communities that are in the process of suffering a major job loss can apply for a credit they could use to help attract new investment immediately into the community. President Obama has also created the Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership, proposing new funding for it through the Department of Commerce and directing Federal agencies to provide coordinated assistance to manufacturing communities to strengthen their ongoing ability to attract lasting business investment. Increasing Our Investments in Clean Energy Research: To ensure that the United States is the leader in the clean energy sector '' creating new companies and new jobs '' President Obama has proposed increasing funding for clean energy technology across all agencies by 30 percent to $7.9 billion. In addition, President Obama has proposed setting aside $2 billion over 10 years, using proceeds from Federal oil and gas development, to support research into a range of cost-effective technologies '' like advanced vehicles that run on electricity, homegrown biofuels, fuel cells, and domestically produced natural gas. Supporting Clean Natural Gas as Part of The United States' Competitive Advantage: The President's budget proposed to invest more than $40 million in research to ensure safe and responsible natural gas production. And as part of a $375 million investment in cleaner energy from fossil fuels, the President's budget includes a new $25 million prize for the first natural gas combined cycle power plant to integrate carbon capture and storage. The President's Budget also includes a tax credit to offset the incremental cost of dedicated alternative fuel trucks, covering both natural gas and electric trucks.
Monsanto has a PR problem? Another job for Curry-Dvorak Consulting: Monsanto-backed GMO giants launch website to combat anti-biotech sentiment
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: News RSS
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 14:33
  A group of biotech seed companies have launched an online forum to rebuff disapproval of genetically modified foods across the world. Activists and consumer groups are skeptical, saying the industry has a 'track record of being anything but transparent'.
  The website is said to be partly backed by the biotech US giant Monsanto, DuPont and Dow AgroSciences, according to Reuters, as well as by other companies whose products feature ingredients that have been genetically altered in ways the companies claim improve food production.
  Founders of www.GMOAnswers.com say the website was created ''to do a better job answering your questions '-- no matter what they are '-- about GMOs.'' Its launch is part of the biotech industry's campaign to respond to concerns for GMO food labeling and tighter regulation in the US.
  One user from Newtown, Pennsylvania identified as Sorgfelt posted a question on the website asking whether he could trust any research done on GMOs that has the imprimatur of the Missouri-based Monsanto. He query was prompted after learning ''from practical experience that, in order to get a job with Monsanto, or do any research that is supported by Monsanto, or even to publish research on Monsanto seeds, that all of my work would have to be approved by Monsanto.''
  ''This makes it very difficult to have legitimate third party research to rely on,'' Sorgfelt, whose question has yet to be answered, added.
  Meanwhile, biotech industry players say all they want is dialogue on the issue.
  "This... is an effort to increase the dialogue. That is all we want," Paul Schickler, president of DuPont Pioneer told Reuters. "Dialogue is good. Over time I think we'll come to a common understanding."
  Activists argue that the newly-established website won't help stop the consumer backlash against genetically engineered foods that has been brewing for years.
  '''...the industry has a track record of being anything but transparent. They spend millions in marketing and lobbying against popular GMO labeling efforts. Their control of patents has prevented research from being done on the long-term impacts of biotech crops and food products. This latest public relations blitz is just more of the same from an industry that is struggling to combat popular sentiment that genetically engineered foods are unlabeled, untested and unsafe,'' Executive Director of Food & Water Watch, Wenonah Hauter, said on Monday.
  ''More claims from the biotech industry about the safety of genetic engineering are not a replacement for the clear labeling that consumers are demanding,'' he added.
  Protests against Monsanto have become a frequent event across the globe. Earlier this month the world's largest seed-maker said it would drop its bid to grow some of its genetically modified crops in Europe after a number of European countries, including France, Germany and Italy, established bans against genetically-modified organisms.
  The company's corporate spokesman explained that Monsanto would offer its biotech crops only to those who want them.
  "We're going to sell the GM seeds only where they enjoy broad farmer support, broad political support and a functioning regulatory system," Thomas Helscher told Reuters in May. "As far as we're convinced this only applies to a few countries in Europe today, primarily Spain and Portugal."
  The company is also looking to gain its share in the corn market in Ukraine. Eastern Europe, as well as South America, are currently the key growth areas for Monsanto.
  Another issue raising public concerns is the labeling of GMOs products, which usually go onto supermarket shelves unmarked.
  Last year, Monsanto and other industry members spent $40 million to defeat a ballot initiative in California to require labeling of GMO food, Reuters reported.
  The Natural Products Association, the nation's largest association for natural products representing 1,900 food industry players, has recently called for all foods containing genetically-modified organisms to be accurately labeled under a uniform standard, so consumers can ''make educated decisions about foods they purchase''.
  In March, grocery retailer Whole Foods announced that by 2018, all products in US and Canadian stores must be labeled if they contain GMOs. This is the first national grocery store to set a deadline for genetically modified ingredients labeling.
  ''We are putting a stake in the ground on GMO labeling to support the consumer's right to know,'' co-CEO of Whole Foods Market, Walter Robb, said. ''The prevalence of GMOs in the US paired with nonexistent mandatory labeling makes it very difficult for retailers to source non-GMO options and for consumers to choose non-GMO products. Accordingly, we are stepping up our support of certified organic agriculture, where GMOs are not allowed, and we are working together with our supplier partners to grow our non-GMO supply chain to ensure we can continue to provide these choices in the future,'' he added.
  In June, Chipotle Mexican became the first US restaurant chain to reveal GMO ingredients after it begun labeling all the ingredients the grill burrito group uses that contain genetically modified organisms.
How Taxpayers Will Bail Out Detroit
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: FrontPage Magazine Â» FrontPage
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:50
  On Sunday, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew ostensibly ruled out a federal government bailout of Detroit following its recent declaration of bankruptcy. ''You know George, Detroit's economic problems have been a long time in developing'...I think when it comes to the questions between Detroit and its creditors, that's what Detroit is going to have to work out with the creditors,'' he told ABC's George Stephanopoulos. Not quite. Detroit is proposing an effort to offload much of its bloated healthcare costs onto the American taxpayer, using ObamaCare as the vehicle for doing so.
  ''The Affordable Care Act does change the possibilities here dramatically,'' said Neil Bomberg, a program director at the National League of Cities. ''It offers a very high-quality, potentially very affordable way to get people into health care without the burden falling back onto the city and town.'' In reality, the proposal would do nothing more than shift the so-called ''burden'' of fiscal irresponsibility produced by decades of ''city and town'' politicians colluding with labor unions onto other cities and towns that had nothing to do with that irresponsibility. As for ''affordability,'' such a statement is equally nonsensical. More affordability for Detroit, and other progressive sinkholes, equals less affordability for those expected to make up the difference.
  Furthermore, Detroit is hardly an isolated case. A study conducted by the Pew Charitable Trusts revealed that ''61 key cities across America '... emerged with a gap of more than $217 billion between what they had promised their workers in pensions and retiree health care and what they had saved to pay that bill.''
  As the chart included with the study indicates, cities have been more responsible with regard to funding worker pension benefits. Of the 61 cities included in the study, 24 had pension funding levels of 80 percent or more, while 37 cities had less than 80 percent. Tellingly, Detroit was one of the more responsible cities in that regard, having funded 93 percent of their pension obligations. Considering Detroit has declared bankruptcy, it stands to reason that healthcare costs are either a much more onerous burden, or one that cities take far less seriously.
  The second chart in the study reveals that underfunded healthcare plans have reached epic proportions. Only two of the 61 cities surveyed have funded worker healthcare costs at a level higher than 50 percent: Los Angeles, CA at 55 percent, and Denver, CO at 51 percent. The most prevalent number on this chart is zero. Thirty-three cities haven't set aside anything and four others are in red figures at negative one percent. The report notes the total shortfall for healthcare funding for cities in 2009, the latest fiscal year with the most complete data, amounted to $118 billion.
  The report also reveals the stunningly obvious correlation between such shortfalls and the quality of city services. ''Annual pension or retiree health care payments come out of the same pool of local tax dollars as spending for key services such as education, public safety, sidewalks, and parks. If annual recommended contributions for pensions go up, dollars for other services can be squeezed.''
  No city epitomizes that squeeze better than Detroit. Two-thirds of the city's ambulances are out of service. Police take an average of 58 minutes to respond to emergencies, five times the national average. Forty percent of the city's streetlights don't work, and 210 of its 317 public parks are closed down. The city's public schools are also on the verge of bankruptcy, and remain some of the worst in the nation. The city's mass-transit system is virtually non-functional. The murder rate is the highest in nearly 40 years. Yet the most telling statistic is the reality that Detroit's retired city workers outnumber active city workers by a more than 2 to 1 ratio.
  That is the burden Detroit would like to ''cost shift'' to the American taxpayer.
  Not just Detroit. As the New York Times notes, while Detroit's restructuring must be approved by a federal judge, the plan being presented there ''is being watched closely by municipal leaders around the nation, many of whom complain of mounting, unsustainable prices for the health care promised to retired city workers.'' The Times further notes efforts are in the process of being ''planned or contemplated'' in Chicago, IL, Sheboygan County, WI and Stockton, CA.
  Timothy S. Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University, illuminates the implications, noting that such a shift would amount to ''a huge cost for the United States government, and it's mandatory spending.''
  Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel isn't waiting to see what happens in Detroit. In May, he announced that Chicago will begin cutting benefits to retired city workers over the next three years, using ObamaCare to shift the cost burden to federal taxpayers. Police officers and firefighters who retired between the ages of 55 and 64 and are not yet eligible for Medicare will remain covered by the city, due to union contract guarantees. The same goes for workers who retired before August 1989 and are protected by a legal settlement. But beginning on January 1, 2014, the rest of the municipal workforce will see their benefits phased out, with the end result being retired workers paying for their own health insurance or getting ObamaCare subsidies. ''The retirement healthcare system as it stands today is fiscally unsustainable, and we have a responsibility to ensure a secure financial path for Chicago taxpayers,'' Emanuel spokeswoman Kathleen Strand said in a statement at the time.
  Apparently Moody's Investors rating service was unimpressed. They handed Chicago an unprecedented triple-drop in the city's bond rating. Moody's cited ''very large and growing'' pension liabilities, ''significant'' debt service payments, ''unrelenting public safety demands'' and the city's historic reluctance to raise local taxes as the reason for the move.
  Regardless, Dan Miller, Harrisburg, PA's controller thinks Detroit's cost-shifting plan would be a boon for his city as well. Harrisburg filed for bankruptcy in October 2011. ''I'm applauding Detroit,'' said Miller. ''I'm hoping that ObamaCare turns out to be a great solution, and I would love for our city to have the opportunity to do that.''
  The entire state of Rhode Island is also considering the same move. This is due to the reality that the state has promised more than $3 billion in medical coverage to retired government and employees, even as it has set aside virtually nothing to cover those liabilities. ''The big benefit to moving workers into the state marketplaces is that it shifts the burden of paying for health care from the city to the federal government,'' writes the Washington Post's Sara Kliff. That's a benefit for the city, at least. For the federal government, more cities moving retirees into the marketplaces means a higher price tag for Obamacare, as it subsidizes more individuals' coverage.''
  That would be a higher price tag on top of a higher price tag. In 2010, Americans were assured by the Obama administration and Democrats that the healthcare bill would cost $898 billion over 10 years. Three years and four revisions later, the price tag has almost doubled to $1.6 trillion. And again, those revisions were calculated before this latest scheme was envisioned.
  ''We can expect other cities to pick up on this,'' said Richard Nathan, the institute's former director of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government. ''I expect it to mushroom.'' What is really mushrooming is the thinly veiled attempt to take the Democrat party's unholy alliance with public service employees '-- in all its municipal and state budget-busting glory '-- and ''redistribute'' such misery nationwide. While it is happening, expect more Obama administration officials to continue denying, exactly as Lew did, that a ''federal bailout'' of Detroit is on the table. Under the table is more like it.
  Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
'Phony Scandals'? No, Phony Investigations
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: FrontPage Magazine Â» FrontPage
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:49
  ''Phony scandals,'' Mr. President? No, your scandals are as real as can be, it's the GOP's investigations into them that are phony. Speaker of the House John Boehner has refused to appoint a special prosecutor to the Benghazi massacre investigation. Why? Because he made a deal with Obama? Because he simply doesn't give a damn? Whatever the reason, he's obstructing the ability to get to the bottom of it once and for all.When the IRS scandal hit, Boehner came out to the media and burped out, ''Who's going to jail?'' He's done nothing to answer his own question.
  Who has paid a price for Obama's scandals? Can you name one individual? What has Mitch McConnell, the Republican minority leader in the Senate, done about these scandals? Has he even said anything of note about them? Now, the IRS's profiling of Tea Party groups was a terrible thing to learn about for Americans, but for politicians in both parties, they could care less, since the Tea Party isn't only a threat to the Democrats, but to the Republicans as well.
  Not only do we have the most lawless administration in American history at this moment in time, but we have the most gutless opposition a party in power has ever had. The only way we can get to the bottom of these scandals is if the next midterms replace the current Republican leadership with those who understand what's at stake and who are willing to fight the bastards in both parties, tooth and nail. No more phony leadership.
  Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
Orange Safeguard - ORG Wiki
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 11:48
  Orange Safeguard is the name given to the adult content filter applied to pay-as-you-go Orange phones in the UK.
  CategoriesCategories blocked by Safeguard are[1]:
  Anonymizers: These sites allow you to browse the Internet and access content anonymously.Anorexia - Bulimia: Promoting and instigating eating disorders.Gambling: Access to online gambling such as casinos and any other online services that let you place bets.Chat: Where you chat in real time to people you don't know.Bombs: Explaining how to prepare, make, build and use explosives and explosive devices.Dating: Websites for match-making where the user can meet other people - make friends, find a partner, etc.Forums: Where you're invited to take part in discussions on predetermined topics with people you don't know.Pornography: Websites with a pornographic or sexual content.Racism: Sites promoting racist behaviour based on culture, race, religion, ideology, etc.Sects: Websites on universally acknowledged sects. Within this category URLs are included on organizations that promote directly or indirectly:(i) group, animal or individual injuries,(ii) esoteric practices,(iii) content that sets a bad example for young children: that teaches or encourages children to perform harmful acts or imitate dangerous behaviour,(iv) content that creates feelings of fear, intimidation, horror, or psychological terror,(v) Incitement or depiction of harm against any individual or group based on gender, sexual orientation, ethnic, religious or national identity.Violence: Containing openly violent content and/or that promote violence or defend it.Hackers: Containing info on hacking, pirated and illegal software as well as software used for hacking.Malware: Websites containing malicious code or programs such as viruses Trojans etc.Spyware: An application that collects confidential and general information from a PC to then transmit to a third party. All this takes place without knowledge and/or consent of the user.LinksReferences'†‘what is 18-rated content?, Orange.co.uk - via archive.org 2012-10-06
Open Rights Group - Sleepwalking into censorship
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:29
  July 25, 2013 | Jim Killock
  After brief conversations with some of the Internet Service Providers that will be implementing the UK's "pornwall" we've established a little bit about what it will be doing. To be fair, the BBC were pretty close.
  The essential detail is that they will assume you want filters enabled across a wide range of content, and unless you un-tick the option, network filters will be enabled. As we've said repeatedly, it's not just about hardcore pornography.
  You'll encounter something like this:
  EDIT NOTE: the category examples are based on current mobile configurations and broad indications from ISPs
  (1) Screen one
  "Parental controls"Do you want to install / enable parental controls'‘ yes' no
  [next]
  (2) Screen two [if you have left the box ticked]
  ''Parental controls''
  Do you want to block
  '‘ pornography'‘ violent material'‘ extremist and terrorist related content'‘ anorexia and eating disorder websites'‘ suicide related websites'‘ alcohol'‘ smoking'‘ web forums'‘ esoteric material'‘ web blocking circumvention tools
  You can opt back in at any time
  [continue]
  The precise pre-ticked options may vary from service to service.
  What's clear here is that David Cameron wants people to sleepwalk into censorship. We know that people stick with defaults: this is part of the idea behind 'nudge theory' and 'choice architecture' that is popular with Cameron.
  The implication is that filtering is good, or at least harmless, for anyone, whether adult or child. Of course, this is not true; there's not just the question of false positives for web users, but the affect on a network economy of excluding a proportion of a legitimate website's audience.
  There comes a point that it is simply better to place your sales through Amazon and ebay, and circulate your news and promotions exclusively through Facebook and Twitter, as you know none of these will ever be filtered.
  Meanwhile ISPs face the unenviable customer relations threat of increased complaints as customers who hadn't paid much attention find websites unexpectedly blocked.
  Just as bad, filters installed with no thought cannot be expected to set appropriately for children of different ages.
  Of course, all of this could be easily avoided by simply having an 'active choice' as the ISPs originally suggested: with no preset defaults, forcing customers to specify whether they wanted filters, or not.
  It's really very surprising that Cameron's campaign has spent six months insisting on a system designed to fail consumers, threatening ISPs with legislation if they didn't use the inaccurate, error prone method that Number 10 seem to believe in.
  If it all seems to work badly, at what point is it ok for ISPs to start running their own businesses, and change the setup screens?
  Update
  We've launched a petition calling for David Cameron to drop his plans for default Internet filtering. Sign the petition here: https://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/cameron-stop-sleepwalking
Cameron's proposed filters extend to more than just porn (Wired UK)
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 08:01
  The British prime minister's internet filters will be about more than just hardcore pornography, according to information obtained by the Open Rights Group.
  The organisation, which campaigns for digital freedoms, has spoken to some of the Internet Service Providers that will be constructing Cameron's content filters. They discovered that a host of other categories of supposedly-objectionable material may be on the block-list.
  As well as pornography, users may automatically be opted in to blocks on "violent material", "extremist related content", "anorexia and eating disorder websites" and "suicide related websites", "alcohol" and "smoking". But the list doesn't stop there. It even extends to blocking "web forums" and "esoteric material", whatever that is. "Web blocking circumvention tools" is also included, of course.
  Don't miss: Hardcore sex in 'Nymphomaniac' puts porn actor genitals on cast's bodies
  The ORG's Jim Killock says: "What's clear here is that David Cameron wants people to sleepwalk into censorship. We know that people stick with defaults: this is part of the idea behind 'nudge theory' and 'choice architecture' that is popular with Cameron."
  He adds: "The implication is that filtering is good, or at least harmless, for anyone, whether adult or child. Of course, this is not true; there's not just the question of false positives for web users, but the affect on a network economy of excluding a proportion of a legitimate website's audience."
  Don't miss: Censorship and surveillance: Cameron's internet
  You can find out more over at the Open Rights Group's website.
iRedMail - Free, Open Source Mail Server Solution for Linux/BSD
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:29
  What iRedMail isA ZERO COST, fully fledged, full-featured mail server solution. All used packages are free and open source, provided by the Linux/BSD distribution venders you trust.An open source project, released under GPLv2, hosted on BitBucket.Note: We have only one edition of iRedMail, it's free and open source. All mail services related features are implemented in iRedMail. When we talk about "Pro", we're talking about iRedAdmin-Pro (web admin panel for iRedMail).
  What iRedMail doesInstall and configure mail server related BINARY packages automatically from the official software repositories provided by Linux/BSD distribution venders.Note: on FreeBSD, packages are installed with ports tree.
  BenefitsZero cost, fully fledged and full-featured.Fast deployment in LESS THAN 1 MINUTE, easy to use and stable. View YouTube Video to check how easy it is.Control over your own data. You have all personal data on your hard disk, it is not on somebody else's storage medium.All components are free and open source softwares, and you get the bug fixes and updates of the used packages from the Linux/BSD distribution venders you trust, not iRedMail project.Works on both non-virtualized and virtualized boxes, e.g. VMware, Xen, KVM, OpenVZ, VirtualBox, with i386 and x86_64/amd64 support.Full-featured web admin panel - iRedAdmin-Pro. Online demo is available, purchase here. You can setup mail server manually with the same softwares as used in iRedMail, but you cannot find a suitable web-based admin panel like iRedAdmin-Pro.Works on main stream Linux/BSD distributions. No matter you switch to which Linux/BSD distribution listed below, you can get the same mail server in few minutes.Addition infoUsed major open source softwares:
  Postfix: SMTP serviceDovecot: POP3/POP3S, IMAP/IMAPS, Managesieve serviceApache: Web serverMySQL/PostgreSQL: Storing application data and/or mail accountsOpenLDAP: Storing mail accountsPolicyd: Postfix policy serverAmavisd: An interface between Postfix and SpamAssassin, ClamAV. Used for spam and virus scanning.Roundcube: WebmailAwstats: Apache and Postfix log analyzerFail2ban: scans log files (e.g. /var/log/maillog) and bans IPs that show the malicious signs -- too many password failures, seeking for exploits, etc.Bruce MacKay (bmackay@), 2012-12-13I have worked with Unix/Linux mail systems for nearly two decades and it has always been a struggle dealing with large numbers of domains and virtual users on a single server. I looked long and hard and actually ran several solutions on small servers for many months before making the decision to purchase iRedAdmin Pro. The product paid for itself in the first couple of weeks in time saved alone. What sealed the deal was the excellent level of technical support that I received when we had a glitch. The problem was resolved quickly and the whole event was completely transparent to our users. iRedAdmin Pro is a mature product with great support and ongoing development. I could not give it a higher recommendation.
  Bahadir Tecer, Turkiye, Call Center, Around 2000 Users. 2011-12-19Great solution and a great time saver for a system administrator.. Iredmail will be my first choice from now on...And also very special thanks for a very special person ZhangHuangbin for the support.. You can pay and buy a software but you cant buy such support... Thanks again...
  Robin (rrlw.net), 2011-05-13Thank you so much for all of the great work you have put into the iRedMail system!
  It (iRedMail) was so easy to install and start using I thought something was wrong. After extensive testing, found it is a reliable, secure, and the best part - a "small footprint" system. I like the iRedAdmin interface so much I didn't hesitate to upgrade to Pro, and highly recommend it when I am asked.
  How has my support experience from the iRedMail team been?Exceptional!!!! Kind and most important - friendly and respectful. I had a few questions I sent, thought it would be a day or 2 before an answer back, and it was quick!
  My overall experience is so good I am recommending all of my clients to at least use the open source version and upgrade to the Pro, and not even waste their time using any other system.
  Luc Verhoeven manages 14 domains, 23 alias domains, 185 users, 160 aliases. 2011-04-14.We are running iRedMail with iRedAdmin-Pro for almost a year now. There have been a lot of updates and improvements. Whenever you need another function which could be useful to a lot of people just tell and in the next update you have it. The support is very quick and good. Thanks a lot for this wonderful program.
  Andrea Di Dato, 2010-10-21.iRedMail is the our choice, thank's to the use of standard packeges and solutions for e-mail management. Before we used sendmail and we was searching for a system that implemented maildir + Dovecot upon LDAP for the managemet of user accounts, so iRedMail is perfect for us. Moreover it is free, has a very good support - and I emphasize *very good* - and the Admin Panel - iRedAdmin-Pro, we bought as soon as deployed iRedMail, is a very valid tool to manage the system.
  Raskin Paul, 2010-05-22.iRedMail is the easiest and reliable mail server with all of the features that a mail server needed for the administrators.I appreciate the developers of iRedMail who have really supported tremendously to deploy the mail server by solving all of the problem of us quickly. 3 cheers to iRedMail.
Britain is losing the war against internet crime, says MP report
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Guardian World News
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:06
  'The threat of a cyber-attack to the UK is so serious it is marked as a higher threat than a nuclear attack,' says the Commons report. Photograph: Getty Images
  Britain is too complacent about the war against internetcrime, which it is losing, a committee of MPs said on Tuesday.
  In a wide-ranging report, the Commons home affairs committee said that internet crime, or e-crime, is now more valuable than the drugs industry; that sentences are too low; and that a "black hole" in the system allowed minor e-crime to be committed with impunity.
  The MPs said the police should be given more training and resources to deal with the problem, and that a state-of-the-art espionage response team should be set up to help companies respond to cyber-attacks.
  Keith Vaz, the Labour MP who chairs the committee, said: "We are not winning the war on online criminal activity. We are being too complacent about these e-wars because the victims are hidden in cyberspace.
  "The threat of a cyber-attack to the UK is so serious it is marked as a higher threat than a nuclear attack.
  "You can steal more on the internet than you can by robbing a bank, and online criminals in 25 countries have chosen the UK as their No 1 target. Astonishingly, some are operating from EU countries. If we don't have a 21st-century response to this 21st-century crime, we will be letting those involved in these gangs off the hook."
  During its 10-month inquiry the committee heard evidence from the online security firm Norton putting the annual global cost of e-crime at an estimated $388bn (£250bn). By comparison, the annual value of the global trade in heroin, cocaine and marijuana is estimated at $288bn.
  The MPs were told that the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau had discovered about 25 countries where criminals were predominantly targeting Britain and they said they were "deeply concerned" that EU partner countries are not doing enough to prevent these cyber-attacks.
  They said they were particularly worried about the "black hole" that allowed e-criminals to get away without being caught.
  "Online criminal activity which defrauds victims of money is often not reported to or investigated by law enforcement," they said.
  "Banks simply reimburse the victims with no pursuit of the perpetrators. Criminals who commit a high volume of low-level fraud can still make huge profits. Banks must be required to report all e-crime fraud to law enforcement."
  On sentencing, the committee said it was "surprised" to learn that hackers from the group Anonymous, who cost Paypal more than £3.5m, were given sentences of seven and 18 months.
  The MPs said they did not believe the hackers would have received such sentences had they physically robbed a bank of £3.5m and they said the director of public prosecutions should review sentencing guidelines.
  Steve Williams, chairman of the Police Federation of England and Wales, said: "This report highlights how the government message that its reforms are working because crime is falling is one which is over-simplistic and misleading.
  "Crime is clearly changing, not falling at the rate the figures suggest, and an unknown but extremely high number of offences are going unreported. The police service needs greater, not fewer, resources to deal with the challenges of the 21st century."
Driver dies in Switzerland train crash
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Guardian World News
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:06
  Two trains locked together after colliding head-on in Granges-pres-Marnand, Switzerland. Photograph: AP/Keystone
  Two trains have collided in Switzerland, killing one of the drivers and injuring at least 35 people, five of them seriously, according to authorities.
  The crash happened at Granges-pres-Marnand in the canton of Vaud as one of the trains headed to Lausanne and the other to Payerne. Between them they were carrying about 40 people.
  Vaud police spokesman Jean-Christophe Sauterel said: "These are regional trains. The speeds are a little lower and even if one deeply regrets the likely loss of life of one person as well as five serious injuries, the situation could have been much more catastrophic."
  Public TV station SRF quoted Vaud canton police spokesman Pierre-Olivier Gaudard as saying that one person had yet to be recovered from the wreckage. This was understood to be one of the drivers.
  The crash happened near the station of Granges-pres-Marnand shortly before 7pm local time on a regional line about 31 miles (50km) south-west of the capital, Bern.
  Photographs from the site showed the two regional trains locked together, partly lifted off the tracks by the force of the collision.
  Last week a high-speed derailment in Spain killed 79 people.
Philadelphia latest U.S. city to sue big banks in Libor scandal
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:05
  Money.MSN.com
  The city of Philadelphia is the latest of a series of U.S. municipalities, following Houston a week ago, to sue some of the world's biggest banks for financial losses incurred in the Libor interest-rate rigging scandal.
  Philadelphia sued nine banks and several subsidiaries on Friday in Pennsylvania Federal Court, seeking punitive and other damages and claiming that the banks' behavior ''was nothing short of naked price-fixing''.
  Other local governments '' including Baltimore, and the California counties of San Diego and Sacramento '' have also sued in connection with the scandal over manipulation of the London Interbank Offered Rate, or Libor.
  The governments say that rate swap agreements that cities use to hedge borrowing costs were manipulated by the financial institutions to their own advantage.
  Read More
Jim Rogers: ''The Whole 'Economic' World Is Artificial'... It's Going To End Very Badly''
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:04
  ZeroHedgeby Tyler Durden
  ''There is a huge artificial boom going on,'' warns Jim Rogers as for the first time in history, all the world's major central banks are simultaneously printing money. While he remains adamant of the positive outlook for agriculture, the fact that ''the whole world is trying to debase their currencies,'' produces a ''major disconnect'' between asset values and economic realities. Stocks are at new highs, not based on reality, but on printing presses ''and that cannot work'... this is going to end very very badly.'' While not all western economies are as egregious as others, the intertwined nature means their fate remains very much tethered to the US, and as Rogers concludes, ''everybody will suffer, be very very careful as these are perilous times.''
  His initial thoughts on the shortage of farmers and the outlook for agriculutre are fascinating but his short-and-sweet explanation of the macro big picture begins around 3:20:
  Via ZeroHedge
US Fast Food Workers Strike, Demand 100% Pay Raise
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:03
  ZeroHedgeby Tyler Durden
  ''It's noisy, it's really hot, fast, they rush you. Sometimes you don't even get breaks. All for $7.25? It's crazy,'' is how one worker described the conditions that have caused her and the rest of America's fast-food employees to go on strike today. They demand the right to unionize and better pay '' calling for a raise in the minimum wage from $7.25 to $15. Workers chanted, ''Supersize our wages,'' as spokespersons for the Fast Food Forward campaign explained the economic logic, ''If they have more money in their pockets, they'll spend it right here, helping to boost the entire economy.'' Which leaves us asking the always awkward question '' where does this new 'economy boosting' money come from for this 107% pay rise? With gas prices rising, rents soaring and many employees already reliant on food stamps and medicaid, ''I can't even order something off the menu with what I earn,'' one worker noted, ''It makes me wonder what I'm even doing there.''Indeed it does with all those benefits on offer elsewhere.
  Bear in mind that the majority of new jobs created have been lower-wage jobs.
  And it seems three years on that the family of four is still struggling.
  Via AP,
  Workers at McDonald's, Burger King and Wendy's restaurants across New York City, Chicago, St. Louis, Detroit, Milwaukee, Kansas City, Mo., and Flint, Mich., walked out Monday in a one-day strike to demand better pay and the right to unionize, calling for minimum wage to more than double from $7.25 to $15 an hour and the end to what activists called ''abusive labor practices.''
  '...
  The workers' actions will lift up all of New York City,'' he said. ''If they have more money in their pockets, they'll spend it right here, helping to boost the entire economy.''
  Doubling the minimum wage would have a ''significant effect on the private sector's ability to create jobs, especially those typically filled by first-time workers and teens,''
  '...
  Glenda Soto, 35, a single mother supporting four children said that though she works full-time and often puts in 13-hour days at the Bronx McDonald's, money is a constant headache.
  ''My rent is going up in September,'' she said. ''We are already living paycheck to paycheck.''
  '...
  The striking workers in Manhattan were joined by politicians and community leaders.
  Via LA Times,
  '...
  But in reaction to Monday's walkouts, the right-leaning Employment Policies Institute said that a $15 minimum wage threshold would actually pose a hardship for employees, especially in the low-margin restaurant industry.
  Tight-pressed eateries forced to pay higher salaries would likely start shifting from human labor to automated technology such as touch-screen ordering or payment devices, according to the group.
  Via ZeroHedge
Thanks to the EPA, you can now enjoy more of Monsanto's herbicide Roundup in your food
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 06:02
  Underground Healthby Rich Duprey
  Thanks to the Environmental Protection Agency, you can now eat more of Monsanto's herbicide Roundup in your food.
  Because there wasn't anywhere near as much coverage as there was for President Obama signing into law the so-called ''Monsanto Protection Act'' '-- which prohibits federal courts from halting the sale of genetically modified or engineered seeds '-- the decision by the regulatory agency to increase the acceptable level of pesticides permitted on food crops went through without much of a fight (though the EPA received nearly 11,000 public comments opposing the move).
  What it means is that Roundup will become an even larger profit center for the chemicals giant. Monsanto's agricultural productivity segment generated $1.2 billion last quarter, driven primarily by sales of its glysophate-based herbicide Roundup to farmers and a smaller portion to consumers, which is handled by Scotts Miracle-Gro. Sales have risen 24% over the first nine months of the fiscal year, only a small portion of which is because of higher prices.
  Roundup remains the largest crop protection brand globally, and because it genetically modifies seeds to survive an application of the herbicide, Monsanto has oriented the focus of its crop protection business to support Roundup Ready crops sold to farmers. Buy seeds that can withstand Roundup, sell more Roundup to spray on crops.
  A byproduct of this symbiotic relationship, though, is the creation of superweeds, weeds that have developed a tolerance to the herbicide and are spreading across farmland, impervious to man and machine. Because farmers who grow GM crops typically use 25% more herbicide, not less, than those who grow traditional seeds, the weeds are developing a thirst for it.
  Yet it's not just weeds that are growing resistant. Bugs, too, have become immune to the chemicals. Monsanto's GM corn, for example, was molecularly modified to kill pests like rootworm, but they're making a comeback even as GM corn accounts for 86% of the country's supply. Now we've got superinsects, too!
  Just as Monsanto is enjoying a surge in sales of Roundup, pesticide makers are witnessing greater sales of pesticides to combat these superbugs. Revenues at Sygenta rose 1.5% to $4.2 billion, FMC's sales were 5% higher, and American Vanguard's surged 39% last quarter. The three companies account for three-quarters of all ground pesticides sold in the United States.
  The greater use of pesticides may also be harming the honeybee population, as a nexus is being formed between colony collapse disorder and the role of neonicotinoids made by Syngenta, Bayer, and Dow Chemical play.
  So having the EPA coming in and allowing our fruits and vegetables to contain even greater amounts of Roundup on them is a big cause for concern. The proposed rules would permit crops such as sesame, flax, and soybean to have twice as much glysophate levels than previously permitted, while sweet potatoes and carrots would see them climb by 15 times and 25 times the previously allowed levels, respectively.
  While Monsanto, of course, says ingesting such amounts of its herbicides is safe, an MIT study published earlier this year found it causes ''insidious'' damage at the cellular level and leads to increased risk of gastrointestinal disorders, heart disease, autism, cancer, and Alzheimer's disease.
  Having to combat superweeds and superbugs requires a lot of herbicides and pesticides. After passage of the Monsanto Protection Act, perhaps this ought to be called the Monsanto Growth Rule. The Roundup segment of the chemical giant's business generates 30% of its revenues and 26% of its operating profits. When these regulations going into effect, we just might see more profits sprouting from there, like a genetically modified plant amid a Roundup-sprayed field.
  Via Underground Health
VIDEO-Former lead Obama auto adviser Steven Rattner: 'Glenn Greenwald is not a journalist' | End the Lie '' Independent News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:59
  By Madison Ruppert
  Editor of End the Lie
  Steven Rattner (Image credit: Daphne Borowski/Financial Times photos/Flickr)
  In statements made on MSNBC's Morning Joe today, former lead auto advisor to Obama, Steven Rattner, said that the Guardian's Glenn Greenwald ''is not a journalist.''
  Instead, claims Rattner, Greenwald, who broke the PRISM story along with several other major stories on government surveillance programs, is actually ''an activist portraying himself as a journalist.''
  Greenwald has been attacked many times in the media and elsewhere over his reporting on the information leaked by Edward Snowden, and there is a possibility that he might testify before the European Parliament on the issue.
  The members of the panel on Monday's Morning Joe were discussing how one might hide from the National Security Agency (NSA). Mika Brzezinski, the host of the show, stated that the story surrounding the NSA surveillance is not black-and-white, though she claims Greenwald believes it is.
  ''That's exactly the point,'' Rattner said. ''First of all, Glenn Greenwald is not a journalist, he's an activist portraying himself as a journalist.''
  ''That's maybe another conversation than what we're having,'' he continued. ''But you're right, it's not a black-and-white story.''
  Philip Bump, writing for the Atlantic Wire, argues that, ''The argument is ridiculous, of course. Even conservative Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina tacitly acknowledges Greenwald is a journalist, if the media shield law he introduced with New York's Chuck Schumer is any indicator.''
  Of course, Graham is most likely no friend of Greenwald's.
  Bump ultimately argues that Greenwald should be treated as a journalist because ''the best of journalism is about seeking reform.''
  Indeed, as New York University journalism professor Jay Rosen stated:
  We've already seen a surprisingly successful, but ultimately failed, attempt to limit NSA surveillance in the House.
  Furthermore, a recent Pew poll shows that 56 percent of Americans believe that federal courts do not provide adequate limits on the telephone and internet data collected by government.
  Even more notable, however, is the fact that 70 percent of Americans believe that the government uses the data they collect for purposes other than investigating terrorism.
  A whopping 63 percent believe that the government is also collecting what is being said in phone calls and emails, with only 18 percent believing the Obama administration's claims that they're only collecting metadata.
  Perhaps most shocking of all, 27 percent of Americans believe that the government has either listened to or read their emails.
  Still, 50 percent of Americans have a positive view of the program overall, though views on the government's anti-terror policies in general have changed significantly over time.
  As Jonathan Weisman reported on Sunday for the New York Times, while opposition to NSA surveillance was ''on the political fringes only a week ago [it] has built a momentum that even critics say may be unstoppable, drawing support from Republican and Democratic leaders, attracting moderates in both parties and pulling in some of the most respected voices on national security in the House.''
  If this shift can be even partially attributed to Greenwald's reporting, Rattner's case would be weak.
  Bump pointedly notes, ''Rattner may actually be unaware of what journalists do. Perhaps this blind spot is because the journalists he hangs out with work for Morning Joe.''
  I'd love to hear your opinion, take a look at your story tips and even your original writing if you would like to get it published. I am also available for interviews on radio, television or any other format. Please email me at Admin@EndtheLie.com
  Please support alternative news and help us start paying contributors by donating, doing your shopping through our Amazon link or check out some must-have products at our store.
  Help Spread Alternative News
Americans more concerned about privacy than terrorism '' Pew study
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: End the Lie - Independent News
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:58
  Reuters / Shannon Stapleton
  For the first time in almost a decade, the majority of Americans are more concerned about the government infringing on their civil liberties than about a potential terrorist attack, according to a new poll by Pew Research.
  Editor's note: this poll was also mentioned in my recent article, ''Former lead Obama auto adviser Steven Rattner: 'Glenn Greenwald is not a journalist'''
  US citizens have traditionally responded to similar polls by saying the government has not yet gone far enough to protect the country from threats. But new results from Pew Research Center reveal that public opinion has drastically shifted '' especially in the wake of NSA spying programs leaked by Edward Snowden nearly two months ago.
  Pew reported that ''a majority of Americans '' 56 per cent '' say that federal courts fail to provide adequate limits on telephone and internet data [which] the government is collecting as part of its anti-terrorism efforts.'' An even larger percentage '' 70 per cent '' believes the government uses the data for ''purposes other than investigating terrorism.'' Another 63 per cent believe ''the government is also gathering information about the content of communications.''
  Image from www.people-press.org
  ''Overall, 47 per cent say their greater concern about government anti-terrorism policies is that they have gone too far in restricting the average person's civil liberties, while 35 per cent say they are more concerned that the policies have not gone far enough to protect the country,'' the authors of the poll wrote. ''This is the first time in Pew research polling that more have expressed concern over civil liberties than protection from terrorism since the question was first asked in 2004.''
  Prior to Snowden's disclosures, a 2010 Pew poll found that 58 per cent of Americans felt the government had ''not gone far enough to protect the country,'' although the NSA surveillance was already underway at that time without the public's knowledge.
  The sea change was reflected in Congress last week when a bill to cut funding to the NSA surveillance program failed to pass by a mere seven votes. Both Democrats and Republicans skirted US President Barack Obama and top leaders of both parties, in an attempt to use legislation as an oversight to the burgeoning intelligence gathering.
  Representative Jim Sensenbrenner, a Wisconsin Republican and an author of the original Patriot Act of 2001 which authorized the spying, has publicly advocated repealing the law. He was among those in Congress who voted for an amendment to defund NSA programs.
  ''The time has come to stop it, and the way we stop it is to approve this amendment,'' he said, adding days later that he had not planned on speaking. ''I was able to say what needed to be said in a minute.''
  Image from www.people-press.org
  While even lawmakers who are in favor of the NSA's indiscriminate and warrantless surveillance might recognize that more oversight is inevitable, Glenn Greenwald of the Guardian has suggested that top Democrats and Republicans benefit financially from the unpopular laws.
  ''But with a few rare and noble exceptions, the Intelligence Committees in both house of Congress are filled with precisely those members who are most slavishly beholden to, completely captured by, the intelligence community over which they supposedly serve as watchdogs,'' Greenwald wrote in a column on Monday.
  ''Many receive large sums of money from the defense and intelligence industries'...in particular, the two chairs of those committees '' Democrat Dianne Feinstein in the Senate and Republican Mike Rogers in the House '' are such absolute loyalists to the NSA and the national security state generally that it is usually impossible to distinguish their behavior, mindset and comments from those of NSA officials.''
  AFP Photo / Spencer Platt
  Source: RT
  Help Spread Alternative News
TEPCO Ordered To Drain Radioactive Water From Fukushima Nuclear Plant Tunnels
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:57
US Developing Mind Reading
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Activist Post
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:56
  YoutubeThe US government is pouring money into a technology called fMRI, functional magnetic resonance imaging, which measures changes in localized brain activity over time by watching blood flow. And it can now be used to infer information about our memories. It can tell things like what we have actually seen or experienced. Though no court has admitted fMRI results as evidence yet, the signs clearly point in that direction.
Twitter abuse: 140 characters in search of a law | Editorial
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:55
  "We would give you and old Mother Pankhurst (the fossil-worm) Five Years Penal Servitude and then burn you both together," wrote an opponent of women's suffrage a hundred years ago. In this less inhibited age, it is all too easy to imagine what the tone of the tweets might have been had the writer had the technology. Men hating women who seek or exercise power is an ancient trope: there were probably men muttering sexually explicit abuse at Boudicca as she drove by. The specific threats of rape that led to the arrest on Sunday of a man who had been tweeting menaces to Caroline Criado-Perez after her successful campaign to have a woman depicted on the next £10 note are an extreme example of something that, for women with a feminist profile on Twitter, has become a commonplace.
  It is no surprise that there are men who see the unmoderated environment of Twitter as an opportunity to project their criminal fantasies onto individual women, but it raises the hard old questions about the limits of free speech. Yet appealing as it may seem to kick away the platform from which they shout, making Twitter liable for what appears on it would risk destroying just what makes the site so valuable. A better course would be to tackle the abusers head on.
  On the face of it, it seems reasonable to argue that Twitter should be treated as a publisher, legally responsible for what appears on its site. When it suspended the journalist Guy Adams's account last year after he was accused of breaking Twitter rules on privacy by tweeting the (office) email of the boss of NBC in a row over the broadcaster's Olympics coverage, it certainly seemed to come close to behaving like one. But Twitter has always held that it's a mere platform. As such, it never acts proactively, only in response to user complaints. Guy Adams's account was suspended because of a complaint from NBC (which had, it emerged, been alerted by Twitter, which was a partner in its Olympics coverage) and then restored because the complaint was rescinded. When the Tory peer Lord McAlpine was wrongly named in an abuse case, it was the individual tweeter he sued, not Twitter.
  But that does not take Twitter off the field altogether. Its conduct since the threats against Ms Criado-Perez began last week, increasing almost to one a minute, was a complete failure for an organisation that depends on trust as part of its business model. The first condition for the successful defence of the free speech by which it defines itself (the "free speech wing of the free speech party") must be a readiness to engage in a public conversation and where necessary to defend its decisions '' in this case apparently to do nothing to block the threats or inhibit the threat-maker. Instead, complaints were met with silence, then a holding email. Only on Monday did Twitter's UK general manager, Tony Wang, promise to make the reporting of abuse more widely available than the cumbersome and restricted "report abuse" button.
  Quick detection followed by decisive action are the absolute minimum responses to this kind of attack. Caroline Criado-Perez is not the first, and already the Labour MP Stella Creasey, a prominent supporter of Ms Criado-Perez, and the more vulnerable for needing to be open to her constituents, is also receiving very specific rape threats. Other prominent women are trolled by people who stop short of the criminal but are still intimidatingly offensive.
  Twitter plainly has a commercial interest, and arguably a moral duty, to do everything it can to protect the extraordinary forum it has created. And, as the Criado-Perez episode illustrates, it is an extraordinary forum. If its dark side is the way that it has exposed a feminist campaigner to criminal threats, it is its sheer universality that allowed her to mobilise the support that made the Bank of England think again. Twitter delivers access for all. Regrettably that means bullies and perverts too. But their behaviour is a matter for the police, or, as Lord McAlpine showed, the civil courts, against the individual, not Twitter.
Papers continue Twitter abuse debate
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BBC News - Home
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:51
  30 July 2013Last updated at00:43 ETSeveral papers continue to examine the use of sexist and abusive comments on Twitter.
  The Guardian says "men hating women who seek or exercise power is an ancient trope" and suggests that Boudicca may have been subjected to sexually explicit abuse.
  It points out that while Twitter may have a moral duty to protect its users, it should not be held liable for the actions of individuals.
  The Times warns that if Twitter fails to find ways of policing itself its users will move to sites that are "less tolerant of unacceptable standards".
  Writing in the paper, columnist Joan Smith thinks it is evidence that "casual sexism is back - and nastier than ever".
  Minimum wageImmigration Minister Mark Harper takes to the Daily Mail to defend the government in the ongoing row about new mobile billboards that urge people who are in Britain illegally to "go home or face arrest".
  He derides critics who have described the measure as racist and accuses them of encouraging illegal immigrants to break the law.
  One of the architects of the national minimum wage introduced by Labour 15 years ago tells the Independent that the policy no longer works because the pay does not rise with inflation.
  Professor Sir George Bain, the first chairman of the Low Pay Commission, says the gap between the minimum wage and the amount needed to meet rising living costs will only widen over the next 15 years.
  He is calling on the government to adopt a more long-term approach to the situation.
  Drug prescriptionsThe Daily Mirror focuses on the Moors murderer Ian Brady's failed attempt to prove he no longer needs to be detained in a secure psychiatric hospital on Merseyside.
  It says Brady's legal challenge, brought because he wanted to be moved to an ordinary prison, has cost the taxpayer £500,000, including £200,000 in legal fees for the local NHS trust.
  A Merseyside MP, Bill Esterson, voices his "outrage", pointing out that the money "could have been spent on mental health patients desperate for help".
  "Prozac Nation" is the headline in the Sun, as it reports that Britain has seen a dramatic rise in the use of anti-depressants.
  It says 50 million prescriptions were written in England alone last year, an increase of 460% since 1991.
  The paper says doctors are prescribing the drugs too readily because patients can wait months for counselling.
  Phone addictsBudget airline Ryanair is said by the Times to have come up with a new "wheeze" to save money - telling its pilots to fly more slowly to conserve fuel.
  The paper says the measure will add an extra two minutes to every hour's flying time.
  It adds that accounts published on Monday reveal that passengers are paying more in ancillary charges, such as £105 to check in a bag if paying at the airport and £70 for forgetting to print off a boarding pass.
  And finally, good news for smartphone addicts whose digits are feeling the strain of hours of texting, emailing and internet browsing.
  The Daily Telegraph reveals that one network provider has come up with a way to prevent injury and fatigue - a miniature weight training device called "thumbells" to build up thumb strength.
RE: What is considered an acceptable SWR reading?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: eHam
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:49
  I think it's more like: With a tuner the reflected power is absorbed by the tuner and without a tuner it gets pushed back to the Amp or transmitter.No, not at all. Tuners do NOT simply absorb reflected power - that's not how they work. If they did, they would get a lot hotter than they actually do in the real world. You might, forexample, see a reading of 200W forward and 100W reflected between the tuner and antennawhen running a 100W transmitter: that means that the net power delivered to the antenna isstill (200 - 100 = ) 100W, basically the same power coming out of the transmitter. You can't getthere if the tuner was absorbing the full 100W reflected power unless the transmitter is reallyputting out 200W.
  That's also why the handy tables of reflected power lost based on SWR that appear in a numberof antenna articles and books (generally NOT geared towards the technical types) are utterrubbish when it comes to calculating the losses in the feedline. The 11.1% reflected power,for example, for a 2 : 1 SWR is true enough, but some of that may be re-reflected from thetuner (or rig, depending on how it is designed) and travel back up to the antenna. And justspecifying the SWR does NOT tell you how the transmitter will behave: most transmitters willbehave differently into 25 ohms than into 100 ohms, even though the SWR is 2 : 1 in both cases.
Quantum computers: coming to a store near you?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Conversation
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:47
  The next big thing: is quantum computing close to being a commercial reality? Image from www.shutterstock.comMike Lazaridis, founder and former CEO of BlackBerry, may be forgiven for not having the foresight of recognising the threat that the iPhone and Android smartphones would pose to his business. However, he may be leading the way in another area by backing a future technology that could revolutionise computing.
  Since 1999, Lazaridis has invested $270 million in the Institute of Quantum Computing at the University of Waterloo in the hope that this would lead to the commercialisation of quantum computers and quantum technologies.
  Lazaridis is not alone in investing in quantum computing in Waterloo. A further $490 million has been invested by the Canadian Government as well as the state of Ontario, and including $100 million from the University of Waterloo itself.
  As futuristic as this sounds, Lazaridis and Canada are not alone in believing that quantum computing is an area worth investing in. Google and Lockheed Martin have each bought a multi-million dollar quantum computer from D-Wave which claims to be a 512-qubit machine. The Hebrew University of Jerusalem has recently assembled 20 inter-disciplinary academics in a Quantum Information Science Center to explore the opportunities that quantum computing will present.
  Conventional computing's progress is slowing down as it becomes increasingly difficult to cram more circuitry onto silicon chips. While processors have followed Moore's Law for some time, roughly doubling in capacity each year, that progress has slowed and will continue to slow. For the computing industry generally, mobile has become more important and CPUs are generally considered fast enough. The engineering challenge is to produce processors that consume less power.
  At the high end, computing also takes huge amounts of resource as supercomputer tasks produce their massive computational capability by scaling out, adding more and more processors to the task. This approach also has its limits and in part it comes back to a limit on resources and power. Quantum computing offers a way of circumventing these problems and capable of providing processing power that is simply not possible through conventional means.
  For this to happen however, you need to be able to build quantum computers. This is something that is still challenging the best minds. For a start, there are a variety of different ways in which the fundamental component of a quantum computer '-- the qubit '-- can be physically represented. Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages. Researchers at UNSW for example have implemented this using the spin of electrons in a phosphorous atom embedded in silicon. The area becomes even more esoteric when you consider that qubits can interact with each other or become ''entangled'', and this allows for implementation of types of calculation that are not possible on conventional computers.
  DWave Quantum Computer http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2011-05/31/d-wave-quantum-computer
  In the case of the company D-Wave, their claims to have built a quantum computer were treated with extreme scepticism when they first announced their computer in 2007. It took researchers five years to provide evidence that the computer was in fact operating at the quantum level and for some of that scepticism to abate. The computers cost in the region of $10 million or more each and so, if nothing else, this is a fundamental marketing problem that they need to resolve if other customers are going to buy into the technology.
  The need for this technology is clearly there. As we process ever-increasing amounts of data and rely on artificial intelligence and sophisticated algorithms to make sense of it, we will need to have the computing resources to do this with. This not only has applications in scientific and medical research, but in everyday businesses that have to deal with their own version of Big Data.
  Initially, the range of customers for quantum computing systems will largely overlap with those using high performance computers. With technologies that enable the currently impossible, it often takes their general availability to really develop the range of products and devices this technology will eventually end up making possible.
  The area of research in quantum computing is a really clear example of where seemingly rarefied research has direct potential impact not only on science but on society and industry as a whole. The marker for this is the willingness of venture capital to invest in technologies that are still barely off the research bench. Despite Mike Laziridis claiming that his investments are largely philanthropic, for him and others, the potential upside is huge.
  This article was written with assistance from Professor Jingbo Wang of the quantum dynamics and computation research group at UWA.
  Sign in to Favourite2 CommentsTagsQuantum computing, BlackBerry
  Related articles 2 May 2013 New research paves way for quantum super computers 18 April 2013 Computing 1-0-1: quantum information in an atom's core 1 February 2013 A juicy BlackBerry 10 won't make BlackBerry phones more desirable 10 October 2012 Influential mentor wins overdue recognition with Nobel Prize in Physics 20 September 2012 Australian breakthrough brings quantum computing closer
The US Senate confirms James B. Comey as FBI director
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: DEBKAFile
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:46
  The US Senate confirms James B. Comey as FBI directorDEBKAfileJuly 30, 2013, 7:56 AM (GMT+02:00)
  He was confirmed by an overwhelming majority vote. Up for confirmation next was Samantha Power as US ambassador to the United Nations.
98 million Americans were given polio vaccine contaminated with cancer-causing virus, admits CDC
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:45
  Natural Newsby Ethan A. Huff
  The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has once again been caught removing pertinent but indicting information about vaccines from its website. This time it involves the infamous polio vaccine, up to 98 million doses of which have been exposed as containing a cancer-causing virus that is now believed to be responsible for causing millions of cancers in America, according to the CDC.
  The information was posted on an official CDC fact sheet entitled Cancer, Simian Virus 40 (SV40), and Polio Vaccine, which has since been removed from the CDC's website. Fortunately, RealFarmacy.com was able to archive the damning page before the CDC ultimately removed it, presumably because SV40 has been receiving considerable attention lately due to its connection to causing cancer.
  You can view the link to the original CDC page on SV40 and polio vaccines, which is no longer active, here:http://www.cdc.gov
  You can view the full archived CDC page here:http://webcache.googleusercontent.com
  As you will notice on the archived CDC page, the SV40 virus was allegedly first discovered in monkeys back in 1960, and not long after began appearing inexplicably in polio vaccines. The SV40 virus, according to this same page, has been linked to causing a variety of human cancers, including childhood leukemia, lung cancer, bone cancer, and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.
  Though the CDC denies a definitive causal link between SV40 and cancer, it implies that the virus, which was supposedly removed from all polio vaccines in 1963, was problematic in relation to cancer development. More than 98 million people, in fact, may have been exposed to SV40 as a result of receiving government-recommended polio vaccines back in the 1960s, and many of these may have developed cancer as a result.
  ''More than 98 million Americans received one or more doses of polio vaccine from 1955 to 1963 when a proportion of vaccine was contaminated with SV40,'' explains the CDC. ''[I]t has been estimated that 10-30 million Americans could have received an SV40 contaminated dose of vaccine.''
  So why the sudden removal of this important information from the CDC's website? The cached CDC page, as you will notice, makes sure to dissuade its readers from thinking that SV40 has been conclusively linked to causing cancer, even though it was demonstrated back in 1961 by the National Institute of Health (NIH) that SV40 is directly linked to causing tumor formation.
  ''Like other polyomaviruses, SV40 is a DNA virus that has been found to cause tumors and cancer,'' explains RealFarmacy.com. ''SV40 is believed to suppress the transcriptional properties of the tumor-suppressing genes in humans through the SV40 Large T-antigen and SV40 Small T-antigen. Mutated genes may contribute to uncontrolled cellular proliferation, leading to cancer.''
  As far as specific conditions linked to SV40, Michele Carbone, Assistant Professor of Pathology at Loyola University in Chicago, found that the virus is present in many cases of both osteosarcoma bone cancer and the increasingly prevalent lung cancer variety known as mesothelioma. As it turns out, Carbone identified SV40 in about one-third of all osteosarcoma cases studied, and in 40 percent of other bone cancers. The same was true for 60 percent of all cases of mesothelioma.
  ''Many authorities now admit much, possibly most, of the world's cancers came from the Salk and Sabin polio vaccines, and hepatitis B vaccines, produced in monkeys and chimps,'' adds RealFarmacy.com. ''It is said (that) mesothelioma is a result of asbestos exposure, but research reveals that 50 percent of the current mesotheliomas being treated no longer occur due to asbestos but rather the SV40 virus contained in polio vaccination.''
  Be sure to read the entire RealFarmacy.com report here:http://www.realfarmacy.com
  Sources for this article include:
  http://www.realfarmacy.com
  http://www.naturalnews.com
  http://www.sv40foundation.org
  http://www.science.naturalnews.com
  Via Natural News
Statement by the President on the Confirmation of James Comey as the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:38
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 29, 2013
  I applaud the overwhelming, bipartisan majority of Senators who today confirmed Jim Comey to be the next director of the FBI. Jim is a natural leader of unquestioned integrity. In the face of ever-changing threats, he has repeatedly demonstrated his commitment to defending America's security and ideals alike. With Jim at the Bureau's helm, I know that the FBI will be in good hands long after I've left office.
  As welcome as today's vote is, however, the Senate still has work to do. Like the FBI, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is a critical law enforcement agency, and it has been without a confirmed director for far too long. I urge the Senate to swiftly confirm Todd Jones, my nominee to lead the ATF, so that he and his team can do their part to keep American families safe. As Senators from both parties recognized today, we cannot allow partisan politics to get in the way of protecting the American people.
  ###
Press Briefing by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Josh Earnest, 7/29/2013
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:38
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 29, 2013
  James S. Brady Press Briefing Room
  See below for a correction to a typo in the transcript (marked with an asterisk).
  1:00 P.M. EDT
  MR. EARNEST: Good afternoon, everybody. I apologize for the delay in getting started. Mr. Carney --
  Q We're accustomed --
  MR. EARNEST: I'm sorry?
  Q We're accustomed to it.
  MR. EARNEST: Okay, good. I want to keep you in the rhythm here.
  Mr. Carney is taking his son to camp today, so I'll be minding the store. So, Julie, I'll ring you up first.
  Q Thank you. A couple questions on the Mideast peace talks that are starting in Washington tonight. We know that the President apparently is going to be meeting with Secretary Kerry later today to discuss those talks, but does he have any plans to meet with the Israeli and Palestinian negotiators while they're in town?
  MR. EARNEST: Julie, I don't have any details about the President's schedule over the next couple of days to read out to you. There's no current plan for that, but I wouldn't preclude anything from getting added in the future.
  As you know, the Middle East peace process is something that -- or at least these conversations that are ongoing, or that are slated for this evening, was part of a process that was kicked off by the President's trip to the Middle East earlier this year. Many of you traveled there for that visit. And the President had the opportunity to visit with Prime Minister Netanyahu, President Abbas, and King Hussein of Jordan, where they had some conversations about how it's in the best interest of both the Israeli and Palestinian people to engage in final status negotiations.
  Since that time, Secretary Kerry has been traveling frequently to the region. I think every couple of weeks it seems like he's taking a trip out there to talk to the parties and to talk to others in the region who have an important stake in this conflict being resolved.
  So we're certainly encouraged that the two parties are coming to Washington and beginning their conversations this evening, but we're also cognizant of the hard work that remains over the next nine months. There are some very serious issues that have to be resolved, and it's not going to be easy. The journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step, and we'll take that first step tonight.
  Q Now that this first round of talks is underway, how does the President see his direct role? Is this something where he's going to still continue to sort of seed the frontrunner status for the U.S. to Secretary Kerry and maybe only get involved if these talks continue and get to a real final status moment?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I'll say a couple things about that. The first is this is a process that got kick-started with the President's trip to the Middle East earlier this year. And at the President's direction, Secretary Kerry has been traveling frequently to the region to engage with leaders of both sides and the leaders of countries in the region to talk about this process. So there has been robust involvement from the United States. There is a role for the United States to play in terms of encouraging both sides to come to the table, trying to facilitate conversations, and in some cases even cajoling one side or the other to try to move the process forward.
  That's something that Secretary Kerry has been engaged in for quite some time now and has taken up a lot of his time over the last several months. Ambassador Indyk is also going to play a role in this process now moving forward, as was announced earlier today, and the President will continue to be briefed as he has been. As you see on the President's schedule, he meets on about a weekly basis with Secretary Kerry. At each of those meetings, the Secretary has kept the President closely apprised of the details of these conversations.
  Q And that's what we should expect at this point -- the President basically hearing from Kerry and others involved in this process, but not at this point getting directly involved in negotiations himself?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I wouldn't get ahead. I mean, the negotiations haven't even started yet, so I wouldn't necessarily make that assumption. I mean, as this process moves forward, the President and this administration will stay engaged.
  I guess the point that I would also want to make here is that it is ultimately up to the two parties to reach a lot of these determinations. Again, there is a role for the United States to play in terms of encouraging, and facilitating and cajoling. But ultimately, when it comes down to making decisions, it's going to be the responsibility of the negotiators on both sides to strike an agreement or to at least reach a resolution.
  Q And then, just quickly, is there anything you can tell us about the lunch that the President had or is having with former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton today?
  MR. EARNEST: Somehow, I knew somebody was going to ask about that today. The President is having lunch this afternoon with Secretary Clinton in the private dining room right off the Oval Office.
  As you know, over the course of the last four years, and as much as been written about over the last four years how Secretary Clinton and the President have developed not just a strong working relationship but also a genuine friendship. And so it's largely friendship that's on the agenda for the lunch today. So it's not a working lunch as much as it is an opportunity for the two who saw each other on a pretty frequent basis over the course of the last four years to get a chance to catch up.
  Q Josh, whose idea was that, may I ask?
  MR. EARNEST: The President invited Secretary Clinton over for lunch.
  Yes, Mark.
  Q Back to the Middle East talks for a second. There's substantial turmoil in the Middle East -- Syria, now in Egypt. Where does the President see these talks on the Middle East fitting into that dynamic of the region? Why is that important? How would that contribute to an easing of tensions? Or is it unrelated?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I think many people who have closely examined this process over the years have acknowledged how the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians has led to some destabilization in the region. And there certainly is the strong potential that a good outcome of these conversations could have an impact on the broader region in terms of lowering some tensions and promoting a little bit more stability.
  But I wouldn't want to -- I don't want to front-run the outcome of this process. There is a long road ahead that both sides will have to come to the negotiating table, which is hard enough getting them to the negotiation table. Actually making the kinds of decisions -- the difficult decisions that will be on the table at those conversations will be even more difficult.
  So I don't want to front-run that process, but certainly there is a strong benefit to finally confronting so much of the tension that has fed a lot of turmoil between these two parties.
  Q With regard to Egypt, does the United States have any misgivings about providing assistance, financial or otherwise, to a military that appears to be responsible for the deaths of so many people involved in protests?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I can tell you that we have been watching closely the events in Egypt. The United States strongly condemns the bloodshed and violence in Cairo and Alexandria over the weekend that claimed the lives of scores of Egyptian demonstrators and injured more than a thousand people. Our sympathies are with the families of those who lost their lives, as well as those who were injured.
  It's the view of the United States that Egyptian authorities have a moral and legal obligation to respect the right of peaceful assembly and freedom of expression. And violence not only further sets back the process of reconciliation and democratization in Egypt, but it will negatively impact regional stability.
  You probably saw the readouts over the weekend from Secretary Kerry and Secretary Hagel. Both of them spoke to their counterparts in Egypt to convey our concern about the violence and bloodshed that we saw. The leaders of the interim government of Egypt have promised the Egyptian people and the rest of the world that they are committed to reinstituting a democratically elected government in Egypt and doing so through an inclusive process. The violence that we saw there certainly is not indicative of that commitment.
  This President and this administration and our allies and partners around the world are committed to making sure that we hold the Egyptian government up to those promises. And, in fact, the U.N. -- I'm sorry, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Catherine Ashton, is in Egypt right now. And she's engaged in a dialogue with the Egyptian government and a range of other parties in Egypt about ending this bloodshed and speeding the democratic transition in Egypt that we hope will take place quickly.
  Q Does this most recent bloodshed put U.S. assistance in any jeopardy as far as Egyptians are concerned? Does it take us closer perhaps to withdrawing that assistance?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I don't have any change in our posture to report to you today. Our assistance to Egypt is something that is reviewed on a regular basis. And many of you reported at the end of last week about the transfer of some F-16s being delayed. So I don't have any new information to convey to you about our assistance, other than to remind you that that's something that is regularly reviewed over here at the White House and at the Obama administration.
  Q If I could just jump to a different topic. The President gave an interview over the weekend in which he made some comments about the Keystone XL pipeline.
  MR. EARNEST: He did.
  Q He said he didn't think it would necessarily create that many jobs on a long-lasting basis. Why -- if he questions the usefulness of that pipeline, either from an economic or in terms of its damage environmentally, potentially -- doesn't he just say no to it? Why drag this out?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, because what the President is committed to is making sure that there is a merit-based process in place to evaluate whether or not the construction of this pipeline is in the interest of the United States of America. There is a process for making that decision, for making that determination, and that rests over at the State Department. And that's what they're engaged in now.
  There are a range of estimates out there about the economic impact of the pipeline, about how this pipeline would have an impact on our energy security. There are also estimates about how this pipeline may or may not contribute to some environmental factors. So there are a range of analyses and studies that have been generated by both sides of this debate.
  What the President is interested in doing is draining the politics out of this debate and evaluating this project on the merits. And that's exactly the process that's underway at the State Department right now.
  Jessica.
  Q How optimistic is the President on the peace talks that this first round of discussions here in Washington will lead to concrete, positive negotiations in the Middle East?
  MR. EARNEST: The question that you're asking is entirely legitimate, but given the fact that the negotiations haven't even started yet, I don't want to predict the outcome. I will tell you that it's obviously a good sign that both sides are sitting down. It's been several years since that's happened.
  Secretary Kerry, at the direction of the President, has been hard at work in trying to facilitate these conversations. So we're pleased to see that that process has moved a little bit at least. But we do so with the full knowledge that there's a lot of difficult work ahead, that there are very difficult decisions that both sides are going to have to confront. And ultimately, these are not decisions that will be made by the President or anybody in the United States of America. These are decisions that are going to have to be made by the leaders of the Palestinian people and by the leaders of the nation of Israel.
  Q Secretary Kerry, the current Secretary of State, arrived at the White House just after Secretary Clinton, your former Secretary of State arrived.
  MR. EARNEST: Were you watching the parking lot back there?
  Q I was. (Laughter.) Any chance the two of them will meet while she is lunching with the President? And will this be a topic of discussion?
  MR. EARNEST: It's my understanding that the table is being set for two, just for the President and Secretary Clinton. I don't know if they bumped into each other in the hallway or not, but it's my understanding that these are two separate meetings.
  Q And is the peace talks one of the topics on the agenda for their lunch?
  MR. EARNEST: For the lunch between the President and Secretary Clinton?
  Q Yes.
  MR. EARNEST: The purpose of the lunch was chiefly social, but given that the President and Secretary Clinton worked on this pretty closely together over the course of the last four years, I'd be surprised if it didn't come up.
  Q Can you give us a little more background on the lunch? How long has this been in the works? And if I can be so silly, what do they plan to eat?
  MR. EARNEST: Knowing of your intense interest -- (laughter) -- I have come prepared to answer your question.
  Q Excellent.
  MR. EARNEST: The White House Chef today whipped up some grilled chicken, some pasta jambalaya, and some salad for them to enjoy during lunch. I haven't had lunch myself, so that sounds pretty good.
  Q Is that what's at the Mess today?
  MR. EARNEST: I don't know what's at the Mess today, actually.
  I don't anticipate that we're going to have a detailed readout of their lunch because it's chiefly a social occasion. But we are working with the photo office to see if we can provide a photo that I imagine many of you will be interested in.
  Q How long has this been scheduled?
  MR. EARNEST: I don't know, I don't think it's been scheduled for too long. But it certainly is -- the President wanted to take advantage of the opportunity for the two of them to catch up, and that's what they're doing.
  Q Do they communicate periodically by phone and whatnot?
  MR. EARNEST: I don't have any other conversations between them to read out to you.
  I want to jump around a little bit. Is there anybody in the back that has a question?
  Q Yes, Josh. Has the President referred to any current or previous member of the Cabinet, or the Vice President, as someone who would be good for the top job, for his job in the future?
  MR. EARNEST: Not that I'm aware of. And 2016, despite the intense media interest, is something that is still quite a ways away.
  Q And when we were talking about the Israel-Palestine negotiations, I didn't hear anything in your statement about the release of prisoners by Israel in your statement at the top. Is there a White House reaction to that?
  MR. EARNEST: Yes, there is. Let me read it to you. Stand by for one second.
  The administration welcomes the Israeli cabinet vote yesterday and sees it as a positive step forward in this process. Prime Minister Netanyahu has publicly said that he thinks it is very important to enter the diplomatic process, and that there are moments like this where he needs to make tough decisions for the good of the country.
  So the United States welcomes the leadership on his part and his interest in making the difficult and courageous decisions that will move this process forward.
  Kristen.
  Q Josh, thanks. Can you give us a bit of a preview of the President's meeting this afternoon with civil rights leaders and local elected officials that are going to discuss the Voting Rights Act? What does the President hope will come out of this meeting, and who specifically will be there?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, we'll have a full list of the people who attended the meeting after the meeting has concluded. The President is interested in having a conversation about the Voting Rights Act. We've articulated already and I think the President himself has articulated his deep disappointment in the Supreme Court decision just a month or two ago.
  I'd remind you that in 2006 the Voting Rights Act was reauthorized -- so this is only seven years ago now -- that the Voting Rights [Act] was reauthorized with the unanimous support of the United States Senate and with the near-unanimous support of the House of Representatives, and then that legislation was signed into law by President George W. Bush.
  So it is our view that this is -- that the protection of the constitutional rights of Americans and the protection of the voting rights of those Americans who are eligible to cast a ballot should be protected, and we should be able to build bipartisan consensus about the need to protect those important rights.
  So that will be some of what the President is going to talk about today with both some civil rights leaders, but also some state and local elected officials. And as I said, I think we'll have a list of those who participated in the meeting after the meeting concludes.
  Q Can we expect him to stay in contact with them moving forward in the coming weeks and months?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, this is certainly an issue that the President cares about. It is something -- the Attorney General will participate in the meeting. This is something that the Attorney General has vowed to keep a close eye on. It's obviously his responsibility as the Attorney General to ensure that the voting rights of those Americans who are eligible to cast a ballot are protected. That is a priority of the Attorney General's, the priority of this administration. So I would anticipate that there would be future conversations along those lines.
  Q And I want to ask you about something that Treasury Secretary Jack Lew said this weekend. He said the President wouldn't sign a government funding bill that cut domestic spending. So I'm wondering, heading into these budget battles in the fall, is the President prepared to shut down the government over this issue?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, what I can tell you is that the President has been traveling across the country; he traveled to both Illinois and Missouri on Wednesday, and he traveled to Florida on Thursday, and then he's obviously headed to Tennessee on Tuesday. And in the remarks where he's giving in each of those locales, he's talking about his view that when we're making economic policy decisions in Washington, D.C., we need to put the interest of middle-class families front and center. The reason for that is not just because that's probably pretty good politics -- I think it probably is -- it also makes a whole lot of sense in terms of policymaking. The President famously said this in the State of the Union address that he believes that the foremost challenge facing this country is how to reignite the engine of our economic growth -- and the engine of our economic growth is the middle class in this country.
  So if we can make the kinds of investments that will expand economic opportunity for the middle class, then we can get a growing and thriving economic recovery, and that should be everybody's priority.
  And so we welcome the opportunity to work with Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill to make progress along that. I assume that Democrats and Republicans share that priority -- that they view getting our economy moving and strengthening our recovery and expanding economic opportunity for the middle class should be our top priority. So if they share that priority with the President, then we shouldn't have any trouble being able to roll up our sleeves, sit down at the table, and work out an agreement to get that done.
  Q Well, then if you can't get an agreement and if Republicans are only offering spending bills -- bills that cut domestic spending -- is the President prepared to go to the brink over that? If you listen to some of his rhetoric both in his interview with The New York Times and again with Treasury Jack Lew who was saying this weekend on the Sunday shows, it seems like they're gearing up for a fight.
  MR. EARNEST: Well, again, if we are going to put the middle class at the center of our economic policy decision-making, then we would understand that more self-inflicted wounds from Washington, D.C. are not going to strengthen our economic recovery. So a government shutdown or a showdown over the debt limit, that's not going to be in the best interest of our economy. We saw in 2011 the terrible impact that that would have on our economy; it would have a terrible impact on certainty. And that is something that we want to avoid.
  Fortunately -- I have good news to report -- there are some senators who have also spoken out and said that this would be something that they think we should avoid. Republicans both in the House and the Senate think that shutting down the government is a bad idea.
  So we should be able to come together around a bipartisan solution that will protect the critical investments for the middle class, things like making sure that we're keeping a college education open to middle-class students; that we are guaranteeing that young children ages 3 and 4 have access to a high-quality early childhood education program; that we can allow responsible homeowners to benefit from a strong housing market; that we can ensure that middle-class families in this country have the opportunity to retire with some dignity and with some measure of financial stability -- that these are the cornerstones to a middle-class life.
  And we can do all of that while continuing to make progress in reducing the deficit. I mean, as has been discussed, the deficit has actually been cut in half since the President took office, so we've made some progress on the deficit. We can continue to make that progress at the same time that we're making the kinds of investments that the President thinks is critical to the country's future not just in the short term, but over the long term as well.
  Let's go to the back. April.
  Q Josh, I want to follow back up on the issues of voting rights. The President met with the Congressional Black Caucus. And also, last month, some of the Democratic senators said -- and this is prior to the Supreme Court's decision on voting rights -- they said that they were working on matters to create a possible fix. Has the President been in contact with the Democratic senators about this possible fix when it comes to voting rights? And also, has he been in touch with the CBC again in reference to voting rights?
  MR. EARNEST: I don't have any specific conversations to read out to you from the President or his staff. But suffice it to say, this is a priority of the President's. It's something that the President worked on even before he entered public life. And I also pointed out a really interesting fact that this morning I wasn't aware of -- that in 2006, this is something that had the unanimous support, that reauthorizing the Voting Rights Act -- that putting in place protections to ensure that individuals who are eligible to cast a vote are able to do so, protecting those rights is paramount to our democracy.
  And the President is certainly interested in working with Democrats and Republicans to protect those rights. And that's something that Republicans have supported in the past, and I don't see why they wouldn't support those kinds of measures in the future.
  Q The language is so tight from the Supreme Court. What kind of ways can you get around the provisions that were struck down? I mean, what is the President thinking?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I'm not an attorney, so I'm not sure I can provide a legal route for ensuring that these rights are protected. But I think it's fair to say that there is demonstrated bipartisan agreement that those rights should be protected.
  And it's not a matter of going around the Supreme Court as much as it is working with Congress to make sure that those rights that are enshrined in our Constitution and are defended by the Supreme Court are protected, and that there are some communities in this country where those rights have historically been at risk. And ensuring that there are protections in place to protect those rights is something that has attracted bipartisan support before and deserves bipartisan support in the future.
  Q Let me go back to Egypt for a second. The administration has been expressing its concern and its mild outrage about what's been going on in Egypt as far as the killing of their citizens. But what should the American public know about when the administration, when the President feels it's time to do more than that? What is the trigger? When is it ''enough is enough,'' that military aid or foreign aid -- both tools that the President has -- should be used?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, first of all, there should be no confusion about the President's view of what happened in Egypt over the weekend. I've made very clear, and you saw some statements over the weekend from various senior administration officials indicating that we condemn the violence and the bloodshed that took place over the weekend there; that that is inconsistent with the commitment that's already been articulated by the interim government to an inclusive process of government that leads to democratic representation and democratic governance of Egypt.
  That perspective was also conveyed directly by Secretary Kerry to his counterpart in Egypt. That perspective was also conveyed directly from Secretary Hagel to General al-Sisi in Egypt. And that is part of the message that Lady Ashton is carrying with her in Egypt on this very day.
  So our views of what's happened there over the course of the last 72 hours or so have been made abundantly clear. So then the question becomes, what do we do? How do we engage with not just the Egyptian government but with all relevant parties in Egypt to steer them back toward an inclusive process that leads to a democratic government?
  And those are the kinds of conversations that this administration is having with our counterparts in Egypt. Those are the kinds of conversations that we're having with other partners in the region that have some leverage over the situation. And this is also one of the reasons that we are on a regular basis reevaluating the assistance that we provide to Egypt. And that's part of an ongoing process.
  Q So there's no particular trigger, no red line as there was before in Syria? Is there anything here that the President just will not stomach before he starts pulling aid?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, what we want to see and what we have told the Egyptians that we would like to see is a prompt return to democratic governance through an inclusive process. That means several things. That means engaging in a dialogue with all parties. We can't engage in a dialogue with all the parties if some of those parties are currently being detained, so we've called for the release of all those who have been detained for political purposes.
  It's going to require Egyptian authorities to respect the rights of Egyptian citizens, including the freedom of expression and the right to a peaceful assembly. That these are all civil rights -- basic civil rights that democratic governments respect around the world, and we will hold the interim Egyptian government and Egyptian authorities that are currently in power accountable for protecting those rights.
  Q And then in a neck-snapping curb, if I could just go over to politics for a moment. The President, as the leader of the Democratic Party, does he have an opinion of whether or not Anthony Weiner should stay or go as far as the race is concerned there?
  MR. EARNEST: Not one that I've heard.
  Major.
  Q I want to get you to say something I think you're saying, but you haven't said directly. The administration believes the Egyptian military is principally responsible for bloodshed in the streets of Egypt, yes or no?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, what he have said is we condemn in no uncertain terms the violence and bloodshed that we saw.
  Q But who is most responsible for it? The Muslim Brotherhood is unequivocal about who is responsible for this. They're being killed in the street by the military that ousted the democratically elected president. Does the White House agree?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, one of the things that we have said is that we are supportive of an independent inquiry into the actions that occurred over the weekend. But that kind of violence and bloodshed that we have seen is unacceptable. And it is why we are -- it is what prompted phone calls from Secretary Kerry to his counterpart. It's what prompted phone calls from Secretary Hagel to General al-Sisi, to make sure that there is no ambiguity associated with our views.
  Q Is there any fear in this White House that by not declaring this a coup and not suspending aid, that the military interpreted that as a green light to carry forward with some of its confrontation with the Muslim Brotherhood that has resulted in this violence?
  MR. EARNEST: Of course not. And the reason for that is simple. We have been very clear with the Egyptian authorities about the need to make good on their promise to put together an inclusive process that will send that country back to a democratically elected government and a government that reflects the will of the people, that reflects basic civil rights like the freedom of expression and the right to a peaceful assembly. These are basic rights that should be protected by a democratically elected government. And there is nothing that is ambiguous about that statement and nothing we have done that is inconsistent with that desire.
  Q Kenneth Bae is an American citizen being held in North Korea. There are some reports that former President Jimmy Carter is considering a trip there. Would the White House encourage or discourage that kind of diplomacy?
  MR. EARNEST: I'd refer you to the State Department. I've seen those reports. I can tell you that President Carter is traveling to North Korea on a private trip. He is doing that in his personal capacity. But in terms of what conversations --
  Q Has he cleared it with the White House?
  MR. EARNEST: In terms of what conversations we've had with President Carter, I'd refer you to the State Department.
  Q Okay. The President in his New York Times interview said he is reviewing several extraordinary candidates for the Federal Reserve chairmanship. Is Janet Yellen among them?
  MR. EARNEST: I'm not prepared at this point to open up the playbook in terms of the process that's underway for filling that very important job.
  Q Is there anything that you could say in addition to the President's current emphasis on the middle class and the Federal Reserve's interaction with the economy that might help us understand how he's evaluating these extraordinary candidates?
  MR. EARNEST: The President did talk about that a little bit in his interview, and I don't think I'm in a position to expand on that at this point.
  Q One last thing before I let you go. I know this is a bit in the weeds, but in 2009, when the President first took this office, he delayed the creation of a new Marine One helicopter for his transport. Thursday is the deadline for submission of bids for a new helicopter that the Navy has put together. I'm not going to ask you who is going to win or anything like that, but it appears that the process has been drafted so tightly that there may only be one applicant, and the cost may actually be higher -- contradicting both the President's stated goals of delaying in the first place. Do you know anything about whether he is disappointed with this process or thinks this is just something that is inevitable in government contracting? And is he going to take the new helicopter?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I think the thing that he would say if he were standing here is that he would say, well, let's what until the window closes on this bidding process before we start evaluating how well the bidding process worked. So for details about that bidding process, I'd refer you to the Navy that's conducting this exercise.
  But certainly the goals that you've articulated and that the President himself has articulated, in terms of doing this in a cost-effective way and in a way that continues to protect the safety of the future Presidents who would fly on that aircraft, those goals remain in place. But in terms of getting to those goals I'd refer you to the Navy about the process.
  Q Well, if on Friday, if there's only one bidder, are you going to be -- we can be sure you'll be giving us all the disappointment from the President about this process?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, if I'm standing here on Friday, then you can ask. (Laughter.)
  Let's go to the back. Leslie.
  Q Josh, are you familiar at all, or is the White House familiar with the report out of New Zealand that U.S. intelligence agencies were helping get some military track the telephone calls of a colleague, a McClatchy journalist working in Afghanistan at the time?
  MR. EARNEST: I'm actually not aware. I've seen the headlines in those reports, but I'm not aware of the story. I would encourage you to either check with the State Department or maybe even the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
  Q But is the White House at all concerned that that raises some questions if U.S. intelligence agencies are helping foreign governments track phone calls that could be used to get metadata of U.S. reporters as well?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, it's hard for me to express that concern without having read the report. So if you want to touch base later after I've had a chance to take a look at it, then maybe we can talk. But my colleagues at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence should be able to help you with that story.
  Ed.
  Q Josh, on government shutdown talk, one of the things that was reported on Friday was The Washington Post saying that the President might be taking a harder line in these negotiations and so wants to do away with the sequester that he might be willing to veto a bill to keep the government open. Is he so determined to do away with the sequester that he'd be willing to shut the government down?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, we've been pretty clear about our view that the sequester is bad policy. That's why it was put in the Budget Control Act in the first place, because it is bad policy. And there are plenty of Republicans who would tell you the same thing. So the question does become, what do you do to turn off the sequester, right?
  Now, the President has put forward a budget where he laid out a very specific plan about how we could turn off the sequester while protecting the critical investments that are so important to expanding opportunity for the middle class, while at the same time actually doing more to reduce the deficit than the sequester itself. So we've laid out our plan for how to do that.
  What the President is most focused on right now, though, is his commitment to ensuring that we maintain the progress we've made in helping our economy recover. We're digging out of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression and we've made a lot of progress. Over the course of the last 40 consecutive months, the private sector in this country has created 7.2 million jobs. We even got a domestic auto industry that was on the brink of collapse that's now coming back. We've got a housing market that is recovering very nicely.
  So we've made a lot of progress. The question now is what are we going to do to maintain that progress. And the President believes that we can maintain that progress by making these investments that are so critical to the middle class, while at the same time staying on the trajectory that we're on to -- that has allowed us to cut the deficit in half over the course of the last five years.
  Q A pretty grim message from Jack Lew, as Kristen mentioned, about how the debt ceiling fight, government shutdown fight could really hurt economic growth. And you've got all these looming budget battles, and yet the President is about to go away for a week. Congress is going away far longer than he is. They take basically most of the month of August off. Is any thought being given inside the White House to calling Congress back into session? If this is as desperate a situation as Jack Lew suggested, why is Washington basically going away for the summer?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, the prospect of a government shutdown or more drama around the debt ceiling would be bad for the economy. There's no doubt about that. And I think, again, that is a view that is shared by leaders in Congress in both parties. So there is ample time for us -- based on that general agreement, there is ample time for us to make sure that that doesn't happen. We don't need any more self-inflicted wounds.
  We saw the damage that that could have -- inflict on the economy back in 2011, and so we can avoid that again. It's just a matter of sitting down, rolling up the sleeves, and figuring out what we can do to preserve these investments that are so critical to the middle class. And we can do that without threatening a government shutdown, and we can do that without any drama or delay and making sure that Congress protects the full faith and credit of the United States of America and pays the bills that they've already incurred.
  Q Two other quick things. The New York Times has a story today saying, one way that Detroit hopes to get out of debt and deal with the bankruptcy situation is to take some of their retirees who may be in their early 60s, not ready -- ineligible for Medicare and take them out of city-paid health care and put them into the insurance exchanges that will come in with the President's health care law. My question is, how worried is the White House that Detroit and other cities in trouble may take some of the health care costs that they don't want to deal with and push them into the exchanges in a way that actually makes it more complicated to implement the law and dumps some of the cost on the federal government?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I've seen the report. I have not heard a close analysis of this. This is certainly something that we're taking a look at. The one thing I will say, though, is this -- is that one of the benefits of the Affordable Care Act is making sure that those Americans that don't get health insurance through their employer are able for the first time to go on the open market, through these marketplaces, and purchase high quality, affordable health insurance. They can comparison shop, and they can choose the program -- the health insurance program that is best for them and their family. That is something that didn't exist before.
  So I don't know how this will shake out or what relationship that has to cities that are contemplating a policy option like this, but it's something at the White House that we're taking a look at.
  Q Last thing, talking about the President's economic tour coming back tomorrow and you say the focus is on the middle class, Pew had a study back in April about the recovery from 2009 to now, and it was saying that, basically, under the President's policies the rich have gotten richer; the middle class has seen incomes shrinking, as the President himself says out there. This study also said that the rich got even richer in the Bush years, by the way. But the point being, how do you go out and make the case and say that this tour is about helping the middle class when in fact the middle class has seen the rich get richer over the last four years?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I think because of the studies that you're citing there, that's actually what's motivating the President's speech, or the comments that the President has made over the last few days.
  The President is concerned about the studies like the ones that you cited there, that as we've gone through the recovery, we need to make sure that those benefits are flowing to the middle class. If they don't, if those benefits flow just to the top 1 percent, what we're going to do is we're going to get back into that boom-and-bust cycle that actually led to the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression in the first place.
  So the President wants to make sure that we can put in place a policy regime that will protect investments that are so important to people in the middle class. So again, this is everything from making sure that a college education is open and accessible and affordable to middle-class families; that every child in this country has access to a high-quality early childhood education program; that middle-class families can retire with some measure of dignity and financial stability; that responsible homeowners can take advantage of a strong and recovering housing market -- that these are the cornerstones of a middle-class life.
  And those are the kinds of investments that the President would like to see. And those are the kinds of investments that are required to make sure that the benefits of this recovery are enjoyed by the middle class. Because if they don't -- if we don't make those kinds of investments, we're going to see the benefits flow just to the top 1 percent, and we're going to end up in the same boom-and-bust cycle that led us to the worst economic downturn in the first place.
  Roger.
  Q Back to the Fed for a moment. About a third of the Senate Democratic Caucus wrote the President late last week -- and you're familiar with the letter I assume -- on recommending Yellin. One, can you release that letter? And second, how does a letter such as that affect the President's selection process?
  MR. EARNEST: As I recall from the reports, that was the letter that was being circulated and had been signed by some members. I don't know that it's actually been sent to us. I haven't seen it if it has. But my guess is --
  Q Will you release it when you get it?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, based on my experience working with my colleagues on Capitol Hill, that if you ask them to release the letter, I'm sure that there are dozens of people who would be happy to do so.
  Q How about the selection process?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, as I told Major, your interest in this is certainly understandable. And I think that there are a lot of people across the country who are interested in this process. But I don't want to weigh in at this point to try to -- even with the best of intentions and my desire to try to steer you in the right direction, I'm concerned that my carefully scrutinized words might cause some to over-interpret what I would say and lead you to the wrong conclusion. That's the opposite of what I'm trying to accomplish here.
  The President talked about this a little bit with The New York Times. The transcript of that interview was published in The New York Times on Sunday. That should give you some pretty good insight into how the President is approaching this decision that needs to be made.
  Q It would be fair to say that he'll give the recommendation some weight, would it not?
  MR. EARNEST: Which -- oh, the letter. We're back to the letter again.
  Q I mean, he doesn't ignore it, right?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, he's the President of the United States, and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve is an appointee of the President of the United States. So I think ''ignore'' might be too strong of a word, but I think the President has --
  Q I assume the Senate has confirmation.
  MR. EARNEST: I think the President has the -- well, sure, but that's their advise-and-consent role, right? So they have a role in this process. But the President's role is to appoint someone. It's the Senate's role in this process to evaluate those appointees. So we'll go through that process.
  I think the President has made clear in that interview that this is something he's been thinking about for some time, and I think he has his own pretty strongly held ideas about what he'd like to see there.
  Ann.
  Q Thank you very much, Josh. You mentioned that 2016 is pretty far off, but do you think at some point the President will want to express his choice of who might be the best Democrat to run for President? And was Vice President Biden invited to the lunch today?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, as you know, Ann, the Vice President has lunch with the President on a weekly basis, so I don't know if he was joining the lunch. As I mentioned to you before, I think the table was set for two. But I would anticipate that the President will continue to have lunch on a weekly basis with the Vice President.
  In terms of whether or not he'll weigh in, on 2016, I think he's far too early to tell. I'm sure there will be plenty of people, probably even you, who will ask him about that. But I'm not going to commit him one way or the other at this point.
  Q And how will he measure the impact of these economic speeches such as the one he'll give tomorrow? Is there some kind of feedback of which the White House figures, yes, these are working, or no, they're not?
  MR. EARNEST: That's a good question. I think the goal of these speeches is to try to re-center the debate, that for so long we spent a lot of time focused on debts and deficits and getting that under control. And as I pointed out, we've made tremendous progress here in terms of cutting that deficit in half over the course of the last five years.
  So what the President wants to do is to redouble his efforts to put the interests of middle-class families back at the center of that debate. Certainly, middle-class families have something to gain from the progress we've made in terms of reducing the deficit. But there's a lot more that we can do to help middle-class families, and that's what the President is focused on right now.
  Q So how do you decide whether or not this series of speeches is working?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, I think what we'll do is we'll evaluate the debate in the weeks and months ahead. And I would concede that that is a rather nebulous criteria, but I think it's important, nonetheless, for the American people to understand what the President's policymaking priority is. It certainly is important for Congress to understand what the President's priorities are.
  And again, I think that there are certainly Democrats and maybe even some Republicans who share the President's view that we should put middle-class families front and center at this debate. That's what the President is committed to doing, and hopefully we'll have a debate that reflects those priorities.
  David.
  Q Josh, later today, in a few minutes maybe, I think the White House is coming out with a report on immigration, talking about the positive economic benefits. But the House looks like they're going to break this week without taking any significant action on reform. And I'm wondering if you could tell us how the White House, and the President in particular, will use the congressional recess to press the case. Will he go out and talk about it publicly, and how so?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, there is a report that's slated for release later this afternoon, and I understand that the Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack, will be talking about the findings of that report, so I don't want to get out ahead of what announcements he may be making, but I certainly commend to all of you that report that has some important conclusions about the economic impact -- and the economic benefits, I should say -- of comprehensive immigration reform, including in smaller communities all across the country.
  In terms of the President's activities over August, his calendar is still coming together for that month. Unlike Congress, the President will be at work for most of that month. And I would anticipate that you'll hear him talking about the importance of finally making some progress on comprehensive immigration reform. The President himself has said that we have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to finally fix a broken immigration system.
  And we've made significant progress by working in bipartisan fashion in the Senate to build strong bipartisan support for that legislation. There's now also strong support all across the country in faith communities and law enforcement communities, among business leaders and leaders in organized labor for that compromised piece of legislation. So we would anticipate that that momentum will continue to build for that piece of legislation. And we'll see --
  Q Do you feel like you've lost momentum, or into the point where it's behind schedule -- that especially with the debt ceiling and other things and the budget coming up in September being such an important part of the focus, is immigration just going to be pushed back farther?
  MR. EARNEST: I won't deny that we would be perfectly happy for the House of Representatives to pass that bipartisan legislation today and have a signing ceremony at the end of the week. I don't anticipate that's going to happen. But I do think that there's pretty strong momentum built up behind this piece of legislation, that we really have built a strong coalition of people that often aren't getting together on pieces of legislation.
  When you see both the business community and labor community strongly supporting a piece of legislation, you know that something pretty interesting is happening. When you see the evangelical community weighing in strongly on a piece of legislation that the President is eager to sign, that's sometimes a pretty good indication that there's something unusual going on. So there is some strong support for this not just in Washington and not just in both parties in Washington, but among communities all across the country. And I think that momentum is only building. And we'll see how House Republicans respond to that pressure.
  Q Can you talk about why Chattanooga tomorrow and whether that speech will be different from the three previous speeches?
  MR. EARNEST: What the President is going to be focused on tomorrow in Chattanooga are policies that we can put in place that will support the private sector as they create jobs and continue to lead this recovery. There are important -- the President alluded to this a little bit in his remarks in Jacksonville, where he talked about how infrastructure improvements and efforts to modernize the port in Jacksonville have led to some job creation and expanded economic activity not just in Jacksonville but in the region.
  So there is a role for the government to play in supporting the private sector as they continue to create jobs and lead this recovery back from the worst recession since the Great Depression. So the President will be speaking at an Amazon fulfillment center in Chattanooga. And I read in the newspaper today that Amazon has committed to hiring another 5,000 workers at those fulfillment centers located all across the country.
  That's the kind of investment that we're starting to see more of -- that if we can put in place policies that will encourage companies to invest in America to bring back jobs from overseas, that if we can invest in the kind of infrastructure that's required to allow companies to get products to market more quickly or to their customers more quickly, that's certainly something that we want to encourage.
  Other companies countries* are making that kind of investment to modernize their infrastructure. And we should be making that kind of investment here in this country as well.
  I'll do a couple more in the back. JC.
  Q You've made it very clear that the President is not directly involved in these talks and that it's the purview of the Secretary of State. What encouraging conversations has the President had or does he look forward to having with the leaders in NATO, for example Prime Minister Cameron, et cetera, because obviously they are part of this whole world concept as well?
  MR. EARNEST: I don't have any specific calls to read out to you at this point. But the President and other officials in this administration are in close touch with our allies as we work to bring both the Palestinians and the Israelis to the table. As I alluded to in a previous question I think from Mark, the world -- many countries all around the world do have a pretty substantial stake in the outcome of these conversations. And this is something that the world community, and certainly with our allies and partners in the region, have been working on for quite some time. And it's something that somebody else had pointed out that previous Presidents have worked on.
  So there is a lot of very difficult work ahead. And we're only going to be able to make progress if our allies and our partners in the region are supportive of the process and work to encourage the Israelis and Palestinians to take the necessary steps to continue down this path toward peace. That's certainly what we'll be encouraging. But ultimately, that is a choice and a set of decisions that will be left up to the Israelis and Palestinians to make.
  Q And bringing in the Brits and the French at this point has been going on? Or the President looks forward to that?
  MR. EARNEST: Well, we certainly are going to rely on our allies to support this process. And there is an important role for our allies to play -- and as I have mentioned, sort of cajoling and encouraging and facilitating the kinds of conversations that are going to lead -- that will hopefully lead to some progress.
  Alexis, I'll give you the last one.
  Q Josh, at the Knox College speech the President talked about something the economists have talked about, the problem of the long-term unemployed. Can you elaborate on what he had to say about hoping that private-sector employers would hire or look for ways to hire those individuals, whether he has an initiative in mind for that? Is there anything the federal government can do along the lines of hiring veterans to encourage that to occur?
  MR. EARNEST: I don't want to get ahead of the President's speech tomorrow, so I would encourage you to tune in. But if you've talked to Alan Krueger or Gene Sperling or any of the President's other senior economic advisors -- Secretary Lew would certainly tell you this as well -- that one of the things that we're concerned about are those who have been unemployed for six months or longer; that we want to make sure that there continues to be economic opportunity and an opportunity for a job for people who are in that situation. And that's something that's very difficult right now, and it is a thorny and rather persistent problem in this country.
  And so we are considering some initiatives that would try to provide some assistance to those who have been looking for a job for quite some time. But with that, I'll leave it there and encourage you to tune in to the President's speech tomorrow.
  Q And one other quick follow-up. The President had suggested that we might see him as Congress departs, so he would get a chance -- maybe at a news conference -- to talk about this break coming up and what he expects to see in the fall. Can we expect to see him this week?
  MR. EARNEST: I don't want to announce the President's schedule for the remainder of the week. But as you know, the President does on occasion like to come out here and talk to you a little bit about what he has been thinking about and take some questions. So I don't have a date to tease out right now, but that's certainly something that the President is interested in doing.
  Thanks, everybody. Have a good Monday.
  Q Will you be back tomorrow?
  MR. EARNEST: Mr. Carney will be on the road with the President tomorrow. Have a good day, everybody.
  END 1:49 P.M. EDT
Notice -- Regarding the Continuation of the National Emergency with respect to Lebanon
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:37
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 29, 2013
  NOTICE
  - - - - - - -
  CONTINUATION OF THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY
  WITH RESPECT TO LEBANON
  On August 1, 2007, by Executive Order 13441, the President declared a national emergency with respect to Lebanon pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States constituted by the actions of certain persons to undermine Lebanon's legitimate and democratically elected government or democratic institutions; to contribute to the deliberate breakdown in the rule of law in Lebanon, including through politically motivated violence and intimidation; to reassert Syrian control or contribute to Syrian interference in Lebanon; or to infringe upon or undermine Lebanese sovereignty and contribute to political and economic instability in that country and the region.
  Certain ongoing activities, such as continuing arms transfers to Hizballah that include increasingly sophisticated weapons systems, serve to undermine Lebanese sovereignty, contribute to political and economic instability in Lebanon, and continue to constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For this reason, the national emergency declared on August 1, 2007, and the measures adopted on that date to deal with that emergency, must continue in effect beyond August 1, 2013. In accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency with respect to Lebanon declared in Executive Order 13441.
  This notice shall be published in the Federal Register and transmitted to the Congress.
  BARACK OBAMA
  THE WHITE HOUSE,July 29, 2013.
Presidential Memorandum -- Delegation of Authority to Sections 110(d)(4) and 110(f) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, as Amended
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:36
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 29, 2013
  MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE
  SUBJECT: Delegation of Authority Pursuant to Sections 110(d)(4) and 110(f) of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, as Amended
  By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including section 301 of title 3, United States Code, I hereby delegate to the Secretary of State the authority conferred upon the President by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (Division A of Public Law 106-386), as amended (the "Act"), to determine, consistent with sections 110(d)(4) and 110(f) of the Act, with respect to Syria for Fiscal Year 2013, that assistance described in section 110(d)(1)(B) of the Act would promote the purposes of the Act or is otherwise in the national interest of the United States.
  You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.
  BARACK OBAMA
Letter -- Regarding the Continuation of the National Emergency with respect to Lebanon
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:35
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 29, 2013
  TEXT OF A LETTER FROM THE PRESIDENT
  TO THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
  AND THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE
  July 29, 2013
  Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)
  Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)) provides for the automatic termination of a national emergency unless, within 90 days prior to the anniversary date of its declaration, the President publishes in the Federal Register and transmits to the Congress a notice stating that the emergency is to continue in effect beyond the anniversary date. In accordance with this provision, I have sent to the Federal Register for publication the enclosed notice stating that the national emergency with respect to Lebanon that was declared in Executive Order 13441 of August 1, 2007, is to continue in effect beyond August 1, 2013.
  Certain ongoing activities, such as continuing arms transfers to Hizballah that include increasingly sophisticated weapons systems, undermine Lebanese sovereignty, contribute to political and economic instability in the region, and continue to constitute an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue the national emergency declared in Executive Order 13441 with respect to Lebanon.
  Sincerely,
  BARACK OBAMA
Who the hell is Leland Obama?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Lame Cherry
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:34
  Who is Leland Obama? That appears to be the name on the jacket of Birther Hussein as the Jinn scampers off to vacation island.
  There was some black student at Morehouse named Leland Shelton that Obama before June 13 decided to try and connect with.....so I do not know if Obama trying to be every famous person from Reagan, to Jesus, to Jimmy Carter, is now as the Jinn trying to take the idenity of Leland Shelton as the Jinn hates being a Designer Negro in Obama.
  Obama's Shout-Out To A 'Morehouse Man' : Code Switch : NPRwww.npr.org/blogs/codeswitch/.../obama-shout-out-to-a-morehouse-manby Gene Demby. May 21, 2013 3:20 PM. Morehouse graduate Leland Shelton is congratulated as he is acknowledged by President Obama. Enlarge image i.The part of Obama's speech that struck Morehouse students most ...video.msnbc.msn.com/msnbc/51935378... Morehouse graduate Leland Shelton, share their reactions to President Obama's commencement address ...I do not seem to comprehend how Fang Jinn could think he looks alike Mr. Shelton as Mr. Shelton is short and black, while the Fang Jinn is tall and as stupid as Obama.
  I do realize that all black people look the same. If it is Shelton above, he looks like Theodore Huxtable surrounded by Correta Scott King, a young Oprah Winfrey and that one woman from Tony Orlando and Dawn....and James what's his name who does CBS sports or is it FOX.....no was FOX and Kurt Minnefield or something took over at FOX and James Brown, not the rock singer as he is dead, took over for CBS.
  Where was I?
  Yes why is it the Fang Jinn is named Leland Obama now?
  Why is Leland Shelton named a normal white name and not like Trayvon Martin.......you know like Leighlahound would be something black....but why is Fang Jinn now attracted to a white name and why does the Jinn think no one will think he is Obama if he changes his name to Leland Obama?
  Is his underwear missing labels now or in new labels? Just how far does and is this name change taking place to hide the identity of the Fang Jinn?
  Is this not though a testimony absolving Stan Ann Dunham for dumping Barry Soetoro and opting out for a black Korean kid long ago when Obama's brain straightening did not work? Is not now Stan Ann vindicated in dumping Barry Obama, as she put up with like 10 years with this adoptee, and then dumped his ass while he was stoned in college sucking Pakistani dick.....that was like 20 years of dealing with Obama, and this Jinn was in Obama's skin just 44 days and he had enough of 44 Obama, and had a new name sewed onto his jacket now calling hisself Leland Obama.
  I can not fault a demon for doing that, and there is probably some demon honor for the Jinn hacking it out that long as Barack Obama. A demon though apparently can only take so much....and it probably was the first Obama miracle really, as a false messiah from the crypt, he actually got a demon to change his name as the Jinn could not hack being Obama another day.
  Married to Muchelle.......two gargantuan children who eat gargantuanly and no marriage prospect.....then there is crazy Joe Biden as President........then there is Eric Holder doing the devil's work......then there is Hillary shrieking about being President......and if only God could help, there is that robotron Val-erie Jarrett as mummy and who knows what she makes that Jinn do with her titties when the curtains are pulled.Hell probably is not enough Cheetos to give rest to the dry places for this Jinn.
  All of that no wonder Obama was always running away on vacation from the White House, and now this demonic Jinn has to run away from Obama's skin too......no wonder it wants to be Leland Obama.
  Who wouldn't?
  Would not this all be better if we just had Mormon Romney as President? I mean Mormon multiple wive marriage would have been all religious, but now with Obama Jinn, the sodomite marriages have no marriages and people can marry horses or children legally, as all that has come about.
  Should be grateful I suppose the Jinn is not going by Lame Obama or just going whole tart for Lame Cherry........
  Come to think of it if the Jinn would do the name Lame Cherry, I would be President.......and with that I would arrest everyone in the executive who has been associated with it in the past 25 years...........arrest the Congress.........arrest most of the Judiciary.........arrest most of the governors and a state congresses........arrest most of them damn state troopers robbing people.......and all of those military political minders......and have the new state Governors and Legislatures appoint poor people with brains to Congress and then appoint a bunch of common sense Judges to fix things.
  Nopers I do not want the Jinn taking my name and me having to be President and fix this mess......no I want a revolution, invasion and Jesus to clean up this mess......want allot of things really like big ass donations, as I'm working today as usual in being upset about the evil people doing to Emma what they did.....no remorse or guilt.....just scurrying cowards.Work is what I do when I am upset as I convince myself if I become more productive then all this hurt you evil people cause is not going to effect me.Why I fix things or try to fix appliance things as when I can not fix what people destroy, then maybe I can fix things with a screwdriver......as I do not turn to things like booze and have never taken any narcotics in this life God has given me.
  I still remember the evil though......God gave me a skunk this morning....named it for all the evil things and people in this world who hurt Em and others and I dusted it off. Was the skunk's purpose in sympathetic curse.
  Hell is coming you curs that think running will make a difference. You will hit the edge soon enough and those demons will get you then.If the Jinn is not comfortable in the Birther skin, you will not be comfortable in your own skin you who are responsible.
  The Holy Ghost Bible verse today speaking to me......
  And it came to pass, when the evil spirit from God was upon Saul, that David took an harp, and played with his hand: so Saul was refreshed, and was well, and the evil spirit departed from him.
  Yes what happens when you rich and mean folks have that evil spirit tormenting you and not comforting you with money and pleasure hurting people.......and you will have to come here to be refreshed by the words found here to find relief........yes what happens then when only donating will give you relief from the demons which possess you........Yes what happens then.....Go ask Leland, maybe it has the answers.
  agtG 343YY
An idea for Kindle books.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dave Winer
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:33
  One of the reasons I like reading on a Kindle is that I can look up words I don't know by clicking and holding. It's a way to increase my vocabulary, and decrease my frustration. It's especially useful when reading a book like Game of Thrones where the author uses a lot of old words that aren't used that often.
  Here's the idea: Let the book author load up the dictionary with the names of characters and places. Books like GoT that have a huge number of characters, often include a chart at the beginning of the book explaining all the relationships between the characters. Wouldn't it be great if this information were baked into the dictionary as you're reading the book? Of course someday it will be.
Kaczynski's comments on McVeigh
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 05:11
  Kaczynski's comments on McVeighThe following is from Appendix B, pages 398 - 402 of the book American Terrorist: Timothy McVeigh & the Oklahoma city bombing by Lou Michel and Dan Herbeck.
  On April 25, 2000, convicted Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski sent a letter to the authors of this book detailing his impressions of Timothy McVeigh. Its text---eleven pages in the handwritten original---is reproduced here in full.
  I should begin by noting that the validity of my comments about McVeigh is limited by the fact that I didn't know him terribly well. We were often put in the outdoor rec yard together in separate wire-mesh cages, but I always spent most of the rec period running in a small oval, because of the restricted area of the cages and consequently I had only about 15 or 20 minutes of each rec period for talking with other inmates. Also, I was at first reluctant to become friendly with McVeigh because I thought (correctly) that any friendly relations between McVeigh and me would be reported to the media and I also thought (incorrectly, it seems) that such reports would lose me many supporters. But my reluctance very soon passed away: When you're confined with other people under the conditions that exist on this range of cells, you develop a sense of solidarity with them regardless of any differences or misgivings.
  On a personal level I like McVeigh and I imagine that most people would like him. He was easily the most outgoing of all the inmates on our range of cells and had excellent social skills. He was considerate of others and knew how to deal with people effectively. He communicated somehow even with the inmates on the range of cells above ours, and, because he talked with more people, he always knew more about what was going on than anyone else on our range.
  Another reason why he knew more about what was going on was that he was very observant. Up to a point, I can identify with this trait of McVeigh's. When you've lived in the woods for a while you get so that your senses are far more alert than those of a city person; you will hardly miss a footprint, or even a fragment of one, and the slightest sound, if it deviates from the pattern of sounds that you're expecting to hear at a given time and place, will catch your attention. But when I was away from the woods, or even when I was in my cabin or absorbed in some task, my senses tended to turn inward, so to speak, and the observant alertness was shut off. Here at the ADX, my senses and my mind are turned inward most of the time, so it struck me as remarkable that even in prison McVeigh remained alert and consistently took an interest in his surroundings.
  It is my impression that McVeigh is very intelligent. He thinks seriously about the problems of our society, especially as they relate to the issue of individual freedom, and to the extent that he expressed his ideas to me they seemed rational and sensible. However, he discussed these matters with me only to a limited extent and I have no way of being sure that he does not have other ideas that he did not express to me and that I would not consider rational or sensible. I know almost nothing about McVeigh's opinions concerning the U.S. government or the events at Waco and Ruby Ridge. Someone sent me a transcript of his interview with 60 Minutes, but I haven't read it yet. Consequently, I have no way of knowing whether I would consider his opinion on these subjects to be rational or sensible.
  McVeigh is considered to belong to the far right, and for that reason some people apparently assume that he has racist tendencies. But I saw no indication of this. On the contrary, he was on very friendly terms with the African-American inmates here and I never heard him make any remark that could have been considered even remotely racist. I do recall his mentioning that prior to the Gulf War, he and other soldiers were subjected to propaganda designed to make them hate the people they were going to fight, but when he arrived in the Persian Gulf area he discovered that the "enemies" he was supposed to kill were human beings just like himself, and he learned to respect their culture.
  McVeigh told me of his idea (which I think may have significant merit) that certain rebellious elements on the American right and left respectively had more in common with one another than is commonly realized, and that the two groups ought to join forces. This led us to discuss, though only briefly, the question of what constitutes the "right." I pointed out that the word "right," in the political sense, was originally associated with authoritarianism, and I raised the question of why certain radically anti-authoritarian groups (such as the Montana Freemen) were lumped together with authoritarian factions as the "right." McVeigh explained that the American far right could be roughly divided into two branches, the fascist/racist branch, and the individualistic or freedom-loving branch which generally was not racist. He did not know why these two branches were lumped together as the "right," but he did suggest a criterion that could be used to distinguish left from right: the left (in America today) generally dislikes firearms, while the right tends to be attracted to firearms.
  By this criterion McVeigh himself would have to be assigned to the right. He once asked me what kind of rifle I'd used for hunting in Montana, and I said I'd had a .22 and a .30-06. On a later occasion McVeigh mentioned that one of the advantages of a .30-06 was that one could get armor-piercing ammunition for it. I said, "So what would I need armor-piercing ammunition for?" In reply, McVeigh indicated that I might some day want to shoot at a tank. I didn't bother to argue with him, but if I'd considered it worth the trouble I could have given the obvious answer: that the chances that I would ever have occasion to shoot at a tank were very remote. I think McVeigh knew well that there was little likelihood that I would ever need to shoot at a tank---or that he would either, unless he rejoined the Army. My speculative interpretation is that McVeigh resembles many people on the right who are attracted to powerful weapons for their own sake and independently of any likelihood that they will ever have a practical use for them. Such people tend to invent excuses, often far-fetched ones, for acquiring weapons for which they have no real need.
  But McVeigh did not fit the stereotype of the extreme right-wingers. I've already indicated that he spoke of respect for other people's cultures, and in doing so he sounded like a liberal. He certainly was not a mean or hostile person, and I wasn't aware of any indication that he was super patriotic. I suspect that he is an adventurer by nature, and America since the closing of the frontier has had little room for adventurers.
  McVeigh never discussed the Oklahoma City bombing with me, nor did he ever make any admissions in my hearing. I know nothing about that case except what the media have said, so I'm not going to offer any opinion about whether McVeigh did what they say he did. However, assuming that the Oklahoma City bombing was intended as a protest against the U.S. government in general and against the government's actions at Waco in particular, I will say that I think the bombing was a bad action because it was unnecessarily inhumane.
  A more effective protest could have been made with far less harm to innocent people. Most of the people who died at Oklahoma City were, I imagine, lower-level government employees---office help and the like---who were not even remotely responsible for objectionable government policies or for the events at Waco. If violence were to be used to express protest, it could have been used far more humanely, and at the same time more effectively, by being directed at the relatively small number of people who were personally responsible for the policies or actions to which the protesters objected. Such protest would have attracted just as much national attention as the Oklahoma City bombing and would have involved relatively little risk to innocent people. Moreover, the protest would have earned far more sympathy than the Oklahoma City bombing did, because it is safe to assume that many anti-government people who might have accepted violence that was more limited and carefully directed were repelled by the large loss of innocent life at Oklahoma City.
  The media teach us to be horrified at the Oklahoma City bombing, but I won't have time to be horrified at it as long as there are greater horrors in the world that make it seem insignificant by comparison. Moreover, our politicians and our military kill people in far larger numbers than was done at Oklahoma City, and they do so for motives that are far more cold blooded and calculating. On orders from the president, a general will kill some thousands of people (usually including many civilians regardless of efforts to avoid such losses) without bothering to ask himself whether the killing is justified. He has to follow orders because his only other alternative would be to resign his commission, and naturally he would rather kill a few thousand people than spoil his career. The politicians and the media justify these actions with propaganda about "defending freedom." However, even if America were a free society (which it is not), most U.S. military action during at least the last couple of decades has not been necessary for the survival of American society but has been designed to protect relatively narrow economic or political interests or to boost the president's approval rating in the public-opinion polls.
  The media portray the killing at Oklahoma City as a ghastly atrocity, but I remember how they cheered the U.S. action in the Gulf War just as they might have cheered for their favorite football team. The whole thing was treated as if it were a big game. I didn't see any sob stories about the death agonies of Iraqi soldiers or about their grieving families. It's easy to see the reason for the difference: America's little wars are designed to promote the interests of "the system," but violence at home is dangerous to the system, so the system's propaganda has to teach us the correspondingly correct attitudes toward such events. Yet I am much less repelled by powerless dissidents who kill a couple hundred because they think they have no other way to effectively state their protest, than I am by politicians and generals---people in positions of great power---who kill hundreds or thousands for the sake of cold calculated political and economic advantages.
  You asked for my thoughts on the behavior of federal law enforcement officers. My personal experience suggests that federal law enforcement officers are neither honest nor competent, and that they often disobey their own rules.
  I've found by experience that any communication with journalists is risky for one in my position. I'm taking the risk in this case mainly because I think that McVeigh would want me to help you in the way that I have. As I indicated near the beginning of this letter, when you're locked up with other people you develop a sense of solidarity with them in spite of any differences.
  Sincerely yours, Ted Kaczynski.
  Kaczynski's comments on McVeighThe following is from Appendix B, pages 398 - 402 of the book American Terrorist: Timothy McVeigh & the Oklahoma city bombing by Lou Michel and Dan Herbeck.
  On April 25, 2000, convicted Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski sent a letter to the authors of this book detailing his impressions of Timothy McVeigh. Its text---eleven pages in the handwritten original---is reproduced here in full.
  I should begin by noting that the validity of my comments about McVeigh is limited by the fact that I didn't know him terribly well. We were often put in the outdoor rec yard together in separate wire-mesh cages, but I always spent most of the rec period running in a small oval, because of the restricted area of the cages and consequently I had only about 15 or 20 minutes of each rec period for talking with other inmates. Also, I was at first reluctant to become friendly with McVeigh because I thought (correctly) that any friendly relations between McVeigh and me would be reported to the media and I also thought (incorrectly, it seems) that such reports would lose me many supporters. But my reluctance very soon passed away: When you're confined with other people under the conditions that exist on this range of cells, you develop a sense of solidarity with them regardless of any differences or misgivings.
  On a personal level I like McVeigh and I imagine that most people would like him. He was easily the most outgoing of all the inmates on our range of cells and had excellent social skills. He was considerate of others and knew how to deal with people effectively. He communicated somehow even with the inmates on the range of cells above ours, and, because he talked with more people, he always knew more about what was going on than anyone else on our range.
  Another reason why he knew more about what was going on was that he was very observant. Up to a point, I can identify with this trait of McVeigh's. When you've lived in the woods for a while you get so that your senses are far more alert than those of a city person; you will hardly miss a footprint, or even a fragment of one, and the slightest sound, if it deviates from the pattern of sounds that you're expecting to hear at a given time and place, will catch your attention. But when I was away from the woods, or even when I was in my cabin or absorbed in some task, my senses tended to turn inward, so to speak, and the observant alertness was shut off. Here at the ADX, my senses and my mind are turned inward most of the time, so it struck me as remarkable that even in prison McVeigh remained alert and consistently took an interest in his surroundings.
  It is my impression that McVeigh is very intelligent. He thinks seriously about the problems of our society, especially as they relate to the issue of individual freedom, and to the extent that he expressed his ideas to me they seemed rational and sensible. However, he discussed these matters with me only to a limited extent and I have no way of being sure that he does not have other ideas that he did not express to me and that I would not consider rational or sensible. I know almost nothing about McVeigh's opinions concerning the U.S. government or the events at Waco and Ruby Ridge. Someone sent me a transcript of his interview with 60 Minutes, but I haven't read it yet. Consequently, I have no way of knowing whether I would consider his opinion on these subjects to be rational or sensible.
  McVeigh is considered to belong to the far right, and for that reason some people apparently assume that he has racist tendencies. But I saw no indication of this. On the contrary, he was on very friendly terms with the African-American inmates here and I never heard him make any remark that could have been considered even remotely racist. I do recall his mentioning that prior to the Gulf War, he and other soldiers were subjected to propaganda designed to make them hate the people they were going to fight, but when he arrived in the Persian Gulf area he discovered that the "enemies" he was supposed to kill were human beings just like himself, and he learned to respect their culture.
  McVeigh told me of his idea (which I think may have significant merit) that certain rebellious elements on the American right and left respectively had more in common with one another than is commonly realized, and that the two groups ought to join forces. This led us to discuss, though only briefly, the question of what constitutes the "right." I pointed out that the word "right," in the political sense, was originally associated with authoritarianism, and I raised the question of why certain radically anti-authoritarian groups (such as the Montana Freemen) were lumped together with authoritarian factions as the "right." McVeigh explained that the American far right could be roughly divided into two branches, the fascist/racist branch, and the individualistic or freedom-loving branch which generally was not racist. He did not know why these two branches were lumped together as the "right," but he did suggest a criterion that could be used to distinguish left from right: the left (in America today) generally dislikes firearms, while the right tends to be attracted to firearms.
  By this criterion McVeigh himself would have to be assigned to the right. He once asked me what kind of rifle I'd used for hunting in Montana, and I said I'd had a .22 and a .30-06. On a later occasion McVeigh mentioned that one of the advantages of a .30-06 was that one could get armor-piercing ammunition for it. I said, "So what would I need armor-piercing ammunition for?" In reply, McVeigh indicated that I might some day want to shoot at a tank. I didn't bother to argue with him, but if I'd considered it worth the trouble I could have given the obvious answer: that the chances that I would ever have occasion to shoot at a tank were very remote. I think McVeigh knew well that there was little likelihood that I would ever need to shoot at a tank---or that he would either, unless he rejoined the Army. My speculative interpretation is that McVeigh resembles many people on the right who are attracted to powerful weapons for their own sake and independently of any likelihood that they will ever have a practical use for them. Such people tend to invent excuses, often far-fetched ones, for acquiring weapons for which they have no real need.
  But McVeigh did not fit the stereotype of the extreme right-wingers. I've already indicated that he spoke of respect for other people's cultures, and in doing so he sounded like a liberal. He certainly was not a mean or hostile person, and I wasn't aware of any indication that he was super patriotic. I suspect that he is an adventurer by nature, and America since the closing of the frontier has had little room for adventurers.
  McVeigh never discussed the Oklahoma City bombing with me, nor did he ever make any admissions in my hearing. I know nothing about that case except what the media have said, so I'm not going to offer any opinion about whether McVeigh did what they say he did. However, assuming that the Oklahoma City bombing was intended as a protest against the U.S. government in general and against the government's actions at Waco in particular, I will say that I think the bombing was a bad action because it was unnecessarily inhumane.
  A more effective protest could have been made with far less harm to innocent people. Most of the people who died at Oklahoma City were, I imagine, lower-level government employees---office help and the like---who were not even remotely responsible for objectionable government policies or for the events at Waco. If violence were to be used to express protest, it could have been used far more humanely, and at the same time more effectively, by being directed at the relatively small number of people who were personally responsible for the policies or actions to which the protesters objected. Such protest would have attracted just as much national attention as the Oklahoma City bombing and would have involved relatively little risk to innocent people. Moreover, the protest would have earned far more sympathy than the Oklahoma City bombing did, because it is safe to assume that many anti-government people who might have accepted violence that was more limited and carefully directed were repelled by the large loss of innocent life at Oklahoma City.
  The media teach us to be horrified at the Oklahoma City bombing, but I won't have time to be horrified at it as long as there are greater horrors in the world that make it seem insignificant by comparison. Moreover, our politicians and our military kill people in far larger numbers than was done at Oklahoma City, and they do so for motives that are far more cold blooded and calculating. On orders from the president, a general will kill some thousands of people (usually including many civilians regardless of efforts to avoid such losses) without bothering to ask himself whether the killing is justified. He has to follow orders because his only other alternative would be to resign his commission, and naturally he would rather kill a few thousand people than spoil his career. The politicians and the media justify these actions with propaganda about "defending freedom." However, even if America were a free society (which it is not), most U.S. military action during at least the last couple of decades has not been necessary for the survival of American society but has been designed to protect relatively narrow economic or political interests or to boost the president's approval rating in the public-opinion polls.
  The media portray the killing at Oklahoma City as a ghastly atrocity, but I remember how they cheered the U.S. action in the Gulf War just as they might have cheered for their favorite football team. The whole thing was treated as if it were a big game. I didn't see any sob stories about the death agonies of Iraqi soldiers or about their grieving families. It's easy to see the reason for the difference: America's little wars are designed to promote the interests of "the system," but violence at home is dangerous to the system, so the system's propaganda has to teach us the correspondingly correct attitudes toward such events. Yet I am much less repelled by powerless dissidents who kill a couple hundred because they think they have no other way to effectively state their protest, than I am by politicians and generals---people in positions of great power---who kill hundreds or thousands for the sake of cold calculated political and economic advantages.
  You asked for my thoughts on the behavior of federal law enforcement officers. My personal experience suggests that federal law enforcement officers are neither honest nor competent, and that they often disobey their own rules.
  I've found by experience that any communication with journalists is risky for one in my position. I'm taking the risk in this case mainly because I think that McVeigh would want me to help you in the way that I have. As I indicated near the beginning of this letter, when you're locked up with other people you develop a sense of solidarity with them in spite of any differences.
  Sincerely yours, Ted Kaczynski.
Kazinski's Law
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:57
  (Source: well.sf.ca.us ) Unabomber's Manifesto The following is full text of the Unabomber's Manifesto. _________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION 1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries. 2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy. 3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later. 4. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence: it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can't predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society. 5. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly important. THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM 6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general. 7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.) 8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th century. 9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential. FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY 10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism. 11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.) 12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families. 13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology). 14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men. 15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful. 16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser. 17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment. 18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly. 19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself. 20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait. 21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred. 22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss. 23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism. OVERSOCIALIZATION 24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem. 25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2] 26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another. 27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals (3) constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most left-wing segment. 28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes (4) for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles. 29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values. 30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like. 31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism. 32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth. THE POWER PROCESS 33. Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something that we will call the "power process." This is closely related to the need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same thing. The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it autonomy and will discuss it later (paragraphs 42-44). 34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one's power. 35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization. 36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression. 37. Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals. SURROGATE ACTIVITIES 38. But not every leisured aristocrat becomes bored and demoralized. For example, the emperor Hirohito, instead of sinking into decadent hedonism, devoted himself to marine biology, a field in which he became distinguished. When people do not have to exert themselves to satisfy their physical needs they often set up artificial goals for themselves. In many cases they then pursue these goals with the same energy and emotional involvement that they otherwise would have put into the search for physical necessities. Thus the aristocrats of the Roman Empire had their literary pretentions; many European aristocrats a few centuries ago invested tremendous time and energy in hunting, though they certainly didn't need the meat; other aristocracies have competed for status through elaborate displays of wealth; and a few aristocrats, like Hirohito, have turned to science. 39. We use the term "surrogate activity" to designate an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that people set up for themselves merely in order to have some goal to work toward, or let us say, merely for the sake of the "fulfillment" that they get from pursuing the goal. Here is a rule of thumb for the identification of surrogate activities. Given a person who devotes much time and energy to the pursuit of goal X, ask yourself this: If he had to devote most of his time and energy to satisfying his biological needs, and if that effort required him to use his physical and mental facilities in a varied and interesting way, would he feel seriously deprived because he did not attain goal X? If the answer is no, then the person's pursuit of a goal X is a surrogate activity. Hirohito's studies in marine biology clearly constituted a surrogate activity, since it is pretty certain that if Hirohito had had to spend his time working at interesting non-scientific tasks in order to obtain the necessities of life, he would not have felt deprived because he didn't know all about the anatomy and life-cycles of marine animals. On the other hand the pursuit of sex and love (for example) is not a surrogate activity, because most people, even if their existence were otherwise satisfactory, would feel deprived if they passed their lives without ever having a relationship with a member of the opposite sex. (But pursuit of an excessive amount of sex, more than one really needs, can be a surrogate activity.) 40. In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one's physical needs. It is enough to go through a training program to acquire some petty technical skill, then come to work on time and exert very modest effort needed to hold a job. The only requirements are a moderate amount of intelligence, and most of all, simple OBEDIENCE. If one has those, society takes care of one from cradle to grave. (Yes, there is an underclass that cannot take physical necessities for granted, but we are speaking here of mainstream society.) Thus it is not surprising that modern society is full of surrogate activities. These include scientific work, athletic achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation, climbing the corporate ladder, acquisition of money and material goods far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional physical satisfaction, and social activism when it addresses issues that are not important for the activist personally, as in the case of white activists who work for the rights of nonwhite minorities. These are not always pure surrogate activities, since for many people they may be motivated in part by needs other than the need to have some goal to pursue. Scientific work may be motivated in part by a drive for prestige, artistic creation by a need to express feelings, militant social activism by hostility. But for most people who pursue them, these activities are in large part surrogate activities. For example, the majority of scientists will probably agree that the "fulfillment" they get from their work is more important than the money and prestige they earn. 41. For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satisfying than the pursuit of real goals ( that is, goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled). One indication of this is the fact that, in many or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly strives for more and more wealth. The scientist no sooner solves one problem than he moves on to the next. The long-distance runner drives himself to run always farther and faster. Many people who pursue surrogate activities will say that they get far more fulfillment from these activities than they do from the "mundane" business of satisfying their biological needs, but that it is because in our society the effort needed to satisfy the biological needs has been reduced to triviality. More importantly, in our society people do not satisfy their biological needs AUTONOMOUSLY but by functioning as parts of an immense social machine. In contrast, people generally have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities. have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities. AUTONOMY 42. Autonomy as a part of the power process may not be necessary for every individual. But most people need a greater or lesser degree of autonomy in working toward their goals. Their efforts must be undertaken on their own initiative and must be under their own direction and control. Yet most people do not have to exert this initiative, direction and control as single individuals. It is usually enough to act as a member of a SMALL group. Thus if half a dozen people discuss a goal among themselves and make a successful joint effort to attain that goal, their need for the power process will be served. But if they work under rigid orders handed down from above that leave them no room for autonomous decision and initiative, then their need for the power process will not be served. The same is true when decisions are made on a collective bases if the group making the collective decision is so large that the role of each individual is insignificant [5] 43. It is true that some individuals seem to have little need for autonomy. Either their drive for power is weak or they satisfy it by identifying themselves with some powerful organization to which they belong. And then there are unthinking, animal types who seem to be satisfied with a purely physical sense of power(the good combat soldier, who gets his sense of power by developing fighting skills that he is quite content to use in blind obedience to his superiors). 44. But for most people it is through the power process-having a goal, making an AUTONOMOUS effort and attaining t the goal-that self-esteem, self-confidence and a sense of power are acquired. When one does not have adequate opportunity to go throughout the power process the consequences are (depending on the individual and on the way the power process is disrupted) boredom, demoralization, low self-esteem, inferiority feelings, defeatism, depression, anxiety, guilt, frustration, hostility, spouse or child abuse, insatiable hedonism, abnormal sexual behavior, sleep disorders, eating disorders, etc. [6] SOURCES OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS 45. Any of the foregoing symptoms can occur in any society, but in modern industrial society they are present on a massive scale. We aren't the first to mention that the world today seems to be going crazy. This sort of thing is not normal for human societies. There is good reason to believe that primitive man suffered from less stress and frustration and was better satisfied with his way of life than modern man is. It is true that not all was sweetness and light in primitive societies. Abuse of women and common among the Australian aborigines, transexuality was fairly common among some of the American Indian tribes. But is does appear that GENERALLY SPEAKING the kinds of problems that we have listed in the preceding paragraph were far less common among primitive peoples than they are in modern society. 46. We attribute the social and psychological problems of modern society to the fact that that society requires people to live under conditions radically different from those under which the human race evolved and to behave in ways that conflict with the patterns of behavior that the human race developed while living under the earlier conditions. It is clear from what we have already written that we consider lack of opportunity to properly experience the power process as the most important of the abnormal conditions to which modern society subjects people. But it is not the only one. Before dealing with disruption of the power process as a source of social problems we will discuss some of the other sources. 47. Among the abnormal conditions present in modern industrial society are excessive density of population, isolation of man from nature, excessive rapidity of social change and the break-down of natural small-scale communities such as the extended family, the village or the tribe. 48. It is well known that crowding increases stress and aggression. The degree of crowding that exists today and the isolation of man from nature are consequences of technological progress. All pre-industrial societies were predominantly rural. The industrial Revolution vastly increased the size of cities and the proportion of the population that lives in them, and modern agricultural technology has made it possible for the Earth to support a far denser population than it ever did before. (Also, technology exacerbates the effects of crowding because it puts increased disruptive powers in people's hands. For example, a variety of noise-making devices: power mowers, radios, motorcycles, etc. If the use of these devices is unrestricted, people who want peace and quiet are frustrated by the noise. If their use is restricted, people who use the devices are frustrated by the regulations... But if these machines had never been invented there would have been no conflict and no frustration generated by them.) 49. For primitive societies the natural world (which usually changes only slowly) provided a stable framework and therefore a sense of security. In the modern world it is human society that dominates nature rather than the other way around, and modern society changes very rapidly owing to technological change. Thus there is no stable framework. 50. The conservatives are fools: They whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support technological progress and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you can't make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society with out causing rapid changes in all other aspects of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably break down traditional values. 51.The breakdown of traditional values to some extent implies the breakdown of the bonds that hold together traditional small-scale social groups. The disintegration of small-scale social groups is also promoted by the fact that modern conditions often require or tempt individuals to move to new locations, separating themselves from their communities. Beyond that, a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first to the system and only secondarily to a small-scale community, because if the internal loyalties of small-scale small-scale communities were stronger than loyalty to the system, such communities would pursue their own advantage at the expense of the system. 52. Suppose that a public official or a corporation executive appoints his cousin, his friend or his co-religionist to a position rather than appointing the person best qualified for the job. He has permitted personal loyalty to supersede his loyalty to the system, and that is "nepotism" or "discrimination," both of which are terrible sins in modern society. Would-be industrial societies that have done a poor job of subordinating personal or local loyalties to loyalty to the system are usually very inefficient. (Look at Latin America.) Thus an advanced industrial society can tolerate only those small-scale communities that are emasculated, tamed and made into tools of the system. [7] 53. Crowding, rapid change and the breakdown of communities have been widely recognized as sources of social problems. but we do not believe they are enough to account for the extent of the problems that are seen today. 54. A few pre-industrial cities were very large and crowded, yet their inhabitants do not seem to have suffered from psychological problems to the same extent as modern man. In America today there still are uncrowded rural areas, and we find there the same problems as in urban areas, though the problems tend to be less acute in the rural areas. Thus crowding does not seem to be the decisive factor. 55. On the growing edge of the American frontier during the 19th century, the mobility of the population probably broke down extended families and small-scale social groups to at least the same extent as these are broken down today. In fact, many nuclear families lived by choice in such isolation, having no neighbors within several miles, that they belonged to no community at all, yet they do not seem to have developed problems as a result. 56.Furthermore, change in American frontier society was very rapid and deep. A man might be born and raised in a log cabin, outside the reach of law and order and fed largely on wild meat; and by the time he arrived at old age he might be working at a regular job and living in an ordered community with effective law enforcement. This was a deeper change that that which typically occurs in the life of a modern individual, yet it does not seem to have led to psychological problems. In fact, 19th century American society had an optimistic and self-confident tone, quite unlike that of today's society. [8] 57. The difference, we argue, is that modern man has the sense (largely justified) that change is IMPOSED on him, whereas the 19th century frontiersman had the sense (also largely justified) that he created change himself, by his own choice. Thus a pioneer settled on a piece of land of his own choosing and made it into a farm through his own effort. In those days an entire county might have only a couple of hundred inhabitants and was a far more isolated and autonomous entity than a modern county is. Hence the pioneer farmer participated as a member of a relatively small group in the creation of a new, ordered community. One may well question whether the creation of this community was an improvement, but at any rate it satisfied the pioneer's need for the power process. 58. It would be possible to give other examples of societies in which there has been rapid change and/or lack of close community ties without he kind of massive behavioral aberration that is seen in today's industrial society. We contend that the most important cause of social and psychological problems in modern society is the fact that people have insufficient opportunity to go through the power process in a normal way. We don't mean to say that modern society is the only one in which the power process has been disrupted. Probably most if not all civilized societies have interfered with the power ' process to a greater or lesser extent. But in modern industrial society the problem has become particularly acute. Leftism, at least in its recent (mid-to-late -20th century) form, is in part a symptom of deprivation with respect to the power process. DISRUPTION OF THE POWER PROCESS IN MODERN SOCIETY 59. We divide human drives into three groups: (1) those drives that can be satisfied with minimal effort; (2) those that can be satisfied but only at the cost of serious effort; (3) those that cannot be adequately satisfied no matter how much effort one makes. The power process is the process of satisfying the drives of the second group. The more drives there are in the third group, the more there is frustration, anger, eventually defeatism, depression, etc. 60. In modern industrial society natural human drives tend to be pushed into the first and third groups, and the second group tends to consist increasingly of artificially created drives. 61. In primitive societies, physical necessities generally fall into group 2: They can be obtained, but only at the cost of serious effort. But modern society tends to guaranty the physical necessities to everyone [9] in exchange for only minimal effort, hence physical needs are pushed into group 1. (There may be disagreement about whether the effort needed to hold a job is "minimal"; but usually, in lower- to middle-level jobs, whatever effort is required is merely that of obedience. You sit or stand where you are told to sit or stand and do what you are told to do in the way you are told to do it. Seldom do you have to exert yourself seriously, and in any case you have hardly any autonomy in work, so that the need for the power process is not well served.) 62. Social needs, such as sex, love and status, often remain in group 2 in modern society, depending on the situation of the individual. [10] But, except for people who have a particularly strong drive for status, the effort required to fulfill the social drives is insufficient to satisfy adequately the need for the power process. 63. So certain artificial needs have been created that fall into group 2, hence serve the need for the power process. Advertising and marketing techniques have been developed that make many people feel they need things that their grandparents never desired or even dreamed of. It requires serious effort to earn enough money to satisfy these artificial needs, hence they fall into group 2. (But see paragraphs 80-82.) Modern man must satisfy his need for the power process largely through pursuit of the artificial needs created by the advertising and marketing industry [11], and through surrogate activities. 64. It seems that for many people, maybe the majority, these artificial forms of the power process are insufficient. A theme that appears repeatedly in the writings of the social critics of the second half of the 20th century is the sense of purposelessness that afflicts many people in modern society. (This purposelessness is often called by other names such as "anomic" or "middle-class vacuity.") We suggest that the so-called "identity crisis" is actually a search for a sense of purpose, often for commitment to a suitable surrogate activity. It may be that existentialism is in large part a response to the purposelessness of modern life. [12] Very widespread in modern society is the search for "fulfillment." But we think that for the majority of people an activity whose main goal is fulfillment (that is, a surrogate activity) does not bring completely satisfactory fulfillment. In other words, it does not fully satisfy the need for the power process. (See paragraph 41.) That need can be fully satisfied only through activities that have some external goal, such as physical necessities, sex, love, status, revenge, etc. 65. Moreover, where goals are pursued through earning money, climbing the status ladder or functioning as part of the system in some other way, most people are not in a position to pursue their goals AUTONOMOUSLY. Most workers are someone else's employee as, as we pointed out in paragraph 61, must spend their days doing what they are told to do in the way they are told to do it. Even most people who are in business for themselves have only limited autonomy. It is a chronic complaint of small-business persons and entrepreneurs that their hands are tied by excessive government regulation. Some of these regulations are doubtless unnecessary, but for the most part government regulations are essential and inevitable parts of our extremely complex society. A large portion of small business today operates on the franchise system. It was reported in the Wall Street Journal a few years ago that many of the franchise-granting companies require applicants for franchises to take a personality test that is designed to EXCLUDE those who have creativity and initiative, because such persons are not sufficiently docile to go along obediently with the franchise system. This excludes from small business many of the people who most need autonomy. 66. Today people live more by virtue of what the system does FOR them or TO them than by virtue of what they do for themselves. And what they do for themselves is done more and more along channels laid down by the system. Opportunities tend to be those that the system provides, the opportunities must be exploited in accord with the rules and regulations [13], and techniques prescribed by experts must be followed if there is to be a chance of success. 67. Thus the power process is disrupted in our society through a deficiency of real goals and a deficiency of autonomy in pursuit of goals. But it is also disrupted because of those human drives that fall into group 3: the drives that one cannot adequately satisfy no matter how much effort one makes. One of these drives is the need for security. Our lives depend on decisions made by other people; we have no control over these decisions and usually we do not even know the people who make them. ("We live in a world in which relatively few people - maybe 500 or 1,00 - make the important decisions" - Philip B. Heymann of Harvard Law School, quoted by Anthony Lewis, New York Times, April 21, 1995.) Our lives depend on whether safety standards at a nuclear power plant are properly maintained; on how much pesticide is allowed to get into our food or how much pollution into our air; on how skillful (or incompetent) our doctor is; whether we lose or get a job may depend on decisions made by government economists or corporation executives; and so forth. Most individuals are not in a position to secure themselves against these threats to more [than] a very limited extent. The individual's search for security is therefore frustrated, which leads to a sense of powerlessness. 68. It may be objected that primitive man is physically less secure than modern man, as is shown by his shorter life expectancy; hence modern man suffers from less, not more than the amount of insecurity that is normal for human beings. but psychological security does not closely correspond with physical security. What makes us FEEL secure is not so much objective security as a sense of confidence in our ability to take care of ourselves. Primitive man, threatened by a fierce animal or by hunger, can fight in self-defense or travel in search of food. He has no certainty of success in these efforts, but he is by no means helpless against the things that threaten him. The modern individual on the other hand is threatened by many things against which he is helpless; nuclear accidents, carcinogens in food, environmental pollution, war, increasing taxes, invasion of his privacy by large organizations, nation-wide social or economic phenomena that may disrupt his way of life. 69. It is true that primitive man is powerless against some of the things that threaten him; disease for example. But he can accept the risk of disease stoically. It is part of the nature of things, it is no one's fault, unless is the fault of some imaginary, impersonal demon. But threats to the modern individual tend to be MAN-MADE. They are not the results of chance but are IMPOSED on him by other persons whose decisions he, as an individual, is unable to influence. Consequently he feels frustrated, humiliated and angry. 70. Thus primitive man for the most part has his security in his own hands (either as an individual or as a member of a SMALL group) whereas the security of modern man is in the hands of persons or organizations that are too remote or too large for him to be able personally to influence them. So modern man's drive for security tends to fall into groups 1 and 3; in some areas (food, shelter, etc.) his security is assured at the cost of only trivial effort, whereas in other areas he CANNOT attain security. (The foregoing greatly simplifies the real situation, but it does indicate in a rough, general way how the condition of modern man differs from that of primitive man.) 71. People have many transitory drives or impulses that are necessary frustrated in modern life, hence fall into group 3. One may become angry, but modern society cannot permit fighting. In many situations it does not even permit verbal aggression. When going somewhere one may be in a hurry, or one may be in a mood to travel slowly, but one generally has no choice but to move with the flow of traffic and obey the traffic signals. One may want to do one's work in a different way, but usually one can work only according to the rules laid down by one's employer. In many other ways as well, modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations (explicit or implicit) that frustrate many of his impulses and thus interfere with the power process. Most of these regulations cannot be disposed with, because the are necessary for the functioning of industrial society. 72. Modern society is in certain respects extremely permissive. In matters that are irrelevant to the functioning of the system we can generally do what we please. We can believe in any religion we like (as long as it does not encourage behavior that is dangerous to the system). We can go to bed with anyone we like (as long as we practice "safe sex"). We can do anything we like as long as it is UNIMPORTANT. But in all IMPORTANT matters the system tends increasingly to regulate our behavior. 73. Behavior is regulated not only through explicit rules and not only by the government. Control is often exercised through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation, and by organizations other than the government, or by the system as a whole. Most large organizations use some form of propaganda [14] to manipulate public attitudes or behavior. Propaganda is not limited to "commercials" and advertisements, and sometimes it is not even consciously intended as propaganda by the people who make it. For instance, the content of entertainment programming is a powerful form of propaganda. An example of indirect coercion: There is no law that says we have to go to work every day and follow our employer's orders. Legally there is nothing to prevent us from going to live in the wild like primitive people or from going into business for ourselves. But in practice there is very little wild country left, and there is room in the economy for only a limited number of small business owners. Hence most of us can survive only as someone else's employee. 74. We suggest that modern man's obsession with longevity, and with maintaining physical vigor and sexual attractiveness to an advanced age, is a symptom of unfulfillment resulting from deprivation with respect to the power process. The "mid-life crisis" also is such a symptom. So is the lack of interest in having children that is fairly common in modern society but almost unheard-of in primitive societies. 75. In primitive societies life is a succession of stages. The needs and purposes of one stage having been fulfilled, there is no particular reluctance about passing on to the next stage. A young man goes through the power process by becoming a hunter, hunting not for sport or for fulfillment but to get meat that is necessary for food. (In young women the process is more complex, with greater emphasis on social power; we won't discuss that here.) This phase having been successfully passed through, the young man has no reluctance about settling down to the responsibilities of raising a family. (In contrast, some modern people indefinitely postpone having children because they are too busy seeking some kind of "fulfillment." We suggest that the fulfillment they need is adequate experience of the power process -- with real goals instead of the artificial goals of surrogate activities.) Again, having successfully raised his children, going through the power process by providing them with the physical necessities, the primitive man feels that his work is done and he is prepared to accept old age (if he survives that long) and death. Many modern people, on the other hand, are disturbed by the prospect of death, as is shown by the amount of effort they expend trying to maintain their physical condition, appearance and health. We argue that this is due to unfulfillment resulting from the fact that they have never put their physical powers to any use, have never gone through the power process using their bodies in a serious way. It is not the primitive man, who has used his body daily for practical purposes, who fears the deterioration of age, but the modern man, who has never had a practical use for his body beyond walking from his car to his house. It is the man whose need for the power process has been satisfied during his life who is best prepared to accept the end of that life. 76. In response to the arguments of this section someone will say, "Society must find a way to give people the opportunity to go through the power process." For such people the value of the opportunity is destroyed by the very fact that society gives it to them. What they need is to find or make their own opportunities. As long as the system GIVES them their opportunities it still has them on a leash. To attain autonomy they must get off that leash. HOW SOME PEOPLE ADJUST 77. Not everyone in industrial-technological society suffers from psychological problems. Some people even profess to be quite satisfied with society as it is. We now discuss some of the reasons why people differ so greatly in their response to modern society. 78. First, there doubtless are differences in the strength of the drive for power. Individuals with a weak drive for power may have relatively little need to go through the power process, or at least relatively little need for autonomy in the power process. These are docile types who would have been happy as plantation darkies in the Old South. (We don't mean to sneer at "plantation darkies" of the Old South. To their credit, most of the slaves were NOT content with their servitude. We do sneer at people who ARE content with servitude.) 79. Some people may have some exceptional drive, in pursuing which they satisfy their need for the power process. For example, those who have an unusually strong drive for social status may spend their whole lives climbing the status ladder without ever getting bored with that game. 80. People vary in their susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques. Some people are so susceptible that, even if they make a great deal of money, they cannot satisfy their constant craving for the shiny new toys that the marketing industry dangles before their eyes. So they always feel hard-pressed financially even if their income is large, and their cravings are frustrated. 81. Some people have low susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques. These are the people who aren't interested in money. Material acquisition does not serve their need for the power process. 82. People who have medium susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques are able to earn enough money to satisfy their craving for goods and services, but only at the cost of serious effort (putting in overtime, taking a second job, earning promotions, etc.) Thus material acquisition serves their need for the power process. But it does not necessarily follow that their need is fully satisfied. They may have insufficient autonomy in the power process (their work may consist of following orders) and some of their drives may be frustrated (e.g., security, aggression). (We are guilty of oversimplification in paragraphs 80-82 because we have assumed that the desire for material acquisition is entirely a creation of the advertising and marketing industry. Of course it's not that simple. 83. Some people partly satisfy their need for power by identifying themselves with a powerful organization or mass movement. An individual lacking goals or power joins a movement or an organization, adopts its goals as his own, then works toward these goals. When some of the goals are attained, the individual, even though his personal efforts have played only an insignificant part in the attainment of the goals, feels (through his identification with the movement or organization) as if he had gone through the power process. This phenomenon was exploited by the fascists, nazis and communists. Our society uses it, too, though less crudely. Example: Manuel Noriega was an irritant to the U.S. (goal: punish Noriega). The U.S. invaded Panama (effort) and punished Noriega (attainment of goal). The U.S. went through the power process and many Americans, because of their identification with the U.S., experienced the power process vicariously. Hence the widespread public approval of the Panama invasion; it gave people a sense of power. [15] We see the same phenomenon in armies, corporations, political parties, humanitarian organizations, religious or ideological movements. In particular, leftist movements tend to attract people who are seeking to satisfy their need for power. But for most people identification with a large organization or a mass movement does not fully satisfy the need for power. 84. Another way in which people satisfy their need for the power process is through surrogate activities. As we explained in paragraphs 38-40, a surrogate activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that the individual pursues for the sake of the "fulfillment" that he gets from pursuing the goal, not because he needs to attain the goal itself. For instance, there is no practical motive for building enormous muscles, hitting a little ball into a hole or acquiring a complete series of postage stamps. Yet many people in our society devote themselves with passion to bodybuilding, golf or stamp collecting. Some people are more "other-directed" than others, and therefore will more readily attack importance to a surrogate activity simply because the people around them treat it as important or because society tells them it is important. That is why some people get very serious about essentially trivial activities such as sports, or bridge, or chess, or arcane scholarly pursuits, whereas others who are more clear-sighted never see these things as anything but the surrogate activities that they are, and consequently never attach enough importance to them to satisfy their need for the power process in that way. It only remains to point out that in many cases a person's way of earning a living is also a surrogate activity. Not a PURE surrogate activity, since part of the motive for the activity is to gain the physical necessities and (for some people) social status and the luxuries that advertising makes them want. But many people put into their work far more effort than is necessary to earn whatever money and status they require, and this extra effort constitutes a surrogate activity. This extra effort, together with the emotional investment that accompanies it, is one of the most potent forces acting toward the continual development and perfecting of the system, with negative consequences for individual freedom (see paragraph 131). Especially, for the most creative scientists and engineers, work tends to be largely a surrogate activity. This point is so important that is deserves a separate discussion, which we shall give in a moment (paragraphs 87-92). 85. In this section we have explained how many people in modern society do satisfy their need for the power process to a greater or lesser extent. But we think that for the majority of people the need for the power process is not fully satisfied. In the first place, those who have an insatiable drive for status, or who get firmly "hooked" or a surrogate activity, or who identify strongly enough with a movement or organization to satisfy their need for power in that way, are exceptional personalities. Others are not fully satisfied with surrogate activities or by identification with an organization (see paragraphs 41, 64). In the second place, too much control is imposed by the system through explicit regulation or through socialization, which results in a deficiency of autonomy, and in frustration due to the impossibility of attaining certain goals and the necessity of restraining too many impulses. 86. But even if most people in industrial-technological society were well satisfied, we (FC) would still be opposed to that form of society, because (among other reasons) we consider it demeaning to fulfill one's need for the power process through surrogate activities or through identification with an organization, rather then through pursuit of real goals. THE MOTIVES OF SCIENTISTS 87. Science and technology provide the most important examples of surrogate activities. Some scientists claim that they are motivated by "curiosity," that notion is simply absurd. Most scientists work on highly specialized problem that are not the object of any normal curiosity. For example, is an astronomer, a mathematician or an entomologist curious about the properties of isopropyltrimethylmethane? Of course not. Only a chemist is curious about such a thing, and he is curious about it only because chemistry is his surrogate activity. Is the chemist curious about the appropriate classification of a new species of beetle? No. That question is of interest only to the entomologist, and he is interested in it only because entomology is his surrogate activity. If the chemist and the entomologist had to exert themselves seriously to obtain the physical necessities, and if that effort exercised their abilities in an interesting way but in some nonscientific pursuit, then they couldn't giver a damn about isopropyltrimethylmethane or the classification of beetles. Suppose that lack of funds for postgraduate education had led the chemist to become an insurance broker instead of a chemist. In that case he would have been very interested in insurance matters but would have cared nothing about isopropyltrimethylmethane. In any case it is not normal to put into the satisfaction of mere curiosity the amount of time and effort that scientists put into their work. The "curiosity" explanation for the scientists' motive just doesn't stand up. 88. The "benefit of humanity" explanation doesn't work any better. Some scientific work has no conceivable relation to the welfare of the human race - most of archaeology or comparative linguistics for example. Some other areas of science present obviously dangerous possibilities. Yet scientists in these areas are just as enthusiastic about their work as those who develop vaccines or study air pollution. Consider the case of Dr. Edward Teller, who had an obvious emotional involvement in promoting nuclear power plants. Did this involvement stem from a desire to benefit humanity? If so, then why didn't Dr. Teller get emotional about other "humanitarian" causes? If he was such a humanitarian then why did he help to develop the H-bomb? As with many other scientific achievements, it is very much open to question whether nuclear power plants actually do benefit humanity. Does the cheap electricity outweigh the accumulating waste and risk of accidents? Dr. Teller saw only one side of the question. Clearly his emotional involvement with nuclear power arose not from a desire to "benefit humanity" but from a personal fulfillment he got from his work and from seeing it put to practical use. 89. The same is true of scientists generally. With possible rare exceptions, their motive is neither curiosity nor a desire to benefit humanity but the need to go through the power process: to have a goal (a scientific problem to solve), to make an effort (research) and to attain the goal (solution of the problem.) Science is a surrogate activity because scientists work mainly for the fulfillment they get out of the work itself. 90. Of course, it's not that simple. Other motives do play a role for many scientists. Money and status for example. Some scientists may be persons of the type who have an insatiable drive for status (see paragraph 79) and this may provide much of the motivation for their work. No doubt the majority of scientists, like the majority of the general population, are more or less susceptible to advertising and marketing techniques and need money to satisfy their craving for goods and services. Thus science is not a PURE surrogate activity. But it is in large part a surrogate activity. 91. Also, science and technology constitute a mass power movement, and many scientists gratify their need for power through identification with this mass movement (see paragraph 83). 92. Thus science marches on blindly, without regard to the real welfare of the human race or to any other standard, obedient only to the psychological needs of the scientists and of the government officials and corporation executives who provide the funds for research. THE NATURE OF FREEDOM 93. We are going to argue that industrial-technological society cannot be reformed in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing the sphere of human freedom. But because "freedom" is a word that can be interpreted in many ways, we must first make clear what kind of freedom we are concerned with. 94. By "freedom" we mean the opportunity to go through the power process, with real goals not the artificial goals of surrogate activities, and without interference, manipulation or supervision from anyone, especially from any large organization. Freedom means being in control (either as an individual or as a member of a SMALL group) of the life-and-death issues of one's existence; food, clothing, shelter and defense against whatever threats there may be in one's environment. Freedom means having power; not the power to control other people but the power to control the circumstances of one's own life. One does not have freedom if anyone else (especially a large organization) has power over one, no matter how benevolently, tolerantly and permissively that power may be exercised. It is important not to confuse freedom with mere permissiveness (see paragraph 72). 95. It is said that we live in a free society because we have a certain number of constitutionally guaranteed rights. But these are not as important as they seem. The degree of personal freedom that exists in a society is determined more by the economic and technological structure of the society than by its laws or its form of government. [16] Most of the Indian nations of New England were monarchies, and many of the cities of the Italian Renaissance were controlled by dictators. But in reading about these societies one gets the impression that they allowed far more personal freedom than out society does. In part this was because they lacked efficient mechanisms for enforcing the ruler's will: There were no modern, well-organized police forces, no rapid long-distance communications, no surveillance cameras, no dossiers of information about the lives of average citizens. Hence it was relatively easy to evade control. 96. As for our constitutional rights, consider for example that of freedom of the press. We certainly don't mean to knock that right: it is very important tool for limiting concentration of political power and for keeping those who do have political power in line by publicly exposing any misbehavior on their part. But freedom of the press is of very little use to the average citizen as an individual. The mass media are mostly under the control of large organizations that are integrated into the system. Anyone who has a little money can have something printed, or can distribute it on the Internet or in some such way, but what he has to say will be swamped by the vast volume of material put out by the media, hence it will have no practical effect. To make an impression on society with words is therefore almost impossible for most individuals and small groups. Take us (FC) for example. If we had never done anything violent and had submitted the present writings to a publisher, they probably would not have been accepted. If they had been accepted and published, they probably would not have attracted many readers, because it's more fun to watch the entertainment put out by the media than to read a sober essay. Even if these writings had had many readers, most of these readers would soon have forgotten what they had read as their minds were flooded by the mass of material to which the media expose them. In order to get our message before the public with some chance of making a lasting impression, we've had to kill people. 97. Constitutional rights are useful up to a point, but they do not serve to guarantee much more than what could be called the bourgeois conception of freedom. According to the bourgeois conception, a "free" man is essentially an element of a social machine and has only a certain set of prescribed and delimited freedoms; freedoms that are designed to serve the needs of the social machine more than those of the individual. Thus the bourgeois's "free" man has economic freedom because that promotes growth and progress; he has freedom of the press because public criticism restrains misbehavior by political leaders; he has a rights to a fair trial because imprisonment at the whim of the powerful would be bad for the system. This was clearly the attitude of Simon Bolivar. To him, people deserved liberty only if they used it to promote progress (progress as conceived by the bourgeois). Other bourgeois thinkers have taken a similar view of freedom as a mere means to collective ends. Chester C. Tan, "Chinese Political Thought in the Twentieth Century," page 202, explains the philosophy of the Kuomintang leader Hu Han-min: "An individual is granted rights because he is a member of society and his community life requires such rights. By community Hu meant the whole society of the nation." And on page 259 Tan states that according to Carsum Chang (Chang Chun-mai, head of the State Socialist Party in China) freedom had to be used in the interest of the state and of the people as a whole. But what kind of freedom does one have if one can use it only as someone else prescribes? FC's conception of freedom is not that of Bolivar, Hu, Chang or other bourgeois theorists. The trouble with such theorists is that they have made the development and application of social theories their surrogate activity. Consequently the theories are designed to serve the needs of the theorists more than the needs of any people who may be unlucky enough to live in a society on which the theories are imposed. 98. One more point to be made in this section: It should not be assumed that a person has enough freedom just because he SAYS he has enough. Freedom is restricted in part by psychological control of which people are unconscious, and moreover many people's ideas of what constitutes freedom are governed more by social convention than by their real needs. For example, it's likely that many leftists of the oversocialized type would say that most people, including themselves are socialized too little rather than too much, yet the oversocialized leftist pays a heavy psychological price for his high level of socialization. SOME PRINCIPLES OF HISTORY 99. Think of history as being the sum of two components: an erratic component that consists of unpredictable events that follow no discernible pattern, and a regular component that consists of long-term historical trends. Here we are concerned with the long-term trends. 100. FIRST PRINCIPLE. If a SMALL change is made that affects a long-term historical trend, then the effect of that change will almost always be transitory - the trend will soon revert to its original state. (Example: A reform movement designed to clean up political corruption in a society rarely has more than a short-term effect; sooner or later the reformers relax and corruption creeps back in. The level of political corruption in a given society tends to remain constant, or to change only slowly with the evolution of the society. Normally, a political cleanup will be permanent only if accompanied by widespread social changes; a SMALL change in the society won't be enough.) If a small change in a long-term historical trend appears to be permanent, it is only because the change acts in the direction in which the trend is already moving, so that the trend is not altered but only pushed a step ahead. 101. The first principle is almost a tautology. If a trend were not stable with respect to small changes, it would wander at random rather than following a definite direction; in other words it would not be a long-term trend at all. 102. SECOND PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is sufficiently large to alter permanently a long-term historical trend, than it will alter the society as a whole. In other words, a society is a system in which all parts are interrelated, and you can't permanently change any important part without change all the other parts as well. 103. THIRD PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is large enough to alter permanently a long-term trend, then the consequences for the society as a whole cannot be predicted in advance. (Unless various other societies have passed through the same change and have all experienced the same consequences, in which case one can predict on empirical grounds that another society that passes through the same change will be like to experience similar consequences.) 104. FOURTH PRINCIPLE. A new kind of society cannot be designed on paper. That is, you cannot plan out a new form of society in advance, then set it up and expect it to function as it was designed to. 105. The third and fourth principles result from the complexity of human societies. A change in human behavior will affect the economy of a society and its physical environment; the economy will affect the environment and vice versa, and the changes in the economy and the environment will affect human behavior in complex, unpredictable ways; and so forth. The network of causes and effects is far too complex to be untangled and understood. 106. FIFTH PRINCIPLE. People do not consciously and rationally choose the form of their society. Societies develop through processes of social evolution that are not under rational human control. 107. The fifth principle is a consequence of the other four. 108. To illustrate: By the first principle, generally speaking an attempt at social reform either acts in the direction in which the society is developing anyway (so that it merely accelerates a change that would have occurred in any case) or else it only has a transitory effect, so that the society soon slips back into its old groove. To make a lasting change in the direction of development of any important aspect of a society, reform is insufficient and revolution is required. (A revolution does not necessarily involve an armed uprising or the overthrow of a government.) By the second principle, a revolution never changes only one aspect of a society; and by the third principle changes occur that were never expected or desired by the revolutionaries. By the fourth principle, when revolutionaries or utopians set up a new kind of society, it never works out as planned. 109. The American Revolution does not provide a counterexample. The American "Revolution" was not a revolution in our sense of the word, but a war of independence followed by a rather far-reaching political reform. The Founding Fathers did not change the direction of development of American society, nor did they aspire to do so. They only freed the development of American society from the retarding effect of British rule. Their political reform did not change any basic trend, but only pushed American political culture along its natural direction of development. British society, of which American society was an off-shoot, had been moving for a long time in the direction of representative democracy. And prior to the War of Independence the Americans were already practicing a significant degree of representative democracy in the colonial assemblies. The political system established by the Constitution was modeled on the British system and on the colonial assemblies. With major alteration, to be sure - there is no doubt that the Founding Fathers took a very important step. But it was a step along the road the English-speaking world was already traveling. The proof is that Britain and all of its colonies that were populated predominantly by people of British descent ended up with systems of representative democracy essentially similar to that of the United States. If the Founding Fathers had lost their nerve and declined to sign the Declaration of Independence, our way of life today would not have been significantly different. Maybe we would have had somewhat closer ties to Britain, and would have had a Parliament and Prime Minister instead of a Congress and President. No big deal. Thus the American Revolution provides not a counterexample to our principles but a good illustration of them. 110. Still, one has to use common sense in applying the principles. They are expressed in imprecise language that allows latitude for interpretation, and exceptions to them can be found. So we present these principles not as inviolable laws but as rules of thumb, or guides to thinking, that may provide a partial antidote to naive ideas about the future of society. The principles should be borne constantly in mind, and whenever one reaches a conclusion that conflicts with them one should carefully reexamine one's thinking and retain the conclusion only if one has good, solid reasons for doing so. INDUSTRIAL-TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY CANNOT BE REFORMED 111. The foregoing principles help to show how hopelessly difficult it would be to reform the industrial system in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing our sphere of freedom. There has been a consistent tendency, going back at least to the Industrial Revolution for technology to strengthen the system at a high cost in individual freedom and local autonomy. Hence any change designed to protect freedom from technology would be contrary to a fundamental trend in the development of our society. Consequently, such a change either would be a transitory one -- soon swamped by the tide of history -- or, if large enough to be permanent would alter the nature of our whole society. This by the first and second principles. Moreover, since society would be altered in a way that could not be predicted in advance (third principle) there would be great risk. Changes large enough to make a lasting difference in favor of freedom would not be initiated because it would realized that they would gravely disrupt the system. So any attempts at reform would be too timid to be effective. Even if changes large enough to make a lasting difference were initiated, they would be retracted when their disruptive effects became apparent. Thus, permanent changes in favor of freedom could be brought about only by persons prepared to accept radical, dangerous and unpredictable alteration of the entire system. In other words, by revolutionaries, not reformers. 112. People anxious to rescue freedom without sacrificing the supposed benefits of technology will suggest naive schemes for some new form of society that would reconcile freedom with technology. Apart from the fact that people who make suggestions seldom propose any practical means by which the new form of society could be set up in the first place, it follows from the fourth principle that even if the new form of society could be once established, it either would collapse or would give results very different from those expected. 113. So even on very general grounds it seems highly improbably that any way of changing society could be found that would reconcile freedom with modern technology. In the next few sections we will give more specific reasons for concluding that freedom and technological progress are incompatible. RESTRICTION OF FREEDOM IS UNAVOIDABLE IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY 114. As explained in paragraph 65-67, 70-73, modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations, and his fate depends on the actions of persons remote from him whose decisions he cannot influence. This is not accidental or a result of the arbitrariness of arrogant bureaucrats. It is necessary and inevitable in any technologically advanced society. The system HAS TO regulate human behavior closely in order to function. At work, people have to do what they are told to do, otherwise production would be thrown into chaos. Bureaucracies HAVE TO be run according to rigid rules. To allow any substantial personal discretion to lower-level bureaucrats would disrupt the system and lead to charges of unfairness due to differences in the way individual bureaucrats exercised their discretion. It is true that some restrictions on our freedom could be eliminated, but GENERALLY SPEAKING the regulation of our lives by large organizations is necessary for the functioning of industrial-technological society. The result is a sense of powerlessness on the part of the average person. It may be, however, that formal regulations will tend increasingly to be replaced by psychological tools that make us want to do what the system requires of us. (Propaganda [14], educational techniques, "mental health" programs, etc.) 115. The system HAS TO force people to behave in ways that are increasingly remote from the natural pattern of human behavior. For example, the system needs scientists, mathematicians and engineers. It can't function without them. So heavy pressure is put on children to excel in these fields. It isn't natural for an adolescent human being to spend the bulk of his time sitting at a desk absorbed in study. A normal adolescent wants to spend his time in active contact with the real world. Among primitive peoples the things that children are trained to do are in natural harmony with natural human impulses. Among the American Indians, for example, boys were trained in active outdoor pursuits -- just the sort of things that boys like. But in our society children are pushed into studying technical subjects, which most do grudgingly. 116. Because of the constant pressure that the system exerts to modify human behavior, there is a gradual increase in the number of people who cannot or will not adjust to society's requirements: welfare leeches, youth-gang members, cultists, anti-government rebels, radical environmentalist saboteurs, dropouts and resisters of various kinds. 117. In any technologically advanced society the individual's fate MUST depend on decisions that he personally cannot influence to any great extent. A technological society cannot be broken down into small, autonomous communities, because production depends on the cooperation of very large numbers of people and machines. Such a society MUST be highly organized and decisions HAVE TO be made that affect very large numbers of people. When a decision affects, say, a million people, then each of the affected individuals has, on the average, only a one-millionth share in making the decision. What usually happens in practice is that decisions are made by public officials or corporation executives, or by technical specialists, but even when the public votes on a decision the number of voters ordinarily is too large for the vote of any one individual to be significant. [17] Thus most individuals are unable to influence measurably the major decisions that affect their lives. Their is no conceivable way to remedy this in a technologically advanced society. The system tries to "solve" this problem by using propaganda to make people WANT the decisions that have been made for them, but even if this "solution" were completely successful in making people feel better, it would be demeaning. 118 Conservatives and some others advocate more "local autonomy." Local communities once did have autonomy, but such autonomy becomes less and less possible as local communities become more enmeshed with and dependent on large-scale systems like public utilities, computer networks, highway systems, the mass communications media, the modern health care system. Also operating against autonomy is the fact that technology applied in one location often affects people at other locations far away. Thus pesticide or chemical use near a creek may contaminate the water supply hundreds of miles downstream, and the greenhouse effect affects the whole world. 119. The system does not and cannot exist to satisfy human needs. Instead, it is human behavior that has to be modified to fit the needs of the system. This has nothing to do with the political or social ideology that may pretend to guide the technological system. It is the fault of technology, because the system is guided not by ideology but by technical necessity. [18] Of course the system does satisfy many human needs, but generally speaking it does this only to the extent that it is to the advantage of the system to do it. It is the needs of the system that are paramount, not those of the human being. For example, the system provides people with food because the system couldn't function if everyone starved; it attends to people's psychological needs whenever it can CONVENIENTLY do so, because it couldn't function if too many people became depressed or rebellious. But the system, for good, solid, practical reasons, must exert constant pressure on people to mold their behavior to the needs of the system. Too much waste accumulating? The government, the media, the educational system, environmentalists, everyone inundates us with a mass of propaganda about recycling. Need more technical personnel? A chorus of voices exhorts kids to study science. No one stops to ask whether it is inhumane to force adolescents to spend the bulk of their time studying subjects most of them hate. When skilled workers are put out of a job by technical advances and have to undergo "retraining," no one asks whether it is humiliating for them to be pushed around in this way. It is simply taken for granted that everyone must bow to technical necessity and for good reason: If human needs were put before technical necessity there would be economic problems, unemployment, shortages or worse. The concept of "mental health" in our society is defined largely by the extent to which an individual behaves in accord with the needs of the system and does so without showing signs of stress. 120. Efforts to make room for a sense of purpose and for autonomy within the system are no better than a joke. For example, one company, instead of having each of its employees assemble only one section of a catalogue, had each assemble a whole catalogue, and this was supposed to give them a sense of purpose and achievement. Some companies have tried to give their employees more autonomy in their work, but for practical reasons this usually can be done only to a very limited extent, and in any case employees are never given autonomy as to ultimate goals -- their "autonomous" efforts can never be directed toward goals that they select personally, but only toward their employer's goals, such as the survival and growth of the company. Any company would soon go out of business if it permitted its employees to act otherwise. Similarly, in any enterprise within a socialist system, workers must direct their efforts toward the goals of the enterprise, otherwise the enterprise will not serve its purpose as part of the system. Once again, for purely technical reasons it is not possible for most individuals or small groups to have much autonomy in industrial society. Even the small-business owner commonly has only limited autonomy. Apart from the necessity of government regulation, he is restricted by the fact that he must fit into the economic system and conform to its requirements. For instance, when someone develops a new technology, the small-business person often has to use that technology whether he wants to or not, in order to remain competitive. THE 'BAD' PARTS OF TECHNOLOGY CANNOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE 'GOOD' PARTS 121. A further reason why industrial society cannot be reformed in favor of freedom is that modern technology is a unified system in which all parts are dependent on one another. You can't get rid of the "bad" parts of technology and retain only the "good" parts. Take modern medicine, for example. Progress in medical science depends on progress in chemistry, physics, biology, computer science and other fields. Advanced medical treatments require expensive, high-tech equipment that can be made available only by a technologically progressive, economically rich society. Clearly you can't have much progress in medicine without the whole technological system and everything that goes with it. 122. Even if medical progress could be maintained without the rest of the technological system, it would by itself bring certain evils. Suppose for example that a cure for diabetes is discovered. People with a genetic tendency to diabetes will then be able to survive and reproduce as well as anyone else. Natural selection against genes for diabetes will cease and such genes will spread throughout the population. (This may be occurring to some extent already, since diabetes, while not curable, can be controlled through the use of insulin.) The same thing will happen with many other diseases susceptibility to which is affected by genetic degradation of the population. The only solution will be some sort of eugenics program or extensive genetic engineering of human beings, so that man in the future will no longer be a creation of nature, or of chance, or of God (depending on your religious or philosophical opinions), but a manufactured product. 123. If you think that big government interferes in your life too much NOW, just wait till the government starts regulating the genetic constitution of your children. Such regulation will inevitably follow the introduction of genetic engineering of human beings, because the consequences of unregulated genetic engineering would be disastrous. [19] 124. The usual response to such concerns is to talk about "medical ethics." But a code of ethics would not serve to protect freedom in the face of medical progress; it would only make matters worse. A code of ethics applicable to genetic engineering would be in effect a means of regulating the genetic constitution of human beings. Somebody (probably the upper-middle class, mostly) would decide that such and such applications of genetic engineering were "ethical" and others were not, so that in effect they would be imposing their own values on the genetic constitution of the population at large. Even if a code of ethics were chosen on a completely democratic basis, the majority would be imposing their own values on any minorities who might have a different idea of what constituted an "ethical" use of genetic engineering. The only code of ethics that would truly protect freedom would be one that prohibited ANY genetic engineering of human beings, and you can be sure that no such code will ever be applied in a technological society. No code that reduced genetic engineering to a minor role could stand up for long, because the temptation presented by the immense power of biotechnology would be irresistible, especially since to the majority of people many of its applications will seem obviously and unequivocally good (eliminating physical and mental diseases, giving people the abilities they need to get along in today's world). Inevitably, genetic engineering will be used extensively, but only in ways consistent with the needs of the industrial-technological system. [20] TECHNOLOGY IS A MORE POWERFUL SOCIAL FORCE THAN THE ASPIRATION FOR FREEDOM 125. It is not possible to make a LASTING compromise between technology and freedom, because technology is by far the more powerful social force and continually encroaches on freedom through REPEATED compromises. Imagine the case of two neighbors, each of whom at the outset owns the same amount of land, but one of whom is more powerful than the other. The powerful one demands a piece of the other's land. The weak one refuses. The powerful one says, "OK, let's compromise. Give me half of what I asked." The weak one has little choice but to give in. Some time later the powerful neighbor demands another piece of land, again there is a compromise, and so forth. By forcing a long series of compromises on the weaker man, the powerful one eventually gets all of his land. So it goes in the conflict between technology and freedom. 126. Let us explain why technology is a more powerful social force than the aspiration for freedom. 127. A technological advance that appears not to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten it very seriously later on. For example, consider motorized transport. A walking man formerly could go where he pleased, go at his own pace without observing any traffic regulations, and was independent of technological support-systems. When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to increase man's freedom. They took no freedom away from the walking man, no one had to have an automobile if he didn't want one, and anyone who did choose to buy an automobile could travel much faster than the walking man. But the introduction of motorized transport soon changed society in such a way as to restrict greatly man's freedom of locomotion. When automobiles became numerous, it became necessary to regulate their use extensively. In a car, especially in densely populated areas, one cannot just go where one likes at one's own pace one's movement is governed by the flow of traffic and by various traffic laws. One is tied down by various obligations: license requirements, driver test, renewing registration, insurance, maintenance required for safety, monthly payments on purchase price. Moreover, the use of motorized transport is no longer optional. Since the introduction of motorized transport the arrangement of our cities has changed in such a way that the majority of people no longer live within walking distance of their place of employment, shopping areas and recreational opportunities, so that they HAVE TO depend on the automobile for transportation. Or else they must use public transportation, in which case they have even less control over their own movement than when driving a car. Even the walker's freedom is now greatly restricted. In the city he continually has to stop and wait for traffic lights that are designed mainly to serve auto traffic. In the country, motor traffic makes it dangerous and unpleasant to walk along the highway. (Note the important point we have illustrated with the case of motorized transport: When a new item of technology is introduced as an option that an individual can accept or not as he chooses, it does not necessarily REMAIN optional. In many cases the new technology changes society in such a way that people eventually find themselves FORCED to use it.) 128. While technological progress AS A WHOLE continually narrows our sphere of freedom, each new technical advance CONSIDERED BY ITSELF appears to be desirable. Electricity, indoor plumbing, rapid long-distance communications . . . how could one argue against any of these things, or against any other of the innumerable technical advances that have made modern society? It would have been absurd to resist the introduction of the telephone, for example. It offered many advantages and no disadvantages. Yet as we explained in paragraphs 59-76, all these technical advances taken together have created world in which the average man's fate is no longer in his own hands or in the hands of his neighbors and friends, but in those of politicians, corporation executives and remote, anonymous technicians and bureaucrats whom he as an individual has no power to influence. [21] The same process will continue in the future. Take genetic engineering, for example. Few people will resist the introduction of a genetic technique that eliminates a hereditary disease It does no apparent harm and prevents much suffering. Yet a large number of genetic improvements taken together will make the human being into an engineered product rather than a free creation of chance (or of God, or whatever, depending on your religious beliefs). 129 Another reason why technology is such a powerful social force is that, within the context of a given society, technological progress marches in only one direction; it can never be reversed. Once a technical innovation has been introduced, people usually become dependent on it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Not only do people become dependent as individuals on a new item of technology, but, even more, the system as a whole becomes dependent on it. (Imagine what would happen to the system today if computers, for example, were eliminated.) Thus the system can move in only one direction, toward greater technologization. Technology repeatedly forces freedom to take a step back -- short of the overthrow of the whole technological system. 130. Technology advances with great rapidity and threatens freedom at many different points at the same time (crowding, rules and regulations, increasing dependence of individuals on large organizations, propaganda and other psychological techniques, genetic engineering, invasion of privacy through surveillance devices and computers, etc.) To hold back any ONE of the threats to freedom would require a long different social struggle. Those who want to protect freedom are overwhelmed by the sheer number of new attacks and the rapidity with which they develop, hence they become pathetic and no longer resist. To fight each of the threats separately would be futile. Success can be hoped for only by fighting the technological system as a whole; but that is revolution not reform. 131. Technicians (we use this term in its broad sense to describe all those who perform a specialized task that requires training) tend to be so involved in their work (their surrogate activity) that when a conflict arises between their technical work and freedom, they almost always decide in favor of their technical work. This is obvious in the case of scientists, but it also appears elsewhere: Educators, humanitarian groups, conservation organizations do not hesitate to use propaganda or other psychological techniques to help them achieve their laudable ends. Corporations and government agencies, when they find it useful, do not hesitate to collect information about individuals without regard to their privacy. Law enforcement agencies are frequently inconvenienced by the constitutional rights of suspects and often of completely innocent persons, and they do whatever they can do legally (or sometimes illegally) to restrict or circumvent those rights. Most of these educators, government officials and law officers believe in freedom, privacy and constitutional rights, but when these conflict with their work, they usually feel that their work is more important. 132. It is well known that people generally work better and more persistently when striving for a reward than when attempting to avoid a punishment or negative outcome. Scientists and other technicians are motivated mainly by the rewards they get through their work. But those who oppose technilogiccal invasions of freedom are working to avoid a negative outcome, consequently there are a few who work persistently and well at this discouraging task. If reformers ever achieved a signal victory that seemed to set up a solid barrier against further erosion of freedom through technological progress, most would tend to relax and turn their attention to more agreeable pursuits. But the scientists would remain busy in their laboratories, and technology as it progresses would find ways, in spite of any barriers, to exert more and more control over individuals and make them always more dependent on the system. 133. No social arrangements, whether laws, institutions, customs or ethical codes, can provide permanent protection against technology. History shows that all social arrangements are transitory; they all change or break down eventually. But technological advances are permanent within the context of a given civilization. Suppose for example that it were possible to arrive at some social arrangements that would prevent genetic engineering from being applied to human beings, or prevent it from being applied in such a ways as to threaten freedom and dignity. Still, the technology would remain waiting. Sooner or later the social arrangement would break down. Probably sooner, given that pace of change in our society. Then genetic engineering would begin to invade our sphere of freedom, and this invasion would be irreversible (short of a breakdown of technological civilization itself). Any illusions about achieving anything permanent through social arrangements should be dispelled by what is currently happening with environmental legislation. A few years ago it seemed that there were secure legal barriers preventing at least SOME of the worst forms of environmental degradation. A change in the political wind, and those barriers begin to crumble. 134. For all of the foregoing reasons, technology is a more powerful social force than the aspiration for freedom. But this statement requires an important qualification. It appears that during the next several decades the industrial-technological system will be undergoing severe stresses due to economic and environmental problems, and especially due to problems of human behavior (alienation, rebellion, hostility, a variety of social and psychological difficulties). We hope that the stresses through which the system is likely to pass will cause it to break down, or at least weaken it sufficiently so that a revolution occurs and is successful, then at that particular moment the aspiration for freedom will have proved more powerful than technology. 135. In paragraph 125 we used an analogy of a weak neighbor who is left destitute by a strong neighbor who takes all his land by forcing on him a series of compromises. But suppose now that the strong neighbor gets sick, so that he is unable to defend himself. The weak neighbor can force the strong one to give him his land back, or he can kill him. If he lets the strong man survive and only forces him to give his land back, he is a fool, because when the strong man gets well he will again take all the land for himself. The only sensible alternative for the weaker man is to kill the strong one while he has the chance. In the same way, while the industrial system is sick we must destroy it. If we compromise with it and let it recover from its sickness, it will eventually wipe out all of our freedom. SIMPLER SOCIAL PROBLEMS HAVE PROVED INTRACTABLE 136. If anyone still imagines that it would be possible to reform the system in such a way as to protect freedom from technology, let him consider how clumsily and for the most part unsuccessfully our society has dealt with other social problems that are far more simple and straightforward. Among other things, the system has failed to stop environmental degradation, political corruption, drug trafficking or domestic abuse. 137. Take our environmental problems, for example. Here the conflict of values is straightforward: economic expedience now versus saving some of our natural resources for our grandchildren [22] But on this subject we get only a lot of blather and obfuscation from the people who have power, and nothing like a clear, consistent line of action, and we keep on piling up environmental problems that our grandchildren will have to live with. Attempts to resolve the environmental issue consist of struggles and compromises between different factions, some of which are ascendant at one moment, others at another moment. The line of struggle changes with the shifting currents of public opinion. This is not a rational process, or is it one that is likely to lead to a timely and successful solution to the problem. Major social problems, if they get "solved" at all, are rarely or never solved through any rational, comprehensive plan. They just work themselves out through a process in which various competing groups pursing their own usually short-term) self-interest [23] arrive (mainly by luck) at some more or less stable modus vivendi. In fact, the principles we formulated in paragraphs 100-106 make it seem doubtful that rational, long-term social planning can EVER be successful. 138. Thus it is clear that the human race has at best a very limited capacity for solving even relatively straightforward social problems. How then is it going to solve the far more difficult and subtle problem of reconciling freedom with technology? Technology presents clear-cut material advantages, whereas freedom is an abstraction that means different things to different people, and its loss is easily obscured by propaganda and fancy talk. 139. And note this important difference: It is conceivable that our environmental problems (for example) may some day be settled through a rational, comprehensive plan, but if this happens it will be only because it is in the long-term interest of the system to solve these problems. But it is NOT in the interest of the system to preserve freedom or small-group autonomy. On the contrary, it is in the interest of the system to bring human behavior under control to the greatest possible extent. Thus, while practical considerations may eventually force the system to take a rational, prudent approach to environmental problems, equally practical considerations will force the system to regulate human behavior ever more closely (preferably by indirect means that will disguise the encroachment on freedom.) This isn't just our opinion. Eminent social scientists (e.g. James Q. Wilson) have stressed the importance of "socializing" people more effectively. REVOLUTION IS EASIER THAN REFORM 140. We hope we have convinced the reader that the system cannot be reformed in a such a way as to reconcile freedom with technology. The only way out is to dispense with the industrial-technological system altogether. This implies revolution, not necessarily an armed uprising, but certainly a radical and fundamental change in the nature of society. 141. People tend to assume that because a revolution involves a much greater change than reform does, it is more difficult to bring about than reform is. Actually, under certain circumstances revolution is much easier than reform. The reason is that a revolutionary movement can inspire an intensity of commitment that a reform movement cannot inspire. A reform movement merely offers to solve a particular social problem A revolutionary movement offers to solve all problems at one stroke and create a whole new world; it provides the kind of ideal for which people will take great risks and make great sacrifices. For this reasons it would be much easier to overthrow the whole technological system than to put effective, permanent restraints on the development of application of any one segment of technology, such as genetic engineering, but under suitable conditions large numbers of people may devote themselves passionately to a revolution against the industrial-technological system. As we noted in paragraph 132, reformers seeking to limite certain aspects of technology would be working to avoid a negative outcome. But revolutionaries work to gain a powerful reward -- fulfillment of their revolutionary vision -- and therefore work harder and more persistently than reformers do. 142. Reform is always restrainde by the fear of painful consequences if changes go too far. But once a revolutionary fever has taken hold of a society, people are willing to undergo unlimited hardships for the sake of their revolution. This was clearly shown in the French and Russian Revolutions. It may be that in such cases only a minority of the population is really committed to the revolution, but this minority is sufficiently large and active so that it becomes the dominant force in society. We will have more to say about revolution in paragraphs 180-205. CONTROL OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR 143. Since the beginning of civilization, organized societies have had to put pressures on human beings of the sake of the functioning of the social organism. The kinds of pressures vary greatly from one society to another. Some of the pressures are physical (poor diet, excessive labor, environmental pollution), some are psychological (noise, crowding, forcing humans behavior into the mold that society requires). In the past, human nature has been approximately constant, or at any rate has varied only within certain bounds. Consequently, societies have been able to push people only up to certain limits. When the limit of human endurance has been passed, things start going rong: rebellion, or crime, or corruption, or evasion of work, or depression and other mental problems, or an elevated death rate, or a declining birth rate or something else, so that either the society breaks down, or its functioning becomes too inefficient and it is (quickly or gradually, through conquest, attrition or evolution) replaces by some more efficient form of society. [25] 144. Thus human nature has in the past put certain limits on the development of societies. People coud be pushed only so far and no farther. But today this may be changing, because modern technology is developing way of modifying human beings. 145. Imagine a society that subjects people to conditions that amke them terribley unhappy, then gives them the drugs to take away their unhappiness. Science fiction? It is already happening to some extent in our own society. It is well known that the rate of clinical depression had been greatly increasing in recent decades. We believe that this is due to disruption fo the power process, as explained in paragraphs 59-76. But even if we are wrong, the increasing rate of depression is certainly the result of SOME conditions that exist in today's society. Instead of removing the conditions that make people depressed, modern society gives them antidepressant drugs. In effect, antidepressants area a means of modifying an individual's internal state in such a way as to enable him to toelrate social conditions that he would otherwise find intolerable. (Yes, we know that depression is often of purely genetic origin. We are referring here to those cases in which environment plays the predominant role.) 146. Drugs that affect the mind are only one example of the methods of controlling human behavior that modern society is developing. Let us look at some of the other methods. 147. To start with, there are the techniques of surveillance. Hidden video cameras are now used in most stores and in many other places, computers are used to collect and process vast amounts of information about individuals. Information so obtained greatly increases the effectiveness of physical coercion (i.e., law enforcement).[26] Then there are the methods of propaganda, for which the mass communication media provide effective vehicles. Efficient techniques have been developed for winning elections, selling products, influencing public opinion. The entertainment industry serves as an important psychological tool of the system, possibly even when it is dishing out large amounts of sex and violence. Entertainment provides modern man with an essential means of escape. While absorbed in television, videos, etc., he can forget stress, anxiety, frustration, dissatisfaction. Many primitive peoples, when they don't have work to do, are quite content to sit for hours at a time doing nothing at all, because they are at peace with themselves and their world. But most modern people must be contantly occupied or entertained, otherwise the get "bored," i.e., they get fidgety, uneasy, irritable. 148. Other techniques strike deeper that the foregoing. Education is no longer a simple affair of paddling a kid's behind when he doesn't know his lessons and patting him on the head when he does know them. It is becoming a scientific technique for controlling the child's development. Sylvan Learning Centers, for example, have had great success in motivating children to study, and psychological techniques are also used with more or less success in many conventional schools. "Parenting" techniques that are taught to parents are designed to make children accept fundamental values of the system and behave in ways that the system finds desirable. "Mental health" programs, "intervention" techniques, psychotherapy and so forth are ostensibly designed to benefit individuals, but in practice they usually serve as methods for inducing individuals to think and behave as the system requires. (There is no contradiction here; an individual whose attitudes or behavior bring him into conflict with the system is up against a force that is too powerful for him to conquer or escape from, hence he is likely to suffer from stress, frustration, defeat. His path will be much easier if he thinks and behaves as the system requires. In that sense the system is acting for the benefit of the individual when it brainwashes him into conformity.) Child abuse in its gross and obvious forms is disapproved in most if not all cultures. Tormenting a child for a trivial reason or no reason at all is something that appalls almost everyone. But many psychologists interpret the concept of abuse much more broadly. Is spanking, when used as part of a rational and consistent system of discipline, a form of abuse? The question will ultimately be decided by whether or not spanking tends to produce behavior that makes a person fit in well with the existing system of society. In practice, the word "abuse" tends to be interpreted to include any method of child-rearing that produces behavior inconvenient for the system. Thus, when they go beyond the prevention of obvious, senseless cruelty, programs for preventing "child abuse" are directed toward the control of human behavior of the system. 149. Presumably, research will continue to increas the effectiveness of psychological techniques for controlling human behavior. But we think it is unlikely that psychological techniques alone will be sufficient to adjust human beings to the kind of society that technology is creating. Biological methods probably will have to be used. We have already mentiond the use of drugs in this connection. Neurology may provide other avenues of modifying the human mind. Genetic engineering of human beings is already beginning to occur in the form of "gene therapy," and there is no reason to assume the such methods will not eventually be used to modify those aspects of the body that affect mental funtioning. 150. As we mentioned in paragraph 134, industrial society seems likely to be entering a period of severe stress, due in part to problems of human behavior and in part to economic and environmental problems. And a considerable proportion of the system's economic and environmental problems result from the way human beings behave. Alienation, low self-esteem, depression, hostility, rebellion; children who won't study, youth gangs, illegal drug use, rape, child abuse , other crimes, unsafe sex, teen pregnancy, population growth, political corruption, race hatred, ethnic rivalry, bitter ideological conflict (i.e., pro-choice vs. pro-life), political extremism, terrorism, sabotage, anti-government groups, hate groups. All these threaten the very survival of the system. The system will be FORCED to use every practical means of controlling human behavior. 151. The social disruption that we see today is certainly not the result of mere chance. It can only be a result fo the conditions of life that the system imposes on people. (We have argued that the most important of these conditions is disruption of the power process.) If the systems succeeds in imposing sufficient control over human behavior to assure itw own survival, a new watershed in human history will have passed. Whereas formerly the limits of human endurance have imposed limits on the development of societies (as we explained in paragraphs 143, 144), industrial-technological society will be able to pass those limits by modifying human beings, whether by psychological methods or biological methods or both. In the future, social systems will not be adjusted to suit the needs of human beings. Instead, human being will be adjusted to suit the needs of the system. [27] 152. Generally speaking, technological control over human behavior will probably not be introduced with a totalitarian intention or even through a conscious desire to restrict human freedom. [28] Each new step in the assertion of control over the human mind will be taken as a rational response to a problem that faces society, such as curing alcoholism, reducing the crime rate or inducing young people to study science and engineering. In many cases, there will be humanitarian justification. For example, when a psychiatrist prescribes an anti-depressant for a depressed patient, he is clearly doing that individual a favor. It would be inhumane to withhold the drug from someone who needs it. When parents send their children to Sylvan Learning Centers to have them manipulated into becoming enthusiastic about their studies, they do so from concern for their children's welfare. It may be that some of these parents wish that one didn't have to have specialized training to get a job and that their kid didn't have to be brainwashed into becoming a computer nerd. But what can they do? They can't change society, and their child may be unemployable if he doesn't have certain skills. So they send him to Sylvan. 153. Thus control over human behavior will be introduced not by a calculated decision of the authorities but through a process of social evolution (RAPID evolution, however). The process will be impossible to resist, because each advance, considered by itself, will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will seem to be less than that which would result from not making it (see paragraph 127). Propaganda for example is used for many good purposes, such as discouraging child abuse or race hatred. [14] Sex education is obviously useful, yet the effect of sex education (to the extent that it is successful) is to take the shaping of sexual attitudes away from the family and put it into the hands of the state as represented by the public school system. 154. Suppose a biological trait is discovered that increases the likelihood that a child will grow up to be a criminal and suppose some sort of gene therapy can remove this trait. [29] Of course most parents whose children possess the trait will have them undergo the therapy. It would be inhumane to do otherwise, since the child would probably have a miserable life if he grew up to be a criminal. But many or most primitive societies have a low crime rate in comparison with that of our society, even though they have neither high-tech methods of child-rearing nor harsh systems of punishment. Since there is no reason to suppose that more modern men than primitive men have innate predatory tendencies, the high crime rate of our society must be due to the pressures that modern conditions put on people, to which many cannot or will not adjust. Thus a treatment designed to remove potential criminal tendencies is at least in part a way of re-engineering people so that they suit the requirements of the system. 155. Our society tends to regard as a "sickness" any mode of thought or behavior that is inconvenient for the system, and this is plausible because when an individual doesn't fit into the system it causes pain to the individual as well as problems for the system. Thus the manipulation of an individual to adjust him to the system is seen as a "cure" for a "sickness" and therefore as good. 156. In paragraph 127 we pointed out that if the use of a new item of technology is INITIALLY optional, it does not necessarily REMAIN optional, because the new technology tends to change society in such a way that it becomes difficult or impossible for an individual to function without using that technology. This applies also to the technology of human behavior. In a world in which most children are put through a program to make them enthusiastic about studying, a parent will almost be forced to put his kid through such a program, because if he does not, then the kid will grow up to be, comparatively speaking, an ignoramus and therefore unemployable. Or suppose a biological treatment is discovered that, without undesirable side-effects, will greatly reduce the psychological stress from which so many people suffer in our society. If large numbers of people choose to undergo the treatment, then the general level of stress in society will be reduced, so that it will be possible for the system to increase the stress-producing pressures. In fact, something like this seems to have happened already with one of our society's most important psychological tools for enabling people to reduce (or at least temporarily escape from) stress, namely, mass entertainment (see paragraph 147). Our use of mass entertainment is "optional": No law requires us to watch television, listen to the radio, read magazines. Yet mass entertainment is a means of escape and stress-reduction on which most of us have become dependent. Everyone complains about the trashiness of television, but almost everyone watches it. A few have kicked the TV habit, but it would be a rare person who could get along today without using ANY form of mass entertainment. (Yet until quite recently in human history most people got along very nicely with no other entertainment than that which each local community created for itself.) Without the entertainment industry the system probably would not have been able to get away with putting as much stress-producing pressure on us as it does. 157. Assuming that industrial society survives, it is likely that technology will eventually acquire something approaching complete control over human behavior. It has been established beyond any rational doubt that human thought and behavior have a largely biological basis. As experimenters have demonstrated, feelings such as hunger, pleasure, anger and fear can be turned on and off by electrical stimulation of appropriate parts of the brain. Memories can be destroyed by damaging parts of the brain or they can be brought to the surface by electrical stimulation. Hallucinations can be induced or moods changed by drugs. There may or may not be an immaterial human soul, but if there is one it clearly is less powerful that the biological mechanisms of human behavior. For if that were not the case then researchers would not be able so easily to manipulate human feelings and behavior with drugs and electrical currents. 158. It presumably would be impractical for all people to have electrodes inserted in their heads so that they could be controlled by the authorities. But the fact that human thoughts and feelings are so open to biological intervention shows that the problem of controlling human behavior is mainly a technical problem; a problem of neurons, hormones and complex molecules; the kind of problem that is accessible to scientific attack. Given the outstanding record of our society in solving technical problems, it is overwhelmingly probable that great advances will be made in the control of human behavior. 159. Will public resistance prevent the introduction of technological control of human behavior? It certainly would if an attempt were made to introduce such control all at once. But since technological control will be introduced through a long sequence of small advances, there will be no rational and effective public resistance. (See paragraphs 127,132, 153.) 160. To those who think that all this sounds like science fiction, we point out that yesterday's science fiction is today's fact. The Industrial Revolution has radically altered man's environment and way of life, and it is only to be expected that as technology is increasingly applied to the human body and mind, man himself will be altered as radically as his environment and way of life have been. HUMAN RACE AT A CROSSROADS 161. But we have gotten ahead of our story. It is one thing to develop in the laboratory a series of psychological or biological techniques for manipulating human behavior and quite another to integrate these techniques into a functioning social system. The latter problem is the more difficult of the two. For example, while the techniques of educational psychology doubtless work quite well in the "lab schools" where they are developed, it is not necessarily easy to apply them effectively throughout our educational system. We all know what many of our schools are like. The teachers are too busy taking knives and guns away from the kids to subject them to the latest techniques for making them into computer nerds. Thus, in spite of all its technical advances relating to human behavior the system to date has not been impressively successful in controlling human beings. The people whose behavior is fairly well under the control of the system are those of the type that might be called "bourgeois." But there are growing numbers of people who in one way or another are rebels against the system: welfare leaches, youth gangs cultists, satanists, nazis, radical environmentalists, militiamen, etc.. 162. The system is currently engaged in a desperate struggle to overcome certain problems that threaten its survival, among which the problems of human behavior are the most important. If the system succeeds in acquiring sufficient control over human behavior quickly enough, it will probably survive. Otherwise it will break down. We think the issue will most likely be resolved within the next several decades, say 40 to 100 years. 163. Suppose the system survives the crisis of the next several decades. By that time it will have to have solved, or at least brought under control, the principal problems that confront it, in particular that of "socializing" human beings; that is, making people sufficiently docile so that their behavior no longer threatens the system. That being accomplished, it does not appear that there would be any further obstacle to the development of technology, and it would presumably advance toward its logical conclusion, which is complete control over everything on Earth, including human beings and all other important organisms. The system may become a unitary, monolithic organization, or it may be more or less fragmented and consist of a number of organizations coexisting in a relationship that includes elements of both cooperation and competition, just as today the government, the corporations and other large organizations both cooperate and compete with one another. Human freedom mostly will have vanished, because individuals and small groups will be impotent vis-a-vis large organizations armed with supertechnology and an arsenal of advanced psychological and biological tools for manipulating human beings, besides instruments of surveillance and physical coercion. Only a small number of people will have any real power, and even these probably will have only very limited freedom, because their behavior too will be regulated; just as today our politicians and corporation executives can retain their positions of power only as long as their behavior remains within certain fairly narrow limits. 164. Don't imagine that the systems will stop developing further techniques for controlling human beings and nature once the crisis of the next few decades is over and increasing control is no longer necessary for the system's survival. On the contrary, once the hard times are over the system will increase its control over people and nature more rapidly, because it will no longer be hampered by difficulties of the kind that it is currently experiencing. Survival is not the principal motive for extending control. As we explained in paragraphs 87-90, technicians and scientists carry on their work largely as a surrogate activity; that is, they satisfy their need for power by solving technical problems. They will continue to do this with unabated enthusiasm, and among the most interesting and challenging problems for them to solve will be those of understanding the human body and mind and intervening in their development. For the "good of humanity," of course. 165. But suppose on the other hand that the stresses of the coming decades prove to be too much for the system. If the system breaks down there may be a period of chaos, a "time of troubles" such as those that history has recorded: at various epochs in the past. It is impossible to predict what would emerge from such a time of troubles, but at any rate the human race would be given a new chance. The greatest danger is that industrial society may begin to reconstitute itself within the first few years after the breakdown. Certainly there will be many people (power-hungry types especially) who will be anxious to get the factories running again. 166. Therefore two tasks confront those who hate the servitude to which the industrial system is reducing the human race. First, we must work to heighten the social stresses within the system so as to increase the likelihood that it will break down or be weakened sufficiently so that a revolution against it becomes possible. Second, it is necessary to develop and propagate an ideology that opposes technology and the industrial society if and when the system becomes sufficiently weakened. And such an ideology will help to assure that, if and when industrial society breaks down, its remnants will be smashed beyond repair, so that the system cannot be reconstituted. The factories should be destroyed, technical books burned, etc. HUMAN SUFFERING 167. The industrial system will not break down purely as a result of revolutionary action. It will not be vulnerable to revolutionary attack unless its own internal problems of development lead it into very serious difficulties. So if the system breaks down it will do so either spontaneously, or through a process that is in part spontaneous but helped along by revolutionaries. If the breakdown is sudden, many people will die, since the world's population has become so overblown that it cannot even feed itself any longer without advanced technology. Even if the breakdown is gradual enough so that reduction of the population can occur more through lowering of the birth rate than through elevation of the death rate, the process of de-industrialization probably will be very chaotic and involve much suffering. It is naive to think it likely that technology can be phased out in a smoothly managed orderly way, especially since the technophiles will fight stubbornly at every step. Is it therefore cruel to work for the breakdown of the system? Maybe, but maybe not. In the first place, revolutionaries will not be able to break the system down unless it is already in deep trouble so that there would be a good chance of its eventually breaking down by itself anyway; and the bigger the system grows, the more disastrous the consequences of its breakdown will be; so it may be that revolutionaries, by hastening the onset of the breakdown will be reducing the extent of the disaster. 168. In the second place, one has to balance the struggle and death against the loss of freedom and dignity. To many of us, freedom and dignity are more important than a long life or avoidance of physical pain. Besides, we all have to die some time, and it may be better to die fighting for survival, or for a cause, than to live a long but empty and purposeless life. 169. In the third place, it is not all certain that the survival of the system will lead to less suffering than the breakdown of the system would. The system has already caused, and is continuing to cause , immense suffering all over the world. Ancient cultures, that for hundreds of years gave people a satisfactory relationship with each other and their environment, have been shattered by contact with industrial society, and the result has been a whole catalogue of economic, environmental, social and psychological problems. One of the effects of the intrusion of industrial society has been that over much of the world traditional controls on population have been thrown out of balance. Hence the population explosion, with all that it implies. Then there is the psychological suffering that is widespread throughout the supposedly fortunate countries of the West (see paragraphs 44, 45). No one knows what will happen as a result of ozone depletion, the greenhouse effect and other environmental problems that cannot yet be foreseen. And, as nuclear proliferation has shown, new technology cannot be kept out of the hands of dictators and irresponsible Third World nations. Would you like to speculate abut what Iraq or North Korea will do with genetic engineering? 170. "Oh!" say the technophiles, "Science is going to fix all that! We will conquer famine, eliminate psychological suffering, make everybody healthy and happy!" Yeah, sure. That's what they said 200 years ago. The Industrial Revolution was supposed to eliminate poverty, make everybody happy, etc. The actual result has been quite different. The technophiles are hopelessly naive (or self-deceiving) in their understanding of social problems. They are unaware of (or choose to ignore) the fact that when large changes, even seemingly beneficial ones, are introduced into a society, they lead to a long sequence of other changes, most of which are impossible to predict (paragraph 103). The result is disruption of the society. So it is very probable that in their attempt to end poverty and disease, engineer docile, happy personalities and so forth, the technophiles will create social systems that are terribly troubled, even more so that the present one. For example, the scientists boast that they will end famine by creating new, genetically engineered food plants. But this will allow the human population to keep expanding indefinitely, and it is well known that crowding leads to increased stress and aggression. This is merely one example of the PREDICTABLE problems that will arise. We emphasize that, as past experience has shown, technical progress will lead to other new problems for society far more rapidly that it has been solving old ones. Thus it will take a long difficult period of trial and error for the technophiles to work the bugs out of their Brave New World (if they ever do). In the meantime there will be great suffering. So it is not all clear that the survival of industrial society would involve less suffering than the breakdown of that society would. Technology has gotten the human race into a fix from which there is not likely to be any easy escape. THE FUTURE 171. But suppose now that industrial society does survive the next several decade and that the bugs do eventually get worked out of the system, so that it functions smoothly. What kind of system will it be? We will consider several possibilities. 172. First let us postulate that the computer scientists succeed in developing intelligent machines that can do all things better that human beings can do them. In that case presumably all work will be done by vast, highly organized systems of machines and no human effort will be necessary. Either of two cases might occur. The machines might be permitted to make all of their own decisions without human oversight, or else human control over the machines might be retained. 173. If the machines are permitted to make all their own decisions, we can't make any conjectures as to the results, because it is impossible to guess how such machines might behave. We only point out that the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines. It might be argued that the human race would never be foolish enough to hand over all the power to the machines. But we are suggesting neither that the human race would voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the machines would willfully seize power. What we do suggest is that the human race might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on the machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the machines decisions. As society and the problems that face it become more and more complex and machines become more and more intelligent, people will let machines make more of their decision for them, simply because machine-made decisions will bring better result than man-made ones. Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be in effective control. People won't be able to just turn the machines off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide. 174. On the other hand it is possible that human control over the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car of his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite -- just as it is today, but with two difference. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless the may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consist of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone's physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes "treatment" to cure his "problem." Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or to make them "sublimate" their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they most certainly will not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals. 175. But suppose now that the computer scientists do not succeed in developing artificial intelligence, so that human work remains necessary. Even so, machines will take care of more and more of the simpler tasks so that there will be an increasing surplus of human workers at the lower levels of ability. (We see this happening already. There are many people who find it difficult or impossible to get work, because for intellectual or psychological reasons they cannot acquire the level of training necessary to make themselves useful in the present system.) On those who are employed, ever-increasing demands will be placed; They will need more and m ore training, more and more ability, and will have to be ever more reliable, conforming and docile, because they will be more and more like cells of a giant organism. Their tasks will be increasingly specialized so that their work will be, in a sense, out of touch with the real world, being concentrated on one tiny slice of reality. The system will have to use any means that I can, whether psychological or biological, to engineer people to be docile, to have the abilities that the system requires and to "sublimate" their drive for power into some specialized task. But the statement that the people of such a society will have to be docile may require qualification. The society may find competitiveness useful, provided that ways are found of directing competitiveness into channels that serve that needs of the system. We can imagine into channels that serve the needs of the system. We can imagine a future society in which there is endless competition for positions of prestige an power. But no more than a very few people will ever reach the top, where the only real power is (see end of paragraph 163). Very repellent is a society in which a person can satisfy his needs for power only by pushing large numbers of other people out of the way and depriving them of THEIR opportunity for power. 176. Once can envision scenarios that incorporate aspects of more than one of the possibilities that we have just discussed. For instance, it may be that machines will take over most of the work that is of real, practical importance, but that human beings will be kept busy by being given relatively unimportant work. It has been suggested, for example, that a great development of the service of industries might provide work for human beings. Thus people will would spend their time shinning each others shoes, driving each other around inn taxicab, making handicrafts for one another, waiting on each other's tables, etc. This seems to us a thoroughly contemptible way for the human race to end up, and we doubt that many people would find fulfilling lives in such pointless busy-work. They would seek other, dangerous outlets (drugs, , crime, "cults," hate groups) unless they were biological or psychologically engineered to adapt them to such a way of life. 177. Needless to day, the scenarios outlined above do not exhaust all the possibilities. They only indicate the kinds of outcomes that seem to us mots likely. But wee can envision no plausible scenarios that are any more palatable that the ones we've just described. It is overwhelmingly probable that if the industrial-technological system survives the next 40 to 100 years, it will by that time have developed certain general characteristics: Individuals (at least those of the "bourgeois" type, who are integrated into the system and make it run, and who therefore have all the power) will be more dependent than ever on large organizations; they will be more "socialized" that ever and their physical and mental qualities to a significant extent (possibly to a very great extent ) will be those that are engineered into them rather than being the results of chance (or of God's will, or whatever); and whatever may be left of wild nature will be reduced to remnants preserved for scientific study and kept under the supervision and management of scientists (hence it will no longer be truly wild). In the long run (say a few centuries from now) it is it is likely that neither the human race nor any other important organisms will exist as we know them today, because once you start modifying organisms through genetic engineering there is no reason to stop at any particular point, so that the modifications will probably continue until man and other organisms have been utterly transformed. 178. Whatever else may be the case, it is certain that technology is creating for human begins a new physical and social environment radically different from the spectrum of environments to which natural selection has adapted the human race physically and psychological. If man is not adjust to this new environment by being artificially re-engineered, then he will be adapted to it through a long an painful process of natural selection. The former is far more likely that the latter. 179. It would be better to dump the whole stinking system and take the consequences. STRATEGY 180. The technophiles are taking us all on an utterly reckless ride into the unknown. Many people understand something of what technological progress is doing to us yet take a passive attitude toward it because they think it is inevitable. But we (FC) don't think it is inevitable. We think it can be stopped, and we will give here some indications of how to go about stopping it. 181. As we stated in paragraph 166, the two main tasks for the present are to promote social stress and instability in industrial society and to develop and propagate an ideology that opposes technology and the industrial system. When the system becomes sufficiently stressed and unstable, a revolution against technology may be possible. The pattern would be similar to that of the French and Russian Revolutions. French society and Russian society, for several decades prior to their respective revolutions, showed increasing signs of stress and weakness. Meanwhile, ideologies were being developed that offered a new world view that was quite different from the old one. In the Russian case, revolutionaries were actively working to undermine the old order. Then, when the old system was put under sufficient additional stress (by financial crisis in France, by military defeat in Russia) it was swept away by revolution. What we propose in something along the same lines. 182. It will be objected that the French and Russian Revolutions were failures. But most revolutions have two goals. One is to destroy an old form of society and the other is to set up the new form of society envisioned by the revolutionaries. The French and Russian revolutionaries failed (fortunately!) to create the new kind of society of which they dreamed, but they were quite successful in destroying the existing form of society. 183. But an ideology, in order to gain enthusiastic support, must have a positive ideals well as a negative one; it must be FOR something as well as AGAINST something. The positive ideal that we propose is Nature. That is , WILD nature; those aspects of the functioning of the Earth and its living things that are independent of human management and free of human interference and control. And with wild nature we include human nature, by which we mean those aspects of the functioning of the human individual that are not subject to regulation by organized society but are products of chance, or free will, or God (depending on your religious or philosophical opinions). 184. Nature makes a perfect counter-ideal to technology for several reasons. Nature (that which is outside the power of the system) is the opposite of technology (which seeks to expand indefinitely the power of the system). Most people will agree that nature is beautiful; certainly it has tremendous popular appeal. The radical environmentalists ALREADY hold an ideology that exalts nature and opposes technology. [30] It is not necessary for the sake of nature to set up some chimerical utopia or any new kind of social order. Nature takes care of itself: It was a spontaneous creation that existed long before any human society, and for countless centuries many different kinds of human societies coexisted with nature without doing it an excessive amount of damage. Only with the Industrial Revolution did the effect of human society on nature become really devastating. To relieve the pressure on nature it is not necessary to create a special kind of social system, it is only necessary to get rid of industrial society. Granted, this will not solve all problems. Industrial society has already done tremendous damage to nature and it will take a very long time for the scars to heal. Besides, even pre-industrial societies can do significant damage to nature. Nevertheless, getting rid of industrial society will accomplish a great deal. It will relieve the worst of the pressure on nature so that the scars can begin to heal. It will remove the capacity of organized society to keep increasing its control over nature (including human nature). Whatever kind of society may exist after the demise of the industrial system, it is certain that most people will live close to nature, because in the absence of advanced technology there is not other way that people CAN live. To feed themselves they must be peasants or herdsmen or fishermen or hunter, etc., And, generally speaking, local autonomy should tend to increase, because lack of advanced technology and rapid communications will limit the capacity of governments or other large organizations to control local communities. 185. As for the negative consequences of eliminating industrial society -- well, you can't eat your cake and have it too. To gain one thing you have to sacrifice another. 186. Most people hate psychological conflict. For this reason they avoid doing any serious thinking about difficult social issues, and they like to have such issues presented to them in simple, black-and-white terms: THIS is all good and THAT is all bad. The revolutionary ideology should therefore be developed on two levels. 187. On the more sophisticated level the ideology should address itself to people who are intelligent, thoughtful and rational. The object should be to create a core of people who will be opposed to the industrial system on a rational, thought-out basis, with full appreciation of the problems and ambiguities involved, and of the price that has to be paid for getting rid of the system. It is particularly important to attract people of this type, as they are capable people and will be instrumental in influencing others. These people should be addressed on as rational a level as possible. Facts should never intentionally be distorted and intemperate language should be avoided. This does not mean that no appeal can be made to the emotions, but in making such appeal care should be taken to avoid misrepresenting the truth or doing anything else that would destroy the intellectual respectability of the ideology. 188. On a second level, the ideology should be propagated in a simplified form that will enable the unthinking majority to see the conflict of technology vs. nature in unambiguous terms. But even on this second level the ideology should not be expressed in language that is so cheap, intemperate or irrational that it alienates people of the thoughtful and rational type. Cheap, intemperate propaganda sometimes achieves impressive short-term gains, but it will be more advantageous in the long run to keep the loyalty of a small number of intelligently committed people than to arouse the passions of an unthinking, fickle mob who will change their attitude as soon as someone comes along with a better propaganda gimmick. However, propaganda of the rabble-rousing type may be necessary when the system is nearing the point of collapse and there is a final struggle between rival ideologies to determine which will become dominant when the old world-view goes under. 189. Prior to that final struggle, the revolutionaries should not expect to have a majority of people on their side. History is made by active, determined minorities, not by the majority, which seldom has a clear and consistent idea of what it really wants. Until the time comes for the final push toward revolution [31], the task of revolutionaries will be less to win the shallow support of the majority than to build a small core of deeply committed people. As for the majority, it will be enough to make them aware of the existence of the new ideology and remind them of it frequently; though of course it will be desirable to get majority support to the extent that this can be done without weakening the core of seriously committed people. 190. Any kind of social conflict helps to destabilize the system, but one should be careful about what kind of conflict one encourages. The line of conflict should be drawn between the mass of the people and the power-holding elite of industrial society (politicians, scientists, upper-level business executives, government officials, etc..). It should NOT be drawn between the revolutionaries and the mass of the people. For example, it would be bad strategy for the revolutionaries to condemn Americans for their habits of consumption. Instead, the average American should be portrayed as a victim of the advertising and marketing industry, which has suckered him into buying a lot of junk that he doesn't need and that is very poor compensation for his lost freedom. Either approach is consistent with the facts. It is merely a matter of attitude whether you blame the advertising industry for manipulating the public or blame the public for allowing itself to be manipulated. As a matter of strategy one should generally avoid blaming the public. 191. One should think twice before encouraging any other social conflict than that between the power-holding elite (which wields technology) and the general public (over which technology exerts its power). For one thing, other conflicts tend to distract attention from the important conflicts (between power-elite and ordinary people, between technology and nature); for another thing, other conflicts may actually tend to encourage technologization, because each side in such a conflict wants to use technological power to gain advantages over its adversary. This is clearly seen in rivalries between nations. It also appears in ethnic conflicts within nations. For example, in America many black leaders are anxious to gain power for African Americans by placing back individuals in the technological power-elite. They want there to be many black government officials, scientists, corporation executives and so forth. In this way they are helping to absorb the African American subculture into the technological system. Generally speaking, one should encourage only those social conflicts that can be fitted into the framework of the conflicts of power--elite vs. ordinary people, technology vs nature. 192. But the way to discourage ethnic conflict is NOT through militant advocacy of minority rights (see paragraphs 21, 29). Instead, the revolutionaries should emphasize that although minorities do suffer more or less disadvantage, this disadvantage is of peripheral significance. Our real enemy is the industrial-technological system, and in the struggle against the system, ethnic distinctions are of no importance. 193. The kind of revolution we have in mind will not necessarily involve an armed uprising against any government. It may or may not involve physical violence, but it will not be a POLITICAL revolution. Its focus will be on technology and economics, not politics. [32] 194. Probably the revolutionaries should even AVOID assuming political power, whether by legal or illegal means, until the industrial system is stressed to the danger point and has proved itself to be a failure in the eyes of most people. Suppose for example that some "green" party should win control of the United States Congress in an election. In order to avoid betraying or watering down their own ideology they would have to take vigorous measures to turn economic growth into economic shrinkage. To the average man the results would appear disastrous: There would be massive unemployment, shortages of commodities, etc. Even if the grosser ill effects could be avoided through superhumanly skillful management, still people would have to begin giving up the luxuries to which they have become addicted. Dissatisfaction would grow, the "green" party would be voted out of of fice and the revolutionaries would have suffered a severe setback. For this reason the revolutionaries should not try to acquire political power until the system has gotten itself into such a mess that any hardships will be seen as resulting from the failures of the industrial system itself and not from the policies of the revolutionaries. The revolution against technology will probably have to be a revolution by outsiders, a revolution from below and not from above. 195. The revolution must be international and worldwide. It cannot be carried out on a nation-by-nation basis. Whenever it is suggested that the United States, for example, should cut back on technological progress or economic growth, people get hysterical and start screaming that if we fall behind in technology the Japanese will get ahead of us. Holy robots The world will fly off its orbit if the Japanese ever sell more cars than we do! (Nationalism is a great promoter of technology.) More reasonably, it is argued that if the relatively democratic nations of the world fall behind in technology while nasty, dictatorial nations like China, Vietnam and North Korea continue to progress, eventually the dictators may come to dominate the world. That is why the industrial system should be attacked in all nations simultaneously, to the extent that this may be possible. True, there is no assurance that the industrial system can be destroyed at approximately the same time all over the world, and it is even conceivable that the attempt to overthrow the system could lead instead to the domination of the system by dictators. That is a risk that has to be taken. And it is worth taking, since the difference between a "democratic" industrial system and one controlled by dictators is small compared with the difference between an industrial system and a non-industrial one. [33] It might even be argued that an industrial system controlled by dictators would be preferable, because dictator-controlled systems usually have proved inefficient, hence they are presumably more likely to break down. Look at Cuba. 196. Revolutionaries might consider favoring measures that tend to bind the world economy into a unified whole. Free trade agreements like NAFTA and GATT are probably harmful to the environment in the short run, but in the long run they may perhaps be advantageous because they foster economic interdependence between nations. I will be eaier to destroy the industrial system on a worldwide basis if he world economy is so unified that its breakdown in any on major nation will lead to its breakdwon in al industrialized nations. the long run they may perhaps be advantageous because they foster economic interdependence between nations. It will be easier to destroy the industrial system on a worldwide basis if the world economy is so unified that its breakdown in any one major nation will lead to its breakdown in all industrialized nations. 197. Some people take the line that modern man has too much power, too much control over nature; they argue for a more passive attitude on the part of the human race. At best these people are expressing themselves unclearly, because they fail to distinguish between power for LARGE ORGANIZATIONS and power for INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS. It is a mistake to argue for powerlessness and passivity, because people NEED power. Modern man as a collective entity--that is, the industrial system--has immense power over nature, and we (FC) regard this as evil. But modern INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS OF INDIVIDUALS have far less power than primitive man ever did. Generally speaking, the vast power of "modern man" over nature is exercised not by individuals or small groups but by large organizations. To the extent that the average modern INDIVIDUAL can wield the power of technology, he is permitted to do so only within narrow limits and only under the supervision and control of the system. (You need a license for everything and with the license come rules and regulations). The individual has only those technological powers with which the system chooses to provide him. His PERSONAL power over nature is slight. 198. Primitive INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS actually had considerable power over nature; or maybe it would be better to say power WITHIN nature. When primitive man needed food he knew how to find and prepare edible roots, how to track game and take it with homemade weapons. He knew how to protect himself from heat, cold, rain, dangerous animals, etc. But primitive man did relatively little damage to nature because the COLLECTIVE power of primitive society was negligible compared to the COLLECTIVE power of industrial society. 199. Instead of arguing for powerlessness and passivity, one should argue that the power of the INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM should be broken, and that this will greatly INCREASE the power and freedom of INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS. 200. Until the industrial system has been thoroughly wrecked, the destruction of that system must be the revolutionaries' ONLY goal. Other goals would distract attention and energy from the main goal. More importantly, if the revolutionaries permit themselves to have any other goal than the destruction of technology, they will be tempted to use technology as a tool for reaching that other goal. If they give in to that temptation, they will fall right back into the technological trap, because modern technology is a unified, tightly organized system, so that, in order to retain SOME technology, one finds oneself obliged to retain MOST technology, hence one ends up sacrificing only token amounts of technology. 201. Suppose for example that the revolutionaries took "social justice" as a goal. Human nature being what it is, social justice would not come about spontaneously; it would have to be enforced. In order to enforce it the revolutionaries would have to retain central organization and control. For that they would need rapid long-distance transportation and communication, and therefore all the technology needed to support the transportation and communication systems. To feed and clothe poor people they would have to use agricultural and manufacturing technology. And so forth. So that the attempt to insure social justice would force them to retain most parts of the technological system. Not that we have anything against social justice, but it must not be allowed to interfere with the effort to get rid of the technological system. 202. It would be hopeless for revolutionaries to try to attack the system without using SOME modern technology. If nothing else they must use the communications media to spread their message. But they should use modern technology for only ONE purpose: to attack the technological system. 203. Imagine an alcoholic sitting with a barrel of wine in front of him. Suppose he starts saying to himself, "Wine isn't bad for you if used in moderation. Why, they say small amounts of wine are even good for you! It won't do me any harm if I take just one little drink..." Well you know what is going to happen. Never forget that the human race with technology is just like an alcoholic with a barrel of wine. 204. Revolutionaries should have as many children as they can. There is strong scientific evidence that social attitudes are to a significant extent inherited. No one suggests that a social attitude is a direct outcome of a person's genetic constitution, but it appears that personality traits tend, within the context of our society, to make a person more likely to hold this or that social attitude. Objections to these findings have been raised, but objections are feeble and seem to be ideologically motivated. In any event, no one denies that children tend on the average to hold social attitudes similar to those of their parents. From our point of view it doesn't matter all that much whether the attitudes are passed on genetically or through childhood training. In either case the ARE passed on. 205. The trouble is that many of the people who are inclined to rebel against the industrial system are also concerned about the population problems, hence they are apt to have few or no children. In this way they may be handing the world over to the sort of people who support or at least accept the industrial system. To insure the strength of the next generation of revolutionaries the present generation must reproduce itself abundantly. In doing so they will be worsening the population problem only slightly. And the most important problem is to get rid of the industrial system, because once the industrial system is gone the world's population necessarily will decrease (see paragraph 167); whereas, if the industrial system survives, it will continue developing new techniques of food production that may enable the world's population to keep increasing almost indefinitely. 206. With regard to revolutionary strategy, the only points on which we absolutely insist are that the single overriding goal must be the elimination of modern technology, and that no other goal can be allowed to compete with this one. For the rest, revolutionaries should take an empirical approach. If experience indicates that some of the recommendations made in the foregoing paragraphs are not going to give good results, then those recommendations should be discarded. TWO KINDS OF TECHNOLOGY 207. An argument likely to be raised against our proposed revolution is that it is bound to fail, because (it is claimed) throughout history technology has always progressed, never regressed, hence technological regression is impossible. But this claim is false. 208. We distinguish between two kinds of technology, which we will call small-scale technology and organization-dependent technology. Small-scale technology is technology that can be used by small-scale communities without outside assistance. Organization-dependent technology is technology that depends on large-scale social organization. We are aware of no significant cases of regression in small-scale technology. But organization-dependent technology DOES regress when the social organization on which it depends breaks down. Example: When the Roman Empire fell apart the Romans' small-scale technology survived because any clever village craftsman could build, for instance, a water wheel, any skilled smith could make steel by Roman methods, and so forth. But the Romans' organization-dependent technology DID regress. Their aqueducts fell into disrepair and were never rebuilt. Their techniques of road construction were lost. The Roman system of urban sanitation was forgotten, so that until rather recent times did the sanitation of European cities that of Ancient Rome. 209. The reason why technology has seemed always to progress is that, until perhaps a century or two before the Industrial Revolution, most technology was small-scale technology. But most of the technology developed since the Industrial Revolution is organization-dependent technology. Take the refrigerator for example. Without factory-made parts or the facilities of a post-industrial machine shop it would be virtually impossible for a handful of local craftsmen to build a refrigerator. If by some miracle they did succeed in building one it would be useless to them without a reliable source of electric power. So they would have to dam a stream and build a generator. Generators require large amounts of copper wire. Imagine trying to make that wire without modern machinery. And where would they get a gas suitable for refrigeration? It would be much easier to build an icehouse or preserve food by drying or picking, as was done before the invention of the refrigerator. 210. So it is clear that if the industrial system were once thoroughly broken down, refrigeration technology would quickly be lost. The same is true of other organization-dependent technology. And once this technology had been lost for a generation or so it would take centuries to rebuild it, just as it took centuries to build it the first time around. Surviving technical books would be few and scattered. An industrial society, if built from scratch without outside help, can only be built in a series of stages: You need tools to make tools to make tools to make tools ... . A long process of economic development and progress in social organization is required. And, even in the absence of an ideology opposed to technology, there is no reason to believe that anyone would be interested in rebuilding industrial society. The enthusiasm for "progress" is a phenomenon particular to the modern form of society, and it seems not to have existed prior to the 17th century or thereabouts. 211. In the late Middle Ages there were four main civilizations that were about equally "advanced": Europe, the Islamic world, India, and the Far East (China, Japan, Korea). Three of those civilizations remained more or less stable, and only Europe became dynamic. No one knows why Europe became dynamic at that time; historians have their theories but these are only speculation. At any rate, it is clear that rapid development toward a technological form of society occurs only under special conditions. So there is no reason to assume that long-lasting technological regression cannot be brought about. 212. Would society EVENTUALLY develop again toward an industrial-technological form? Maybe, but there is no use in worrying about it, since we can't predict or control events 500 or 1,000 years in the future. Those problems must be dealt with by the people who will live at that time. THE DANGER OF LEFTISM 213. Because of their need for rebellion and for membership in a movement, leftists or persons of similar psychological type are often unattracted to a rebellious or activist movement whose goals and membership are not initially leftist. The resulting influx of leftish types can easily turn a non-leftist movement into a leftist one, so that leftist goals replace or distort the original goals of the movement. 214. To avoid this, a movement that exalts nature and opposes technology must take a resolutely anti-leftist stance and must avoid all collaboration with leftists. Leftism is in the long run inconsistent with wild nature, with human freedom and with the elimination of modern technology. Leftism is collectivist; it seeks to bind together the entire world (both nature and the human race) into a unified whole. But this implies management of nature and of human life by organized society, and it requires advanced technology. You can't have a united world without rapid transportation and communication, you can't make all people love one another without sophisticated psychological techniques, you can't have a "planned society" without the necessary technological base. Above all, leftism is driven by the need for power, and the leftist seeks power on a collective basis, through identification with a mass movement or an organization. Leftism is unlikely ever to give up technology, because technology is too valuable a source of collective power. 215. The anarchist [34] too seeks power, but he seeks it on an individual or small-group basis; he wants individuals and small groups to be able to control the circumstances of their own lives. He opposes technology because it makes small groups dependent on large organizations. 216. Some leftists may seem to oppose technology, but they will oppose it only so long as they are outsiders and the technological system is controlled by non-leftists. If leftism ever becomes dominant in society, so that the technological system becomes a tool in the hands of leftists, they will enthusiastically use it and promote its growth. In doing this they will be repeating a pattern that leftism has shown again and again in the past. When the Bolsheviks in Russia were outsiders, they vigorously opposed censorship and the secret police, they advocated self-determination for ethnic minorities, and so forth; but as soon as they came into power themselves, they imposed a tighter censorship and created a more ruthless secret police than any that had existed under the tsars, and they oppressed ethnic minorities at least as much as the tsars had done. In the United States, a couple of decades ago when leftists were a minority in our universities, leftist professors were vigorous proponents of academic freedom, but today, in those universities where leftists have become dominant, they have shown themselves ready to take away from everyone else's academic freedom. (This is "political correctness.") The same will happen with leftists and technology: They will use it to oppress everyone else if they ever get it under their own control. 217. In earlier revolutions, leftists of the most power-hungry type, repeatedly, have first cooperated with non-leftist revolutionaries, as well as with leftists of a more libertarian inclination, and later have double-crossed them to seize power for themselves. Robespierre did this in the French Revolution, the Bolsheviks did it in the Russian Revolution, the communists did it in Spain in 1938 and Castro and his followers did it in Cuba. Given the past history of leftism, it would be utterly foolish for non-leftist revolutionaries today to collaborate with leftists. 218. Various thinkers have pointed out that leftism is a kind of religion. Leftism is not a religion in the strict sense because leftist doctrine does not postulate the existence of any supernatural being. But for the leftist, leftism plays a psychological role much like that which religion plays for some people. The leftist NEEDS to believe in leftism; it plays a vital role in his psychological economy. His beliefs are not easily modified by logic or facts. He has a deep conviction that leftism is morally Right with a capital R, and that he has not only a right but a duty to impose leftist morality on everyone. (However, many of the people we are referring to as "leftists" do not think of themselves as leftists and would not describe their system of beliefs as leftism. We use the term "leftism" because we don't know of any better words to designate the spectrum of related creeds that includes the feminist, gay rights, political correctness, etc., movements, and because these movements have a strong affinity with the old left. See paragraphs 227-230.) 219. Leftism is totalitarian force. Wherever leftism is in a position of power it tends to invade every private corner and force every thought into a leftist mold. In part this is because of the quasi-religious character of leftism; everything contrary to leftists beliefs represents Sin. More importantly, leftism is a totalitarian force because of the leftists' drive for power. The leftist seeks to satisfy his need for power through identification with a social movement and he tries to go through the power process by helping to pursue and attain the goals of the movement (see paragraph 83). But no matter how far the movement has gone in attaining its goals the leftist is never satisfied, because his activism is a surrogate activity (see paragraph 41). That is, the leftist's real motive is not to attain the ostensible goals of leftism; in reality he is motivated by the sense of power he gets from struggling for and then reaching a social goal.[35] Consequently the leftist is never satisfied with the goals he has already attained; his need for the power process leads him always to pursue some new goal. The leftist wants equal opportunities for minorities. When that is attained he insists on statistical equality of achievement by minorities. And as long as anyone harbors in some corner of his mind a negative attitude toward some minority, the leftist has to re-educated him. And ethnic minorities are not enough; no one can be allowed to have a negative attitude toward homosexuals, disabled people, fat people, old people, ugly people, and on and on and on. It's not enough that the public should be informed about the hazards of smoking; a warning has to be stamped on every package of cigarettes. Then cigarette advertising has to be restricted if not banned. The activists will never be satisfied until tobacco is outlawed, and after that it will be alco hot then junk food, etc. Activists have fought gross child abuse, which is reasonable. But now they want to stop all spanking. When they have done that they will want to ban something else they consider unwholesome, then another thing and then another. They will never be satisfied until they have complete control over all child rearing practices. And then they will move on to another cause. 220. Suppose you asked leftists to make a list of ALL the things that were wrong with society, and then suppose you instituted EVERY social change that they demanded. It is safe to say that within a couple of years the majority of leftists would find something new to complain about, some new social "evil" to correct because, once again, the leftist is motivated less by distress at society's ills than by the need to satisfy his drive for power by imposing his solutions on society. 221. Because of the restrictions placed on their thoughts and behavior by their high level of socialization, many leftists of the over-socialized type cannot pursue power in the ways that other people do. For them the drive for power has only one morally acceptable outlet, and that is in the struggle to impose their morality on everyone. 222. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, are True Believers in the sense of Eric Hoffer's book, "The True Believer." But not all True Believers are of the same psychological type as leftists. Presumably a truebelieving nazi, for instance is very different psychologically from a truebelieving leftist. Because of their capacity for single-minded devotion to a cause, True Believers are a useful, perhaps a necessary, ingredient of any revolutionary movement. This presents a problem with which we must admit we don't know how to deal. We aren't sure how to harness the energies of the True Believer to a revolution against technology. At present all we can say is that no True Believer will make a safe recruit to the revolution unless his commitment is exclusively to the destruction of technology. If he is committed also to another ideal, he may want to use technology as a tool for pursuing that other ideal (see paragraphs 220, 221). 223. Some readers may say, "This stuff about leftism is a lot of crap. I know John and Jane who are leftish types and they don't have all these totalitarian tendencies." It's quite true that many leftists, possibly even a numerical majority, are decent people who sincerely believe in tolerating others' values (up to a point) and wouldn't want to use high-handed methods to reach their social goals. Our remarks about leftism are not meant to apply to every individual leftist but to describe the general character of leftism as a movement. And the general character of a movement is not necessarily determined by the numerical proportions of the various kinds of people involved in the movement. 224. The people who rise to positions of power in leftist movements tend to be leftists of the most power-hungry type because power-hungry people are those who strive hardest to get into positions of power. Once the power-hungry types have captured control of the movement, there are many leftists of a gentler breed who inwardly disapprove of many of the actions of the leaders, but cannot bring themselves to oppose them. They NEED their faith in the movement, and because they cannot give up this faith they go along with the leaders. True, SOME leftists do have the guts to oppose the totalitarian tendencies that emerge, but they generally lose, because the power-hungry types are better organized, are more ruthless and Machiavellian and have taken care to build themselves a strong power base. 225. These phenomena appeared clearly in Russia and other countries that were taken over by leftists. Similarly, before the breakdown of communism in the USSR, leftish types in the West would seldom criticize that country. If prodded they would admit that the USSR did many wrong things, but then they would try to find excuses for the communists and begin talking about the faults of the West. They always opposed Western military resistance to communist aggression. Leftish types all over the world vigorously protested the U.S. military action in Vietnam, but when the USSR invaded Afghanistan they did nothing. Not that they approved of the Soviet actions; but because of their leftist faith, they just couldn't bear to put themselves in opposition to communism. Today, in those of our universities where "political correctness" has become dominant, there are probably many leftish types who privately disapprove of the suppression of academic freedom, but they go along with it anyway. 226. Thus the fact that many individual leftists are personally mild and fairly tolerant people by no means prevents leftism as a whole form having a totalitarian tendency. 227. Our discussion of leftism has a serious weakness. It is still far from clear what we mean by the word "leftist." There doesn't seem to be much we can do about this. Today leftism is fragmented into a whole spectrum of activist movements. Yet not all activist movements are leftist, and some activist movements (e.g.., radical environmentalism) seem to include both personalities of the leftist type and personalities of thoroughly un-leftist types who ought to know better than to collaborate with leftists. Varieties of leftists fade out gradually into varieties of non-leftists and we ourselves would often be hard-pressed to decide whether a given individual is or is not a leftist. To the extent that it is defined at all, our conception of leftism is defined by the discussion of it that we have given in this article, and we can only advise the reader to use his own judgment in deciding who is a leftist. 228. But it will be helpful to list some criteria for diagnosing leftism. These criteria cannot be applied in a cut and dried manner. Some individuals may meet some of the criteria without being leftists, some leftists may not meet any of the criteria. Again, you just have to use your judgment. 229. The leftist is oriented toward largescale collectivism. He emphasizes the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. He has a negative attitude toward individualism. He often takes a moralistic tone. He tends to be for gun control, for sex education and other psychologically "enlightened" educational methods, for planning, for affirmative action, for multiculturalism. He tends to identify with victims. He tends to be against competition and against violence, but he often finds excuses for those leftists who do commit violence. He is fond of using the common catch-phrases of the left like "racism, " "sexism, " "homophobia, " "capitalism," "imperialism," "neocolonialism " "genocide," "social change," "social justice," "social responsibility." Maybe the best diagnostic trait of the leftist is his tendency to sympathize with the following movements: feminism, gay rights, ethnic rights, disability rights, animal rights political correctness. Anyone who strongly sympathizes with ALL of these movements is almost certainly a leftist. [36] 230. The more dangerous leftists, that is, those who are most power-hungry, are often characterized by arrogance or by a dogmatic approach to ideology. However, the most dangerous leftists of all may be certain oversocialized types who avoid irritating displays of aggressiveness and refrain from advertising their leftism, but work quietly and unobtrusively to promote collectivist values, "enlightened" psychological techniques for socializing children, dependence of the individual on the system, and so forth. These crypto-leftists (as we may call them) approximate certain bourgeois types as far as practical action is concerned, but differ from them in psychology, ideology and motivation. The ordinary bourgeois tries to bring people under control of the system in order to protect his way of life, or he does so simply because his attitudes are conventional. The crypto-leftist tries to bring people under control of the system because he is a True Believer in a collectivistic ideology. The crypto-leftist is differentiated from the average leftist of the oversocialized type by the fact that his rebellious impulse is weaker and he is more securely socialized. He is differentiated from the ordinary well-socialized bourgeois by the fact that there is some deep lack within him that makes it necessary for him to devote himself to a cause and immerse himself in a collectivity. And maybe his (well-sublimated) drive for power is stronger than that of the average bourgeois. FINAL NOTE 231. Throughout this article we've made imprecise statements and statements that ought to have had all sorts of qualifications and reservations attached to them; and some of our statements may be flatly false. Lack of sufficient information and the need for brevity made it impossible for us to fomulate our assertions more precisely or add all the necessary qualifications. And of course in a discussion of this kind one must rely heavily on intuitive judgment, and that can sometimes be wrong. So we don't claim that this article expresses more than a crude approximation to the truth. 232. All the same we are reasonably confident that the general outlines of the picture we have painted here are roughly correct. We have portrayed leftism in its modern form as a phenomenon peculiar to our time and as a symptom of the disruption of the power process. But we might possibly be wrong about this. Oversocialized types who try to satisfy their drive for power by imposing their morality on everyone have certainly been around for a long time. But we THINK that the decisive role played by feelings of inferiority, low self-esteem, powerlessness, identification with victims by people who are not themselves victims, is a peculiarity of modern leftism. Identification with victims by people not themselves victims can be seen to some extent in 19th century leftism and early Christianity but as far as we can make out, symptoms of low self-esteem, etc., were not nearly so evident in these movements, or in any other movements, as they are in modern leftism. But we are not in a position to assert confidently that no such movements have existed prior to modern leftism. This is a significant question to which historians ought to give their attention. NOTES 1. (Paragraph 19) We are asserting that ALL, or even most, bullies and ruthless competitors suffer from feelings of inferiority. 2. (Paragraph 25) During the Victorian period many oversocialized people suffered from serious psychological problems as a result of repressing or trying to repress their sexual feelings. Freud apparently based his theories on people of this type. Today the focus of socialization has shifted from sex to aggression. 3. (Paragraph 27) Not necessarily including specialists in engineering "hard" sciences. 4. (Paragraph 28) There are many individuals of the middle and upper classes who resist some of these values, but usually their resistance is more or less covert. Such resistance appears in the mass media only to a very limited extent. The main thrust of propaganda in our society is in favor of the stated values. The main reasons why these values have become, so to speak, the official values of our society is that they are useful to the industrial system. Violence is discouraged because it disrupts the functioning of the system. Racism is discouraged because ethnic conflicts also disrupt the system, and discrimination wastes the talent of minority-group members who could be useful to the system. Poverty must be "cured" because the underclass causes problems for the system and contact with the underclass lowers the moral of the other classes. Women are encouraged to have careers because their talents are useful to the system and, more importantly because by having regular jobs women become better integrated into the system and tied directly to it rather than to their families. This helps to weaken family solidarity. (The leaders of the system say they want to strengthen the family, but they really mean is that they want the family to serve as an effective tool for socializing children in accord with the needs of the system. We argue in paragraphs 51,52 that the system cannot afford to let the family or other small-scale social groups be strong or autonomous.) 5. (Paragraph 42) It may be argued that the majority of people don't want to make their own decisions but want leaders to do their thinking for them. There is an element of truth in this. People like to make their own decisions in small matters, but making decisions on difficult, fundamental questions require facing up to psychological conflict, and most people hate psychological conflict. Hence they tend to lean on others in making difficult decisions. The majority of people are natural followers, not leaders, but they like to have direct personal access to their leaders and participate to some extent in making difficult decisions. At least to that degree they need autonomy. 6. (Paragraph 44) Some of the symptoms listed are similar to those shown by caged animals. To explain how these symptoms arise from deprivation with respect to the power process: Common-sense understanding of human nature tells one that lack of goals whose attainment requires effort leads to boredom and that boredom, long continued, often leads eventually to depression. Failure to obtain goals leads to frustration and lowering of self-esteem. Frustration leads to anger, anger to aggression, often in the form of spouse or child abuse. It has been shown that long-continued frustration commonly leads to depression and that depression tends to cause guilt, sleep disorders, eating disorders and bad feelings about oneself. Those who are tending toward depression seek pleasure as an antidote; hence insatiable hedonism and excessive sex, with perversions as a means of getting new kicks. Boredom too tends to cause excessive pleasure-seeking since, lacking other goals, people often use pleasure as a goal. See accompanying diagram. The foregoing is a simplification. Reality is more complex, and of course deprivation with respect to the power process is not the ONLY cause of the symptoms described. By the way, when we mention depression we do not necessarily mean depression that is severe enough to be treated by a psychiatrist. Often only mild forms of depression are involved. And when we speak of goals we do not necessarily mean long-term, thought out goals. For many or most people through much of human history, the goals of a hand-to-mouth existence (merely providing oneself and one's family with food from day to day) have been quite sufficient. 7. (Paragraph 52) A partial exception may be made for a few passive, inward looking groups, such as the Amish, which have little effect on the wider society. Apart from these, some genuine small-scale communities do exist in America today. For instance, youth gangs and "cults". Everyone regards them as dangerous, and so they are, because the members of these groups are loyal primarily to one another rather than to the system, hence the system cannot control them. Or take the gypsies. The gypsies commonly get away with theft and fraud because their loyalties are such that they can always get other gypsies to give testimony that "proves" their innocence. Obviously the system would be in serious trouble if too many people belonged to such groups. Some of the early-20th century Chinese thinkers who were concerned with modernizing China recognized the necessity of breaking down small-scale social groups such as the family: "(According to Sun Yat-sen) The Chinese people needed a new surge of patriotism, which would lead to a transfer of loyalty from the family to the state. . .(According to Li Huang) traditional attachments, particularly to the family had to be abandoned if nationalism were to develop to China." (Chester C. Tan, Chinese Political Thought in the Twentieth Century," page 125, page 297.) 8. (Paragraph 56) Yes, we know that 19th century America had its problems, and serious ones, but for the sake of breviety we have to express ourselves in simplified terms. 9. (Paragraph 61) We leave aside the underclass. We are speaking of the mainstream. 10. (Paragraph 62) Some social scientists, educators, "mental health" professionals and the like are doing their best to push the social drives into group 1 by trying to see to it that everyone has a satisfactory social life. 11. (Paragraphs 63, 82) Is the drive for endless material acquisition really an artificial creation of the advertising and marketing industry? Certainly there is no innate human drive for material acquisition. There have been many cultures in which people have desired little material wealth beyond what was necessary to satisfy their basic physical needs (Australian aborigines, traditional Mexican peasant culture, some African cultures). On the other hand there have also been many pre-industrial cultures in which material acquisition has played an important role. So we can't claim that today's acquisition-oriented culture is exclusively a creation of the advertising and marketing industry. But it is clear that the advertising and marketing industry has had an important part in creating that culture. The big corporations that spend millions on advertising wouldn't be spending that kind of money without solid proof that they were getting it back in increased sales. One member of FC met a sales manager a couple of years ago who was frank enough to tell him, "Our job is to make people buy things they don't want and don't need." He then described how an untrained novice could present people with the facts about a product, and make no sales at all, while a trained and experienced professional salesman would make lots of sales to the same people. This shows that people are manipulated into buying things they don't really want. 12. (Paragraph 64) The problem of purposelessness seems to have become less serious during the last 15 years or so, because people now feel less secure physically and economically than they did earlier, and the need for security provides them with a goal. But purposelessness has been replaced by frustration over the difficulty of attaining security. We emphasize the problem of purposelessness because the liberals and leftists would wish to solve our social problems by having society guarantee everyone's security; but if that could be done it would only bring back the problem of purposelessness. The real issue is not whether society provides well or poorly for people's security; the trouble is that people are dependent on the system for their security rather than having it in their own hands. This, by the way, is part of the reason why some people get worked up about the right to bear arms; possession of a gun puts that aspect of their security in their own hands. 13. (Paragraph 66) Conservatives' efforts to decrease the amount of government regulation are of little benefit to the average man. For one thing, only a fraction of the regulations can be eliminated because most regulations are necessary. For another thing, most of the deregulation affects business rather than the average individual, so that its main effect is to take power from the government and give it to private corporations. What this means for the average man is that government interference in his life is replaced by interference from big corporations, which may be permitted, for example, to dump more chemicals that get into his water supply and give him cancer. The conservatives are just taking the average man for a sucker, exploiting his resentment of Big Government to promote the power of Big Business. 14. (Paragraph 73) When someone approves of the purpose for which propaganda is being used in a given case, he generally calls it "education" or applies to it some similar euphemism. But propaganda is propaganda regardless of the purpose for which it is used. 15. (Paragraph 83) We are not expressing approval or disapproval of the Panama invasion. We only use it to illustrate a point. 16. (Paragraph 95) When the American colonies were under British rule there were fewer and less effective legal guarantees of freedom than there were after the American Constitution went into effect, yet there was more personal freedom in pre-industrial America, both before and after the War of Independence, than there was after the Industrial Revolution took hold in this country. We quote from "Violence in America: Historical and Comparative perspectives," edited by Hugh Davis Graham and Ted Robert Gurr, Chapter 12 by Roger Lane, pages 476-478: "The progressive heightening of standards of property, and with it the increasing reliance on official law enforcement (in 19th century America). . .were common to the whole society. . .[T]he change in social behavior is so long term and so widespread as to suggest a connection with the most fundamental of contemporary social processes; that of industrial urbanization itself. . ."Massachusetts in 1835 had a population of some 660,940, 81 percent rural, overwhelmingly preindustrial and native born. It's citizens were used to considerable personal freedom. Whether teamsters, farmers or artisans, they were all accustomed to setting their own schedules, and the nature of their work made them physically dependent on each other. . .Individual problems, sins or even crimes, were not generally cause for wider social concern. . ."But the impact of the twin movements to the city and to the factory, both just gathering force in 1835, had a progressive effect on personal behavior throughout the 19th century and into the 20th. The factory demanded regularity of behavior, a life governed by obedience to the rhythms of clock and calendar, the demands of foreman and supervisor. In the city or town, the needs of living in closely packed neighborhoods inhibited many actions previously unobjectionable. Both blue- and white-collar employees in larger establishments were mutually dependent on their fellows. as one man's work fit into another's, so one man's business was no longer his own. "The results of the new organization of life and work were apparent by 1900, when some 76 percent of the 2,805,346 inhabitants of Massachusetts were classified as urbanites. Much violent or irregular behavior which had been tolerable in a casual, independent society was no longer acceptable in the more formalized, cooperative atmosphere of the later period. . .The move to the cities had, in short, produced a more tractable, more socialized, more 'civilized' generation than its predecessors." 17. (Paragraph 117) Apologists for the system are fond of citing cases in which elections have been decided by one or two votes, but such cases are rare. 18. (Paragraph 119) "Today, in technologically advanced lands, men live very similar lives in spite of geographical, religious and political differences. The daily lives of a Christian bank clerk in Chicago, a Buddhist bank clerk in Tokyo, a Communist bank clerk in Moscow are far more alike than the life any one of them is like that of any single man who lived a thousand years ago. These similarities are the result of a common technology. . ." L. Sprague de Camp, "The Ancient Engineers," Ballentine edition, page 17. The lives of the three bank clerks are not IDENTICAL. Ideology does have SOME effect. But all technological societies, in order to survive, must evolve along APPROXIMATELY the same trajectory. 19. (Paragraph 123) Just think an irresponsible genetic engineer might create a lot of terrorists. 20. (Paragraph 124) For a further example of undesirable consequences of medical progress, suppose a reliable cure for cancer is discovered. Even if the treatment is too expensive to be available to any but the elite, it will greatly reduce their incentive to stop the escape of carcinogens into the environment. 21. (Paragraph 128) Since many people may find paradoxical the notion that a large number of good things can add up to a bad thing, we will illustrate with an analogy. Suppose Mr. A is playing chess with Mr. B. Mr. C, a Grand Master, is looking over Mr. A's shoulder. Mr. A of course wants to win his game, so if Mr. C points out a good move for him to make, he is doing Mr. A a favor. But suppose now that Mr. C tells Mr. A how to make ALL of his moves. In each particular instance he does Mr. A a favor by showing him his best move, but by making ALL of his moves for him he spoils the game, since there is not point in Mr. A's playing the game at all if someone else makes all his moves. The situation of modern man is analogous to that of Mr. A. The system makes an individual's life easier for him in innumerable ways, but in doing so it deprives him of control over his own fate. 22. (Paragraph 137) Here we are considering only the conflict of values within the mainstream. For the sake of simplicity we leave out of the picture "outsider" values like the idea that wild nature is more important than human economic welfare. 23. (Paragraph 137) Self-interest is not necessarily MATERIAL self-interest. It can consist in fulfillment of some psychological need, for example, by promoting one's own ideology or religion. 24. (Paragraph 139) A qualification: It is in the interest of the system to permit a certain prescribed degree of freedom in some areas. For example, economic freedom (with suitable limitations and restraints) has proved effective in promoting economic growth. But only planned, circumscribed, limited freedom is in the interest of the system. The individual must always be kept on a leash, even if the leash is sometimes long( see paragraphs 94, 97). 25. (Paragraph 143) We don't mean to suggest that the efficiency or the potential for survival of a society has always been inversely proportional to the amount of pressure or discomfort to which the society subjects people. That is certainly not the case. There is good reason to believe that many primitive societies subjected people to less pressure than the European society did, but European society proved far more efficient than any primitive society and always won out in conflicts with such societies because of the advantages conferred by technology. 26. (Paragraph 147) If you think that more effective law enforcement is unequivocally good because it suppresses crime, then remember that crime as defined by the system is not necessarily what YOU would call crime. Today, smoking marijuana is a "crime," and, in some places in the U.S.., so is possession of ANY firearm, registered or not, may be made a crime, and the same thing may happen with disapproved methods of child-rearing, such as spanking. In some countries, expression of dissident political opinions is a crime, and there is no certainty that this will never happen in the U.S., since no constitution or political system lasts forever. If a society needs a large, powerful law enforcement establishment, then there is something gravely wrong with that society; it must be subjecting people to severe pressures if so many refuse to follow the rules, or follow them only because forced. Many societies in the past have gotten by with little or no formal law-enforcement. 27. (Paragraph 151) To be sure, past societies have had means of influencing behavior, but these have been primitive and of low effectiveness compared with the technological means that are now being developed. 28. (Paragraph 152) However, some psychologists have publicly expressed opinions indicating their contempt for human freedom. And the mathematician Claude Shannon was quoted in Omni (August 1987) as saying, "I visualize a time when we will be to robots what dogs are to humans, and I'm rooting for the machines." 29. (Paragraph 154) This is no science fiction! After writing paragraph 154 we came across an article in Scientific American according to which scientists are actively developing techniques for identifying possible future criminals and for treating them by a combination of biological and psychological means. Some scientists advocate compulsory application of the treatment, which may be available in the near future. (See "Seeking the Criminal Element", by W. Wayt Gibbs, Scientific American, March 1995.) Maybe you think this is OK because the treatment would be applied to those who might become drunk drivers (they endanger human life too), then perhaps to peel who spank their children, then to environmentalists who sabotage logging equipment, eventually to anyone whose behavior is inconvenient for the system. 30. (Paragraph 184) A further advantage of nature as a counter-ideal to technology is that, in many people, nature inspires the kind of reverence that is associated with religion, so that nature could perhaps be idealized on a religious basis. It is true that in many societies religion has served as a support and justification for the established order, but it is also true that religion has often provided a basis for rebellion. Thus it may be useful to introduce a religious element into the rebellion against technology, the more so because Western society today has no strong religious foundation. Religion, nowadays either is used as cheap and transparent support for narrow, short-sighted selfishness (some conservatives use it this way), or even is cynically exploited to make easy money (by many evangelists), or has degenerated into crude irrationalism (fundamentalist Protestant sects, "cults"), or is simply stagnant (Catholicism, main-line Protestantism). The nearest thing to a strong, widespread, dynamic religion that the West has seen in recent times has been the quasi-religion of leftism, but leftism today is fragmented and has no clear, unified inspiring goal. Thus there is a religious vaccuum in our society that could perhaps be filled by a religion focused on nature in opposition to technology. But it would be a mistake to try to concoct artificially a religion to fill this role. Such an invented religion would probably be a failure. Take the "Gaia" religion for example. Do its adherents REALLY believe in it or are they just play-acting? If they are just play-acting their religion will be a flop in the end. It is probably best not to try to introduce religion into the conflict of nature vs. technology unless you REALLY believe in that religion yourself and find that it arouses a deep, strong, genuine response in many other people. 31. (Paragraph 189) Assuming that such a final push occurs. Conceivably the industrial system might be eliminated in a somewhat gradual or piecemeal fashion. (see paragraphs 4, 167 and Note 4). 32. (Paragraph 193) It is even conceivable (remotely) that the revolution might consist only of a massive change of attitudes toward technology resulting in a relatively gradual and painless disintegration of the industrial system. But if this happens we'll be very lucky. It's far more probably that the transition to a nontechnological society will be very difficult and full of conflicts and disasters. 33. (Paragraph 195) The economic and technological structure of a society are far more important than its political structure in determining the way the average man lives (see paragraphs 95, 119 and Notes 16, 18). 34. (Paragraph 215) This statement refers to our particular brand of anarchism. A wide variety of social attitudes have been called "anarchist," and it may be that many who consider themselves anarchists would not accept our statement of paragraph 215. It should be noted, by the way, that there is a nonviolent anarchist movement whose members probably would not accept FC as anarchist and certainly would not approve of FC's violent methods. 35. (Paragraph 219) Many leftists are motivated also by hostility, but the hostility probably results in part from a frustrated need for power. 36. (Paragraph 229) It is important to understand that we mean someone who sympathizes with these MOVEMENTS as they exist today in our society. One who believes that women, homosexuals, etc., should have equal rights is not necessarily a leftist. The feminist, gay rights, etc., movements that exist in our society have the particular ideological tone that characterizes leftism, and if one believes, for example, that women should have equal rights it does not necessarily follow that one must sympathize with the feminist movement as it exists today. If copyright problems make it impossible for this long quotation to be printed, then please change Note 16 to read as follows: 16. (Paragraph 95) When the American colonies were under British rule there were fewer and less effective legal guarantees of freedom than there were after the American Constitution went into effect, yet there was more personal freedom in pre-industrial America, both before and after the War of Independence, than there was after the Industrial Revolution took hold in this country. In "Violence in America: Historical and Comparative Perspectives," edited by Hugh Davis Graham and Ted Robert Gurr, Chapter 12 by Roger Lane, it is explained how in pre-industrial America the average person had greater independence and autonomy than he does today, and how the process of industrialization necessarily led to the restriction of personal freedom. _________________________________________________________________
  (Source: well.sf.ca.us ) Unabomber's Manifesto The following is full text of the Unabomber's Manifesto. _________________________________________________________________ INTRODUCTION 1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in "advanced" countries, but they have destabilized society, have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The continued development of technology will worsen the situation. It will certainly subject human beings to greater indignities and inflict greater damage on the natural world, it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological suffering, and it may lead to increased physical suffering even in "advanced" countries. 2. The industrial-technological system may survive or it may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but only after passing through a long and very painful period of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing human beings and many other living organisms to engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine. Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of dignity and autonomy. 3. If the system breaks down the consequences will still be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is to break down it had best break down sooner rather than later. 4. We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial system. This revolution may or may not make use of violence: it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. We can't predict any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the measures that those who hate the industrial system should take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society. 5. In this article we give attention to only some of the negative developments that have grown out of the industrial-technological system. Other such developments we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant. For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion to areas that have received insufficient public attention or in which we have something new to say. For example, since there are well-developed environmental and wilderness movements, we have written very little about environmental degradation or the destruction of wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly important. THE PSYCHOLOGY OF MODERN LEFTISM 6. Almost everyone will agree that we live in a deeply troubled society. One of the most widespread manifestations of the craziness of our world is leftism, so a discussion of the psychology of leftism can serve as an introduction to the discussion of the problems of modern society in general. 7. But what is leftism? During the first half of the 20th century leftism could have been practically identified with socialism. Today the movement is fragmented and it is not clear who can properly be called a leftist. When we speak of leftists in this article we have in mind mainly socialists, collectivists, "politically correct" types, feminists, gay and disability activists, animal rights activists and the like. But not everyone who is associated with one of these movements is a leftist. What we are trying to get at in discussing leftism is not so much a movement or an ideology as a psychological type, or rather a collection of related types. Thus, what we mean by "leftism" will emerge more clearly in the course of our discussion of leftist psychology (Also, see paragraphs 227-230.) 8. Even so, our conception of leftism will remain a good deal less clear than we would wish, but there doesn't seem to be any remedy for this. All we are trying to do is indicate in a rough and approximate way the two psychological tendencies that we believe are the main driving force of modern leftism. We by no means claim to be telling the WHOLE truth about leftist psychology. Also, our discussion is meant to apply to modern leftism only. We leave open the question of the extent to which our discussion could be applied to the leftists of the 19th and early 20th century. 9. The two psychological tendencies that underlie modern leftism we call "feelings of inferiority" and "oversocialization." Feelings of inferiority are characteristic of modern leftism as a whole, while oversocialization is characteristic only of a certain segment of modern leftism; but this segment is highly influential. FEELINGS OF INFERIORITY 10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism. 11. When someone interprets as derogatory almost anything that is said about him (or about groups with whom he identifies) we conclude that he has inferiority feelings or low self-esteem. This tendency is pronounced among minority rights advocates, whether or not they belong to the minority groups whose rights they defend. They are hypersensitive about the words used to designate minorities. The terms "negro," "oriental," "handicapped" or "chick" for an African, an Asian, a disabled person or a woman originally had no derogatory connotation. "Broad" and "chick" were merely the feminine equivalents of "guy," "dude" or "fellow." The negative connotations have been attached to these terms by the activists themselves. Some animal rights advocates have gone so far as to reject the word "pet" and insist on its replacement by "animal companion." Leftist anthropologists go to great lengths to avoid saying anything about primitive peoples that could conceivably be interpreted as negative. They want to replace the word "primitive" by "nonliterate." They seem almost paranoid about anything that might suggest that any primitive culture is inferior to our own. (We do not mean to imply that primitive cultures ARE inferior to ours. We merely point out the hypersensitivity of leftish anthropologists.) 12. Those who are most sensitive about "politically incorrect" terminology are not the average black ghetto-dweller, Asian immigrant, abused woman or disabled person, but a minority of activists, many of whom do not even belong to any "oppressed" group but come from privileged strata of society. Political correctness has its stronghold among university professors, who have secure employment with comfortable salaries, and the majority of whom are heterosexual, white males from middle-class families. 13. Many leftists have an intense identification with the problems of groups that have an image of being weak (women), defeated (American Indians), repellent (homosexuals), or otherwise inferior. The leftists themselves feel that these groups are inferior. They would never admit it to themselves that they have such feelings, but it is precisely because they do see these groups as inferior that they identify with their problems. (We do not suggest that women, Indians, etc., ARE inferior; we are only making a point about leftist psychology). 14. Feminists are desperately anxious to prove that women are as strong as capable as men. Clearly they are nagged by a fear that women may NOT be as strong and as capable as men. 15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful. 16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser. 17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment. 18. Modern leftist philosophers tend to dismiss reason, science, objective reality and to insist that everything is culturally relative. It is true that one can ask serious questions about the foundations of scientific knowledge and about how, if at all, the concept of objective reality can be defined. But it is obvious that modern leftist philosophers are not simply cool-headed logicians systematically analyzing the foundations of knowledge. They are deeply involved emotionally in their attack on truth and reality. They attack these concepts because of their own psychological needs. For one thing, their attack is an outlet for hostility, and, to the extent that it is successful, it satisfies the drive for power. More importantly, the leftist hates science and rationality because they classify certain beliefs as true (i.e., successful, superior) and other beliefs as false (i.e. failed, inferior). The leftist's feelings of inferiority run so deep that he cannot tolerate any classification of some things as successful or superior and other things as failed or inferior. This also underlies the rejection by many leftists of the concept of mental illness and of the utility of IQ tests. Leftists are antagonistic to genetic explanations of human abilities or behavior because such explanations tend to make some persons appear superior or inferior to others. Leftists prefer to give society the credit or blame for an individual's ability or lack of it. Thus if a person is "inferior" it is not his fault, but society's, because he has not been brought up properly. 19. The leftist is not typically the kind of person whose feelings of inferiority make him a braggart, an egotist, a bully, a self-promoter, a ruthless competitor. This kind of person has not wholly lost faith in himself. He has a deficit in his sense of power and self-worth, but he can still conceive of himself as having the capacity to be strong, and his efforts to make himself strong produce his unpleasant behavior. [1] But the leftist is too far gone for that. His feelings of inferiority are so ingrained that he cannot conceive of himself as individually strong and valuable. Hence the collectivism of the leftist. He can feel strong only as a member of a large organization or a mass movement with which he identifies himself. 20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait. 21. Leftists may claim that their activism is motivated by compassion or by moral principle, and moral principle does play a role for the leftist of the oversocialized type. But compassion and moral principle cannot be the main motives for leftist activism. Hostility is too prominent a component of leftist behavior; so is the drive for power. Moreover, much leftist behavior is not rationally calculated to be of benefit to the people whom the leftists claim to be trying to help. For example, if one believes that affirmative action is good for black people, does it make sense to demand affirmative action in hostile or dogmatic terms? Obviously it would be more productive to take a diplomatic and conciliatory approach that would make at least verbal and symbolic concessions to white people who think that affirmative action discriminates against them. But leftist activists do not take such an approach because it would not satisfy their emotional needs. Helping black people is not their real goal. Instead, race problems serve as an excuse for them to express their own hostility and frustrated need for power. In doing so they actually harm black people, because the activists' hostile attitude toward the white majority tends to intensify race hatred. 22. If our society had no social problems at all, the leftists would have to INVENT problems in order to provide themselves with an excuse for making a fuss. 23. We emphasize that the foregoing does not pretend to be an accurate description of everyone who might be considered a leftist. It is only a rough indication of a general tendency of leftism. OVERSOCIALIZATION 24. Psychologists use the term "socialization" to designate the process by which children are trained to think and act as society demands. A person is said to be well socialized if he believes in and obeys the moral code of his society and fits in well as a functioning part of that society. It may seem senseless to say that many leftists are over-socialized, since the leftist is perceived as a rebel. Nevertheless, the position can be defended. Many leftists are not such rebels as they seem. 25. The moral code of our society is so demanding that no one can think, feel and act in a completely moral way. For example, we are not supposed to hate anyone, yet almost everyone hates somebody at some time or other, whether he admits it to himself or not. Some people are so highly socialized that the attempt to think, feel and act morally imposes a severe burden on them. In order to avoid feelings of guilt, they continually have to deceive themselves about their own motives and find moral explanations for feelings and actions that in reality have a non-moral origin. We use the term "oversocialized" to describe such people. [2] 26. Oversocialization can lead to low self-esteem, a sense of powerlessness, defeatism, guilt, etc. One of the most important means by which our society socializes children is by making them feel ashamed of behavior or speech that is contrary to society's expectations. If this is overdone, or if a particular child is especially susceptible to such feelings, he ends by feeling ashamed of HIMSELF. Moreover the thought and the behavior of the oversocialized person are more restricted by society's expectations than are those of the lightly socialized person. The majority of people engage in a significant amount of naughty behavior. They lie, they commit petty thefts, they break traffic laws, they goof off at work, they hate someone, they say spiteful things or they use some underhanded trick to get ahead of the other guy. The oversocialized person cannot do these things, or if he does do them he generates in himself a sense of shame and self-hatred. The oversocialized person cannot even experience, without guilt, thoughts or feelings that are contrary to the accepted morality; he cannot think "unclean" thoughts. And socialization is not just a matter of morality; we are socialized to confirm to many norms of behavior that do not fall under the heading of morality. Thus the oversocialized person is kept on a psychological leash and spends his life running on rails that society has laid down for him. In many oversocialized people this results in a sense of constraint and powerlessness that can be a severe hardship. We suggest that oversocialization is among the more serious cruelties that human beings inflict on one another. 27. We argue that a very important and influential segment of the modern left is oversocialized and that their oversocialization is of great importance in determining the direction of modern leftism. Leftists of the oversocialized type tend to be intellectuals or members of the upper-middle class. Notice that university intellectuals (3) constitute the most highly socialized segment of our society and also the most left-wing segment. 28. The leftist of the oversocialized type tries to get off his psychological leash and assert his autonomy by rebelling. But usually he is not strong enough to rebel against the most basic values of society. Generally speaking, the goals of today's leftists are NOT in conflict with the accepted morality. On the contrary, the left takes an accepted moral principle, adopts it as its own, and then accuses mainstream society of violating that principle. Examples: racial equality, equality of the sexes, helping poor people, peace as opposed to war, nonviolence generally, freedom of expression, kindness to animals. More fundamentally, the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. All these have been deeply rooted values of our society (or at least of its middle and upper classes (4) for a long time. These values are explicitly or implicitly expressed or presupposed in most of the material presented to us by the mainstream communications media and the educational system. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, usually do not rebel against these principles but justify their hostility to society by claiming (with some degree of truth) that society is not living up to these principles. 29. Here is an illustration of the way in which the oversocialized leftist shows his real attachment to the conventional attitudes of our society while pretending to be in rebellion against it. Many leftists push for affirmative action, for moving black people into high-prestige jobs, for improved education in black schools and more money for such schools; the way of life of the black "underclass" they regard as a social disgrace. They want to integrate the black man into the system, make him a business executive, a lawyer, a scientist just like upper-middle-class white people. The leftists will reply that the last thing they want is to make the black man into a copy of the white man; instead, they want to preserve African American culture. But in what does this preservation of African American culture consist? It can hardly consist in anything more than eating black-style food, listening to black-style music, wearing black-style clothing and going to a black-style church or mosque. In other words, it can express itself only in superficial matters. In all ESSENTIAL respects more leftists of the oversocialized type want to make the black man conform to white, middle-class ideals. They want to make him study technical subjects, become an executive or a scientist, spend his life climbing the status ladder to prove that black people are as good as white. They want to make black fathers "responsible." they want black gangs to become nonviolent, etc. But these are exactly the values of the industrial-technological system. The system couldn't care less what kind of music a man listens to, what kind of clothes he wears or what religion he believes in as long as he studies in school, holds a respectable job, climbs the status ladder, is a "responsible" parent, is nonviolent and so forth. In effect, however much he may deny it, the oversocialized leftist wants to integrate the black man into the system and make him adopt its values. 30. We certainly do not claim that leftists, even of the oversocialized type, NEVER rebel against the fundamental values of our society. Clearly they sometimes do. Some oversocialized leftists have gone so far as to rebel against one of modern society's most important principles by engaging in physical violence. By their own account, violence is for them a form of "liberation." In other words, by committing violence they break through the psychological restraints that have been trained into them. Because they are oversocialized these restraints have been more confining for them than for others; hence their need to break free of them. But they usually justify their rebellion in terms of mainstream values. If they engage in violence they claim to be fighting against racism or the like. 31. We realize that many objections could be raised to the foregoing thumb-nail sketch of leftist psychology. The real situation is complex, and anything like a complete description of it would take several volumes even if the necessary data were available. We claim only to have indicated very roughly the two most important tendencies in the psychology of modern leftism. 32. The problems of the leftist are indicative of the problems of our society as a whole. Low self-esteem, depressive tendencies and defeatism are not restricted to the left. Though they are especially noticeable in the left, they are widespread in our society. And today's society tries to socialize us to a greater extent than any previous society. We are even told by experts how to eat, how to exercise, how to make love, how to raise our kids and so forth. THE POWER PROCESS 33. Human beings have a need (probably based in biology) for something that we will call the "power process." This is closely related to the need for power (which is widely recognized) but is not quite the same thing. The power process has four elements. The three most clear-cut of these we call goal, effort and attainment of goal. (Everyone needs to have goals whose attainment requires effort, and needs to succeed in attaining at least some of his goals.) The fourth element is more difficult to define and may not be necessary for everyone. We call it autonomy and will discuss it later (paragraphs 42-44). 34. Consider the hypothetical case of a man who can have anything he wants just by wishing for it. Such a man has power, but he will develop serious psychological problems. At first he will have a lot of fun, but by and by he will become acutely bored and demoralized. Eventually he may become clinically depressed. History shows that leisured aristocracies tend to become decadent. This is not true of fighting aristocracies that have to struggle to maintain their power. But leisured, secure aristocracies that have no need to exert themselves usually become bored, hedonistic and demoralized, even though they have power. This shows that power is not enough. One must have goals toward which to exercise one's power. 35. Everyone has goals; if nothing else, to obtain the physical necessities of life: food, water and whatever clothing and shelter are made necessary by the climate. But the leisured aristocrat obtains these things without effort. Hence his boredom and demoralization. 36. Nonattainment of important goals results in death if the goals are physical necessities, and in frustration if nonattainment of the goals is compatible with survival. Consistent failure to attain goals throughout life results in defeatism, low self-esteem or depression. 37. Thus, in order to avoid serious psychological problems, a human being needs goals whose attainment requires effort, and he must have a reasonable rate of success in attaining his goals. SURROGATE ACTIVITIES 38. But not every leisured aristocrat becomes bored and demoralized. For example, the emperor Hirohito, instead of sinking into decadent hedonism, devoted himself to marine biology, a field in which he became distinguished. When people do not have to exert themselves to satisfy their physical needs they often set up artificial goals for themselves. In many cases they then pursue these goals with the same energy and emotional involvement that they otherwise would have put into the search for physical necessities. Thus the aristocrats of the Roman Empire had their literary pretentions; many European aristocrats a few centuries ago invested tremendous time and energy in hunting, though they certainly didn't need the meat; other aristocracies have competed for status through elaborate displays of wealth; and a few aristocrats, like Hirohito, have turned to science. 39. We use the term "surrogate activity" to designate an activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that people set up for themselves merely in order to have some goal to work toward, or let us say, merely for the sake of the "fulfillment" that they get from pursuing the goal. Here is a rule of thumb for the identification of surrogate activities. Given a person who devotes much time and energy to the pursuit of goal X, ask yourself this: If he had to devote most of his time and energy to satisfying his biological needs, and if that effort required him to use his physical and mental facilities in a varied and interesting way, would he feel seriously deprived because he did not attain goal X? If the answer is no, then the person's pursuit of a goal X is a surrogate activity. Hirohito's studies in marine biology clearly constituted a surrogate activity, since it is pretty certain that if Hirohito had had to spend his time working at interesting non-scientific tasks in order to obtain the necessities of life, he would not have felt deprived because he didn't know all about the anatomy and life-cycles of marine animals. On the other hand the pursuit of sex and love (for example) is not a surrogate activity, because most people, even if their existence were otherwise satisfactory, would feel deprived if they passed their lives without ever having a relationship with a member of the opposite sex. (But pursuit of an excessive amount of sex, more than one really needs, can be a surrogate activity.) 40. In modern industrial society only minimal effort is necessary to satisfy one's physical needs. It is enough to go through a training program to acquire some petty technical skill, then come to work on time and exert very modest effort needed to hold a job. The only requirements are a moderate amount of intelligence, and most of all, simple OBEDIENCE. If one has those, society takes care of one from cradle to grave. (Yes, there is an underclass that cannot take physical necessities for granted, but we are speaking here of mainstream society.) Thus it is not surprising that modern society is full of surrogate activities. These include scientific work, athletic achievement, humanitarian work, artistic and literary creation, climbing the corporate ladder, acquisition of money and material goods far beyond the point at which they cease to give any additional physical satisfaction, and social activism when it addresses issues that are not important for the activist personally, as in the case of white activists who work for the rights of nonwhite minorities. These are not always pure surrogate activities, since for many people they may be motivated in part by needs other than the need to have some goal to pursue. Scientific work may be motivated in part by a drive for prestige, artistic creation by a need to express feelings, militant social activism by hostility. But for most people who pursue them, these activities are in large part surrogate activities. For example, the majority of scientists will probably agree that the "fulfillment" they get from their work is more important than the money and prestige they earn. 41. For many if not most people, surrogate activities are less satisfying than the pursuit of real goals ( that is, goals that people would want to attain even if their need for the power process were already fulfilled). One indication of this is the fact that, in many or most cases, people who are deeply involved in surrogate activities are never satisfied, never at rest. Thus the money-maker constantly strives for more and more wealth. The scientist no sooner solves one problem than he moves on to the next. The long-distance runner drives himself to run always farther and faster. Many people who pursue surrogate activities will say that they get far more fulfillment from these activities than they do from the "mundane" business of satisfying their biological needs, but that it is because in our society the effort needed to satisfy the biological needs has been reduced to triviality. More importantly, in our society people do not satisfy their biological needs AUTONOMOUSLY but by functioning as parts of an immense social machine. In contrast, people generally have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities. have a great deal of autonomy in pursuing their surrogate activities. AUTONOMY 42. Autonomy as a part of the power process may not be necessary for every individual. But most people need a greater or lesser degree of autonomy in working toward their goals. Their efforts must be undertaken on their own initiative and must be under their own direction and control. Yet most people do not have to exert this initiative, direction and control as single individuals. It is usually enough to act as a member of a SMALL group. Thus if half a dozen people discuss a goal among themselves and make a successful joint effort to attain that goal, their need for the power process will be served. But if they work under rigid orders handed down from above that leave them no room for autonomous decision and initiative, then their need for the power process will not be served. The same is true when decisions are made on a collective bases if the group making the collective decision is so large that the role of each individual is insignificant [5] 43. It is true that some individuals seem to have little need for autonomy. Either their drive for power is weak or they satisfy it by identifying themselves with some powerful organization to which they belong. And then there are unthinking, animal types who seem to be satisfied with a purely physical sense of power(the good combat soldier, who gets his sense of power by developing fighting skills that he is quite content to use in blind obedience to his superiors). 44. But for most people it is through the power process-having a goal, making an AUTONOMOUS effort and attaining t the goal-that self-esteem, self-confidence and a sense of power are acquired. When one does not have adequate opportunity to go throughout the power process the consequences are (depending on the individual and on the way the power process is disrupted) boredom, demoralization, low self-esteem, inferiority feelings, defeatism, depression, anxiety, guilt, frustration, hostility, spouse or child abuse, insatiable hedonism, abnormal sexual behavior, sleep disorders, eating disorders, etc. [6] SOURCES OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS 45. Any of the foregoing symptoms can occur in any society, but in modern industrial society they are present on a massive scale. We aren't the first to mention that the world today seems to be going crazy. This sort of thing is not normal for human societies. There is good reason to believe that primitive man suffered from less stress and frustration and was better satisfied with his way of life than modern man is. It is true that not all was sweetness and light in primitive societies. Abuse of women and common among the Australian aborigines, transexuality was fairly common among some of the American Indian tribes. But is does appear that GENERALLY SPEAKING the kinds of problems that we have listed in the preceding paragraph were far less common among primitive peoples than they are in modern society. 46. We attribute the social and psychological problems of modern society to the fact that that society requires people to live under conditions radically different from those under which the human race evolved and to behave in ways that conflict with the patterns of behavior that the human race developed while living under the earlier conditions. It is clear from what we have already written that we consider lack of opportunity to properly experience the power process as the most important of the abnormal conditions to which modern society subjects people. But it is not the only one. Before dealing with disruption of the power process as a source of social problems we will discuss some of the other sources. 47. Among the abnormal conditions present in modern industrial society are excessive density of population, isolation of man from nature, excessive rapidity of social change and the break-down of natural small-scale communities such as the extended family, the village or the tribe. 48. It is well known that crowding increases stress and aggression. The degree of crowding that exists today and the isolation of man from nature are consequences of technological progress. All pre-industrial societies were predominantly rural. The industrial Revolution vastly increased the size of cities and the proportion of the population that lives in them, and modern agricultural technology has made it possible for the Earth to support a far denser population than it ever did before. (Also, technology exacerbates the effects of crowding because it puts increased disruptive powers in people's hands. For example, a variety of noise-making devices: power mowers, radios, motorcycles, etc. If the use of these devices is unrestricted, people who want peace and quiet are frustrated by the noise. If their use is restricted, people who use the devices are frustrated by the regulations... But if these machines had never been invented there would have been no conflict and no frustration generated by them.) 49. For primitive societies the natural world (which usually changes only slowly) provided a stable framework and therefore a sense of security. In the modern world it is human society that dominates nature rather than the other way around, and modern society changes very rapidly owing to technological change. Thus there is no stable framework. 50. The conservatives are fools: They whine about the decay of traditional values, yet they enthusiastically support technological progress and economic growth. Apparently it never occurs to them that you can't make rapid, drastic changes in the technology and the economy of a society with out causing rapid changes in all other aspects of the society as well, and that such rapid changes inevitably break down traditional values. 51.The breakdown of traditional values to some extent implies the breakdown of the bonds that hold together traditional small-scale social groups. The disintegration of small-scale social groups is also promoted by the fact that modern conditions often require or tempt individuals to move to new locations, separating themselves from their communities. Beyond that, a technological society HAS TO weaken family ties and local communities if it is to function efficiently. In modern society an individual's loyalty must be first to the system and only secondarily to a small-scale community, because if the internal loyalties of small-scale small-scale communities were stronger than loyalty to the system, such communities would pursue their own advantage at the expense of the system. 52. Suppose that a public official or a corporation executive appoints his cousin, his friend or his co-religionist to a position rather than appointing the person best qualified for the job. He has permitted personal loyalty to supersede his loyalty to the system, and that is "nepotism" or "discrimination," both of which are terrible sins in modern society. Would-be industrial societies that have done a poor job of subordinating personal or local loyalties to loyalty to the system are usually very inefficient. (Look at Latin America.) Thus an advanced industrial society can tolerate only those small-scale communities that are emasculated, tamed and made into tools of the system. [7] 53. Crowding, rapid change and the breakdown of communities have been widely recognized as sources of social problems. but we do not believe they are enough to account for the extent of the problems that are seen today. 54. A few pre-industrial cities were very large and crowded, yet their inhabitants do not seem to have suffered from psychological problems to the same extent as modern man. In America today there still are uncrowded rural areas, and we find there the same problems as in urban areas, though the problems tend to be less acute in the rural areas. Thus crowding does not seem to be the decisive factor. 55. On the growing edge of the American frontier during the 19th century, the mobility of the population probably broke down extended families and small-scale social groups to at least the same extent as these are broken down today. In fact, many nuclear families lived by choice in such isolation, having no neighbors within several miles, that they belonged to no community at all, yet they do not seem to have developed problems as a result. 56.Furthermore, change in American frontier society was very rapid and deep. A man might be born and raised in a log cabin, outside the reach of law and order and fed largely on wild meat; and by the time he arrived at old age he might be working at a regular job and living in an ordered community with effective law enforcement. This was a deeper change that that which typically occurs in the life of a modern individual, yet it does not seem to have led to psychological problems. In fact, 19th century American society had an optimistic and self-confident tone, quite unlike that of today's society. [8] 57. The difference, we argue, is that modern man has the sense (largely justified) that change is IMPOSED on him, whereas the 19th century frontiersman had the sense (also largely justified) that he created change himself, by his own choice. Thus a pioneer settled on a piece of land of his own choosing and made it into a farm through his own effort. In those days an entire county might have only a couple of hundred inhabitants and was a far more isolated and autonomous entity than a modern county is. Hence the pioneer farmer participated as a member of a relatively small group in the creation of a new, ordered community. One may well question whether the creation of this community was an improvement, but at any rate it satisfied the pioneer's need for the power process. 58. It would be possible to give other examples of societies in which there has been rapid change and/or lack of close community ties without he kind of massive behavioral aberration that is seen in today's industrial society. We contend that the most important cause of social and psychological problems in modern society is the fact that people have insufficient opportunity to go through the power process in a normal way. We don't mean to say that modern society is the only one in which the power process has been disrupted. Probably most if not all civilized societies have interfered with the power ' process to a greater or lesser extent. But in modern industrial society the problem has become particularly acute. Leftism, at least in its recent (mid-to-late -20th century) form, is in part a symptom of deprivation with respect to the power process. DISRUPTION OF THE POWER PROCESS IN MODERN SOCIETY 59. We divide human drives into three groups: (1) those drives that can be satisfied with minimal effort; (2) those that can be satisfied but only at the cost of serious effort; (3) those that cannot be adequately satisfied no matter how much effort one makes. The power process is the process of satisfying the drives of the second group. The more drives there are in the third group, the more there is frustration, anger, eventually defeatism, depression, etc. 60. In modern industrial society natural human drives tend to be pushed into the first and third groups, and the second group tends to consist increasingly of artificially created drives. 61. In primitive societies, physical necessities generally fall into group 2: They can be obtained, but only at the cost of serious effort. But modern society tends to guaranty the physical necessities to everyone [9] in exchange for only minimal effort, hence physical needs are pushed into group 1. (There may be disagreement about whether the effort needed to hold a job is "minimal"; but usually, in lower- to middle-level jobs, whatever effort is required is merely that of obedience. You sit or stand where you are told to sit or stand and do what you are told to do in the way you are told to do it. Seldom do you have to exert yourself seriously, and in any case you have hardly any autonomy in work, so that the need for the power process is not well served.) 62. Social needs, such as sex, love and status, often remain in group 2 in modern society, depending on the situation of the individual. [10] But, except for people who have a particularly strong drive for status, the effort required to fulfill the social drives is insufficient to satisfy adequately the need for the power process. 63. So certain artificial needs have been created that fall into group 2, hence serve the need for the power process. Advertising and marketing techniques have been developed that make many people feel they need things that their grandparents never desired or even dreamed of. It requires serious effort to earn enough money to satisfy these artificial needs, hence they fall into group 2. (But see paragraphs 80-82.) Modern man must satisfy his need for the power process largely through pursuit of the artificial needs created by the advertising and marketing industry [11], and through surrogate activities. 64. It seems that for many people, maybe the majority, these artificial forms of the power process are insufficient. A theme that appears repeatedly in the writings of the social critics of the second half of the 20th century is the sense of purposelessness that afflicts many people in modern society. (This purposelessness is often called by other names such as "anomic" or "middle-class vacuity.") We suggest that the so-called "identity crisis" is actually a search for a sense of purpose, often for commitment to a suitable surrogate activity. It may be that existentialism is in large part a response to the purposelessness of modern life. [12] Very widespread in modern society is the search for "fulfillment." But we think that for the majority of people an activity whose main goal is fulfillment (that is, a surrogate activity) does not bring completely satisfactory fulfillment. In other words, it does not fully satisfy the need for the power process. (See paragraph 41.) That need can be fully satisfied only through activities that have some external goal, such as physical necessities, sex, love, status, revenge, etc. 65. Moreover, where goals are pursued through earning money, climbing the status ladder or functioning as part of the system in some other way, most people are not in a position to pursue their goals AUTONOMOUSLY. Most workers are someone else's employee as, as we pointed out in paragraph 61, must spend their days doing what they are told to do in the way they are told to do it. Even most people who are in business for themselves have only limited autonomy. It is a chronic complaint of small-business persons and entrepreneurs that their hands are tied by excessive government regulation. Some of these regulations are doubtless unnecessary, but for the most part government regulations are essential and inevitable parts of our extremely complex society. A large portion of small business today operates on the franchise system. It was reported in the Wall Street Journal a few years ago that many of the franchise-granting companies require applicants for franchises to take a personality test that is designed to EXCLUDE those who have creativity and initiative, because such persons are not sufficiently docile to go along obediently with the franchise system. This excludes from small business many of the people who most need autonomy. 66. Today people live more by virtue of what the system does FOR them or TO them than by virtue of what they do for themselves. And what they do for themselves is done more and more along channels laid down by the system. Opportunities tend to be those that the system provides, the opportunities must be exploited in accord with the rules and regulations [13], and techniques prescribed by experts must be followed if there is to be a chance of success. 67. Thus the power process is disrupted in our society through a deficiency of real goals and a deficiency of autonomy in pursuit of goals. But it is also disrupted because of those human drives that fall into group 3: the drives that one cannot adequately satisfy no matter how much effort one makes. One of these drives is the need for security. Our lives depend on decisions made by other people; we have no control over these decisions and usually we do not even know the people who make them. ("We live in a world in which relatively few people - maybe 500 or 1,00 - make the important decisions" - Philip B. Heymann of Harvard Law School, quoted by Anthony Lewis, New York Times, April 21, 1995.) Our lives depend on whether safety standards at a nuclear power plant are properly maintained; on how much pesticide is allowed to get into our food or how much pollution into our air; on how skillful (or incompetent) our doctor is; whether we lose or get a job may depend on decisions made by government economists or corporation executives; and so forth. Most individuals are not in a position to secure themselves against these threats to more [than] a very limited extent. The individual's search for security is therefore frustrated, which leads to a sense of powerlessness. 68. It may be objected that primitive man is physically less secure than modern man, as is shown by his shorter life expectancy; hence modern man suffers from less, not more than the amount of insecurity that is normal for human beings. but psychological security does not closely correspond with physical security. What makes us FEEL secure is not so much objective security as a sense of confidence in our ability to take care of ourselves. Primitive man, threatened by a fierce animal or by hunger, can fight in self-defense or travel in search of food. He has no certainty of success in these efforts, but he is by no means helpless against the things that threaten him. The modern individual on the other hand is threatened by many things against which he is helpless; nuclear accidents, carcinogens in food, environmental pollution, war, increasing taxes, invasion of his privacy by large organizations, nation-wide social or economic phenomena that may disrupt his way of life. 69. It is true that primitive man is powerless against some of the things that threaten him; disease for example. But he can accept the risk of disease stoically. It is part of the nature of things, it is no one's fault, unless is the fault of some imaginary, impersonal demon. But threats to the modern individual tend to be MAN-MADE. They are not the results of chance but are IMPOSED on him by other persons whose decisions he, as an individual, is unable to influence. Consequently he feels frustrated, humiliated and angry. 70. Thus primitive man for the most part has his security in his own hands (either as an individual or as a member of a SMALL group) whereas the security of modern man is in the hands of persons or organizations that are too remote or too large for him to be able personally to influence them. So modern man's drive for security tends to fall into groups 1 and 3; in some areas (food, shelter, etc.) his security is assured at the cost of only trivial effort, whereas in other areas he CANNOT attain security. (The foregoing greatly simplifies the real situation, but it does indicate in a rough, general way how the condition of modern man differs from that of primitive man.) 71. People have many transitory drives or impulses that are necessary frustrated in modern life, hence fall into group 3. One may become angry, but modern society cannot permit fighting. In many situations it does not even permit verbal aggression. When going somewhere one may be in a hurry, or one may be in a mood to travel slowly, but one generally has no choice but to move with the flow of traffic and obey the traffic signals. One may want to do one's work in a different way, but usually one can work only according to the rules laid down by one's employer. In many other ways as well, modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations (explicit or implicit) that frustrate many of his impulses and thus interfere with the power process. Most of these regulations cannot be disposed with, because the are necessary for the functioning of industrial society. 72. Modern society is in certain respects extremely permissive. In matters that are irrelevant to the functioning of the system we can generally do what we please. We can believe in any religion we like (as long as it does not encourage behavior that is dangerous to the system). We can go to bed with anyone we like (as long as we practice "safe sex"). We can do anything we like as long as it is UNIMPORTANT. But in all IMPORTANT matters the system tends increasingly to regulate our behavior. 73. Behavior is regulated not only through explicit rules and not only by the government. Control is often exercised through indirect coercion or through psychological pressure or manipulation, and by organizations other than the government, or by the system as a whole. Most large organizations use some form of propaganda [14] to manipulate public attitudes or behavior. Propaganda is not limited to "commercials" and advertisements, and sometimes it is not even consciously intended as propaganda by the people who make it. For instance, the content of entertainment programming is a powerful form of propaganda. An example of indirect coercion: There is no law that says we have to go to work every day and follow our employer's orders. Legally there is nothing to prevent us from going to live in the wild like primitive people or from going into business for ourselves. But in practice there is very little wild country left, and there is room in the economy for only a limited number of small business owners. Hence most of us can survive only as someone else's employee. 74. We suggest that modern man's obsession with longevity, and with maintaining physical vigor and sexual attractiveness to an advanced age, is a symptom of unfulfillment resulting from deprivation with respect to the power process. The "mid-life crisis" also is such a symptom. So is the lack of interest in having children that is fairly common in modern society but almost unheard-of in primitive societies. 75. In primitive societies life is a succession of stages. The needs and purposes of one stage having been fulfilled, there is no particular reluctance about passing on to the next stage. A young man goes through the power process by becoming a hunter, hunting not for sport or for fulfillment but to get meat that is necessary for food. (In young women the process is more complex, with greater emphasis on social power; we won't discuss that here.) This phase having been successfully passed through, the young man has no reluctance about settling down to the responsibilities of raising a family. (In contrast, some modern people indefinitely postpone having children because they are too busy seeking some kind of "fulfillment." We suggest that the fulfillment they need is adequate experience of the power process -- with real goals instead of the artificial goals of surrogate activities.) Again, having successfully raised his children, going through the power process by providing them with the physical necessities, the primitive man feels that his work is done and he is prepared to accept old age (if he survives that long) and death. Many modern people, on the other hand, are disturbed by the prospect of death, as is shown by the amount of effort they expend trying to maintain their physical condition, appearance and health. We argue that this is due to unfulfillment resulting from the fact that they have never put their physical powers to any use, have never gone through the power process using their bodies in a serious way. It is not the primitive man, who has used his body daily for practical purposes, who fears the deterioration of age, but the modern man, who has never had a practical use for his body beyond walking from his car to his house. It is the man whose need for the power process has been satisfied during his life who is best prepared to accept the end of that life. 76. In response to the arguments of this section someone will say, "Society must find a way to give people the opportunity to go through the power process." For such people the value of the opportunity is destroyed by the very fact that society gives it to them. What they need is to find or make their own opportunities. As long as the system GIVES them their opportunities it still has them on a leash. To attain autonomy they must get off that leash. HOW SOME PEOPLE ADJUST 77. Not everyone in industrial-technological society suffers from psychological problems. Some people even profess to be quite satisfied with society as it is. We now discuss some of the reasons why people differ so greatly in their response to modern society. 78. First, there doubtless are differences in the strength of the drive for power. Individuals with a weak drive for power may have relatively little need to go through the power process, or at least relatively little need for autonomy in the power process. These are docile types who would have been happy as plantation darkies in the Old South. (We don't mean to sneer at "plantation darkies" of the Old South. To their credit, most of the slaves were NOT content with their servitude. We do sneer at people who ARE content with servitude.) 79. Some people may have some exceptional drive, in pursuing which they satisfy their need for the power process. For example, those who have an unusually strong drive for social status may spend their whole lives climbing the status ladder without ever getting bored with that game. 80. People vary in their susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques. Some people are so susceptible that, even if they make a great deal of money, they cannot satisfy their constant craving for the shiny new toys that the marketing industry dangles before their eyes. So they always feel hard-pressed financially even if their income is large, and their cravings are frustrated. 81. Some people have low susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques. These are the people who aren't interested in money. Material acquisition does not serve their need for the power process. 82. People who have medium susceptibility to advertising and marketing techniques are able to earn enough money to satisfy their craving for goods and services, but only at the cost of serious effort (putting in overtime, taking a second job, earning promotions, etc.) Thus material acquisition serves their need for the power process. But it does not necessarily follow that their need is fully satisfied. They may have insufficient autonomy in the power process (their work may consist of following orders) and some of their drives may be frustrated (e.g., security, aggression). (We are guilty of oversimplification in paragraphs 80-82 because we have assumed that the desire for material acquisition is entirely a creation of the advertising and marketing industry. Of course it's not that simple. 83. Some people partly satisfy their need for power by identifying themselves with a powerful organization or mass movement. An individual lacking goals or power joins a movement or an organization, adopts its goals as his own, then works toward these goals. When some of the goals are attained, the individual, even though his personal efforts have played only an insignificant part in the attainment of the goals, feels (through his identification with the movement or organization) as if he had gone through the power process. This phenomenon was exploited by the fascists, nazis and communists. Our society uses it, too, though less crudely. Example: Manuel Noriega was an irritant to the U.S. (goal: punish Noriega). The U.S. invaded Panama (effort) and punished Noriega (attainment of goal). The U.S. went through the power process and many Americans, because of their identification with the U.S., experienced the power process vicariously. Hence the widespread public approval of the Panama invasion; it gave people a sense of power. [15] We see the same phenomenon in armies, corporations, political parties, humanitarian organizations, religious or ideological movements. In particular, leftist movements tend to attract people who are seeking to satisfy their need for power. But for most people identification with a large organization or a mass movement does not fully satisfy the need for power. 84. Another way in which people satisfy their need for the power process is through surrogate activities. As we explained in paragraphs 38-40, a surrogate activity that is directed toward an artificial goal that the individual pursues for the sake of the "fulfillment" that he gets from pursuing the goal, not because he needs to attain the goal itself. For instance, there is no practical motive for building enormous muscles, hitting a little ball into a hole or acquiring a complete series of postage stamps. Yet many people in our society devote themselves with passion to bodybuilding, golf or stamp collecting. Some people are more "other-directed" than others, and therefore will more readily attack importance to a surrogate activity simply because the people around them treat it as important or because society tells them it is important. That is why some people get very serious about essentially trivial activities such as sports, or bridge, or chess, or arcane scholarly pursuits, whereas others who are more clear-sighted never see these things as anything but the surrogate activities that they are, and consequently never attach enough importance to them to satisfy their need for the power process in that way. It only remains to point out that in many cases a person's way of earning a living is also a surrogate activity. Not a PURE surrogate activity, since part of the motive for the activity is to gain the physical necessities and (for some people) social status and the luxuries that advertising makes them want. But many people put into their work far more effort than is necessary to earn whatever money and status they require, and this extra effort constitutes a surrogate activity. This extra effort, together with the emotional investment that accompanies it, is one of the most potent forces acting toward the continual development and perfecting of the system, with negative consequences for individual freedom (see paragraph 131). Especially, for the most creative scientists and engineers, work tends to be largely a surrogate activity. This point is so important that is deserves a separate discussion, which we shall give in a moment (paragraphs 87-92). 85. In this section we have explained how many people in modern society do satisfy their need for the power process to a greater or lesser extent. But we think that for the majority of people the need for the power process is not fully satisfied. In the first place, those who have an insatiable drive for status, or who get firmly "hooked" or a surrogate activity, or who identify strongly enough with a movement or organization to satisfy their need for power in that way, are exceptional personalities. Others are not fully satisfied with surrogate activities or by identification with an organization (see paragraphs 41, 64). In the second place, too much control is imposed by the system through explicit regulation or through socialization, which results in a deficiency of autonomy, and in frustration due to the impossibility of attaining certain goals and the necessity of restraining too many impulses. 86. But even if most people in industrial-technological society were well satisfied, we (FC) would still be opposed to that form of society, because (among other reasons) we consider it demeaning to fulfill one's need for the power process through surrogate activities or through identification with an organization, rather then through pursuit of real goals. THE MOTIVES OF SCIENTISTS 87. Science and technology provide the most important examples of surrogate activities. Some scientists claim that they are motivated by "curiosity," that notion is simply absurd. Most scientists work on highly specialized problem that are not the object of any normal curiosity. For example, is an astronomer, a mathematician or an entomologist curious about the properties of isopropyltrimethylmethane? Of course not. Only a chemist is curious about such a thing, and he is curious about it only because chemistry is his surrogate activity. Is the chemist curious about the appropriate classification of a new species of beetle? No. That question is of interest only to the entomologist, and he is interested in it only because entomology is his surrogate activity. If the chemist and the entomologist had to exert themselves seriously to obtain the physical necessities, and if that effort exercised their abilities in an interesting way but in some nonscientific pursuit, then they couldn't giver a damn about isopropyltrimethylmethane or the classification of beetles. Suppose that lack of funds for postgraduate education had led the chemist to become an insurance broker instead of a chemist. In that case he would have been very interested in insurance matters but would have cared nothing about isopropyltrimethylmethane. In any case it is not normal to put into the satisfaction of mere curiosity the amount of time and effort that scientists put into their work. The "curiosity" explanation for the scientists' motive just doesn't stand up. 88. The "benefit of humanity" explanation doesn't work any better. Some scientific work has no conceivable relation to the welfare of the human race - most of archaeology or comparative linguistics for example. Some other areas of science present obviously dangerous possibilities. Yet scientists in these areas are just as enthusiastic about their work as those who develop vaccines or study air pollution. Consider the case of Dr. Edward Teller, who had an obvious emotional involvement in promoting nuclear power plants. Did this involvement stem from a desire to benefit humanity? If so, then why didn't Dr. Teller get emotional about other "humanitarian" causes? If he was such a humanitarian then why did he help to develop the H-bomb? As with many other scientific achievements, it is very much open to question whether nuclear power plants actually do benefit humanity. Does the cheap electricity outweigh the accumulating waste and risk of accidents? Dr. Teller saw only one side of the question. Clearly his emotional involvement with nuclear power arose not from a desire to "benefit humanity" but from a personal fulfillment he got from his work and from seeing it put to practical use. 89. The same is true of scientists generally. With possible rare exceptions, their motive is neither curiosity nor a desire to benefit humanity but the need to go through the power process: to have a goal (a scientific problem to solve), to make an effort (research) and to attain the goal (solution of the problem.) Science is a surrogate activity because scientists work mainly for the fulfillment they get out of the work itself. 90. Of course, it's not that simple. Other motives do play a role for many scientists. Money and status for example. Some scientists may be persons of the type who have an insatiable drive for status (see paragraph 79) and this may provide much of the motivation for their work. No doubt the majority of scientists, like the majority of the general population, are more or less susceptible to advertising and marketing techniques and need money to satisfy their craving for goods and services. Thus science is not a PURE surrogate activity. But it is in large part a surrogate activity. 91. Also, science and technology constitute a mass power movement, and many scientists gratify their need for power through identification with this mass movement (see paragraph 83). 92. Thus science marches on blindly, without regard to the real welfare of the human race or to any other standard, obedient only to the psychological needs of the scientists and of the government officials and corporation executives who provide the funds for research. THE NATURE OF FREEDOM 93. We are going to argue that industrial-technological society cannot be reformed in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing the sphere of human freedom. But because "freedom" is a word that can be interpreted in many ways, we must first make clear what kind of freedom we are concerned with. 94. By "freedom" we mean the opportunity to go through the power process, with real goals not the artificial goals of surrogate activities, and without interference, manipulation or supervision from anyone, especially from any large organization. Freedom means being in control (either as an individual or as a member of a SMALL group) of the life-and-death issues of one's existence; food, clothing, shelter and defense against whatever threats there may be in one's environment. Freedom means having power; not the power to control other people but the power to control the circumstances of one's own life. One does not have freedom if anyone else (especially a large organization) has power over one, no matter how benevolently, tolerantly and permissively that power may be exercised. It is important not to confuse freedom with mere permissiveness (see paragraph 72). 95. It is said that we live in a free society because we have a certain number of constitutionally guaranteed rights. But these are not as important as they seem. The degree of personal freedom that exists in a society is determined more by the economic and technological structure of the society than by its laws or its form of government. [16] Most of the Indian nations of New England were monarchies, and many of the cities of the Italian Renaissance were controlled by dictators. But in reading about these societies one gets the impression that they allowed far more personal freedom than out society does. In part this was because they lacked efficient mechanisms for enforcing the ruler's will: There were no modern, well-organized police forces, no rapid long-distance communications, no surveillance cameras, no dossiers of information about the lives of average citizens. Hence it was relatively easy to evade control. 96. As for our constitutional rights, consider for example that of freedom of the press. We certainly don't mean to knock that right: it is very important tool for limiting concentration of political power and for keeping those who do have political power in line by publicly exposing any misbehavior on their part. But freedom of the press is of very little use to the average citizen as an individual. The mass media are mostly under the control of large organizations that are integrated into the system. Anyone who has a little money can have something printed, or can distribute it on the Internet or in some such way, but what he has to say will be swamped by the vast volume of material put out by the media, hence it will have no practical effect. To make an impression on society with words is therefore almost impossible for most individuals and small groups. Take us (FC) for example. If we had never done anything violent and had submitted the present writings to a publisher, they probably would not have been accepted. If they had been accepted and published, they probably would not have attracted many readers, because it's more fun to watch the entertainment put out by the media than to read a sober essay. Even if these writings had had many readers, most of these readers would soon have forgotten what they had read as their minds were flooded by the mass of material to which the media expose them. In order to get our message before the public with some chance of making a lasting impression, we've had to kill people. 97. Constitutional rights are useful up to a point, but they do not serve to guarantee much more than what could be called the bourgeois conception of freedom. According to the bourgeois conception, a "free" man is essentially an element of a social machine and has only a certain set of prescribed and delimited freedoms; freedoms that are designed to serve the needs of the social machine more than those of the individual. Thus the bourgeois's "free" man has economic freedom because that promotes growth and progress; he has freedom of the press because public criticism restrains misbehavior by political leaders; he has a rights to a fair trial because imprisonment at the whim of the powerful would be bad for the system. This was clearly the attitude of Simon Bolivar. To him, people deserved liberty only if they used it to promote progress (progress as conceived by the bourgeois). Other bourgeois thinkers have taken a similar view of freedom as a mere means to collective ends. Chester C. Tan, "Chinese Political Thought in the Twentieth Century," page 202, explains the philosophy of the Kuomintang leader Hu Han-min: "An individual is granted rights because he is a member of society and his community life requires such rights. By community Hu meant the whole society of the nation." And on page 259 Tan states that according to Carsum Chang (Chang Chun-mai, head of the State Socialist Party in China) freedom had to be used in the interest of the state and of the people as a whole. But what kind of freedom does one have if one can use it only as someone else prescribes? FC's conception of freedom is not that of Bolivar, Hu, Chang or other bourgeois theorists. The trouble with such theorists is that they have made the development and application of social theories their surrogate activity. Consequently the theories are designed to serve the needs of the theorists more than the needs of any people who may be unlucky enough to live in a society on which the theories are imposed. 98. One more point to be made in this section: It should not be assumed that a person has enough freedom just because he SAYS he has enough. Freedom is restricted in part by psychological control of which people are unconscious, and moreover many people's ideas of what constitutes freedom are governed more by social convention than by their real needs. For example, it's likely that many leftists of the oversocialized type would say that most people, including themselves are socialized too little rather than too much, yet the oversocialized leftist pays a heavy psychological price for his high level of socialization. SOME PRINCIPLES OF HISTORY 99. Think of history as being the sum of two components: an erratic component that consists of unpredictable events that follow no discernible pattern, and a regular component that consists of long-term historical trends. Here we are concerned with the long-term trends. 100. FIRST PRINCIPLE. If a SMALL change is made that affects a long-term historical trend, then the effect of that change will almost always be transitory - the trend will soon revert to its original state. (Example: A reform movement designed to clean up political corruption in a society rarely has more than a short-term effect; sooner or later the reformers relax and corruption creeps back in. The level of political corruption in a given society tends to remain constant, or to change only slowly with the evolution of the society. Normally, a political cleanup will be permanent only if accompanied by widespread social changes; a SMALL change in the society won't be enough.) If a small change in a long-term historical trend appears to be permanent, it is only because the change acts in the direction in which the trend is already moving, so that the trend is not altered but only pushed a step ahead. 101. The first principle is almost a tautology. If a trend were not stable with respect to small changes, it would wander at random rather than following a definite direction; in other words it would not be a long-term trend at all. 102. SECOND PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is sufficiently large to alter permanently a long-term historical trend, than it will alter the society as a whole. In other words, a society is a system in which all parts are interrelated, and you can't permanently change any important part without change all the other parts as well. 103. THIRD PRINCIPLE. If a change is made that is large enough to alter permanently a long-term trend, then the consequences for the society as a whole cannot be predicted in advance. (Unless various other societies have passed through the same change and have all experienced the same consequences, in which case one can predict on empirical grounds that another society that passes through the same change will be like to experience similar consequences.) 104. FOURTH PRINCIPLE. A new kind of society cannot be designed on paper. That is, you cannot plan out a new form of society in advance, then set it up and expect it to function as it was designed to. 105. The third and fourth principles result from the complexity of human societies. A change in human behavior will affect the economy of a society and its physical environment; the economy will affect the environment and vice versa, and the changes in the economy and the environment will affect human behavior in complex, unpredictable ways; and so forth. The network of causes and effects is far too complex to be untangled and understood. 106. FIFTH PRINCIPLE. People do not consciously and rationally choose the form of their society. Societies develop through processes of social evolution that are not under rational human control. 107. The fifth principle is a consequence of the other four. 108. To illustrate: By the first principle, generally speaking an attempt at social reform either acts in the direction in which the society is developing anyway (so that it merely accelerates a change that would have occurred in any case) or else it only has a transitory effect, so that the society soon slips back into its old groove. To make a lasting change in the direction of development of any important aspect of a society, reform is insufficient and revolution is required. (A revolution does not necessarily involve an armed uprising or the overthrow of a government.) By the second principle, a revolution never changes only one aspect of a society; and by the third principle changes occur that were never expected or desired by the revolutionaries. By the fourth principle, when revolutionaries or utopians set up a new kind of society, it never works out as planned. 109. The American Revolution does not provide a counterexample. The American "Revolution" was not a revolution in our sense of the word, but a war of independence followed by a rather far-reaching political reform. The Founding Fathers did not change the direction of development of American society, nor did they aspire to do so. They only freed the development of American society from the retarding effect of British rule. Their political reform did not change any basic trend, but only pushed American political culture along its natural direction of development. British society, of which American society was an off-shoot, had been moving for a long time in the direction of representative democracy. And prior to the War of Independence the Americans were already practicing a significant degree of representative democracy in the colonial assemblies. The political system established by the Constitution was modeled on the British system and on the colonial assemblies. With major alteration, to be sure - there is no doubt that the Founding Fathers took a very important step. But it was a step along the road the English-speaking world was already traveling. The proof is that Britain and all of its colonies that were populated predominantly by people of British descent ended up with systems of representative democracy essentially similar to that of the United States. If the Founding Fathers had lost their nerve and declined to sign the Declaration of Independence, our way of life today would not have been significantly different. Maybe we would have had somewhat closer ties to Britain, and would have had a Parliament and Prime Minister instead of a Congress and President. No big deal. Thus the American Revolution provides not a counterexample to our principles but a good illustration of them. 110. Still, one has to use common sense in applying the principles. They are expressed in imprecise language that allows latitude for interpretation, and exceptions to them can be found. So we present these principles not as inviolable laws but as rules of thumb, or guides to thinking, that may provide a partial antidote to naive ideas about the future of society. The principles should be borne constantly in mind, and whenever one reaches a conclusion that conflicts with them one should carefully reexamine one's thinking and retain the conclusion only if one has good, solid reasons for doing so. INDUSTRIAL-TECHNOLOGICAL SOCIETY CANNOT BE REFORMED 111. The foregoing principles help to show how hopelessly difficult it would be to reform the industrial system in such a way as to prevent it from progressively narrowing our sphere of freedom. There has been a consistent tendency, going back at least to the Industrial Revolution for technology to strengthen the system at a high cost in individual freedom and local autonomy. Hence any change designed to protect freedom from technology would be contrary to a fundamental trend in the development of our society. Consequently, such a change either would be a transitory one -- soon swamped by the tide of history -- or, if large enough to be permanent would alter the nature of our whole society. This by the first and second principles. Moreover, since society would be altered in a way that could not be predicted in advance (third principle) there would be great risk. Changes large enough to make a lasting difference in favor of freedom would not be initiated because it would realized that they would gravely disrupt the system. So any attempts at reform would be too timid to be effective. Even if changes large enough to make a lasting difference were initiated, they would be retracted when their disruptive effects became apparent. Thus, permanent changes in favor of freedom could be brought about only by persons prepared to accept radical, dangerous and unpredictable alteration of the entire system. In other words, by revolutionaries, not reformers. 112. People anxious to rescue freedom without sacrificing the supposed benefits of technology will suggest naive schemes for some new form of society that would reconcile freedom with technology. Apart from the fact that people who make suggestions seldom propose any practical means by which the new form of society could be set up in the first place, it follows from the fourth principle that even if the new form of society could be once established, it either would collapse or would give results very different from those expected. 113. So even on very general grounds it seems highly improbably that any way of changing society could be found that would reconcile freedom with modern technology. In the next few sections we will give more specific reasons for concluding that freedom and technological progress are incompatible. RESTRICTION OF FREEDOM IS UNAVOIDABLE IN INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY 114. As explained in paragraph 65-67, 70-73, modern man is strapped down by a network of rules and regulations, and his fate depends on the actions of persons remote from him whose decisions he cannot influence. This is not accidental or a result of the arbitrariness of arrogant bureaucrats. It is necessary and inevitable in any technologically advanced society. The system HAS TO regulate human behavior closely in order to function. At work, people have to do what they are told to do, otherwise production would be thrown into chaos. Bureaucracies HAVE TO be run according to rigid rules. To allow any substantial personal discretion to lower-level bureaucrats would disrupt the system and lead to charges of unfairness due to differences in the way individual bureaucrats exercised their discretion. It is true that some restrictions on our freedom could be eliminated, but GENERALLY SPEAKING the regulation of our lives by large organizations is necessary for the functioning of industrial-technological society. The result is a sense of powerlessness on the part of the average person. It may be, however, that formal regulations will tend increasingly to be replaced by psychological tools that make us want to do what the system requires of us. (Propaganda [14], educational techniques, "mental health" programs, etc.) 115. The system HAS TO force people to behave in ways that are increasingly remote from the natural pattern of human behavior. For example, the system needs scientists, mathematicians and engineers. It can't function without them. So heavy pressure is put on children to excel in these fields. It isn't natural for an adolescent human being to spend the bulk of his time sitting at a desk absorbed in study. A normal adolescent wants to spend his time in active contact with the real world. Among primitive peoples the things that children are trained to do are in natural harmony with natural human impulses. Among the American Indians, for example, boys were trained in active outdoor pursuits -- just the sort of things that boys like. But in our society children are pushed into studying technical subjects, which most do grudgingly. 116. Because of the constant pressure that the system exerts to modify human behavior, there is a gradual increase in the number of people who cannot or will not adjust to society's requirements: welfare leeches, youth-gang members, cultists, anti-government rebels, radical environmentalist saboteurs, dropouts and resisters of various kinds. 117. In any technologically advanced society the individual's fate MUST depend on decisions that he personally cannot influence to any great extent. A technological society cannot be broken down into small, autonomous communities, because production depends on the cooperation of very large numbers of people and machines. Such a society MUST be highly organized and decisions HAVE TO be made that affect very large numbers of people. When a decision affects, say, a million people, then each of the affected individuals has, on the average, only a one-millionth share in making the decision. What usually happens in practice is that decisions are made by public officials or corporation executives, or by technical specialists, but even when the public votes on a decision the number of voters ordinarily is too large for the vote of any one individual to be significant. [17] Thus most individuals are unable to influence measurably the major decisions that affect their lives. Their is no conceivable way to remedy this in a technologically advanced society. The system tries to "solve" this problem by using propaganda to make people WANT the decisions that have been made for them, but even if this "solution" were completely successful in making people feel better, it would be demeaning. 118 Conservatives and some others advocate more "local autonomy." Local communities once did have autonomy, but such autonomy becomes less and less possible as local communities become more enmeshed with and dependent on large-scale systems like public utilities, computer networks, highway systems, the mass communications media, the modern health care system. Also operating against autonomy is the fact that technology applied in one location often affects people at other locations far away. Thus pesticide or chemical use near a creek may contaminate the water supply hundreds of miles downstream, and the greenhouse effect affects the whole world. 119. The system does not and cannot exist to satisfy human needs. Instead, it is human behavior that has to be modified to fit the needs of the system. This has nothing to do with the political or social ideology that may pretend to guide the technological system. It is the fault of technology, because the system is guided not by ideology but by technical necessity. [18] Of course the system does satisfy many human needs, but generally speaking it does this only to the extent that it is to the advantage of the system to do it. It is the needs of the system that are paramount, not those of the human being. For example, the system provides people with food because the system couldn't function if everyone starved; it attends to people's psychological needs whenever it can CONVENIENTLY do so, because it couldn't function if too many people became depressed or rebellious. But the system, for good, solid, practical reasons, must exert constant pressure on people to mold their behavior to the needs of the system. Too much waste accumulating? The government, the media, the educational system, environmentalists, everyone inundates us with a mass of propaganda about recycling. Need more technical personnel? A chorus of voices exhorts kids to study science. No one stops to ask whether it is inhumane to force adolescents to spend the bulk of their time studying subjects most of them hate. When skilled workers are put out of a job by technical advances and have to undergo "retraining," no one asks whether it is humiliating for them to be pushed around in this way. It is simply taken for granted that everyone must bow to technical necessity and for good reason: If human needs were put before technical necessity there would be economic problems, unemployment, shortages or worse. The concept of "mental health" in our society is defined largely by the extent to which an individual behaves in accord with the needs of the system and does so without showing signs of stress. 120. Efforts to make room for a sense of purpose and for autonomy within the system are no better than a joke. For example, one company, instead of having each of its employees assemble only one section of a catalogue, had each assemble a whole catalogue, and this was supposed to give them a sense of purpose and achievement. Some companies have tried to give their employees more autonomy in their work, but for practical reasons this usually can be done only to a very limited extent, and in any case employees are never given autonomy as to ultimate goals -- their "autonomous" efforts can never be directed toward goals that they select personally, but only toward their employer's goals, such as the survival and growth of the company. Any company would soon go out of business if it permitted its employees to act otherwise. Similarly, in any enterprise within a socialist system, workers must direct their efforts toward the goals of the enterprise, otherwise the enterprise will not serve its purpose as part of the system. Once again, for purely technical reasons it is not possible for most individuals or small groups to have much autonomy in industrial society. Even the small-business owner commonly has only limited autonomy. Apart from the necessity of government regulation, he is restricted by the fact that he must fit into the economic system and conform to its requirements. For instance, when someone develops a new technology, the small-business person often has to use that technology whether he wants to or not, in order to remain competitive. THE 'BAD' PARTS OF TECHNOLOGY CANNOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE 'GOOD' PARTS 121. A further reason why industrial society cannot be reformed in favor of freedom is that modern technology is a unified system in which all parts are dependent on one another. You can't get rid of the "bad" parts of technology and retain only the "good" parts. Take modern medicine, for example. Progress in medical science depends on progress in chemistry, physics, biology, computer science and other fields. Advanced medical treatments require expensive, high-tech equipment that can be made available only by a technologically progressive, economically rich society. Clearly you can't have much progress in medicine without the whole technological system and everything that goes with it. 122. Even if medical progress could be maintained without the rest of the technological system, it would by itself bring certain evils. Suppose for example that a cure for diabetes is discovered. People with a genetic tendency to diabetes will then be able to survive and reproduce as well as anyone else. Natural selection against genes for diabetes will cease and such genes will spread throughout the population. (This may be occurring to some extent already, since diabetes, while not curable, can be controlled through the use of insulin.) The same thing will happen with many other diseases susceptibility to which is affected by genetic degradation of the population. The only solution will be some sort of eugenics program or extensive genetic engineering of human beings, so that man in the future will no longer be a creation of nature, or of chance, or of God (depending on your religious or philosophical opinions), but a manufactured product. 123. If you think that big government interferes in your life too much NOW, just wait till the government starts regulating the genetic constitution of your children. Such regulation will inevitably follow the introduction of genetic engineering of human beings, because the consequences of unregulated genetic engineering would be disastrous. [19] 124. The usual response to such concerns is to talk about "medical ethics." But a code of ethics would not serve to protect freedom in the face of medical progress; it would only make matters worse. A code of ethics applicable to genetic engineering would be in effect a means of regulating the genetic constitution of human beings. Somebody (probably the upper-middle class, mostly) would decide that such and such applications of genetic engineering were "ethical" and others were not, so that in effect they would be imposing their own values on the genetic constitution of the population at large. Even if a code of ethics were chosen on a completely democratic basis, the majority would be imposing their own values on any minorities who might have a different idea of what constituted an "ethical" use of genetic engineering. The only code of ethics that would truly protect freedom would be one that prohibited ANY genetic engineering of human beings, and you can be sure that no such code will ever be applied in a technological society. No code that reduced genetic engineering to a minor role could stand up for long, because the temptation presented by the immense power of biotechnology would be irresistible, especially since to the majority of people many of its applications will seem obviously and unequivocally good (eliminating physical and mental diseases, giving people the abilities they need to get along in today's world). Inevitably, genetic engineering will be used extensively, but only in ways consistent with the needs of the industrial-technological system. [20] TECHNOLOGY IS A MORE POWERFUL SOCIAL FORCE THAN THE ASPIRATION FOR FREEDOM 125. It is not possible to make a LASTING compromise between technology and freedom, because technology is by far the more powerful social force and continually encroaches on freedom through REPEATED compromises. Imagine the case of two neighbors, each of whom at the outset owns the same amount of land, but one of whom is more powerful than the other. The powerful one demands a piece of the other's land. The weak one refuses. The powerful one says, "OK, let's compromise. Give me half of what I asked." The weak one has little choice but to give in. Some time later the powerful neighbor demands another piece of land, again there is a compromise, and so forth. By forcing a long series of compromises on the weaker man, the powerful one eventually gets all of his land. So it goes in the conflict between technology and freedom. 126. Let us explain why technology is a more powerful social force than the aspiration for freedom. 127. A technological advance that appears not to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten freedom often turns out to threaten it very seriously later on. For example, consider motorized transport. A walking man formerly could go where he pleased, go at his own pace without observing any traffic regulations, and was independent of technological support-systems. When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to increase man's freedom. They took no freedom away from the walking man, no one had to have an automobile if he didn't want one, and anyone who did choose to buy an automobile could travel much faster than the walking man. But the introduction of motorized transport soon changed society in such a way as to restrict greatly man's freedom of locomotion. When automobiles became numerous, it became necessary to regulate their use extensively. In a car, especially in densely populated areas, one cannot just go where one likes at one's own pace one's movement is governed by the flow of traffic and by various traffic laws. One is tied down by various obligations: license requirements, driver test, renewing registration, insurance, maintenance required for safety, monthly payments on purchase price. Moreover, the use of motorized transport is no longer optional. Since the introduction of motorized transport the arrangement of our cities has changed in such a way that the majority of people no longer live within walking distance of their place of employment, shopping areas and recreational opportunities, so that they HAVE TO depend on the automobile for transportation. Or else they must use public transportation, in which case they have even less control over their own movement than when driving a car. Even the walker's freedom is now greatly restricted. In the city he continually has to stop and wait for traffic lights that are designed mainly to serve auto traffic. In the country, motor traffic makes it dangerous and unpleasant to walk along the highway. (Note the important point we have illustrated with the case of motorized transport: When a new item of technology is introduced as an option that an individual can accept or not as he chooses, it does not necessarily REMAIN optional. In many cases the new technology changes society in such a way that people eventually find themselves FORCED to use it.) 128. While technological progress AS A WHOLE continually narrows our sphere of freedom, each new technical advance CONSIDERED BY ITSELF appears to be desirable. Electricity, indoor plumbing, rapid long-distance communications . . . how could one argue against any of these things, or against any other of the innumerable technical advances that have made modern society? It would have been absurd to resist the introduction of the telephone, for example. It offered many advantages and no disadvantages. Yet as we explained in paragraphs 59-76, all these technical advances taken together have created world in which the average man's fate is no longer in his own hands or in the hands of his neighbors and friends, but in those of politicians, corporation executives and remote, anonymous technicians and bureaucrats whom he as an individual has no power to influence. [21] The same process will continue in the future. Take genetic engineering, for example. Few people will resist the introduction of a genetic technique that eliminates a hereditary disease It does no apparent harm and prevents much suffering. Yet a large number of genetic improvements taken together will make the human being into an engineered product rather than a free creation of chance (or of God, or whatever, depending on your religious beliefs). 129 Another reason why technology is such a powerful social force is that, within the context of a given society, technological progress marches in only one direction; it can never be reversed. Once a technical innovation has been introduced, people usually become dependent on it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Not only do people become dependent as individuals on a new item of technology, but, even more, the system as a whole becomes dependent on it. (Imagine what would happen to the system today if computers, for example, were eliminated.) Thus the system can move in only one direction, toward greater technologization. Technology repeatedly forces freedom to take a step back -- short of the overthrow of the whole technological system. 130. Technology advances with great rapidity and threatens freedom at many different points at the same time (crowding, rules and regulations, increasing dependence of individuals on large organizations, propaganda and other psychological techniques, genetic engineering, invasion of privacy through surveillance devices and computers, etc.) To hold back any ONE of the threats to freedom would require a long different social struggle. Those who want to protect freedom are overwhelmed by the sheer number of new attacks and the rapidity with which they develop, hence they become pathetic and no longer resist. To fight each of the threats separately would be futile. Success can be hoped for only by fighting the technological system as a whole; but that is revolution not reform. 131. Technicians (we use this term in its broad sense to describe all those who perform a specialized task that requires training) tend to be so involved in their work (their surrogate activity) that when a conflict arises between their technical work and freedom, they almost always decide in favor of their technical work. This is obvious in the case of scientists, but it also appears elsewhere: Educators, humanitarian groups, conservation organizations do not hesitate to use propaganda or other psychological techniques to help them achieve their laudable ends. Corporations and government agencies, when they find it useful, do not hesitate to collect information about individuals without regard to their privacy. Law enforcement agencies are frequently inconvenienced by the constitutional rights of suspects and often of completely innocent persons, and they do whatever they can do legally (or sometimes illegally) to restrict or circumvent those rights. Most of these educators, government officials and law officers believe in freedom, privacy and constitutional rights, but when these conflict with their work, they usually feel that their work is more important. 132. It is well known that people generally work better and more persistently when striving for a reward than when attempting to avoid a punishment or negative outcome. Scientists and other technicians are motivated mainly by the rewards they get through their work. But those who oppose technilogiccal invasions of freedom are working to avoid a negative outcome, consequently there are a few who work persistently and well at this discouraging task. If reformers ever achieved a signal victory that seemed to set up a solid barrier against further erosion of freedom through technological progress, most would tend to relax and turn their attention to more agreeable pursuits. But the scientists would remain busy in their laboratories, and technology as it progresses would find ways, in spite of any barriers, to exert more and more control over individuals and make them always more dependent on the system. 133. No social arrangements, whether laws, institutions, customs or ethical codes, can provide permanent protection against technology. History shows that all social arrangements are transitory; they all change or break down eventually. But technological advances are permanent within the context of a given civilization. Suppose for example that it were possible to arrive at some social arrangements that would prevent genetic engineering from being applied to human beings, or prevent it from being applied in such a ways as to threaten freedom and dignity. Still, the technology would remain waiting. Sooner or later the social arrangement would break down. Probably sooner, given that pace of change in our society. Then genetic engineering would begin to invade our sphere of freedom, and this invasion would be irreversible (short of a breakdown of technological civilization itself). Any illusions about achieving anything permanent through social arrangements should be dispelled by what is currently happening with environmental legislation. A few years ago it seemed that there were secure legal barriers preventing at least SOME of the worst forms of environmental degradation. A change in the political wind, and those barriers begin to crumble. 134. For all of the foregoing reasons, technology is a more powerful social force than the aspiration for freedom. But this statement requires an important qualification. It appears that during the next several decades the industrial-technological system will be undergoing severe stresses due to economic and environmental problems, and especially due to problems of human behavior (alienation, rebellion, hostility, a variety of social and psychological difficulties). We hope that the stresses through which the system is likely to pass will cause it to break down, or at least weaken it sufficiently so that a revolution occurs and is successful, then at that particular moment the aspiration for freedom will have proved more powerful than technology. 135. In paragraph 125 we used an analogy of a weak neighbor who is left destitute by a strong neighbor who takes all his land by forcing on him a series of compromises. But suppose now that the strong neighbor gets sick, so that he is unable to defend himself. The weak neighbor can force the strong one to give him his land back, or he can kill him. If he lets the strong man survive and only forces him to give his land back, he is a fool, because when the strong man gets well he will again take all the land for himself. The only sensible alternative for the weaker man is to kill the strong one while he has the chance. In the same way, while the industrial system is sick we must destroy it. If we compromise with it and let it recover from its sickness, it will eventually wipe out all of our freedom. SIMPLER SOCIAL PROBLEMS HAVE PROVED INTRACTABLE 136. If anyone still imagines that it would be possible to reform the system in such a way as to protect freedom from technology, let him consider how clumsily and for the most part unsuccessfully our society has dealt with other social problems that are far more simple and straightforward. Among other things, the system has failed to stop environmental degradation, political corruption, drug trafficking or domestic abuse. 137. Take our environmental problems, for example. Here the conflict of values is straightforward: economic expedience now versus saving some of our natural resources for our grandchildren [22] But on this subject we get only a lot of blather and obfuscation from the people who have power, and nothing like a clear, consistent line of action, and we keep on piling up environmental problems that our grandchildren will have to live with. Attempts to resolve the environmental issue consist of struggles and compromises between different factions, some of which are ascendant at one moment, others at another moment. The line of struggle changes with the shifting currents of public opinion. This is not a rational process, or is it one that is likely to lead to a timely and successful solution to the problem. Major social problems, if they get "solved" at all, are rarely or never solved through any rational, comprehensive plan. They just work themselves out through a process in which various competing groups pursing their own usually short-term) self-interest [23] arrive (mainly by luck) at some more or less stable modus vivendi. In fact, the principles we formulated in paragraphs 100-106 make it seem doubtful that rational, long-term social planning can EVER be successful. 138. Thus it is clear that the human race has at best a very limited capacity for solving even relatively straightforward social problems. How then is it going to solve the far more difficult and subtle problem of reconciling freedom with technology? Technology presents clear-cut material advantages, whereas freedom is an abstraction that means different things to different people, and its loss is easily obscured by propaganda and fancy talk. 139. And note this important difference: It is conceivable that our environmental problems (for example) may some day be settled through a rational, comprehensive plan, but if this happens it will be only because it is in the long-term interest of the system to solve these problems. But it is NOT in the interest of the system to preserve freedom or small-group autonomy. On the contrary, it is in the interest of the system to bring human behavior under control to the greatest possible extent. Thus, while practical considerations may eventually force the system to take a rational, prudent approach to environmental problems, equally practical considerations will force the system to regulate human behavior ever more closely (preferably by indirect means that will disguise the encroachment on freedom.) This isn't just our opinion. Eminent social scientists (e.g. James Q. Wilson) have stressed the importance of "socializing" people more effectively. REVOLUTION IS EASIER THAN REFORM 140. We hope we have convinced the reader that the system cannot be reformed in a such a way as to reconcile freedom with technology. The only way out is to dispense with the industrial-technological system altogether. This implies revolution, not necessarily an armed uprising, but certainly a radical and fundamental change in the nature of society. 141. People tend to assume that because a revolution involves a much greater change than reform does, it is more difficult to bring about than reform is. Actually, under certain circumstances revolution is much easier than reform. The reason is that a revolutionary movement can inspire an intensity of commitment that a reform movement cannot inspire. A reform movement merely offers to solve a particular social problem A revolutionary movement offers to solve all problems at one stroke and create a whole new world; it provides the kind of ideal for which people will take great risks and make great sacrifices. For this reasons it would be much easier to overthrow the whole technological system than to put effective, permanent restraints on the development of application of any one segment of technology, such as genetic engineering, but under suitable conditions large numbers of people may devote themselves passionately to a revolution against the industrial-technological system. As we noted in paragraph 132, reformers seeking to limite certain aspects of technology would be working to avoid a negative outcome. But revolutionaries work to gain a powerful reward -- fulfillment of their revolutionary vision -- and therefore work harder and more persistently than reformers do. 142. Reform is always restrainde by the fear of painful consequences if changes go too far. But once a revolutionary fever has taken hold of a society, people are willing to undergo unlimited hardships for the sake of their revolution. This was clearly shown in the French and Russian Revolutions. It may be that in such cases only a minority of the population is really committed to the revolution, but this minority is sufficiently large and active so that it becomes the dominant force in society. We will have more to say about revolution in paragraphs 180-205. CONTROL OF HUMAN BEHAVIOR 143. Since the beginning of civilization, organized societies have had to put pressures on human beings of the sake of the functioning of the social organism. The kinds of pressures vary greatly from one society to another. Some of the pressures are physical (poor diet, excessive labor, environmental pollution), some are psychological (noise, crowding, forcing humans behavior into the mold that society requires). In the past, human nature has been approximately constant, or at any rate has varied only within certain bounds. Consequently, societies have been able to push people only up to certain limits. When the limit of human endurance has been passed, things start going rong: rebellion, or crime, or corruption, or evasion of work, or depression and other mental problems, or an elevated death rate, or a declining birth rate or something else, so that either the society breaks down, or its functioning becomes too inefficient and it is (quickly or gradually, through conquest, attrition or evolution) replaces by some more efficient form of society. [25] 144. Thus human nature has in the past put certain limits on the development of societies. People coud be pushed only so far and no farther. But today this may be changing, because modern technology is developing way of modifying human beings. 145. Imagine a society that subjects people to conditions that amke them terribley unhappy, then gives them the drugs to take away their unhappiness. Science fiction? It is already happening to some extent in our own society. It is well known that the rate of clinical depression had been greatly increasing in recent decades. We believe that this is due to disruption fo the power process, as explained in paragraphs 59-76. But even if we are wrong, the increasing rate of depression is certainly the result of SOME conditions that exist in today's society. Instead of removing the conditions that make people depressed, modern society gives them antidepressant drugs. In effect, antidepressants area a means of modifying an individual's internal state in such a way as to enable him to toelrate social conditions that he would otherwise find intolerable. (Yes, we know that depression is often of purely genetic origin. We are referring here to those cases in which environment plays the predominant role.) 146. Drugs that affect the mind are only one example of the methods of controlling human behavior that modern society is developing. Let us look at some of the other methods. 147. To start with, there are the techniques of surveillance. Hidden video cameras are now used in most stores and in many other places, computers are used to collect and process vast amounts of information about individuals. Information so obtained greatly increases the effectiveness of physical coercion (i.e., law enforcement).[26] Then there are the methods of propaganda, for which the mass communication media provide effective vehicles. Efficient techniques have been developed for winning elections, selling products, influencing public opinion. The entertainment industry serves as an important psychological tool of the system, possibly even when it is dishing out large amounts of sex and violence. Entertainment provides modern man with an essential means of escape. While absorbed in television, videos, etc., he can forget stress, anxiety, frustration, dissatisfaction. Many primitive peoples, when they don't have work to do, are quite content to sit for hours at a time doing nothing at all, because they are at peace with themselves and their world. But most modern people must be contantly occupied or entertained, otherwise the get "bored," i.e., they get fidgety, uneasy, irritable. 148. Other techniques strike deeper that the foregoing. Education is no longer a simple affair of paddling a kid's behind when he doesn't know his lessons and patting him on the head when he does know them. It is becoming a scientific technique for controlling the child's development. Sylvan Learning Centers, for example, have had great success in motivating children to study, and psychological techniques are also used with more or less success in many conventional schools. "Parenting" techniques that are taught to parents are designed to make children accept fundamental values of the system and behave in ways that the system finds desirable. "Mental health" programs, "intervention" techniques, psychotherapy and so forth are ostensibly designed to benefit individuals, but in practice they usually serve as methods for inducing individuals to think and behave as the system requires. (There is no contradiction here; an individual whose attitudes or behavior bring him into conflict with the system is up against a force that is too powerful for him to conquer or escape from, hence he is likely to suffer from stress, frustration, defeat. His path will be much easier if he thinks and behaves as the system requires. In that sense the system is acting for the benefit of the individual when it brainwashes him into conformity.) Child abuse in its gross and obvious forms is disapproved in most if not all cultures. Tormenting a child for a trivial reason or no reason at all is something that appalls almost everyone. But many psychologists interpret the concept of abuse much more broadly. Is spanking, when used as part of a rational and consistent system of discipline, a form of abuse? The question will ultimately be decided by whether or not spanking tends to produce behavior that makes a person fit in well with the existing system of society. In practice, the word "abuse" tends to be interpreted to include any method of child-rearing that produces behavior inconvenient for the system. Thus, when they go beyond the prevention of obvious, senseless cruelty, programs for preventing "child abuse" are directed toward the control of human behavior of the system. 149. Presumably, research will continue to increas the effectiveness of psychological techniques for controlling human behavior. But we think it is unlikely that psychological techniques alone will be sufficient to adjust human beings to the kind of society that technology is creating. Biological methods probably will have to be used. We have already mentiond the use of drugs in this connection. Neurology may provide other avenues of modifying the human mind. Genetic engineering of human beings is already beginning to occur in the form of "gene therapy," and there is no reason to assume the such methods will not eventually be used to modify those aspects of the body that affect mental funtioning. 150. As we mentioned in paragraph 134, industrial society seems likely to be entering a period of severe stress, due in part to problems of human behavior and in part to economic and environmental problems. And a considerable proportion of the system's economic and environmental problems result from the way human beings behave. Alienation, low self-esteem, depression, hostility, rebellion; children who won't study, youth gangs, illegal drug use, rape, child abuse , other crimes, unsafe sex, teen pregnancy, population growth, political corruption, race hatred, ethnic rivalry, bitter ideological conflict (i.e., pro-choice vs. pro-life), political extremism, terrorism, sabotage, anti-government groups, hate groups. All these threaten the very survival of the system. The system will be FORCED to use every practical means of controlling human behavior. 151. The social disruption that we see today is certainly not the result of mere chance. It can only be a result fo the conditions of life that the system imposes on people. (We have argued that the most important of these conditions is disruption of the power process.) If the systems succeeds in imposing sufficient control over human behavior to assure itw own survival, a new watershed in human history will have passed. Whereas formerly the limits of human endurance have imposed limits on the development of societies (as we explained in paragraphs 143, 144), industrial-technological society will be able to pass those limits by modifying human beings, whether by psychological methods or biological methods or both. In the future, social systems will not be adjusted to suit the needs of human beings. Instead, human being will be adjusted to suit the needs of the system. [27] 152. Generally speaking, technological control over human behavior will probably not be introduced with a totalitarian intention or even through a conscious desire to restrict human freedom. [28] Each new step in the assertion of control over the human mind will be taken as a rational response to a problem that faces society, such as curing alcoholism, reducing the crime rate or inducing young people to study science and engineering. In many cases, there will be humanitarian justification. For example, when a psychiatrist prescribes an anti-depressant for a depressed patient, he is clearly doing that individual a favor. It would be inhumane to withhold the drug from someone who needs it. When parents send their children to Sylvan Learning Centers to have them manipulated into becoming enthusiastic about their studies, they do so from concern for their children's welfare. It may be that some of these parents wish that one didn't have to have specialized training to get a job and that their kid didn't have to be brainwashed into becoming a computer nerd. But what can they do? They can't change society, and their child may be unemployable if he doesn't have certain skills. So they send him to Sylvan. 153. Thus control over human behavior will be introduced not by a calculated decision of the authorities but through a process of social evolution (RAPID evolution, however). The process will be impossible to resist, because each advance, considered by itself, will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will appear to be beneficial, or at least the evil involved in making the advance will seem to be less than that which would result from not making it (see paragraph 127). Propaganda for example is used for many good purposes, such as discouraging child abuse or race hatred. [14] Sex education is obviously useful, yet the effect of sex education (to the extent that it is successful) is to take the shaping of sexual attitudes away from the family and put it into the hands of the state as represented by the public school system. 154. Suppose a biological trait is discovered that increases the likelihood that a child will grow up to be a criminal and suppose some sort of gene therapy can remove this trait. [29] Of course most parents whose children possess the trait will have them undergo the therapy. It would be inhumane to do otherwise, since the child would probably have a miserable life if he grew up to be a criminal. But many or most primitive societies have a low crime rate in comparison with that of our society, even though they have neither high-tech methods of child-rearing nor harsh systems of punishment. Since there is no reason to suppose that more modern men than primitive men have innate predatory tendencies, the high crime rate of our society must be due to the pressures that modern conditions put on people, to which many cannot or will not adjust. Thus a treatment designed to remove potential criminal tendencies is at least in part a way of re-engineering people so that they suit the requirements of the system. 155. Our society tends to regard as a "sickness" any mode of thought or behavior that is inconvenient for the system, and this is plausible because when an individual doesn't fit into the system it causes pain to the individual as well as problems for the system. Thus the manipulation of an individual to adjust him to the system is seen as a "cure" for a "sickness" and therefore as good. 156. In paragraph 127 we pointed out that if the use of a new item of technology is INITIALLY optional, it does not necessarily REMAIN optional, because the new technology tends to change society in such a way that it becomes difficult or impossible for an individual to function without using that technology. This applies also to the technology of human behavior. In a world in which most children are put through a program to make them enthusiastic about studying, a parent will almost be forced to put his kid through such a program, because if he does not, then the kid will grow up to be, comparatively speaking, an ignoramus and therefore unemployable. Or suppose a biological treatment is discovered that, without undesirable side-effects, will greatly reduce the psychological stress from which so many people suffer in our society. If large numbers of people choose to undergo the treatment, then the general level of stress in society will be reduced, so that it will be possible for the system to increase the stress-producing pressures. In fact, something like this seems to have happened already with one of our society's most important psychological tools for enabling people to reduce (or at least temporarily escape from) stress, namely, mass entertainment (see paragraph 147). Our use of mass entertainment is "optional": No law requires us to watch television, listen to the radio, read magazines. Yet mass entertainment is a means of escape and stress-reduction on which most of us have become dependent. Everyone complains about the trashiness of television, but almost everyone watches it. A few have kicked the TV habit, but it would be a rare person who could get along today without using ANY form of mass entertainment. (Yet until quite recently in human history most people got along very nicely with no other entertainment than that which each local community created for itself.) Without the entertainment industry the system probably would not have been able to get away with putting as much stress-producing pressure on us as it does. 157. Assuming that industrial society survives, it is likely that technology will eventually acquire something approaching complete control over human behavior. It has been established beyond any rational doubt that human thought and behavior have a largely biological basis. As experimenters have demonstrated, feelings such as hunger, pleasure, anger and fear can be turned on and off by electrical stimulation of appropriate parts of the brain. Memories can be destroyed by damaging parts of the brain or they can be brought to the surface by electrical stimulation. Hallucinations can be induced or moods changed by drugs. There may or may not be an immaterial human soul, but if there is one it clearly is less powerful that the biological mechanisms of human behavior. For if that were not the case then researchers would not be able so easily to manipulate human feelings and behavior with drugs and electrical currents. 158. It presumably would be impractical for all people to have electrodes inserted in their heads so that they could be controlled by the authorities. But the fact that human thoughts and feelings are so open to biological intervention shows that the problem of controlling human behavior is mainly a technical problem; a problem of neurons, hormones and complex molecules; the kind of problem that is accessible to scientific attack. Given the outstanding record of our society in solving technical problems, it is overwhelmingly probable that great advances will be made in the control of human behavior. 159. Will public resistance prevent the introduction of technological control of human behavior? It certainly would if an attempt were made to introduce such control all at once. But since technological control will be introduced through a long sequence of small advances, there will be no rational and effective public resistance. (See paragraphs 127,132, 153.) 160. To those who think that all this sounds like science fiction, we point out that yesterday's science fiction is today's fact. The Industrial Revolution has radically altered man's environment and way of life, and it is only to be expected that as technology is increasingly applied to the human body and mind, man himself will be altered as radically as his environment and way of life have been. HUMAN RACE AT A CROSSROADS 161. But we have gotten ahead of our story. It is one thing to develop in the laboratory a series of psychological or biological techniques for manipulating human behavior and quite another to integrate these techniques into a functioning social system. The latter problem is the more difficult of the two. For example, while the techniques of educational psychology doubtless work quite well in the "lab schools" where they are developed, it is not necessarily easy to apply them effectively throughout our educational system. We all know what many of our schools are like. The teachers are too busy taking knives and guns away from the kids to subject them to the latest techniques for making them into computer nerds. Thus, in spite of all its technical advances relating to human behavior the system to date has not been impressively successful in controlling human beings. The people whose behavior is fairly well under the control of the system are those of the type that might be called "bourgeois." But there are growing numbers of people who in one way or another are rebels against the system: welfare leaches, youth gangs cultists, satanists, nazis, radical environmentalists, militiamen, etc.. 162. The system is currently engaged in a desperate struggle to overcome certain problems that threaten its survival, among which the problems of human behavior are the most important. If the system succeeds in acquiring sufficient control over human behavior quickly enough, it will probably survive. Otherwise it will break down. We think the issue will most likely be resolved within the next several decades, say 40 to 100 years. 163. Suppose the system survives the crisis of the next several decades. By that time it will have to have solved, or at least brought under control, the principal problems that confront it, in particular that of "socializing" human beings; that is, making people sufficiently docile so that their behavior no longer threatens the system. That being accomplished, it does not appear that there would be any further obstacle to the development of technology, and it would presumably advance toward its logical conclusion, which is complete control over everything on Earth, including human beings and all other important organisms. The system may become a unitary, monolithic organization, or it may be more or less fragmented and consist of a number of organizations coexisting in a relationship that includes elements of both cooperation and competition, just as today the government, the corporations and other large organizations both cooperate and compete with one another. Human freedom mostly will have vanished, because individuals and small groups will be impotent vis-a-vis large organizations armed with supertechnology and an arsenal of advanced psychological and biological tools for manipulating human beings, besides instruments of surveillance and physical coercion. Only a small number of people will have any real power, and even these probably will have only very limited freedom, because their behavior too will be regulated; just as today our politicians and corporation executives can retain their positions of power only as long as their behavior remains within certain fairly narrow limits. 164. Don't imagine that the systems will stop developing further techniques for controlling human beings and nature once the crisis of the next few decades is over and increasing control is no longer necessary for the system's survival. On the contrary, once the hard times are over the system will increase its control over people and nature more rapidly, because it will no longer be hampered by difficulties of the kind that it is currently experiencing. Survival is not the principal motive for extending control. As we explained in paragraphs 87-90, technicians and scientists carry on their work largely as a surrogate activity; that is, they satisfy their need for power by solving technical problems. They will continue to do this with unabated enthusiasm, and among the most interesting and challenging problems for them to solve will be those of understanding the human body and mind and intervening in their development. For the "good of humanity," of course. 165. But suppose on the other hand that the stresses of the coming decades prove to be too much for the system. If the system breaks down there may be a period of chaos, a "time of troubles" such as those that history has recorded: at various epochs in the past. It is impossible to predict what would emerge from such a time of troubles, but at any rate the human race would be given a new chance. The greatest danger is that industrial society may begin to reconstitute itself within the first few years after the breakdown. Certainly there will be many people (power-hungry types especially) who will be anxious to get the factories running again. 166. Therefore two tasks confront those who hate the servitude to which the industrial system is reducing the human race. First, we must work to heighten the social stresses within the system so as to increase the likelihood that it will break down or be weakened sufficiently so that a revolution against it becomes possible. Second, it is necessary to develop and propagate an ideology that opposes technology and the industrial society if and when the system becomes sufficiently weakened. And such an ideology will help to assure that, if and when industrial society breaks down, its remnants will be smashed beyond repair, so that the system cannot be reconstituted. The factories should be destroyed, technical books burned, etc. HUMAN SUFFERING 167. The industrial system will not break down purely as a result of revolutionary action. It will not be vulnerable to revolutionary attack unless its own internal problems of development lead it into very serious difficulties. So if the system breaks down it will do so either spontaneously, or through a process that is in part spontaneous but helped along by revolutionaries. If the breakdown is sudden, many people will die, since the world's population has become so overblown that it cannot even feed itself any longer without advanced technology. Even if the breakdown is gradual enough so that reduction of the population can occur more through lowering of the birth rate than through elevation of the death rate, the process of de-industrialization probably will be very chaotic and involve much suffering. It is naive to think it likely that technology can be phased out in a smoothly managed orderly way, especially since the technophiles will fight stubbornly at every step. Is it therefore cruel to work for the breakdown of the system? Maybe, but maybe not. In the first place, revolutionaries will not be able to break the system down unless it is already in deep trouble so that there would be a good chance of its eventually breaking down by itself anyway; and the bigger the system grows, the more disastrous the consequences of its breakdown will be; so it may be that revolutionaries, by hastening the onset of the breakdown will be reducing the extent of the disaster. 168. In the second place, one has to balance the struggle and death against the loss of freedom and dignity. To many of us, freedom and dignity are more important than a long life or avoidance of physical pain. Besides, we all have to die some time, and it may be better to die fighting for survival, or for a cause, than to live a long but empty and purposeless life. 169. In the third place, it is not all certain that the survival of the system will lead to less suffering than the breakdown of the system would. The system has already caused, and is continuing to cause , immense suffering all over the world. Ancient cultures, that for hundreds of years gave people a satisfactory relationship with each other and their environment, have been shattered by contact with industrial society, and the result has been a whole catalogue of economic, environmental, social and psychological problems. One of the effects of the intrusion of industrial society has been that over much of the world traditional controls on population have been thrown out of balance. Hence the population explosion, with all that it implies. Then there is the psychological suffering that is widespread throughout the supposedly fortunate countries of the West (see paragraphs 44, 45). No one knows what will happen as a result of ozone depletion, the greenhouse effect and other environmental problems that cannot yet be foreseen. And, as nuclear proliferation has shown, new technology cannot be kept out of the hands of dictators and irresponsible Third World nations. Would you like to speculate abut what Iraq or North Korea will do with genetic engineering? 170. "Oh!" say the technophiles, "Science is going to fix all that! We will conquer famine, eliminate psychological suffering, make everybody healthy and happy!" Yeah, sure. That's what they said 200 years ago. The Industrial Revolution was supposed to eliminate poverty, make everybody happy, etc. The actual result has been quite different. The technophiles are hopelessly naive (or self-deceiving) in their understanding of social problems. They are unaware of (or choose to ignore) the fact that when large changes, even seemingly beneficial ones, are introduced into a society, they lead to a long sequence of other changes, most of which are impossible to predict (paragraph 103). The result is disruption of the society. So it is very probable that in their attempt to end poverty and disease, engineer docile, happy personalities and so forth, the technophiles will create social systems that are terribly troubled, even more so that the present one. For example, the scientists boast that they will end famine by creating new, genetically engineered food plants. But this will allow the human population to keep expanding indefinitely, and it is well known that crowding leads to increased stress and aggression. This is merely one example of the PREDICTABLE problems that will arise. We emphasize that, as past experience has shown, technical progress will lead to other new problems for society far more rapidly that it has been solving old ones. Thus it will take a long difficult period of trial and error for the technophiles to work the bugs out of their Brave New World (if they ever do). In the meantime there will be great suffering. So it is not all clear that the survival of industrial society would involve less suffering than the breakdown of that society would. Technology has gotten the human race into a fix from which there is not likely to be any easy escape. THE FUTURE 171. But suppose now that industrial society does survive the next several decade and that the bugs do eventually get worked out of the system, so that it functions smoothly. What kind of system will it be? We will consider several possibilities. 172. First let us postulate that the computer scientists succeed in developing intelligent machines that can do all things better that human beings can do them. In that case presumably all work will be done by vast, highly organized systems of machines and no human effort will be necessary. Either of two cases might occur. The machines might be permitted to make all of their own decisions without human oversight, or else human control over the machines might be retained. 173. If the machines are permitted to make all their own decisions, we can't make any conjectures as to the results, because it is impossible to guess how such machines might behave. We only point out that the fate of the human race would be at the mercy of the machines. It might be argued that the human race would never be foolish enough to hand over all the power to the machines. But we are suggesting neither that the human race would voluntarily turn power over to the machines nor that the machines would willfully seize power. What we do suggest is that the human race might easily permit itself to drift into a position of such dependence on the machines that it would have no practical choice but to accept all of the machines decisions. As society and the problems that face it become more and more complex and machines become more and more intelligent, people will let machines make more of their decision for them, simply because machine-made decisions will bring better result than man-made ones. Eventually a stage may be reached at which the decisions necessary to keep the system running will be so complex that human beings will be incapable of making them intelligently. At that stage the machines will be in effective control. People won't be able to just turn the machines off, because they will be so dependent on them that turning them off would amount to suicide. 174. On the other hand it is possible that human control over the machines may be retained. In that case the average man may have control over certain private machines of his own, such as his car of his personal computer, but control over large systems of machines will be in the hands of a tiny elite -- just as it is today, but with two difference. Due to improved techniques the elite will have greater control over the masses; and because human work will no longer be necessary the masses will be superfluous, a useless burden on the system. If the elite is ruthless the may simply decide to exterminate the mass of humanity. If they are humane they may use propaganda or other psychological or biological techniques to reduce the birth rate until the mass of humanity becomes extinct, leaving the world to the elite. Or, if the elite consist of soft-hearted liberals, they may decide to play the role of good shepherds to the rest of the human race. They will see to it that everyone's physical needs are satisfied, that all children are raised under psychologically hygienic conditions, that everyone has a wholesome hobby to keep him busy, and that anyone who may become dissatisfied undergoes "treatment" to cure his "problem." Of course, life will be so purposeless that people will have to be biologically or psychologically engineered either to remove their need for the power process or to make them "sublimate" their drive for power into some harmless hobby. These engineered human beings may be happy in such a society, but they most certainly will not be free. They will have been reduced to the status of domestic animals. 175. But suppose now that the computer scientists do not succeed in developing artificial intelligence, so that human work remains necessary. Even so, machines will take care of more and more of the simpler tasks so that there will be an increasing surplus of human workers at the lower levels of ability. (We see this happening already. There are many people who find it difficult or impossible to get work, because for intellectual or psychological reasons they cannot acquire the level of training necessary to make themselves useful in the present system.) On those who are employed, ever-increasing demands will be placed; They will need more and m ore training, more and more ability, and will have to be ever more reliable, conforming and docile, because they will be more and more like cells of a giant organism. Their tasks will be increasingly specialized so that their work will be, in a sense, out of touch with the real world, being concentrated on one tiny slice of reality. The system will have to use any means that I can, whether psychological or biological, to engineer people to be docile, to have the abilities that the system requires and to "sublimate" their drive for power into some specialized task. But the statement that the people of such a society will have to be docile may require qualification. The society may find competitiveness useful, provided that ways are found of directing competitiveness into channels that serve that needs of the system. We can imagine into channels that serve the needs of the system. We can imagine a future society in which there is endless competition for positions of prestige an power. But no more than a very few people will ever reach the top, where the only real power is (see end of paragraph 163). Very repellent is a society in which a person can satisfy his needs for power only by pushing large numbers of other people out of the way and depriving them of THEIR opportunity for power. 176. Once can envision scenarios that incorporate aspects of more than one of the possibilities that we have just discussed. For instance, it may be that machines will take over most of the work that is of real, practical importance, but that human beings will be kept busy by being given relatively unimportant work. It has been suggested, for example, that a great development of the service of industries might provide work for human beings. Thus people will would spend their time shinning each others shoes, driving each other around inn taxicab, making handicrafts for one another, waiting on each other's tables, etc. This seems to us a thoroughly contemptible way for the human race to end up, and we doubt that many people would find fulfilling lives in such pointless busy-work. They would seek other, dangerous outlets (drugs, , crime, "cults," hate groups) unless they were biological or psychologically engineered to adapt them to such a way of life. 177. Needless to day, the scenarios outlined above do not exhaust all the possibilities. They only indicate the kinds of outcomes that seem to us mots likely. But wee can envision no plausible scenarios that are any more palatable that the ones we've just described. It is overwhelmingly probable that if the industrial-technological system survives the next 40 to 100 years, it will by that time have developed certain general characteristics: Individuals (at least those of the "bourgeois" type, who are integrated into the system and make it run, and who therefore have all the power) will be more dependent than ever on large organizations; they will be more "socialized" that ever and their physical and mental qualities to a significant extent (possibly to a very great extent ) will be those that are engineered into them rather than being the results of chance (or of God's will, or whatever); and whatever may be left of wild nature will be reduced to remnants preserved for scientific study and kept under the supervision and management of scientists (hence it will no longer be truly wild). In the long run (say a few centuries from now) it is it is likely that neither the human race nor any other important organisms will exist as we know them today, because once you start modifying organisms through genetic engineering there is no reason to stop at any particular point, so that the modifications will probably continue until man and other organisms have been utterly transformed. 178. Whatever else may be the case, it is certain that technology is creating for human begins a new physical and social environment radically different from the spectrum of environments to which natural selection has adapted the human race physically and psychological. If man is not adjust to this new environment by being artificially re-engineered, then he will be adapted to it through a long an painful process of natural selection. The former is far more likely that the latter. 179. It would be better to dump the whole stinking system and take the consequences. STRATEGY 180. The technophiles are taking us all on an utterly reckless ride into the unknown. Many people understand something of what technological progress is doing to us yet take a passive attitude toward it because they think it is inevitable. But we (FC) don't think it is inevitable. We think it can be stopped, and we will give here some indications of how to go about stopping it. 181. As we stated in paragraph 166, the two main tasks for the present are to promote social stress and instability in industrial society and to develop and propagate an ideology that opposes technology and the industrial system. When the system becomes sufficiently stressed and unstable, a revolution against technology may be possible. The pattern would be similar to that of the French and Russian Revolutions. French society and Russian society, for several decades prior to their respective revolutions, showed increasing signs of stress and weakness. Meanwhile, ideologies were being developed that offered a new world view that was quite different from the old one. In the Russian case, revolutionaries were actively working to undermine the old order. Then, when the old system was put under sufficient additional stress (by financial crisis in France, by military defeat in Russia) it was swept away by revolution. What we propose in something along the same lines. 182. It will be objected that the French and Russian Revolutions were failures. But most revolutions have two goals. One is to destroy an old form of society and the other is to set up the new form of society envisioned by the revolutionaries. The French and Russian revolutionaries failed (fortunately!) to create the new kind of society of which they dreamed, but they were quite successful in destroying the existing form of society. 183. But an ideology, in order to gain enthusiastic support, must have a positive ideals well as a negative one; it must be FOR something as well as AGAINST something. The positive ideal that we propose is Nature. That is , WILD nature; those aspects of the functioning of the Earth and its living things that are independent of human management and free of human interference and control. And with wild nature we include human nature, by which we mean those aspects of the functioning of the human individual that are not subject to regulation by organized society but are products of chance, or free will, or God (depending on your religious or philosophical opinions). 184. Nature makes a perfect counter-ideal to technology for several reasons. Nature (that which is outside the power of the system) is the opposite of technology (which seeks to expand indefinitely the power of the system). Most people will agree that nature is beautiful; certainly it has tremendous popular appeal. The radical environmentalists ALREADY hold an ideology that exalts nature and opposes technology. [30] It is not necessary for the sake of nature to set up some chimerical utopia or any new kind of social order. Nature takes care of itself: It was a spontaneous creation that existed long before any human society, and for countless centuries many different kinds of human societies coexisted with nature without doing it an excessive amount of damage. Only with the Industrial Revolution did the effect of human society on nature become really devastating. To relieve the pressure on nature it is not necessary to create a special kind of social system, it is only necessary to get rid of industrial society. Granted, this will not solve all problems. Industrial society has already done tremendous damage to nature and it will take a very long time for the scars to heal. Besides, even pre-industrial societies can do significant damage to nature. Nevertheless, getting rid of industrial society will accomplish a great deal. It will relieve the worst of the pressure on nature so that the scars can begin to heal. It will remove the capacity of organized society to keep increasing its control over nature (including human nature). Whatever kind of society may exist after the demise of the industrial system, it is certain that most people will live close to nature, because in the absence of advanced technology there is not other way that people CAN live. To feed themselves they must be peasants or herdsmen or fishermen or hunter, etc., And, generally speaking, local autonomy should tend to increase, because lack of advanced technology and rapid communications will limit the capacity of governments or other large organizations to control local communities. 185. As for the negative consequences of eliminating industrial society -- well, you can't eat your cake and have it too. To gain one thing you have to sacrifice another. 186. Most people hate psychological conflict. For this reason they avoid doing any serious thinking about difficult social issues, and they like to have such issues presented to them in simple, black-and-white terms: THIS is all good and THAT is all bad. The revolutionary ideology should therefore be developed on two levels. 187. On the more sophisticated level the ideology should address itself to people who are intelligent, thoughtful and rational. The object should be to create a core of people who will be opposed to the industrial system on a rational, thought-out basis, with full appreciation of the problems and ambiguities involved, and of the price that has to be paid for getting rid of the system. It is particularly important to attract people of this type, as they are capable people and will be instrumental in influencing others. These people should be addressed on as rational a level as possible. Facts should never intentionally be distorted and intemperate language should be avoided. This does not mean that no appeal can be made to the emotions, but in making such appeal care should be taken to avoid misrepresenting the truth or doing anything else that would destroy the intellectual respectability of the ideology. 188. On a second level, the ideology should be propagated in a simplified form that will enable the unthinking majority to see the conflict of technology vs. nature in unambiguous terms. But even on this second level the ideology should not be expressed in language that is so cheap, intemperate or irrational that it alienates people of the thoughtful and rational type. Cheap, intemperate propaganda sometimes achieves impressive short-term gains, but it will be more advantageous in the long run to keep the loyalty of a small number of intelligently committed people than to arouse the passions of an unthinking, fickle mob who will change their attitude as soon as someone comes along with a better propaganda gimmick. However, propaganda of the rabble-rousing type may be necessary when the system is nearing the point of collapse and there is a final struggle between rival ideologies to determine which will become dominant when the old world-view goes under. 189. Prior to that final struggle, the revolutionaries should not expect to have a majority of people on their side. History is made by active, determined minorities, not by the majority, which seldom has a clear and consistent idea of what it really wants. Until the time comes for the final push toward revolution [31], the task of revolutionaries will be less to win the shallow support of the majority than to build a small core of deeply committed people. As for the majority, it will be enough to make them aware of the existence of the new ideology and remind them of it frequently; though of course it will be desirable to get majority support to the extent that this can be done without weakening the core of seriously committed people. 190. Any kind of social conflict helps to destabilize the system, but one should be careful about what kind of conflict one encourages. The line of conflict should be drawn between the mass of the people and the power-holding elite of industrial society (politicians, scientists, upper-level business executives, government officials, etc..). It should NOT be drawn between the revolutionaries and the mass of the people. For example, it would be bad strategy for the revolutionaries to condemn Americans for their habits of consumption. Instead, the average American should be portrayed as a victim of the advertising and marketing industry, which has suckered him into buying a lot of junk that he doesn't need and that is very poor compensation for his lost freedom. Either approach is consistent with the facts. It is merely a matter of attitude whether you blame the advertising industry for manipulating the public or blame the public for allowing itself to be manipulated. As a matter of strategy one should generally avoid blaming the public. 191. One should think twice before encouraging any other social conflict than that between the power-holding elite (which wields technology) and the general public (over which technology exerts its power). For one thing, other conflicts tend to distract attention from the important conflicts (between power-elite and ordinary people, between technology and nature); for another thing, other conflicts may actually tend to encourage technologization, because each side in such a conflict wants to use technological power to gain advantages over its adversary. This is clearly seen in rivalries between nations. It also appears in ethnic conflicts within nations. For example, in America many black leaders are anxious to gain power for African Americans by placing back individuals in the technological power-elite. They want there to be many black government officials, scientists, corporation executives and so forth. In this way they are helping to absorb the African American subculture into the technological system. Generally speaking, one should encourage only those social conflicts that can be fitted into the framework of the conflicts of power--elite vs. ordinary people, technology vs nature. 192. But the way to discourage ethnic conflict is NOT through militant advocacy of minority rights (see paragraphs 21, 29). Instead, the revolutionaries should emphasize that although minorities do suffer more or less disadvantage, this disadvantage is of peripheral significance. Our real enemy is the industrial-technological system, and in the struggle against the system, ethnic distinctions are of no importance. 193. The kind of revolution we have in mind will not necessarily involve an armed uprising against any government. It may or may not involve physical violence, but it will not be a POLITICAL revolution. Its focus will be on technology and economics, not politics. [32] 194. Probably the revolutionaries should even AVOID assuming political power, whether by legal or illegal means, until the industrial system is stressed to the danger point and has proved itself to be a failure in the eyes of most people. Suppose for example that some "green" party should win control of the United States Congress in an election. In order to avoid betraying or watering down their own ideology they would have to take vigorous measures to turn economic growth into economic shrinkage. To the average man the results would appear disastrous: There would be massive unemployment, shortages of commodities, etc. Even if the grosser ill effects could be avoided through superhumanly skillful management, still people would have to begin giving up the luxuries to which they have become addicted. Dissatisfaction would grow, the "green" party would be voted out of of fice and the revolutionaries would have suffered a severe setback. For this reason the revolutionaries should not try to acquire political power until the system has gotten itself into such a mess that any hardships will be seen as resulting from the failures of the industrial system itself and not from the policies of the revolutionaries. The revolution against technology will probably have to be a revolution by outsiders, a revolution from below and not from above. 195. The revolution must be international and worldwide. It cannot be carried out on a nation-by-nation basis. Whenever it is suggested that the United States, for example, should cut back on technological progress or economic growth, people get hysterical and start screaming that if we fall behind in technology the Japanese will get ahead of us. Holy robots The world will fly off its orbit if the Japanese ever sell more cars than we do! (Nationalism is a great promoter of technology.) More reasonably, it is argued that if the relatively democratic nations of the world fall behind in technology while nasty, dictatorial nations like China, Vietnam and North Korea continue to progress, eventually the dictators may come to dominate the world. That is why the industrial system should be attacked in all nations simultaneously, to the extent that this may be possible. True, there is no assurance that the industrial system can be destroyed at approximately the same time all over the world, and it is even conceivable that the attempt to overthrow the system could lead instead to the domination of the system by dictators. That is a risk that has to be taken. And it is worth taking, since the difference between a "democratic" industrial system and one controlled by dictators is small compared with the difference between an industrial system and a non-industrial one. [33] It might even be argued that an industrial system controlled by dictators would be preferable, because dictator-controlled systems usually have proved inefficient, hence they are presumably more likely to break down. Look at Cuba. 196. Revolutionaries might consider favoring measures that tend to bind the world economy into a unified whole. Free trade agreements like NAFTA and GATT are probably harmful to the environment in the short run, but in the long run they may perhaps be advantageous because they foster economic interdependence between nations. I will be eaier to destroy the industrial system on a worldwide basis if he world economy is so unified that its breakdown in any on major nation will lead to its breakdwon in al industrialized nations. the long run they may perhaps be advantageous because they foster economic interdependence between nations. It will be easier to destroy the industrial system on a worldwide basis if the world economy is so unified that its breakdown in any one major nation will lead to its breakdown in all industrialized nations. 197. Some people take the line that modern man has too much power, too much control over nature; they argue for a more passive attitude on the part of the human race. At best these people are expressing themselves unclearly, because they fail to distinguish between power for LARGE ORGANIZATIONS and power for INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS. It is a mistake to argue for powerlessness and passivity, because people NEED power. Modern man as a collective entity--that is, the industrial system--has immense power over nature, and we (FC) regard this as evil. But modern INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS OF INDIVIDUALS have far less power than primitive man ever did. Generally speaking, the vast power of "modern man" over nature is exercised not by individuals or small groups but by large organizations. To the extent that the average modern INDIVIDUAL can wield the power of technology, he is permitted to do so only within narrow limits and only under the supervision and control of the system. (You need a license for everything and with the license come rules and regulations). The individual has only those technological powers with which the system chooses to provide him. His PERSONAL power over nature is slight. 198. Primitive INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS actually had considerable power over nature; or maybe it would be better to say power WITHIN nature. When primitive man needed food he knew how to find and prepare edible roots, how to track game and take it with homemade weapons. He knew how to protect himself from heat, cold, rain, dangerous animals, etc. But primitive man did relatively little damage to nature because the COLLECTIVE power of primitive society was negligible compared to the COLLECTIVE power of industrial society. 199. Instead of arguing for powerlessness and passivity, one should argue that the power of the INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM should be broken, and that this will greatly INCREASE the power and freedom of INDIVIDUALS and SMALL GROUPS. 200. Until the industrial system has been thoroughly wrecked, the destruction of that system must be the revolutionaries' ONLY goal. Other goals would distract attention and energy from the main goal. More importantly, if the revolutionaries permit themselves to have any other goal than the destruction of technology, they will be tempted to use technology as a tool for reaching that other goal. If they give in to that temptation, they will fall right back into the technological trap, because modern technology is a unified, tightly organized system, so that, in order to retain SOME technology, one finds oneself obliged to retain MOST technology, hence one ends up sacrificing only token amounts of technology. 201. Suppose for example that the revolutionaries took "social justice" as a goal. Human nature being what it is, social justice would not come about spontaneously; it would have to be enforced. In order to enforce it the revolutionaries would have to retain central organization and control. For that they would need rapid long-distance transportation and communication, and therefore all the technology needed to support the transportation and communication systems. To feed and clothe poor people they would have to use agricultural and manufacturing technology. And so forth. So that the attempt to insure social justice would force them to retain most parts of the technological system. Not that we have anything against social justice, but it must not be allowed to interfere with the effort to get rid of the technological system. 202. It would be hopeless for revolutionaries to try to attack the system without using SOME modern technology. If nothing else they must use the communications media to spread their message. But they should use modern technology for only ONE purpose: to attack the technological system. 203. Imagine an alcoholic sitting with a barrel of wine in front of him. Suppose he starts saying to himself, "Wine isn't bad for you if used in moderation. Why, they say small amounts of wine are even good for you! It won't do me any harm if I take just one little drink..." Well you know what is going to happen. Never forget that the human race with technology is just like an alcoholic with a barrel of wine. 204. Revolutionaries should have as many children as they can. There is strong scientific evidence that social attitudes are to a significant extent inherited. No one suggests that a social attitude is a direct outcome of a person's genetic constitution, but it appears that personality traits tend, within the context of our society, to make a person more likely to hold this or that social attitude. Objections to these findings have been raised, but objections are feeble and seem to be ideologically motivated. In any event, no one denies that children tend on the average to hold social attitudes similar to those of their parents. From our point of view it doesn't matter all that much whether the attitudes are passed on genetically or through childhood training. In either case the ARE passed on. 205. The trouble is that many of the people who are inclined to rebel against the industrial system are also concerned about the population problems, hence they are apt to have few or no children. In this way they may be handing the world over to the sort of people who support or at least accept the industrial system. To insure the strength of the next generation of revolutionaries the present generation must reproduce itself abundantly. In doing so they will be worsening the population problem only slightly. And the most important problem is to get rid of the industrial system, because once the industrial system is gone the world's population necessarily will decrease (see paragraph 167); whereas, if the industrial system survives, it will continue developing new techniques of food production that may enable the world's population to keep increasing almost indefinitely. 206. With regard to revolutionary strategy, the only points on which we absolutely insist are that the single overriding goal must be the elimination of modern technology, and that no other goal can be allowed to compete with this one. For the rest, revolutionaries should take an empirical approach. If experience indicates that some of the recommendations made in the foregoing paragraphs are not going to give good results, then those recommendations should be discarded. TWO KINDS OF TECHNOLOGY 207. An argument likely to be raised against our proposed revolution is that it is bound to fail, because (it is claimed) throughout history technology has always progressed, never regressed, hence technological regression is impossible. But this claim is false. 208. We distinguish between two kinds of technology, which we will call small-scale technology and organization-dependent technology. Small-scale technology is technology that can be used by small-scale communities without outside assistance. Organization-dependent technology is technology that depends on large-scale social organization. We are aware of no significant cases of regression in small-scale technology. But organization-dependent technology DOES regress when the social organization on which it depends breaks down. Example: When the Roman Empire fell apart the Romans' small-scale technology survived because any clever village craftsman could build, for instance, a water wheel, any skilled smith could make steel by Roman methods, and so forth. But the Romans' organization-dependent technology DID regress. Their aqueducts fell into disrepair and were never rebuilt. Their techniques of road construction were lost. The Roman system of urban sanitation was forgotten, so that until rather recent times did the sanitation of European cities that of Ancient Rome. 209. The reason why technology has seemed always to progress is that, until perhaps a century or two before the Industrial Revolution, most technology was small-scale technology. But most of the technology developed since the Industrial Revolution is organization-dependent technology. Take the refrigerator for example. Without factory-made parts or the facilities of a post-industrial machine shop it would be virtually impossible for a handful of local craftsmen to build a refrigerator. If by some miracle they did succeed in building one it would be useless to them without a reliable source of electric power. So they would have to dam a stream and build a generator. Generators require large amounts of copper wire. Imagine trying to make that wire without modern machinery. And where would they get a gas suitable for refrigeration? It would be much easier to build an icehouse or preserve food by drying or picking, as was done before the invention of the refrigerator. 210. So it is clear that if the industrial system were once thoroughly broken down, refrigeration technology would quickly be lost. The same is true of other organization-dependent technology. And once this technology had been lost for a generation or so it would take centuries to rebuild it, just as it took centuries to build it the first time around. Surviving technical books would be few and scattered. An industrial society, if built from scratch without outside help, can only be built in a series of stages: You need tools to make tools to make tools to make tools ... . A long process of economic development and progress in social organization is required. And, even in the absence of an ideology opposed to technology, there is no reason to believe that anyone would be interested in rebuilding industrial society. The enthusiasm for "progress" is a phenomenon particular to the modern form of society, and it seems not to have existed prior to the 17th century or thereabouts. 211. In the late Middle Ages there were four main civilizations that were about equally "advanced": Europe, the Islamic world, India, and the Far East (China, Japan, Korea). Three of those civilizations remained more or less stable, and only Europe became dynamic. No one knows why Europe became dynamic at that time; historians have their theories but these are only speculation. At any rate, it is clear that rapid development toward a technological form of society occurs only under special conditions. So there is no reason to assume that long-lasting technological regression cannot be brought about. 212. Would society EVENTUALLY develop again toward an industrial-technological form? Maybe, but there is no use in worrying about it, since we can't predict or control events 500 or 1,000 years in the future. Those problems must be dealt with by the people who will live at that time. THE DANGER OF LEFTISM 213. Because of their need for rebellion and for membership in a movement, leftists or persons of similar psychological type are often unattracted to a rebellious or activist movement whose goals and membership are not initially leftist. The resulting influx of leftish types can easily turn a non-leftist movement into a leftist one, so that leftist goals replace or distort the original goals of the movement. 214. To avoid this, a movement that exalts nature and opposes technology must take a resolutely anti-leftist stance and must avoid all collaboration with leftists. Leftism is in the long run inconsistent with wild nature, with human freedom and with the elimination of modern technology. Leftism is collectivist; it seeks to bind together the entire world (both nature and the human race) into a unified whole. But this implies management of nature and of human life by organized society, and it requires advanced technology. You can't have a united world without rapid transportation and communication, you can't make all people love one another without sophisticated psychological techniques, you can't have a "planned society" without the necessary technological base. Above all, leftism is driven by the need for power, and the leftist seeks power on a collective basis, through identification with a mass movement or an organization. Leftism is unlikely ever to give up technology, because technology is too valuable a source of collective power. 215. The anarchist [34] too seeks power, but he seeks it on an individual or small-group basis; he wants individuals and small groups to be able to control the circumstances of their own lives. He opposes technology because it makes small groups dependent on large organizations. 216. Some leftists may seem to oppose technology, but they will oppose it only so long as they are outsiders and the technological system is controlled by non-leftists. If leftism ever becomes dominant in society, so that the technological system becomes a tool in the hands of leftists, they will enthusiastically use it and promote its growth. In doing this they will be repeating a pattern that leftism has shown again and again in the past. When the Bolsheviks in Russia were outsiders, they vigorously opposed censorship and the secret police, they advocated self-determination for ethnic minorities, and so forth; but as soon as they came into power themselves, they imposed a tighter censorship and created a more ruthless secret police than any that had existed under the tsars, and they oppressed ethnic minorities at least as much as the tsars had done. In the United States, a couple of decades ago when leftists were a minority in our universities, leftist professors were vigorous proponents of academic freedom, but today, in those universities where leftists have become dominant, they have shown themselves ready to take away from everyone else's academic freedom. (This is "political correctness.") The same will happen with leftists and technology: They will use it to oppress everyone else if they ever get it under their own control. 217. In earlier revolutions, leftists of the most power-hungry type, repeatedly, have first cooperated with non-leftist revolutionaries, as well as with leftists of a more libertarian inclination, and later have double-crossed them to seize power for themselves. Robespierre did this in the French Revolution, the Bolsheviks did it in the Russian Revolution, the communists did it in Spain in 1938 and Castro and his followers did it in Cuba. Given the past history of leftism, it would be utterly foolish for non-leftist revolutionaries today to collaborate with leftists. 218. Various thinkers have pointed out that leftism is a kind of religion. Leftism is not a religion in the strict sense because leftist doctrine does not postulate the existence of any supernatural being. But for the leftist, leftism plays a psychological role much like that which religion plays for some people. The leftist NEEDS to believe in leftism; it plays a vital role in his psychological economy. His beliefs are not easily modified by logic or facts. He has a deep conviction that leftism is morally Right with a capital R, and that he has not only a right but a duty to impose leftist morality on everyone. (However, many of the people we are referring to as "leftists" do not think of themselves as leftists and would not describe their system of beliefs as leftism. We use the term "leftism" because we don't know of any better words to designate the spectrum of related creeds that includes the feminist, gay rights, political correctness, etc., movements, and because these movements have a strong affinity with the old left. See paragraphs 227-230.) 219. Leftism is totalitarian force. Wherever leftism is in a position of power it tends to invade every private corner and force every thought into a leftist mold. In part this is because of the quasi-religious character of leftism; everything contrary to leftists beliefs represents Sin. More importantly, leftism is a totalitarian force because of the leftists' drive for power. The leftist seeks to satisfy his need for power through identification with a social movement and he tries to go through the power process by helping to pursue and attain the goals of the movement (see paragraph 83). But no matter how far the movement has gone in attaining its goals the leftist is never satisfied, because his activism is a surrogate activity (see paragraph 41). That is, the leftist's real motive is not to attain the ostensible goals of leftism; in reality he is motivated by the sense of power he gets from struggling for and then reaching a social goal.[35] Consequently the leftist is never satisfied with the goals he has already attained; his need for the power process leads him always to pursue some new goal. The leftist wants equal opportunities for minorities. When that is attained he insists on statistical equality of achievement by minorities. And as long as anyone harbors in some corner of his mind a negative attitude toward some minority, the leftist has to re-educated him. And ethnic minorities are not enough; no one can be allowed to have a negative attitude toward homosexuals, disabled people, fat people, old people, ugly people, and on and on and on. It's not enough that the public should be informed about the hazards of smoking; a warning has to be stamped on every package of cigarettes. Then cigarette advertising has to be restricted if not banned. The activists will never be satisfied until tobacco is outlawed, and after that it will be alco hot then junk food, etc. Activists have fought gross child abuse, which is reasonable. But now they want to stop all spanking. When they have done that they will want to ban something else they consider unwholesome, then another thing and then another. They will never be satisfied until they have complete control over all child rearing practices. And then they will move on to another cause. 220. Suppose you asked leftists to make a list of ALL the things that were wrong with society, and then suppose you instituted EVERY social change that they demanded. It is safe to say that within a couple of years the majority of leftists would find something new to complain about, some new social "evil" to correct because, once again, the leftist is motivated less by distress at society's ills than by the need to satisfy his drive for power by imposing his solutions on society. 221. Because of the restrictions placed on their thoughts and behavior by their high level of socialization, many leftists of the over-socialized type cannot pursue power in the ways that other people do. For them the drive for power has only one morally acceptable outlet, and that is in the struggle to impose their morality on everyone. 222. Leftists, especially those of the oversocialized type, are True Believers in the sense of Eric Hoffer's book, "The True Believer." But not all True Believers are of the same psychological type as leftists. Presumably a truebelieving nazi, for instance is very different psychologically from a truebelieving leftist. Because of their capacity for single-minded devotion to a cause, True Believers are a useful, perhaps a necessary, ingredient of any revolutionary movement. This presents a problem with which we must admit we don't know how to deal. We aren't sure how to harness the energies of the True Believer to a revolution against technology. At present all we can say is that no True Believer will make a safe recruit to the revolution unless his commitment is exclusively to the destruction of technology. If he is committed also to another ideal, he may want to use technology as a tool for pursuing that other ideal (see paragraphs 220, 221). 223. Some readers may say, "This stuff about leftism is a lot of crap. I know John and Jane who are leftish types and they don't have all these totalitarian tendencies." It's quite true that many leftists, possibly even a numerical majority, are decent people who sincerely believe in tolerating others' values (up to a point) and wouldn't want to use high-handed methods to reach their social goals. Our remarks about leftism are not meant to apply to every individual leftist but to describe the general character of leftism as a movement. And the general character of a movement is not necessarily determined by the numerical proportions of the various kinds of people involved in the movement. 224. The people who rise to positions of power in leftist movements tend to be leftists of the most power-hungry type because power-hungry people are those who strive hardest to get into positions of power. Once the power-hungry types have captured control of the movement, there are many leftists of a gentler breed who inwardly disapprove of many of the actions of the leaders, but cannot bring themselves to oppose them. They NEED their faith in the movement, and because they cannot give up this faith they go along with the leaders. True, SOME leftists do have the guts to oppose the totalitarian tendencies that emerge, but they generally lose, because the power-hungry types are better organized, are more ruthless and Machiavellian and have taken care to build themselves a strong power base. 225. These phenomena appeared clearly in Russia and other countries that were taken over by leftists. Similarly, before the breakdown of communism in the USSR, leftish types in the West would seldom criticize that country. If prodded they would admit that the USSR did many wrong things, but then they would try to find excuses for the communists and begin talking about the faults of the West. They always opposed Western military resistance to communist aggression. Leftish types all over the world vigorously protested the U.S. military action in Vietnam, but when the USSR invaded Afghanistan they did nothing. Not that they approved of the Soviet actions; but because of their leftist faith, they just couldn't bear to put themselves in opposition to communism. Today, in those of our universities where "political correctness" has become dominant, there are probably many leftish types who privately disapprove of the suppression of academic freedom, but they go along with it anyway. 226. Thus the fact that many individual leftists are personally mild and fairly tolerant people by no means prevents leftism as a whole form having a totalitarian tendency. 227. Our discussion of leftism has a serious weakness. It is still far from clear what we mean by the word "leftist." There doesn't seem to be much we can do about this. Today leftism is fragmented into a whole spectrum of activist movements. Yet not all activist movements are leftist, and some activist movements (e.g.., radical environmentalism) seem to include both personalities of the leftist type and personalities of thoroughly un-leftist types who ought to know better than to collaborate with leftists. Varieties of leftists fade out gradually into varieties of non-leftists and we ourselves would often be hard-pressed to decide whether a given individual is or is not a leftist. To the extent that it is defined at all, our conception of leftism is defined by the discussion of it that we have given in this article, and we can only advise the reader to use his own judgment in deciding who is a leftist. 228. But it will be helpful to list some criteria for diagnosing leftism. These criteria cannot be applied in a cut and dried manner. Some individuals may meet some of the criteria without being leftists, some leftists may not meet any of the criteria. Again, you just have to use your judgment. 229. The leftist is oriented toward largescale collectivism. He emphasizes the duty of the individual to serve society and the duty of society to take care of the individual. He has a negative attitude toward individualism. He often takes a moralistic tone. He tends to be for gun control, for sex education and other psychologically "enlightened" educational methods, for planning, for affirmative action, for multiculturalism. He tends to identify with victims. He tends to be against competition and against violence, but he often finds excuses for those leftists who do commit violence. He is fond of using the common catch-phrases of the left like "racism, " "sexism, " "homophobia, " "capitalism," "imperialism," "neocolonialism " "genocide," "social change," "social justice," "social responsibility." Maybe the best diagnostic trait of the leftist is his tendency to sympathize with the following movements: feminism, gay rights, ethnic rights, disability rights, animal rights political correctness. Anyone who strongly sympathizes with ALL of these movements is almost certainly a leftist. [36] 230. The more dangerous leftists, that is, those who are most power-hungry, are often characterized by arrogance or by a dogmatic approach to ideology. However, the most dangerous leftists of all may be certain oversocialized types who avoid irritating displays of aggressiveness and refrain from advertising their leftism, but work quietly and unobtrusively to promote collectivist values, "enlightened" psychological techniques for socializing children, dependence of the individual on the system, and so forth. These crypto-leftists (as we may call them) approximate certain bourgeois types as far as practical action is concerned, but differ from them in psychology, ideology and motivation. The ordinary bourgeois tries to bring people under control of the system in order to protect his way of life, or he does so simply because his attitudes are conventional. The crypto-leftist tries to bring people under control of the system because he is a True Believer in a collectivistic ideology. The crypto-leftist is differentiated from the average leftist of the oversocialized type by the fact that his rebellious impulse is weaker and he is more securely socialized. He is differentiated from the ordinary well-socialized bourgeois by the fact that there is some deep lack within him that makes it necessary for him to devote himself to a cause and immerse himself in a collectivity. And maybe his (well-sublimated) drive for power is stronger than that of the average bourgeois. FINAL NOTE 231. Throughout this article we've made imprecise statements and statements that ought to have had all sorts of qualifications and reservations attached to them; and some of our statements may be flatly false. Lack of sufficient information and the need for brevity made it impossible for us to fomulate our assertions more precisely or add all the necessary qualifications. And of course in a discussion of this kind one must rely heavily on intuitive judgment, and that can sometimes be wrong. So we don't claim that this article expresses more than a crude approximation to the truth. 232. All the same we are reasonably confident that the general outlines of the picture we have painted here are roughly correct. We have portrayed leftism in its modern form as a phenomenon peculiar to our time and as a symptom of the disruption of the power process. But we might possibly be wrong about this. Oversocialized types who try to satisfy their drive for power by imposing their morality on everyone have certainly been around for a long time. But we THINK that the decisive role played by feelings of inferiority, low self-esteem, powerlessness, identification with victims by people who are not themselves victims, is a peculiarity of modern leftism. Identification with victims by people not themselves victims can be seen to some extent in 19th century leftism and early Christianity but as far as we can make out, symptoms of low self-esteem, etc., were not nearly so evident in these movements, or in any other movements, as they are in modern leftism. But we are not in a position to assert confidently that no such movements have existed prior to modern leftism. This is a significant question to which historians ought to give their attention. NOTES 1. (Paragraph 19) We are asserting that ALL, or even most, bullies and ruthless competitors suffer from feelings of inferiority. 2. (Paragraph 25) During the Victorian period many oversocialized people suffered from serious psychological problems as a result of repressing or trying to repress their sexual feelings. Freud apparently based his theories on people of this type. Today the focus of socialization has shifted from sex to aggression. 3. (Paragraph 27) Not necessarily including specialists in engineering "hard" sciences. 4. (Paragraph 28) There are many individuals of the middle and upper classes who resist some of these values, but usually their resistance is more or less covert. Such resistance appears in the mass media only to a very limited extent. The main thrust of propaganda in our society is in favor of the stated values. The main reasons why these values have become, so to speak, the official values of our society is that they are useful to the industrial system. Violence is discouraged because it disrupts the functioning of the system. Racism is discouraged because ethnic conflicts also disrupt the system, and discrimination wastes the talent of minority-group members who could be useful to the system. Poverty must be "cured" because the underclass causes problems for the system and contact with the underclass lowers the moral of the other classes. Women are encouraged to have careers because their talents are useful to the system and, more importantly because by having regular jobs women become better integrated into the system and tied directly to it rather than to their families. This helps to weaken family solidarity. (The leaders of the system say they want to strengthen the family, but they really mean is that they want the family to serve as an effective tool for socializing children in accord with the needs of the system. We argue in paragraphs 51,52 that the system cannot afford to let the family or other small-scale social groups be strong or autonomous.) 5. (Paragraph 42) It may be argued that the majority of people don't want to make their own decisions but want leaders to do their thinking for them. There is an element of truth in this. People like to make their own decisions in small matters, but making decisions on difficult, fundamental questions require facing up to psychological conflict, and most people hate psychological conflict. Hence they tend to lean on others in making difficult decisions. The majority of people are natural followers, not leaders, but they like to have direct personal access to their leaders and participate to some extent in making difficult decisions. At least to that degree they need autonomy. 6. (Paragraph 44) Some of the symptoms listed are similar to those shown by caged animals. To explain how these symptoms arise from deprivation with respect to the power process: Common-sense understanding of human nature tells one that lack of goals whose attainment requires effort leads to boredom and that boredom, long continued, often leads eventually to depression. Failure to obtain goals leads to frustration and lowering of self-esteem. Frustration leads to anger, anger to aggression, often in the form of spouse or child abuse. It has been shown that long-continued frustration commonly leads to depression and that depression tends to cause guilt, sleep disorders, eating disorders and bad feelings about oneself. Those who are tending toward depression seek pleasure as an antidote; hence insatiable hedonism and excessive sex, with perversions as a means of getting new kicks. Boredom too tends to cause excessive pleasure-seeking since, lacking other goals, people often use pleasure as a goal. See accompanying diagram. The foregoing is a simplification. Reality is more complex, and of course deprivation with respect to the power process is not the ONLY cause of the symptoms described. By the way, when we mention depression we do not necessarily mean depression that is severe enough to be treated by a psychiatrist. Often only mild forms of depression are involved. And when we speak of goals we do not necessarily mean long-term, thought out goals. For many or most people through much of human history, the goals of a hand-to-mouth existence (merely providing oneself and one's family with food from day to day) have been quite sufficient. 7. (Paragraph 52) A partial exception may be made for a few passive, inward looking groups, such as the Amish, which have little effect on the wider society. Apart from these, some genuine small-scale communities do exist in America today. For instance, youth gangs and "cults". Everyone regards them as dangerous, and so they are, because the members of these groups are loyal primarily to one another rather than to the system, hence the system cannot control them. Or take the gypsies. The gypsies commonly get away with theft and fraud because their loyalties are such that they can always get other gypsies to give testimony that "proves" their innocence. Obviously the system would be in serious trouble if too many people belonged to such groups. Some of the early-20th century Chinese thinkers who were concerned with modernizing China recognized the necessity of breaking down small-scale social groups such as the family: "(According to Sun Yat-sen) The Chinese people needed a new surge of patriotism, which would lead to a transfer of loyalty from the family to the state. . .(According to Li Huang) traditional attachments, particularly to the family had to be abandoned if nationalism were to develop to China." (Chester C. Tan, Chinese Political Thought in the Twentieth Century," page 125, page 297.) 8. (Paragraph 56) Yes, we know that 19th century America had its problems, and serious ones, but for the sake of breviety we have to express ourselves in simplified terms. 9. (Paragraph 61) We leave aside the underclass. We are speaking of the mainstream. 10. (Paragraph 62) Some social scientists, educators, "mental health" professionals and the like are doing their best to push the social drives into group 1 by trying to see to it that everyone has a satisfactory social life. 11. (Paragraphs 63, 82) Is the drive for endless material acquisition really an artificial creation of the advertising and marketing industry? Certainly there is no innate human drive for material acquisition. There have been many cultures in which people have desired little material wealth beyond what was necessary to satisfy their basic physical needs (Australian aborigines, traditional Mexican peasant culture, some African cultures). On the other hand there have also been many pre-industrial cultures in which material acquisition has played an important role. So we can't claim that today's acquisition-oriented culture is exclusively a creation of the advertising and marketing industry. But it is clear that the advertising and marketing industry has had an important part in creating that culture. The big corporations that spend millions on advertising wouldn't be spending that kind of money without solid proof that they were getting it back in increased sales. One member of FC met a sales manager a couple of years ago who was frank enough to tell him, "Our job is to make people buy things they don't want and don't need." He then described how an untrained novice could present people with the facts about a product, and make no sales at all, while a trained and experienced professional salesman would make lots of sales to the same people. This shows that people are manipulated into buying things they don't really want. 12. (Paragraph 64) The problem of purposelessness seems to have become less serious during the last 15 years or so, because people now feel less secure physically and economically than they did earlier, and the need for security provides them with a goal. But purposelessness has been replaced by frustration over the difficulty of attaining security. We emphasize the problem of purposelessness because the liberals and leftists would wish to solve our social problems by having society guarantee everyone's security; but if that could be done it would only bring back the problem of purposelessness. The real issue is not whether society provides well or poorly for people's security; the trouble is that people are dependent on the system for their security rather than having it in their own hands. This, by the way, is part of the reason why some people get worked up about the right to bear arms; possession of a gun puts that aspect of their security in their own hands. 13. (Paragraph 66) Conservatives' efforts to decrease the amount of government regulation are of little benefit to the average man. For one thing, only a fraction of the regulations can be eliminated because most regulations are necessary. For another thing, most of the deregulation affects business rather than the average individual, so that its main effect is to take power from the government and give it to private corporations. What this means for the average man is that government interference in his life is replaced by interference from big corporations, which may be permitted, for example, to dump more chemicals that get into his water supply and give him cancer. The conservatives are just taking the average man for a sucker, exploiting his resentment of Big Government to promote the power of Big Business. 14. (Paragraph 73) When someone approves of the purpose for which propaganda is being used in a given case, he generally calls it "education" or applies to it some similar euphemism. But propaganda is propaganda regardless of the purpose for which it is used. 15. (Paragraph 83) We are not expressing approval or disapproval of the Panama invasion. We only use it to illustrate a point. 16. (Paragraph 95) When the American colonies were under British rule there were fewer and less effective legal guarantees of freedom than there were after the American Constitution went into effect, yet there was more personal freedom in pre-industrial America, both before and after the War of Independence, than there was after the Industrial Revolution took hold in this country. We quote from "Violence in America: Historical and Comparative perspectives," edited by Hugh Davis Graham and Ted Robert Gurr, Chapter 12 by Roger Lane, pages 476-478: "The progressive heightening of standards of property, and with it the increasing reliance on official law enforcement (in 19th century America). . .were common to the whole society. . .[T]he change in social behavior is so long term and so widespread as to suggest a connection with the most fundamental of contemporary social processes; that of industrial urbanization itself. . ."Massachusetts in 1835 had a population of some 660,940, 81 percent rural, overwhelmingly preindustrial and native born. It's citizens were used to considerable personal freedom. Whether teamsters, farmers or artisans, they were all accustomed to setting their own schedules, and the nature of their work made them physically dependent on each other. . .Individual problems, sins or even crimes, were not generally cause for wider social concern. . ."But the impact of the twin movements to the city and to the factory, both just gathering force in 1835, had a progressive effect on personal behavior throughout the 19th century and into the 20th. The factory demanded regularity of behavior, a life governed by obedience to the rhythms of clock and calendar, the demands of foreman and supervisor. In the city or town, the needs of living in closely packed neighborhoods inhibited many actions previously unobjectionable. Both blue- and white-collar employees in larger establishments were mutually dependent on their fellows. as one man's work fit into another's, so one man's business was no longer his own. "The results of the new organization of life and work were apparent by 1900, when some 76 percent of the 2,805,346 inhabitants of Massachusetts were classified as urbanites. Much violent or irregular behavior which had been tolerable in a casual, independent society was no longer acceptable in the more formalized, cooperative atmosphere of the later period. . .The move to the cities had, in short, produced a more tractable, more socialized, more 'civilized' generation than its predecessors." 17. (Paragraph 117) Apologists for the system are fond of citing cases in which elections have been decided by one or two votes, but such cases are rare. 18. (Paragraph 119) "Today, in technologically advanced lands, men live very similar lives in spite of geographical, religious and political differences. The daily lives of a Christian bank clerk in Chicago, a Buddhist bank clerk in Tokyo, a Communist bank clerk in Moscow are far more alike than the life any one of them is like that of any single man who lived a thousand years ago. These similarities are the result of a common technology. . ." L. Sprague de Camp, "The Ancient Engineers," Ballentine edition, page 17. The lives of the three bank clerks are not IDENTICAL. Ideology does have SOME effect. But all technological societies, in order to survive, must evolve along APPROXIMATELY the same trajectory. 19. (Paragraph 123) Just think an irresponsible genetic engineer might create a lot of terrorists. 20. (Paragraph 124) For a further example of undesirable consequences of medical progress, suppose a reliable cure for cancer is discovered. Even if the treatment is too expensive to be available to any but the elite, it will greatly reduce their incentive to stop the escape of carcinogens into the environment. 21. (Paragraph 128) Since many people may find paradoxical the notion that a large number of good things can add up to a bad thing, we will illustrate with an analogy. Suppose Mr. A is playing chess with Mr. B. Mr. C, a Grand Master, is looking over Mr. A's shoulder. Mr. A of course wants to win his game, so if Mr. C points out a good move for him to make, he is doing Mr. A a favor. But suppose now that Mr. C tells Mr. A how to make ALL of his moves. In each particular instance he does Mr. A a favor by showing him his best move, but by making ALL of his moves for him he spoils the game, since there is not point in Mr. A's playing the game at all if someone else makes all his moves. The situation of modern man is analogous to that of Mr. A. The system makes an individual's life easier for him in innumerable ways, but in doing so it deprives him of control over his own fate. 22. (Paragraph 137) Here we are considering only the conflict of values within the mainstream. For the sake of simplicity we leave out of the picture "outsider" values like the idea that wild nature is more important than human economic welfare. 23. (Paragraph 137) Self-interest is not necessarily MATERIAL self-interest. It can consist in fulfillment of some psychological need, for example, by promoting one's own ideology or religion. 24. (Paragraph 139) A qualification: It is in the interest of the system to permit a certain prescribed degree of freedom in some areas. For example, economic freedom (with suitable limitations and restraints) has proved effective in promoting economic growth. But only planned, circumscribed, limited freedom is in the interest of the system. The individual must always be kept on a leash, even if the leash is sometimes long( see paragraphs 94, 97). 25. (Paragraph 143) We don't mean to suggest that the efficiency or the potential for survival of a society has always been inversely proportional to the amount of pressure or discomfort to which the society subjects people. That is certainly not the case. There is good reason to believe that many primitive societies subjected people to less pressure than the European society did, but European society proved far more efficient than any primitive society and always won out in conflicts with such societies because of the advantages conferred by technology. 26. (Paragraph 147) If you think that more effective law enforcement is unequivocally good because it suppresses crime, then remember that crime as defined by the system is not necessarily what YOU would call crime. Today, smoking marijuana is a "crime," and, in some places in the U.S.., so is possession of ANY firearm, registered or not, may be made a crime, and the same thing may happen with disapproved methods of child-rearing, such as spanking. In some countries, expression of dissident political opinions is a crime, and there is no certainty that this will never happen in the U.S., since no constitution or political system lasts forever. If a society needs a large, powerful law enforcement establishment, then there is something gravely wrong with that society; it must be subjecting people to severe pressures if so many refuse to follow the rules, or follow them only because forced. Many societies in the past have gotten by with little or no formal law-enforcement. 27. (Paragraph 151) To be sure, past societies have had means of influencing behavior, but these have been primitive and of low effectiveness compared with the technological means that are now being developed. 28. (Paragraph 152) However, some psychologists have publicly expressed opinions indicating their contempt for human freedom. And the mathematician Claude Shannon was quoted in Omni (August 1987) as saying, "I visualize a time when we will be to robots what dogs are to humans, and I'm rooting for the machines." 29. (Paragraph 154) This is no science fiction! After writing paragraph 154 we came across an article in Scientific American according to which scientists are actively developing techniques for identifying possible future criminals and for treating them by a combination of biological and psychological means. Some scientists advocate compulsory application of the treatment, which may be available in the near future. (See "Seeking the Criminal Element", by W. Wayt Gibbs, Scientific American, March 1995.) Maybe you think this is OK because the treatment would be applied to those who might become drunk drivers (they endanger human life too), then perhaps to peel who spank their children, then to environmentalists who sabotage logging equipment, eventually to anyone whose behavior is inconvenient for the system. 30. (Paragraph 184) A further advantage of nature as a counter-ideal to technology is that, in many people, nature inspires the kind of reverence that is associated with religion, so that nature could perhaps be idealized on a religious basis. It is true that in many societies religion has served as a support and justification for the established order, but it is also true that religion has often provided a basis for rebellion. Thus it may be useful to introduce a religious element into the rebellion against technology, the more so because Western society today has no strong religious foundation. Religion, nowadays either is used as cheap and transparent support for narrow, short-sighted selfishness (some conservatives use it this way), or even is cynically exploited to make easy money (by many evangelists), or has degenerated into crude irrationalism (fundamentalist Protestant sects, "cults"), or is simply stagnant (Catholicism, main-line Protestantism). The nearest thing to a strong, widespread, dynamic religion that the West has seen in recent times has been the quasi-religion of leftism, but leftism today is fragmented and has no clear, unified inspiring goal. Thus there is a religious vaccuum in our society that could perhaps be filled by a religion focused on nature in opposition to technology. But it would be a mistake to try to concoct artificially a religion to fill this role. Such an invented religion would probably be a failure. Take the "Gaia" religion for example. Do its adherents REALLY believe in it or are they just play-acting? If they are just play-acting their religion will be a flop in the end. It is probably best not to try to introduce religion into the conflict of nature vs. technology unless you REALLY believe in that religion yourself and find that it arouses a deep, strong, genuine response in many other people. 31. (Paragraph 189) Assuming that such a final push occurs. Conceivably the industrial system might be eliminated in a somewhat gradual or piecemeal fashion. (see paragraphs 4, 167 and Note 4). 32. (Paragraph 193) It is even conceivable (remotely) that the revolution might consist only of a massive change of attitudes toward technology resulting in a relatively gradual and painless disintegration of the industrial system. But if this happens we'll be very lucky. It's far more probably that the transition to a nontechnological society will be very difficult and full of conflicts and disasters. 33. (Paragraph 195) The economic and technological structure of a society are far more important than its political structure in determining the way the average man lives (see paragraphs 95, 119 and Notes 16, 18). 34. (Paragraph 215) This statement refers to our particular brand of anarchism. A wide variety of social attitudes have been called "anarchist," and it may be that many who consider themselves anarchists would not accept our statement of paragraph 215. It should be noted, by the way, that there is a nonviolent anarchist movement whose members probably would not accept FC as anarchist and certainly would not approve of FC's violent methods. 35. (Paragraph 219) Many leftists are motivated also by hostility, but the hostility probably results in part from a frustrated need for power. 36. (Paragraph 229) It is important to understand that we mean someone who sympathizes with these MOVEMENTS as they exist today in our society. One who believes that women, homosexuals, etc., should have equal rights is not necessarily a leftist. The feminist, gay rights, etc., movements that exist in our society have the particular ideological tone that characterizes leftism, and if one believes, for example, that women should have equal rights it does not necessarily follow that one must sympathize with the feminist movement as it exists today. If copyright problems make it impossible for this long quotation to be printed, then please change Note 16 to read as follows: 16. (Paragraph 95) When the American colonies were under British rule there were fewer and less effective legal guarantees of freedom than there were after the American Constitution went into effect, yet there was more personal freedom in pre-industrial America, both before and after the War of Independence, than there was after the Industrial Revolution took hold in this country. In "Violence in America: Historical and Comparative Perspectives," edited by Hugh Davis Graham and Ted Robert Gurr, Chapter 12 by Roger Lane, it is explained how in pre-industrial America the average person had greater independence and autonomy than he does today, and how the process of industrialization necessarily led to the restriction of personal freedom. _________________________________________________________________
FRESNO: California High-Speed Rail Authority sneaked in change to bidding process | Local News | Modesto Bee
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:55
  FRESNO '-- When the California High-Speed Rail Authority put the first stretch of its statewide train system out for bids last year, the agency set a high technical standard for five contracting teams courting the more than $1 billion construction contract.
  In March 2012, the authority's board decreed that even if all five teams submitted bids, only the three most "technically competitive" firms could compete based on the cost to build the 29-mile segment in Madera and Fresno counties. The teams with the lowest technical scores would be dropped and their price envelopes returned unopened.
  That rule, however, didn't stick. In August '-- months before contractors submitted bids '-- the authority's executive staff quietly altered the process without formal action by the board.
  What was touted as a rigorous, competitive procedure to ensure that only the most technically sound bids would advance instead became a "pass-fail" analysis requiring contractors to only meet "the minimum elements required" before cost would be considered for all bidders.
  That change '-- seemingly minor in August '-- is taking on greater significance now as the authority negotiates with its lowest-cost bidder. The team of Tutor Perini Corp. of Sylmar, Texas-based Zachry Construction and Parsons Corp. of Pasadena bid about $985 million to build the Fresno-Madera segment. That beat the state's estimates of $1.2 billion to $1.8 billion. The consortium's bid was deemed the "apparent best value."
  But Tutor Perini-Zachry-Parsons also had the lowest technical score '-- 20.55 points out of 30 '-- among the five contracting teams. Put another way, the Tutor Perini group was deemed to be the least skilled of the bidders. That has prompted speculation that the team's bid may potentially have been eliminated from consideration if the evaluation process remained unchanged, and given rise to concerns about rigging the analysis in favor of Tutor Perini.
  The rail authority declined to answer specific questions from The Fresno Bee about why the agency chose to amend the bid-evaluation process. Authority spokesman Rob Wilcox said in an email that "the authority's objective was to increase transparency and gain greater value for the project and the state."
  "There was a real concern that by not opening all the bids, it could have left hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on the table," he said.
  "It is important to note that on Caltrans design-build projects that use best value, they also base valuations on a combination of technical score and price, and all responsive bids are opened," he added.
  A contract with Tutor Perini-Zachry-Parsons could be presented to the rail authority's board for approval in June.
  Rigged?In a letter to state legislative leaders, authority chief executive Jeffrey Morales rejected the notion that the change had the effect of rigging the evaluation process in favor of Tutor Perini-Zachry-Parsons. "Any suggestion or implication that decisions were made with particular bidders in mind is completely without merit and has no basis in fact," Morales wrote.
  He added that it's unfair to conclude that any bidding team would be dropped from consideration under the original process "because the actual bid proposals were submitted in light of the improved evaluation process, not the preceding one," he wrote. "Bidding teams modify their proposals to reflect all terms of the (request for proposals), including the scoring and evaluation criteria."
  He also asserted that the change in process did not lower the bar for technical analysis. After contractors submitted bids in January, Morales wrote, "there were two separate reviews of the technical portions, to ensure that all criteria and requirements were met and that the proposers had demonstrated full capability to deliver the project."
  Only after the technical reviews were complete, he added, were the price envelopes opened.
  The contractor's technical merit will be crucial because of the challenges presented by the project '-- a controversial and politically divisive effort that will be closely scrutinized because it is the first chunk of the first high-speed train system proposed in the United States.
  In addition to building the railbed from Avenue 17 near Madera to American Avenue south of Fresno, the project includes a new bridge over the San Joaquin River; elevated tracks over Herndon Avenue; relocating portions of Golden State Boulevard through northwest and central Fresno; a tunnel or trench under Belmont Avenue, Highway 180 and a freight railroad line; elevated tracks above Highway 99 south of downtown Fresno; and a dozen new or rebuilt street over- or underpasses.
  The winning firm will be tasked with completing the design work '-- which the rail authority and consultants had drawn to about 30 percent completion '-- and building the line.
  In its March 1, 2012, decision, the authority's board voted 5-0 to issue a request for bids for the Madera-Fresno segment and to use a two-step method to assess bids. At that time, five teams of contractors including Tutor
  Perini-Zachry-Parsons were "pre-qualified" to bid based on their technical capability to handle the job.
  Thomas Fellenz, the authority's chief counsel, told the board that the two-step analysis would "accomplish the goals of the authority best" by securing the most technically sound bids and competitive prices.
  Rigorous technical assessmentThe process called for a rigorous technical assessment of all of the bids while each firm's price remained sealed. Only the three highest-ranked proposals under the technical evaluation would be eligible to compete for cost. Among the factors considered in the technical analysis were the contractor's understanding of the project, conceptual engineering, ability to stay on schedule, solutions to anticipated problems, quality and self-certification.
  "We're making it very competitive because, you know, if you're not in the top three, you'll be dropped off," Fellenz said last year.
  The authority board's March 2012 vote also allowed the agency's chief executive officer "to make appropriate non-substantive changes" in consultation with board chairman Dan Richard to the terms under which contractors were to submit bids.
  The revised language detailing the bid-evaluation process was tucked innocuously into an addendum to the agency's request for proposals '-- the fourth such addendum, issued Aug. 22.
  Wilcox, the authority's spokesman, would not address why a process approved by the board in March was no longer suitable in August, or why the change was made without notification to or approval by the board. The agency also did not address who within the authority's leadership decided that changing the bid-screening process was "non-substantive," or disclose when Richard, the board chairman, was consulted by Morales on the amendment.
  In his letter to legislators, Morales '-- who was hired in June 2012 '-- defended the change. "Notification was sent to legislative staff and members of the media" about changes throughout the bidding process, including the Aug. 22 addendum.
  The August addendum and others were posted on the authority's web site. However, The Fresno Bee received no written or emailed notification of such changes, as has been routine with many other aspects of high-speed rail media relations.
  Between March 2012 and January, when the contracting teams submitted their bids, the agency issued nine addenda to the original request for proposals as "bidders raised questions and concerns," Morales wrote. The changes, he added, "ranged from highly detailed technical clarifications to broader issues relating to liability and the manner in which the authority would evaluate and score the proposals."
  Addendum 4, Morales said, "required the authority to open the bids from all five teams as long as each bid was technically sound." The authority would not disclose whether any of the prospective contracting teams threatened to not submit bids unless the process was changed.
  Some property owners in Fresno and Madera counties will start receiving within days the first written offers from the California High-Speed Rail Authority to buy their land.
  The rail agency needs to buy all or portions of more than 350 parcels to prepare for building its first 29 miles of the proposed statewide high-speed train route. Several owners of residential and commercial property between Madera and downtown Fresno will be among the first recipients of offer letters from the authority's right-of-way agents.
  The agency is in negotiations with a team of construction companies to begin building the line between Avenue 17, near Madera, and American Avenue at the south edge of Fresno, in hopes of awarding a contract in June and beginning work this summer.
  But the rail authority cannot begin construction, demolition or utility relocation until it owns the property.
  Earlier this year, the rail authority identified about 75 parcels that it hopes to buy by the end of September, and nearly 130 parcels that it expects to need by the end of this year.
  The parcels are in the path of the railroad itself or would be affected by related work, including overpasses to carry city streets and county roads over the high-speed tracks.
  A land-acquisition plan provided to purchasing consultants in January indicated that the rail authority expects to buy about 100 parcels in their entirety '-- mostly smaller lots where the acreage left over from the railroad work would be practically useless. For other parcels, the authority would buy only the portions it needs for the route.
  Construction is expected to take two to three years.
Wake up America: Unexplained, Strange Sounds In The Sky Are Back Again (Videos)
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:47
  By Susan DuclosI always have loved a good mystery.
  They are being called creepy, spooky, strange and just about every other adjective that can be used for something unexplained and these strange hornlike sounds are being heard across the world. Explanations range from natural phenomenon to Apocalyptic, biblical omens to magnetic fields.
  They seem to be almost musical in nature, for lack of a better description, and have been likened to the sound of trumpets. Many think they could be hoaxes, and no doubt some could be, but they are heard in different countries, different locations within those countries, uploaded by multiple different users and all are similar sounding.
  The videos below are a small sample of what can be found searching for these strange sounds coming from the sky, including video compilations of sounds spanning the globe, going back to 2011.
  Last but not least, a video titled "The Hidden Truth - Strange And Unexplained Horn-Like Sounds Filling The Air 2012"
snopes.com: Obamacare Requires Microchip Implantation?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:44
  Claim: Health care legislation requires that U.S. residents be implanted with RFID microchips.Examples: [Collected via e-mail, March 2012]Obamacare law requires an RFID chip implanted in all of us.
  Are you ready to have your RFID Chip Implanted? 3/23/2013 is your date!
  This new Health Care (Obamacare) law requires an RFID chip implanted in all of us. This chip will not only contain your personal information with tracking capability but it will also be linked to your bank account. And get this, Page 1004 of the new law (dictating the timing of this chip), reads, and I quote: "Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment". It is now the law of the land that by March 23rd 2013 we will all be required to have an RFID chip underneath our skin and this chip will be link to our bank accounts as well as have our personal records and tracking capability built into it..."
  [Collected via e-mail, March 2010]Seems people will be getting more than they bargained for in this new health care bill.
  The Obama health care bill under Sec. 2521, page 1,000 will establish a National Medical Device Registry. What does a National Medical Device Registry mean?
  National Medical Device Registry from H.R. 3200 [Healthcare Bill], pages 1,001-1,008:
  (g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the 'registry') to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that:
  (A) is or has been used in or on a patient;(B) and is: (i) a class III device;
  or (ii) a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.
  A "class II device that is implantable?"Then on page 1,004 it describes what the term "data" means in paragraph 1, section B: "(B) In this paragraph, the term 'data' refers to in formation respecting a device described in paragraph (1), including claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary."
  Approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is a "implantable radiofrequency transponder system for patient identification and health information."
  This sort of device would be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option. With the reform of the private insurance companies, who charge outrageous rates, many people will switch their coverage to a more affordable insurance plan. This means the number of people who choose the public option will increase. This also means the number of people chipped will be plentiful as well. The adults who choose to have a chip implanted are the lucky (yes, lucky if you're a Govt Control Libtard) ones in this case. Children who are "born in the United States who at the time of birth is not otherwise covered under acceptable coverage" will be qualified and placed into the CHIP or Children's Health Insurance Program (what a convenient name). With a name like CHIP it would seem consistent to have the chip implanted into a child. Children conceived by parents who are already covered under the public option will more than likely be implanted with a chip by the consent of the parent. Eventually everyone will be implanted with a chip. And with the price and coverage of the public option being so competitive with the private companies, the private company may not survive.
  Origins: "Big Brother" rumors (often linked to the "mark of the beast" referenced in Revelation 13:16-18) warning that the government will ultimately require all citizens to be implanted with microchips have been around just about as long as microchips have, and specific claims that health care reform legislation will require such implantations date to the Clinton administration. So, the warning reproduced above '-- that health care reform legislation passed by the U.S. Congress in 2010 would require "this sort ofdevice be implanted in the majority of people who opt to become covered by the public health care option" '-- is nothing new under the sun. This warning is also just as false as all such previous rumors, a combination of someone's using inapplicable source material and also misunderstanding the meaning of the information contained within that source.First off, the referenced information was not part of the "Obamacare" health care legislation actually enacted by Congress. The page numbers and language cited in the example above were taken from HR 3200, an early House version of health care reform legislation which was never passed by Congress; passages cited from HR 3200 are therefore irrelevant. The cited wording did not appear in the replacement bill (HR 3590) eventually passed as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and although similar language was included in initial versions of the subsequent reconciliation bill (HR 4872), it too did not appear in the final version of that bill as passed by Congress.
  Second, nothing in any of those unpassed bills mandated that anyone be implanted with any type of microchip or RFID-based device, for any reason. The passages quoted above reference a section of the legislation that simply called for the creation of a registry which would allow the Department of Health and Human Services to collect data about medical devices "used in or on a patient" (such as pacemakers or hip replacements) for purposes that included tracking the effectiveness of such devices and facilitating the distribution of manufacturer recall notices. Absolutely nothing in those bills required that patients receive any type of implantable device (microchip or otherwise) or authorized the government to mandate the implantation of devices in patients.
  Some May 2012 versions of the hoax circulated by e-mail and Facebook postings displayed a photograph of the purported chip meant to be implanted, an item described as the size of "a grain of rice." The chip shown in the photo is actually one that measures glucose levels in diabetes patients, as evidenced by this 2007 article about this new concept in glucose monitoring.
  Update: A 28 July 2013 article about implanted microchips being "given a test run on the proud and patriotic citizens of Hanna, Wyoming" was mistaken by many readers for a genuine news story. However, that article was just a bit of political satire from the National Report, a web site that publishes outrageous fictional stories such as "IRS Plans to Target Leprechauns Next," "Boy Scouts Announce Boobs Merit Badge," and "New CDC Study Indicates Pets of Gay Couples Worse at Sports, Better at Fashion Than Pets of Straight Couples."
  Last updated: 28 July 2013
  Urban Legends Reference Pages (C) 1995-2013 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson.This material may not be reproduced without permission.snopes and the snopes.com logo are registered service marks of snopes.com.
RFID Chip Now Being Issued In Hanna, Wyoming As Part Of New "Obamacare" Plan | Jane M. Agni
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:43
  Here We Can See The Size And Shape Of The Exciting New RFID Chip
  By Jane M. Agni
  The ''Obamacare'' RFID chips are currently being given a test run on the proud and patriotic citizens of Hanna, Wyoming.
  Over the last two weeks a special piece of legislation has been passed making it mandatory for anyone who receives welfare, or any other form of government assistance to be implanted with these new identification chips. Even select government employees and officials have been ordered to receive the new sub-dermal device, which is typically implanted in the fatty tissue of the individual's buttock. Police officers, military, even garbage men will all be required to have the RFID chip by the end of next month or face termination from their jobs.
  During the beta testing stage of this amazing new technological development, many news outlets have remained silent waiting to see how the trial pans out before reporting on the subject. National Report, always on the cutting edge, sent me on location to Hanna, Wyoming to speak with some of the towns folk and gather their opinions and experiences regarding their newly acquired RFID chips.
  Tammy Josephine Laurence, a single mother of three who is currently accepting housing assistance got her chip implanted just hours before we had a chance to sit down and speak with her. She had the following to say:
  Preliminary Sketches Of What Later Came To Be Known As The RFID Chip
  ''Well, they said I better do this, or they was gonna cut the welfare. I'm a full time single mother. I got three young kids that need me at all hours and ain't no man to help. I didn't have no choice'...''
  When asked if the procedure was invasive she informed us that it was ''a little like giving blood'' and that she felt ''tired after getting the implant'' which apparently is a common but benign side effect.
  I also spoke with Hanna, Wyoming's Mayor Ted Howell, whose full support of the RFID chip made it mandatory for the citizens of his small community. Leading by example he was the first recipient of the RFID chip , having it implanted publicly at a recent town hall meeting. ''This is change for a better, safer America'' he said while undergoing the ten minute procedure. ''With this scientific advancement, the terrorists do not stand a chance'... USA will prevail'...''
  The ordinance has had some opposition, however, as several of the local churches have spoke out against the chips with protests. These fringe apocalyptic churches believe Obama to be the anti-Christ and claim the RFID chip is the Mark Of The Beast written about in their Book Of Revelations. They site the RFID chip's supposed serial number of 131618 as corresponding with Revelations 13:16-18. Of course, rural superstitions ultimately have no sway when it comes to the progressive new America and their scripture laden outcries have largely been ignored.
  This journalist embraces the new change, and even got her very own RFID chip before heading back to the National Report's home offices. The surgery was quick, simple and more or less painless. I can barely tell I've been implanted at all. A sacrifice I've gladly made for my country's national security and hope you will too.
  *DISCLAIMER: The National Report is an online portal for "citizen journalists". The views expressed by writers on this site are theirs alone and are not reflective of the fine journalistic and editorial integrity of National Report. Advice given is NOT to be construed as professional. If you are in need of professional help, please consult a professional. National Report is not intended for children under the age of 18.
Software experts attack cars, to release code as hackers meet | smh.com.au
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:39
  Jim Finkle, Joseph Lichterman and Christine MurrayMon Jul 29 00:59:59 UTC 2013
  The Ford Escape, pictured, was one of the cars hacked by the researchers.
  Car hacking is not a new field, but its secrets have long been closely guarded. That is about to change, thanks to two well-known computer software hackers who got bored finding bugs in software from Microsoft and Apple.
  Charlie Miller and Chris Valasek say they will publish detailed blueprints of techniques for attacking critical systems in the Toyota Prius and Ford Escape in a 100-page white paper, following several months of research they conducted with a grant from the US government.
  The two "white hats" - hackers who try to uncover software vulnerabilities before criminals can exploit them - will also release the software they built for hacking the cars at the Def Con hacking convention in Las Vegas this week.
  They said they devised ways to force a Toyota Prius to brake suddenly at 80 miles an hour (128 km/h), jerk its steering wheel, or accelerate the engine. They also say they can disable the brakes of a Ford Escape traveling at very slow speeds, so that the car keeps moving no matter how hard the driver presses the pedal.
  "Imagine what would happen if you were near a crowd," said Valasek, director of security intelligence at consulting firm IOActive, known for finding bugs in Microsoft's Windows software.
  But it is not as scary as it may sound at first blush.
  They were sitting inside the cars using laptops connected directly to the vehicles' computer networks when they did their work. So they will not be providing information on how to hack remotely into a car network, which is what would typically be needed to launch a real-world attack.
  The two say they hope the data they publish will encourage other white-hat hackers to uncover more security flaws in cars so they can be fixed.
  "I trust the eyes of 100 security researchers more than the eyes that are in Ford and Toyota," said Miller, a Twitter security engineer known for his research on hacking Apple's App Store.
  Toyota spokesman John Hanson said the company was reviewing the work. He said the carmaker had invested heavily in electronic security, but that bugs remained - as they do in cars of other manufacturers.
  "It's entirely possible to do," Hanson said, referring to the newly exposed hacks. "Absolutely we take it seriously."
  Ford spokesman Craig Daitch said the company takes seriously the electronic security of its vehicles. He said the fact that Miller's and Valasek's hacking methods required them to be inside the vehicle they were trying to manipulate mitigated the risk.
  "This particular attack was not performed remotely over the air, but as a highly aggressive direct physical manipulation of one vehicle over an elongated period of time, which would not be a risk to customers and any mass level," Daitch said.
  Time to shore up defences
  Miller and Valasek said they did not research remote attacks because that had already been done.
  A group of academics described ways to infect cars using Bluetooth systems and wireless networks in 2011. But unlike Miller and Valasek, the academics have kept the details of their work a closely guarded secret, refusing even to identify the make of the car they hacked.
  Their work got the attention of the US government. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has begun an auto cybersecurity research program.
  "While increased use of electronic controls and connectivity is enhancing transportation safety and efficiency, it brings a new challenge of safeguarding against potential vulnerabilities," the agency said in a statement. It said it knew of no consumer incident where a vehicle was hacked.
  Still, some experts believe malicious hackers may already have the ability to launch attacks.
  "It's time to shore up the defences," said Tiffany Strauchs Rad, a researcher with Kaspersky Lab, who previously worked for an auto security research centre.
  A group of European computer scientists had been scheduled to present research on hacking the locks of luxury vehicles, including Porsches, Audis, Bentleys and Lamborghinis, at a conference in Washington in mid-August.
  But Volkswagen AG obtained a restraining order from a British high court prohibiting discussion of the research by Flavio D. Garcia of the University of Birmingham, and Roel Verdult and Baris Ege of Radboud University Nijmegen in the Netherlands.
  A spokeswoman for the three scientists said they would pull out of the prestigious Usenix conference because of the restraining order. Both universities said they would hold off on publishing the paper, pending the resolution of litigation.
  Volkswagen declined to comment.
  Reuters
GPS jamming: Out of sight | The Economist
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:30
  EVERY day for up to ten minutes near the London Stock Exchange, someone blocks signals from the global positioning system (GPS) network of satellites. Navigation systems in cars stop working and timestamps on trades made in financial institutions can be affected. The incidents are not a cyber-attack by a foreign power, though. The most likely culprit, according to Charles Curry, whose firm Chronos Technology covertly monitors such events, is a delivery driver dodging his bosses' attempts to track him.
  The signals are weak. Mr Curry likens them to a 20-watt light bulb viewed from 12,000 miles (19,300 km). And the jammers are cheap: a driver can buy a dashboard model for about £50 ($78). They are a growing menace. The bubbles of electromagnetic noise they create interfere with legitimate GPS users. They can disrupt civil aviation and kill mobile-phone signals, too. In America their sale and use is banned. In Britain they are illegal for civilians to use deliberately, but not, yet, to buy: Ofcom, a regulator, is mulling a ban. In recent years Australian officials have destroyed hundreds of jammers.
  In the right (or wrong) hands, they are potential weapons. Britain's armed services test the devices in the Brecon Beacons in Wales, a military training area. North Korea uses big lorry-mounted versions to block GPS signals in South Korea. Starting with a four-day burst in August 2010, the attacks, which come from three positions inside the North, have lengthened. In early 2012 they ran for 16 days, causing 1,016 aircraft and 254 ships to report disruption.
  Mr Curry worries that criminals or terrorists could knock out GPS for an entire city or shipping lane anywhere in a flash. Even without North Korean-sized contraptions, the jamming can be substantial. Suitcase-sized devices on sale on the internet claim a range of 300-1,000 metres.
  Malfunctioning satellites and natural interference from solar activity have hit GPS signals and sent ships off course. David Last, a navigation expert, says an accidental power cut, perhaps caused by a jammer taken on board a car ferry, could cause a shipwreck. Generating a false signal'--spoofing'--is another threat. In December 2011 Iran said it had spoofed an American drone before capturing it (most experts dismiss the claim). So far effective spoofing seems confined to laboratories, but Mr Last says some governments are already taking countermeasures.
  One solution is a different means of navigation. In April South Korea announced plans for a network of 43 eLoran (enhanced long-range navigation) ground-based radio towers, based on technology first used in the second world war. It uses a far stronger signal than GPS, and should give pilots and ships' captains a safer alternative by 2016. With Chinese and Russian help, South Korea hopes to expand coverage across the region.
  Britain's General Lighthouse Authorities (GLA) are following suit with seven new eLoran stations. Martin Bransby, an engineer with the GLA, says this will replace visual navigation as the main backup for GPS. It will be working by mid-2014, and cost less than £700,000; receivers cost £2,000 per vessel. By 2019 coverage should reach all big British ports.
  America's military-research agency DARPA has an experimental ''single-chip timing and inertial measurement unit'' (TIMU). When finished, according to the project's boss, Andrei Shkel, it will use tiny gyroscopes and accelerometers to track its position without using satellites or radio towers. America's White Sands missile range in New Mexico is installing a ''Non-GPS Based Positioning System'', using ground-based antennae to provide centimetre-level positioning over 2,500 square miles. In May the Canadian government said it would splash out on anti-jam upgrades for military aircraft.
  A new version of the US air force's bunker-busting bomb, designed in part to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities, includes technology to prevent defenders from blocking its satellite-based guidance systems. MBDA, a European missile firm, is working on similar lines.
  But for many users, GPS and other space-based navigation systems'--which include Russia's GLONASS, China's partly complete Beidou, and an as-yet unfinished project by the European Union'--remain indispensable and ubiquitous. They are also vulnerable. For those whose lives or livelihoods depend on knowing where they are, more resilient substitutes cannot come fast enough.
Activist Post: UK Internet Filter to Also Block Conspiracy Theories
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 30 Jul 2013 04:27
  Big Brother Weds the Nanny Who's Pregnant with Internet Censorship.Eric BlairActivist PostThe totalitarian tip-toe is tap dancing to tyranny with the proposed Internet censorship bill in the United Kingdom. In the name of keeping children safe from porn, the UK law will impose Internet filters on far more than just porn.
  According to Wired:
  As well as pornography, users may automatically be opted in to blocks on "violent material", "extremist related content", "anorexia and eating disorder websites" and "suicide related websites", "alcohol" and "smoking". But the list doesn't stop there. It even extends to blocking "web forums" and "esoteric material", whatever that is. "Web blocking circumvention tools" is also included, of course.
  The definition of "esoteric" makes clear that censorship of broad topics is the goal of this so-called ISP filter:es·o·ter·ic [es-uh-ter-ik] adjective1. understood by or meant for only the select few who have special knowledge or interest;2. belonging to the select few.3. private; secret; confidential.
  Translation: anything outside the acceptable mainstream narrative will be filtered. In short, the free flow of information is under assault with this law.The organization Open Rights Group refers to this totalitarian tip-toe as "sleepwalking into censorship":
  What's clear here is that David Cameron wants people to sleepwalk into censorship. We know that people stick with defaults: this is part of the idea behind 'nudge theory' and 'choice architecture' that is popular with Cameron.
  The implication is that filtering is good, or at least harmless, for anyone, whether adult or child. Of course, this is not true; there's not just the question of false positives for web users, but the affect on a network economy of excluding a proportion of a legitimate website's audience.
  Open Rights also says the law could be used to play economic favorites, thus undermining the free market on the Internet:There comes a point that it is simply better to place your sales through Amazon and ebay, and circulate your news and promotions exclusively through Facebook and Twitter, as you know none of these will ever be filtered.
  It seems Western government's voracity for Internet censorship has increased many fold since the Snowden revelations about digital spying.Direct Internet censorship was imposed on millions of U.S. government computers blocking them from viewing any material related to the Snowden leak, which at the time of the leak and even now represents a large percentage of all political and technical news stories.
  And as John Naughton of the Guardian points out today, the real story about the Snowden leak that everyone is ignoring are the implications on Internet freedom, which he lists as the following:
  The first is that the days of the internet as a truly global network are numbered. It was always a possibility that the system would eventually be Balkanised, ie divided into a number of geographical or jurisdiction-determined subnets as societies such as China, Russia, Iran and other Islamic states decided that they needed to control how their citizens communicated. Now, Balkanisation is a certainty.
  Second, the issue of internet governance is about to become very contentious. Given what we now know about how the US and its satraps have been abusing their privileged position in the global infrastructure, the idea that the western powers can be allowed to continue to control it has become untenable.
  Third, as Evgeny Morozov has pointed out, the Obama administration's "internet freedom agenda" has been exposed as patronising cant. "Today," he writes, "the rhetoric of the 'internet freedom agenda' looks as trustworthy as George Bush's 'freedom agenda' after Abu Ghraib."
  As a final note, porn filters already exist for parents in the private marketplace if they choose to use them. So, there is no need for governments to make them mandatory, which indicates that the real agenda behind these new proposed laws is much more about censorship than protecting children.Read other articles by Eric Blair Here
  BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW
Pazzi conspiracy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 21:40
  The Pazzi family were not the only instigators of the plot. The Salviati, Papal bankers in Florence, were at the centre of the conspiracy. Pope Sixtus IV was an enemy of the Medici. He had purchased from Milan the lordship of Imola, a stronghold on the border between Papal and Tuscan territory that Lorenzo de' Medici wanted for Florence. The purchase was financed by the Pazzi bank, even though Francesco de' Pazzi had promised Lorenzo they would not aid the Pope. As a reward, Sixtus IV granted the Pazzi monopoly at the alum mines at Tolfa '-- alum being an essential mordant in dyeing in the textile trade that was central to the Florentine economy '-- and he assigned to the Pazzi bank lucrative rights to manage Papal revenues. Sixtus IV appointed his nephew, Girolamo Riario, as the new governor of Imola, and Francesco Salviati as archbishop of Pisa, a city that was a former commercial rival but now subject to Florence. Lorenzo had refused to permit Salviati to enter Pisa because of the challenge such an ecclesiastical position offered to his own government in Florence.
  Salviati and Francesco de' Pazzi put together a plan to assassinate Lorenzo and Giuliano de' Medici. Riario himself remained in Rome. The plan was widely known: the Pope was reported to have said, "I support it '-- as long as no one is killed." In 2004, an encrypted letter in the archives of the Ubaldini family was discovered by Marcello Simonetta, a historian then teaching at Wesleyan University in Connecticut, and decoded. It revealed that Federico da Montefeltro, Duke of Urbino, a renowned humanist and condottiere for the Papacy, was deeply embroiled in the conspiracy and had committed himself to position 600 troops outside Florence, waiting for the moment.
  On Sunday, 26 April 1478, during High Mass at the Duomo before a crowd of 10,000, the Medici brothers were assaulted. Giuliano de' Medici was stabbed 19 times by Bernardo Bandi and Francesco de' Pazzi. As he bled to death on the cathedral floor, his brother Lorenzo escaped with serious, but non life-threatening wounds. Lorenzo reappeared shortly after, locked safely in the sacristy by the humanistPoliziano. A coordinated attempt to capture the Gonfaloniere and Signoria was thwarted when the archbishop and head of the Salviati clan were trapped in a room whose doors had a hidden latch. The coup d'(C)tat had failed, and the enraged Florentines seized and killed the conspirators. Jacopo de' Pazzi was tossed from a window. To finish him off, the mob dragged him naked through the streets, then threw him into the Arno River. The Pazzi family were stripped of their possessions in Florence, every vestige of their name effaced. Salviati was hanged on the walls of the Palazzo Vecchio. Although Lorenzo appealed to the crowd not to exact summary justice, many of the conspirators, as well as many people accused of being conspirators, were killed. Lorenzo did manage to save the nephew of Sixtus IV, Cardinal Raffaele Riario, who was almost certainly an innocent dupe of the conspirators, as well as two relatives of the conspirators. The main conspirators were hunted down throughout Italy and the fortunes of the various Pazzi companies across Europe were despoiled. The Pazzi crest and all references to their name were banned.
Natural gas pipeline's opening heralds China-Myanmar energy network
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Global Times
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:39
  A Myanmar-China natural gas pipeline began operations Sunday in Mandalay, Myanmar's second largest city.
  The 793-kilometer pipeline is part of an oil and gas pipelines project involving investments from six corporations from four countries, including China, Myanmar, South Korea and India. A crude oil pipeline also nearing completion has an annual capacity of 22 million tons.
  "The pipelines project will not only benefit the four countries but also help promote Myanmar's economic growth, industrialization and electrification, which are very meaningful to Myanmar's long-term development," said Myanmar Vice-President U Nyan Tun.
  The pipeline goes all the way from Myanmar to the Chinese border town Ruili in Yunnan Province. With six processing stations, it will be able to carry 12 billion cubic meters of gas annually.
  An unnamed senior Chinese official told the Global Times that Myanmar could offload some 2 million tons of oil and 20 percent of gas from the pipelines annually for its domestic use after the whole project is completed.
  "The pipelines could help spread the pressure on energy transportation more widely and reduce China's dependence on the Strait of Malacca for transportation," Lin Boqiang, director of the Center for Energy Economics Research at Xiamen University, told the Global Times.
  "These pipelines could make China's energy map more complete and the energy supply for the southwestern part of China would become more reliable," Bi Shihong, a professor with the School of International Studies at Yunnan University, told the Global Times.
  "The construction of the pipelines will strengthen economic cooperation between China and Myanmar," said Bi, adding that Myanmar has a serious trade deficit with China and the project would alleviate the trade imbalance.
  The fate of these pipelines project was previously thought to be in danger after two large-scale Chinese projects encountered setbacks in Myanmar.
  Agencies contributed to this story
Modern Cars Can Be Hacked -- Boats and Planes Next?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Activist Post
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:33
  Nicholas WestActivist PostThe question of whether or not modern cars can be hacked has been answered in the wake of the suspicious circumstances surrounding the death of journalist Michael Hastings.
  Dr. Kathleen Fisher spoke in 2012 about DARPA's High-Assurance Cyber Military Systems (HACMS) program, making it clear that all modern cars could be vulnerable to hacking and solutions need to be found.
  Additional concerns are now being raised about the role GPS systems could play in making it possible to hack boats, planes and other GPS-reliant systems.
  GPS tracking and positioning technology was brought to us by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). Apparently, DARPA has done such a good job thoroughly embedding GPS into military applications, as well as permitting it to trickle down to "civilian devices," that it has permeated nearly all of modern life.
  As stated by Arati Prabhakar, head of DARPA, "sometimes a capability is so powerful that our reliance on it, in itself, becomes a vulnerability."
  As Extreme Tech reports, this vulnerability can be exploited very easily, and very cheaply:About a year ago, Todd Humphreys and his team from the University of Texas called GPS navigation into serious question. Using just a few simple pieces of equipment, a roughly $3,000 investment dwarfed by what cyber-criminals often invest in hardware, they were able to steer a small drone badly off course. It was a blunt instrument, just capable of messing with the drone's sense of direction and, potentially, sending it careening into the ground. The demonstration was so worrying that Humphreys soon found himself testifying before Congress, and sitting in meetings with everyone from the FAA to the Pentagon.
  The same hole used to exploit GPS to down the drone still exists, and Humphrey's team has upped their game by further improving their capability to interfere with GPS:This week, they boarded a 210-foot super-yacht by the name of White Rose of the Drachs and used the exact same technique to leave its captain and crew stunned and helpless.
  All you have to do is introduce a signal stronger than the one generated by these satellites.
  With just a laptop, a small antenna, and a GPS ''spoofing'' device, the team fed a stronger signal to the yacht's steering system than the genuine one, incoming from actual GPS satellites...
  This is an insidious form of attack because the ship's navigation technology will continue to report that the ship is both on course and precisely where it is supposed to be '-- even if neither of those things is true...
  The team was able to steer the ship to port or starboard at will, and the crew was totally unaware that anything was wrong. Captain Andrew Schofield told Fox News he was ''gobsmacked,'' when he found out what had been done to his ship, as was the entire deck team. His $80 million baby could have easily been run into a sandbar or reef...
  This spoofing attack undermines the trust these professionals put in their navigation systems. Even slightly interfering with a large amount of sea traffic could hamper trading ports, and potentially throw a wrench into large-scale economies.
  The threat extends to any type of transportation that uses GPS, which of course includes planes. The same type of attack could be used to steer a plane, or planes, off course, causing mid-air collisions or worse. However, at least with boats and planes there is a possible human override. Not so with unmanned systems. In fact, drones already have been revealed as open to hacking and viruses, as Dr. Kathleen Fisher also confirmed in the video above, but apparently Congress is not sufficiently concerned to thwart the entrance of drones to American skies by 2015.Beyond drones, what about GPS-directed munitions? These are the scenarios that become worrisome at a whole different level.
  Extreme Tech closes their article with a solution: "implement the P(Y)-code encryption used by military assets in a wider range of civilian technology."However, DARPA has already moved in another direction, which may indicate the increased news coverage about GPS vulnerability. Whether or not the threat is real, they are using it to explore the idea of an "autonomous chip."The world has apparently become so dependent on GPS, that mega defense contractor, Raytheon, offers the following infographic - "Imagine The World Without GPS" - to illustrate the comprehensive concern:Naturally, the original source of what has now become a problem is offering the solution. DARPA seeks to augment or perhaps eliminate the reliance on satellites altogether by establishing a new system that relies on microchips:The tiny chip holds three gyroscopes, three accelerometers and an atomic clock, which, together, work as an autonomous navigation system.
  DARPA envisages using this technology to replace GPS in some contexts, especially in small-caliber ammunition or for monitoring people. (emphasis added) [Source]
  The official DARPA press release entitled, "Extreme Miniaturization: Seven Devices, One Chip to Navigate Without GPS" is worth reading in its entirety as it is a perfect example of why we should never feel safe looking to the military-industrial complex for safety. Using our tax dollars, they all but admit that the GPS technology with which they have marked the world is severely compromised. And, naturally, it is that waste of money that requires us to throw more money into the solution, even as they supposedly could not have envisioned the threat from the beginning.This project might be a massive boondoggle, since it is slightly strange that the call to augment or replace GPS was publicized one year ago by DARPA, and is being openly developed. If the scenarios for creating mass havoc on the cheap are to be believed, this would not be a smart announcement to make.
  It is almost certain that we will be increasingly subjected to potential scenarios designed to convince us that every "bad actor" from North Korea to Anonymous to any common low-rent terrorist is set to bring down planes, the economy, and whatever else will get us to welcome the latest round of ubiquitous surveillance and tracking technology.
  Additional Sources:http://defensesystems.com/articles/2011/08/16/darpa-develops-gps-free-navigation-systems.aspxhttp://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/110916/north-korea%E2%80%99s-gps-jammer-brigade-spy-plane
  Read other articles by Nicholas West Here
  BE THE CHANGE! PLEASE SHARE THIS USING THE TOOLS BELOW
Gary Glitter may earn £1m from Oasis royalties
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Culture | theguardian.com
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:31
  Gary Glitter during his trial in 2006. Photograph: Julian Abram Wainwright/EPA
  Gary Glitter has reportedly earned £1m worth of royalties from the Oasis track Hello which uses a sample of his lyrics.
  According to the Sun, the singer will continue to earn a significant amount of money for many years as a result of the song, which is the opening track on Oasis' second album (What's the Story) Morning Glory?. It includes the lyric "Hello, hello, it's good to be back", a line taken from Glitter's 1973 hit Hello, Hello, I'm Back Again.
  The 69-year-old, whose real name is Paul Gadd, gets a payment for each album sold, as well as each play on the radio and online. To date (What's the Story) Morning Glory? has sold 22m copies worldwide since its release in 1995.
  Music lawyer Craig Brookes told the Sun that Hello could have earned Glitter £1m so far, on top of the annual £300,000 he gets from royalties linked to his back catalogue of releases. He is legally entitled to the money as he is still credited as the co-writer of Hello, despite being jailed for four months in 1999 for downloading child pornography, as well as serving a further three years in prison in Vietnam in 2006 for molesting two girls.
  In addition to his royalties, in 1999 Gadd received an estimated £200,000 for copyright infringement after taking legal action against Oasis.
Fed Economist Fired for Investigating Suspicious 9/11 Cash Transfers
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Top Information Post
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:30
  Would you be surprised to learn that tens of billions in cold, hard cash was shuffled around just prior to 9-11 by none other than the Fed itself? Probably not. Here's a graph, illustrating the change in USD currency production over a ten week period prior to 9-11 compared to the average over the five years prior (which, by the way, includes the Y2K money printing orgy in the year 2000 itself, which skews the average higher):
  That's right. The average increase was $8 billion over five years, but it exploded to $18 billion just prior to that fateful day. None other than a Federal Reserve economist discovered this and was promptly fired for his efforts to reveal the cause. The official story involves an Argentine currency crisis. Clearly, this required his termination. We interviewed him, and this is his story at 2:49 in:
  We also discuss shipments of cash to Afghanistan and Iraq. And, Justine Underhill explains just who Benny's money-printing IOER profligacy is actually benefitting (answer: foreign banks, a topic covered on Zero Hedge here and by us at EPJ here).
  Finally, in case you missed it, we interviewed Steve Keen last week, and at 2:54 he breaks down the difference between different economic religions (the neoclassical school, Keynseyian, post-Keynseyian and other oft-conflated economic taxonomies). We also discuss the role of banks (5:55), whether we have true capitalism (6:20), the crisis of confidence in the US Dollar (8:20), the Fed's rescue of debtors, not creditors (9:40), how stock margin debt drives stock prices (10:20), and why it's all about the leverage (liquidity?) at 11:05.
  At 19:57, we debate him on the merrits of the mortgage jubilee.
  Here's the interview:
  Source
  Leave CommentsComments
EPA Documents Show U.S. Goal to Harmonize with Codex Alimentarius
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Top Information Post
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:25
  Brandon TurbevilleActivist Post
  In many of the articles I have written regarding Codex Alimentarius, as well as in my book Codex Alimentarius '' The End of Health Freedom, I have mentioned the stated goals of Codex Alimentarius, national governments and, hence, government agencies to harmonize domestic laws, regulations, and policies as the Codex guidelines are established.
  Yet, while some may doubt the veracity of this claim, it can be no clearer than the statement provided by the EPA in their own Reregistration for Eligibility Decision documents for pesticides that harmonization with Codex guidelines is the intention of the U.S. government.
  Although virtually all of the Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) documents contain essentially the same prescripts and tangential information, one need only to take a look at one of the documents '' the document dealing with Acephate for the purposes of this article '' to locate the statement of purpose to harmonize Codex guidelines and those of the EPA. It says,
  The Codex Alimentarius Commission has established several maximum residue limits (MRLs) for residues of acephate in/on various plant and animals commodities. The Codex MRLs are expressed in terms of acephate per se. Harmonization of expression/definition between Codex MRLs and U.S. tolerances will be achieved when the residue definition of the U.S. tolerances is changed from combined residues of acephate and the metabolite methamidophos to acephate per se. A numerical comparison of the Codex MRLs and the corresponding reassessed U.S. tolerances is presented in Table 16. Recommendations for compatibility are based on conclusions following reassessment of U.S. tolerances (see Table 15.)[1]
  This statement of intended harmonization with Codex standards is included in virtually every one of the Reregistration for Eligibility Decision (RED) documents.
  Interestingly enough, these statements not only openly announce their intentions of harmonization, but clearly state that the U.S. will amend its standards to meet those of Codex Alimentarius. These pesticides are continually reassessed for these reasons.
  Indeed, the charts presented in the RED documents contain figures for the ''reassessed'' MRLs in comparison to those of Codex. But while changing scientific conclusions for political purposes is not only unscientific, it is also highly deceptive and unethical. Yet this is what the EPA admits to doing in its own documents.
  Obviously, neither the science nor the evidence will change simply because governments have entered into an agreement. However, it appears that the methods used to achieve such conclusions, as well as the conclusions themselves will do just that.
  Continuing with Acephate as an example, one can see harmonization in action. When one looks at the MRLs set by Codex and those set by the EPA, two things are readily apparent. First, in this particular case, the MRLs of Codex are set much higher than those of the EPA. Second, many of the ''reassessed'' U.S. MRLs are compatible with those of Codex.
  The following values are expressed in ppm. Once converted, ppm is the same value as the mg/kg designation that Codex uses.
  Codex and EPA MRLs for AcephateBrussels Sprouts = EPA 3.0/CODEX 5Cattle Fat = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1Cattle Meat = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1Cauliflower = EPA 2.0/CODEX 5Cotton Seed = EPA 0.5/CODEX 2Eggs = EPA 0.1/CODEX 0.1Lettuce, Head = EPA 10.0/CODEX 5Milks = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1Pig Fat = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1Pig Meat = EPA TBD/CODEX 0.1Poultry Fats = EPA 0.1/CODEX 0.1Poultry Meat = EPA 0.1/CODEX 0.1Soya Bean (dry) = EPA 1.0/CODEX 0.5[2]Here, compatibility exists in three categories (eggs, poultry fats, and poultry meats). With the exception of lettuce, all Codex MRLs are higher than the EPA limits. All of the EPA limits have been ''reassessed'' after the introduction of Codex MRLs. The differences in the upper limits are attributed to ''differences in agricultural practices in the U.S. upon which the residue data were developed.''[3]
  This may be true, of course, but it is also a convenient excuse. As stated earlier, it appears that true scientific practice is taking a backseat to political considerations in the arena of pesticide MRLs and Codex harmonization.
  Yet even with the stated goal of harmonization, it appears that the levels of ''acceptable'' pesticide residues in food will not go down. That is, at least from the EPA's standpoint. When one observes the MRL list for substances such as Dicofol, a pesticide in which the EPA's tolerances are generally higher than that of Codex's own, the EPA tends to remain resolute in its position.
  For instance, Codex sets a Dicofol MRL of 0.1 while the EPA sets an MRL of 0.5.[4] However, whereas the EPA ''reassesses'' its tolerances for substances such as Acephate as demonstrated above, in this case it states, ''Data do not support a lower US tolerance, with field trial residues as great as 0.4 ppm.''
  For dry hops, Codex sets the MRL at 50 mg/kg. The EPA sets the value at 65 ppm.[5] In this case as well, the EPA remains firm saying, ''Data indicate that the tolerance cannot be decreased.''[6]
  Apparently, the EPA is capable of standing up to Codex when it comes to harmonizing its own standards to higher acceptable levels of contamination, but not for lower ones. As I have discussed in previous articles, this opens the door to the WTO dispute resolution mechanism to address pesticide MRL's. It may be in the WTO ''court'' that the issues of MRLs for pesticide residues are resolved.
  While such disregard for the welfare and concerns of consumers is to be expected of Codex, it is nonetheless still hypocritical. This is most evident by examining the procedures being followed for pesticide residues when compared to those used when assessing vitamin and mineral supplements.[7]
  However, some telling comments were made by the (Food and Agricultural Organization) FAO on its own website regarding the Revised Guidelines for Predicting Dietary Intake of Pesticide Residues.
  In reference to these guidelines it states, ''The use of these guidelines should significantly reduce the number of cases where exposure assessments cause unnecessary concern.''[8] While few would argue that this statement is unreasonable, it is without doubt a completely different mindset than that guiding the Codex Committee on Nutrition and Foods For Special Dietary Uses[9] (CCNFSDU) in regards to natural supplements.
  Indeed, it seems that the purpose of the CCNFSDU is to ''cause unnecessary concern'' regarding vitamins and minerals. When it comes to pesticides however, the standards are quite a bit looser.
  Again, in regards to the Revised Guidelines for Predicting Dietary Intake of Pesticide Residues, the same document continues by saying,
  The Guidelines explicitly state that a worst-case estimate is a gross overestimate of true exposure and that more refined calculations should be performed using other relevant data. However, some Members of CCPR reject MRLs when this additional data is not available. Others rely, for instance, on monitoring data, which may demonstrate that no exposure problems are to be expected.[10]
  This statement, taken on its own, might not seem like a reason for consumers to rise up in arms. However, not only does it downplay what it considers to be the worst-case scenario but it also admits to a potential bias toward conclusions that determine there are no exposure problems. It is also quite misleading to suggest that a gross overestimate of true exposure of pesticides is a trivial matter. To overestimate the exposure of populations, such as in the Global Expectable Average Daily Diet[11] for vitamins and minerals,[12] is to overestimate the tolerances (depending on which scientific model is chosen) of those populations, possibly leading to even higher MRL and acceptable tolerances of pesticide residues in foods.
  Ultimately, however, whether the acceptable levels of pesticide residue in foods are moved up or down, it cannot be argued that the goal is to harmonize domestic U.S. standards with the international Codex Alimentarius Guidelines. After all, such a goal has been stated by the EPA itself within its own RED documents.
  With this in mind, it would be wise for all American consumers to more closely monitor the decisions of their domestic regulatory agencies.
  Leave CommentsComments
Harvard study suggests drinking coffee can halve suicide risk
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: euronews
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:24
  A Harvard study has concluded that drinking several cups of coffee a day can reduce the risk of suicide in both men and women.
  The study, which was published in the World Journal of Biological Psychiatry, reviewed data from three large-scale US studies. The research compared the suicide rate among adults who drank between 2 and 4 caffeinated cups of coffee a day, those who drank much less coffee a day, non-coffee drinkers and those who drank decaffeinated coffee.
  Covering around 200,000 participants over 16 years, the investigation found that the risk of suicide was 50 percent less for those consuming up to 400mg of caffeine a day.
  Michel Lucas, one of the lead researchers from the Department of Nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, said: ''Unlike previous investigations, we were able to assess association of consumption of caffeinated and non-caffeinated beverages, and we identify caffeine as the most likely candidate of any putative protective effect of coffee.''
  It is believed that caffeine has an effect on neurotransmitters and boosts the production of serotonin, dopamine and noradrenaline, which work as mild antidepressants. In the past, other studies have found that coffee reduced depression in women but this is the first research to look into the link between caffeine and incidents of suicide.
  Despite the positive results scientists are still advising moderation: ''Overall, our results suggest that there is little further benefit for consumption above two to three cups/day or 400 mg of caffeine/day.'' They explained that although their own data for drinkers of large quantities of coffee was not extensive enough for significant results, other studies had found that suicide rates were higher in those drinking between 8 and 9 cups a day.
  More about:Health, Medical research, ResearchCopyright (C) 2013 euronews
Russia to Hand Over 'Black Hole' Sub to Vietnam in November
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: RIA Novosti
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:24
  MOSCOW, July 29 (RIA Novosti) '' The first of six Russian submarines, dubbed by the US Navy as ''black holes in the ocean'' because they are nearly undetectable when submerged, will be delivered to Vietnam in November, the shipbuilder said Monday.
  The Varshavyanka class (Project 636M) of diesel-electric submarines have very low noise emission and can hit targets at long distances without being detected by an enemy's anti-submarine warfare assets.
  ''We are expecting the signing of the acceptance act and the sub's sailing to Vietnam in November,'' the press service of Admiralty Shipyards said from St. Petersburg.
  The submarine successfully completed 100-day sea trials in July while the Vietnamese crew has been in training since April this year, the shipbuilder said in a statement.
  ''The vessel showed excellent maneuverability and reliable work of all mechanisms during the trials,'' the statement said.
  Vietnam ordered a fleet of six Russian-made submarines in 2009, seen as an effort to counterbalance China's expanding maritime influence in the region. The contract, which also stipulates the training of Vietnamese submarine crews in Russia, is reportedly worth $2 billion.
  All six boats are being built at Admiralty Shipyards. They are due for delivery by 2016.
  The Varshavyanka class is an improvement on the Kilo, with more advanced stealth technology and an extended combat range. The vessels displace 3,100 tons, reach speeds of 20 knots, can dive to 300 meters and carry crews of 52 people.
  The submarines, which feature 533-milimeter torpedo tubes and are armed with torpedoes, mines and Kalibr 3M54 (NATO SS-N-27 Sizzler) cruise missiles, are mainly intended for anti-shipping and anti-submarine missions in relatively shallow waters.
Howard Dean: Sarah Palin was right about death panels! Yeaarrggh!
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Twitchy Â» US Politics
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:23
  When you've lost Hollerin' Howard Dean, it may be time to rethink some things.
  In 2009, Sarah Palin coined the term ''death panels'' as a more accurate name for Obamacare's Independent Payment Advisory Board, or IPAB. Palin was widely ridiculed for her claim, but today, Howard Dean, of all people, is suggesting that she was on to something. After initially dismissing Palin's credibility and assailing her for her remarks, the fist-pumping firebrand is coming out forcefully today against the IPAB:
  Dean makes it clear that, to him, the Affordable Care Act holds a great deal of promise. But he has no doubt that the IPAB is a disaster in the making:
  One major problem is the so-called Independent Payment Advisory Board. The IPAB is essentially a health-care rationing body. By setting doctor reimbursement rates for Medicare and determining which procedures and drugs will be covered and at what price, the IPAB will be able to stop certain treatments its members do not favor by simply setting rates to levels where no doctor or hospital will perform them.
  '...
  The IPAB will cause frustration to providers and patients alike, and it will fail to control costs. When, and if, the atmosphere on Capitol Hill improves and leadership becomes interested again in addressing real problems instead of posturing, getting rid of the IPAB is something Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on.
  Ouch.
  Will Dean's views generate the same uproar from the Left that Palin's did?
  So do we. In the meantime, here's a solution that will assuage all our concerns:
  Amen.
Announcing Trigger.io v2.0
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Hacker News
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 17:07
  Trigger.io makes it simple for web developers to create native mobile apps for iOS and Android by using JavaScript to compose different native features.
  Today we release our v2 platform which enables developers to create and re-use native modules provided by 3rd parties.
  In the past if you wanted to add a native feature to your app that was not supported by existing Trigger.io Forge APIs, you would have to dive down into native code yourself or hire a contractor to do that. Trigger.io v2.0 is a big deal since developers can now make the native modules they've built on top of Trigger.io available for re-use.
  Ultimately this means you'll be able to select from a much broader range of native features '' both the core APIs built by our team and others contributed by 3rd parties '' and combine them with the best of HTML5.
  You can see some examples on modules page right now:
  If you have already built a Trigger.io plugin and would be interested in making it available to others as a module, please get in touch, we'd love to hear from you.The journey and v1 productWe launched Trigger.io last year because of the huge shift to mobile and our desire to help web developers navigate that. Our core community of developers grew fast. They told us that they loved our platform because of the super fast build / test cycle, fast native bridge, and rich API which includes native UI components and integrations with cloud services which is much broader than alternatives.
  All of that is enabled by our Toolkit UI, command-line tools and unique Forge build technology.
  Later Reload made the proposition to web developers even more compelling: update your app at web speed without needing to go through the App Store approval process. On top of the ROI benefits to being able to reuse web code and skills when you first build your app, Reload makes a Trigger.io-style hybrid mobile app better for the long-haul when you update your apps and manage their lifecycle.
  But what if you need a native mobile feature that the Trigger.io Forge APIs don't support? We want you to have the best possible development process without compromising on your your app features, so we enabled extensibility through plugins. Now we've taken that extensibility to another level.
  What Trigger.io v2.0 means for developersOur v2.0 platform is a big step forward, but if you're already familiar with our platform, you'll see our commitment to speed in the build process, native wrapper, and the broad range of APIs remains the same '' our module ecosystem is an addition, not a major change to what you're already using.
  But now, web developers who are building mobile apps with Trigger.io will be able to access to a broader range of APIs including cloud service integrations and native UI components sooner. Because you'll be able to use 3rd party developed modules as well as those built by our team here at Trigger.io.
  Instead of contracting for services whenever you want a new new feature for your native app, you'll be able to pick-up and integrate re-usable components.
  For developers who are able to build natively, you can make re-usable components available through our platform so you don't need to repeat your work for each new client engagement. While you can't charge for individual modules right now, you can use our platform to get more customers for your services and support contracts. And in the future we'll enable a rev-share so you can earn a passive income from your work.
  What's next?If you're building, or thinking about build mobile apps, you're concerned about which platforms you should be supporting, the upcoming iOS7 release and figuring out the set of features you'll need '' we're there for you. Please get in touch at support@trigger.io so we can try to help.
  Our plan is to continue to focus on improving our tooling and making the build / test cycle as simple as possible. While building a high quality module ecosystem that gives you the broad range of features that you can compose in new and interesting ways.
  Mobile development should be a pleasure. Right now it isn't. We're further along the path and are determined to help web developers get there.
Spain's fatal crash jeopardizes Renfe bid for US$16bn Rio-S£o Paulo bullet train - BNamericas
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 16:17
  The fatal train crash that occurred Wednesday (Jul 24) in northwestern Spain will likely disqualify Spanish state-owned railway operator Renfe from competing in Brazil's upcoming 35.6bn-real (US$15.9bn) Rio-S£o Paulo-Campinas bullet train tender.
  "All bidders must submit a document stating that they have not participated in a highspeed train project which has recorded a fatal accident in the past five years, which resulted from faulty operation of the train system," the tender documents published by national ground transport agency ANTT read.
  A train operated by Renfe derailed near the city of Santiago de Compostela on Wednesday, claiming the lives of 80 people and injuring another 130 passengers, as of Thursday (Jul 25) evening.
  An official probe has yet to be carried out, but most likely the accident was caused by the train approaching a curve at way above the speed limit, according to early reports from local press. It is not clear yet why the train was going that fast.
  SPANISH BID
  Brazil's project, currently the largest railway project underway in Latin America, entails building and operating 511km of a high speed train route - also known as the EF-222 line - with stations at Campinas, S£o Paulo, Guarulhos and S£o Jos(C) dos Campos in S£o Paulo state, and Rio de Janeiro and Volta Redonda-Barra Mansa, in Rio de Janeiro state.
  Spain's development minister, Ana Paster, confirmed in May that a government consortium would participate in the tender. The group, which expected Renfe to team up with railway infrastructure authority Adif and transport engineering and consultancy agency Ineco, was considered among the best placed to win the contract.
  The announcement followed a December agreement between EPL and Ineco, which involved developing a macro-strategy of deploying a high speed system that included addressing technological implications and social and environmental issues.
  BULLET TRAIN SPELL
  Firms affiliated with China's national railway operator, China Railways, have already been disqualified due to an accident on its Yongtaiwen Railway in 2011, which resulted in over 30 fatalities.
  Also, a number of other high-profile bidders such as Alstom, Bombardier, CAF, and Mitsui are being investigated for the formation of an alleged cartel. Whether this will affect their participation in the competition has not been determined.
  Numerous other companies have been eyeing the project. Among them are Korea's Hyundai and Samsung, US-based Bechtel, Germany's Siemens, and Japan's Hitachi, Mitsubishi, Toshiba.
  Parties interested in bidding for phase one works must deliver proposals by August 13 and bids will be opened on S£o Paulo's Bovespa stock exchange on September 19, According to the project's tender schedule.
Spanish train crash driver 'admits he was reckless'
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 11:23
  Francisco Garz"n has been accused of manslaughter by police but the drivers' union urged ­caution in the rush to blame. Photograph: Lavandeira Jr/EPA
  The driver of the train involved in Spain's worst rail disaster in almost 70 years was freed on bail on Sunday night after reportedly admitting to a judge that he had behaved recklessly.
  Police on Friday formally accused 52-year-old Francisco Garz"n of manslaughter caused by recklessness.
  During the closed-door hearing, Judge Luis Alez took away Garz"n's passport and ordered him to report weekly to the court, according to local media. The driver, accompanied by his lawyer, was questioned for around two hours.
  The reports, citing police and judicial sources, said Garz"n had admitted reckless behaviour. But it was not clear whether the judge had laid charges against the driver or, if so, whether they were the same as those levelled by police.
  Garz"n arrived at the court handcuffed and wearing dark glasses. He had a visible bruise on his forehead '' the result of a gash that he sustained in the crash and which required nine stitches.
  Video evidence and passenger accounts indicate the high-speed Alvia train derailed as it hurtled into a sharp bend outside Santiago de Compostela last week. The death toll from the crash rose to 79 on Sunday after another victim died in hospital.
  Garz"n was brought to court after spending a night in the cells of city's central police station. As he left hospital on Saturday, he made no response when a relative of one of the injured hurled abuse at him, according to an eyewitness account in the newspaper El Correo Gallego.
  The railway drivers' union expressed concern that Garz"n had been formally accused before the extraction and analysis of data from the so-called "black boxes".
  It is hoped the onboard recorders will offer clues as to why a driver known for his prudence entered the curve at more than twice the 80kph (49mph) limit.
  Carla Serrano, 19, from Madrid, who survived the crash with minor injuries, said that seconds before the crash the display panel in her carriage showed the train was travelling at 210kph. Her boyfriend pointed it out to her. "I looked up and said: 'Well, yes,'" she said.
  At the weekend, several colleagues and neighbours of Garz"n came forward to defend him, describing him as a responsible and cautious driver. Eladio Rodr­guez, regional head of the transport sector of the socialist General Workers' Union said: "There have to be causes other than the alleged human error."
  Before Garz"n testified, claims were made of delays in co-ordinating the rescue operation. The daily El Pa­s said it had obtained reports compiled by the emergency services that showed it took two hours to declare the state of alert needed to mobilise help from other provinces.
  The inhabitants of the neighbourhood of Angrois, where the crash took place, have been widely praised in Spain for their courageous response to the disaster. Without regard for their own safety, they poured on to the tracks, smashing in the windows of the carriages with rocks to pull out the injured, dead and dying.
  But the paper said their efforts were offset by official delays. A mobile communications centre, vital for co-ordinating the work of the rescue services, took 46 minutes to reach the scene, El Pa­s said.
  The most deadly previous crash was in 1944 when up to 800 people are said to have died at Torre del Bierzo.
  The days since the accident have seen the chiefs of the Spanish state rail company, Renfe, and the network operator, Adif, put the blame squarely on the driver. The view the courts take of the crash could have important financial repercussions.
  Renfe is among the firms bidding for a '‚¬13bn contract to build a high-speed rail link in Brazil. The terms of the tender reportedly exclude firms involved in the running of high-speed train systems where an accident has taken place in the preceding five years.
The Coming Shortage Of Physical Gold That Will Change Everything
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:52
  The American Dreamby Michael Snyder
  Is the paper gold scam about to be brutally crushed by a crippling shortage of physical gold? If so, what will that do to global financial markets? According to the Reserve Bank of India, ''the traded amount of 'paper linked to gold' exceeds by far the actual supply of physical gold: the volume on the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) OTC market and the major Futures and Options Exchanges was OVER 92 TIMES that of the underlying Physical Market.'' In other words, there is a massive amount of paper out there, but very little actual physical gold to back it up. And right now, we are witnessing voracious hoarding of physical gold all over the globe. This is especially true in Asia. Just see this article and this article. All of this hoarding is putting a tremendous amount of pressure on those that have made all of these ''paper promises'', because the truth is that there really isn't all that much physical gold on the planet. In fact, Warren Buffett once estimated that if all of the gold in the entire world was brought into one place, it could be formed into a cube that would only be 69 feet long by 69 feet high by 69 feet wide.
  As the emerging shortage of physical gold becomes increasingly apparent, the massive Ponzi scheme that the bullion banks have been running for decades is going to completely fall apart. The following is what Egon von Greyerz told King World News the other day'...
  Governments and central banks have, for decades, leased or sold their gold to the bullion banks. So they are very likely to own very little of the 23,000 tons that Western central banks are said to hold.
  But now bullion banks also have a problem: They tried to replenish their (physical gold) coffers during the massive manipulative selling that we've seen over the last few months in the paper market. Although they took the price down, most of the physical (gold) that was released by selling from ETFs and hedge funds was absorbed by Asia.
  So the bullion banks are still massively short of physical gold.
  Right now there simply is not enough physical gold out there and the bullion banks and the central planners are starting to panic. One of the individuals that really has his hand on the pulse of what is going on is billionaire Eric Sprott'...
  We have seen the COMEX inventories decline rapidly. We know that all of the dealer inventory on the COMEX has already been spoken for by delivery notices, so essentially there will be zero (inventory) if they ever make the delivery.
  And the central planners (also) went to India and said, 'Look, you've got to do something about all of this gold buying in India.' So we've had ten different steps by the Indian government to try to curb demand '-- a 2% tax, a 4% tax, a 6% tax, an 8% tax, and a ruling that banks couldn't lend money for people to buy gold.
  They also convinced the Jewelers Association that as of July 1st they couldn't sell gold bars and coins. Just last week there was a new rule implemented that if you are importing gold you have to prove that a certain amount is being re-exported. We've probably had ten or twelve things (restrictions) happen in six months, all of which is a huge attempt to get the second biggest buyer of gold in the world, after China, to decrease consumption because the gold isn't around.
  The central planners have arranged all of these things. I think it's just been one big scheme to try to get people dissuaded from owning gold and to cause supply to come out. As you mentioned, because of it (central planner actions) we have the gold forward rates (for gold) being negative, backwardation, and inventories plunging, all of which have been manifested because there is a shortage of gold.
  Already the emerging shortage of physical gold is starting to cause some very unusual things to happen in the financial markets. A recent article by Reg Howe did a good job of explaining what we have been witnessing lately'...
  By undercutting normal gold lease rates, these super low interest rates have forced central banks to reduce their lease rates to nonsensical levels in order to prevent gold futures from going into overt backwardation. Recall that GOFO, the gold forward rate, is the interest rate for a given maturity less the lease rate for that maturity, and that a negative GOFO represents backwardation. See Gold Derivatives: GLD and Ass Backwardation (5/24/2010); Gold Derivatives: The Tide Turns (5/25/2009). Passing the argument that widely reported premiums for spot physical delivery represent a form of backwardation, figures from the LBMA have now shown a negative GOFO at the shorter maturities for almost three weeks (July 8 through July 25) due to a surge in lease rates, which still remain below more normal historical levels.
  Indeed, this unusual event has attracted considerable attention even from those outside the narrow world of gold. See, e.g., J. Skoyles, Backwardation, negative GOFO and the gold price, The Real Asset Co. (July 24, 2013); M. Kentz, Gold futures hiccup indicates demand outpacing supply, Reuters (July 19, 2013); G. Williams, What If, Things that Make You Go Hmmm, Mauldin Economics (July 15, 2013).
  The bottom line is that there is a very serious shortage of physical gold, and as this becomes increasingly apparent to the rest of the world, this is likely to cause a tremendous amount of instability in the financial markets in the months ahead.
  For much more on this, please see the recent interview with Alasdair Macleod of goldmoney.com that is posted below'...
  Right now we are also witnessing tremendous demand for physical silver as well.
  For example, the U.S. Mint is going to break the all-time record for July by a very wide margin, and it is being projected that sales of Silver Eagles will likely be above 45 million for the entire year.
  And remember, unlike gold, silver is used in thousands of different consumer products. So silver is continually being used up and taken out of the overall global supply.
  If silver continues to be used at the current rate, eventually the global supply would be whittled down to almost nothing. And right now, it appears that the industrial demand for silver is rising substantially. For instance, a recent article by David Franklin and David Baker described the massive amount of silver that is going to be required by Japan and China as they move very heavily into solar power over the next few years'...
  With 5.3 gigawatts of new capacity in Japan in 2013 and up to 30 gigawatts added in China over the next three years, the solar industry could potentially have a big impact in the silver market. Silver is a key component in solar panels due to its unique electrical conductive properties, with approximately 80kg of silver required to generate 1MW of electricity. According to the Silver Institute, one megawatt of solar power requires as much as 2.8 million ounces of silver. China and Japan's solar projects combined will add up to 27 gigawatts over the next three years. This capacity will require approximately 91 million ounces of silver, which means that China and Japan's new demand could consume up to 11% of global mine supply '' and that's if the world produces as much silver as it did in 2012.
  Silver used in solar panels cannot be recycled and therefore disappears from the world's silver stockpile. If China and Japan can follow-through with their respective solar programs, the silver market could benefit significantly.
  So what does all of this mean for you?
  What it means is that while we may see wild fluctuations in the prices of gold and silver over the short-term, the long-term prognosis for both metals is absolutely fantastic.
  Via The American Dream
Saluting the formation of the largest agency holding company in the world, Publicis Omnicom Group
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: VENITISM
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 08:49
  By Tod Sacerdoti
  "In the midst of chaos, there is also opportunity.'' -- Sun-Tzu"This is a new company for a new world." -- Maurice L(C)vy, CEO of Publicis On Sunday, Omnicom and Publicis announced their intention to merge, which will create the largest agency holding company in the world, Publicis Omnicom Group. This new entity will have combined revenues of $23B and a market capitalization of $35B. Without a doubt, this merger will have profound implications and creates both winners and losers across the media ecosystem.
  Although I have written extensively about how software is eating the digital advertising business and many pundits have argued that ad agencies are dying, the reality remains that ad agencies are powerful, well capitalized and fully aware of their inevitable commoditization if they don't act. As such, they are doing what any rational business actor would do in such a situation, which is fight back.
  They are fighting back by consolidating their three greatest competitive weapons in marketplace -- media spend, data and, you guessed it, technology.
  Media Spend.Agencies are middlemen as they don't own products to advertise and they don't own media properties to advertise with. As such, they are always at risk of being commoditized. Large brands, such as Coca-cola and P&G, try to commoditize them by driving down their fees on advertising spend under the threat of going around them. Large publishers, such as ABC or NBC on the TV side and Google or Facebook on the digital side, try to commoditize them by going around them and selling directly to the brands themselves. To combat this risk, agencies have continued to merge in order to put more total media spend under one roof which, in theory, would give them more negotiating power and prevent commoditization. This merger will create the largest consolidated media spend in world history and there is no doubt that Publicis Omnicom Group will wield this power as necessary to ensure their survival.
  Data.Although agencies have been historically weak at using data for the benefit of their clients and technology companies such as Google and Facebook have dramatic advantages when it comes to data, there remains an enormous opportunity for agencies to offer value in this area. Put simply, as more spend moves to digital channels, including traditional channels such TV being served using digital technologies, the unique data assets of an ad agency become dramatically more powerful. Only the ad agencies (and their clients) have access to all the media spend and user data across online, mobile, tablets and connected TVs. By aggregating sets of data that nobody else can aggregate and then scaling that data across the largest pool of media spend ever seen, Publicis Omnicom Group will be able to add unique value and preserve their position in the ecosystem.
  Technology.Although ad agencies have minimal and usually weak technology assets, they do have the ability to make third-party platforms succeed simply by committing media spend to them. However, rather than wield this power as a competitive weapon, agencies have followed their historical media buying strategy of spreading budget around to many players. To prevent commoditization, Publicis Omnicom Group will not only be consolidating their media budgets and data, but they will be consolidating their use of third-party technologies such that they can own and control or worst case strongly influence the roadmap and development of technology solutions needed to meet the demands of their clients.
  So, who are the winners?
  The big winners here are Publicis Omnicom Group and WPP. With these two (formerly three) holding companies controlling over 50% of revenue from the top 50 agencies worldwide, both will have increased leverage over both clients and publishers. Advertisers themselves may be winners as the next person to be commoditized after the agencies themselves are the advertisers. Google and Facebook have already demonstrated an ability to commoditize direct advertisers in the direct response space. That all said, you will be challenged to find an advertiser happy about being less material to the success of their agency as all clients will be after the merger.
  So, who are the losers?
  The big losers are big traditional publishers (FOX, NBC, Disney, New York Times) with the heaviest losses happening in TV. Although us in the digital space always think of digital first, the reality is the real spend (and the real savings) are to be had in the television world. On the digital side, the players who have the most to lose are the largest aggregated sellers (Google and Facebook) but they are unlikely to be impacted heavily as their positioning is simply too strong. Other smaller, but still large, digital sellers (AOL, Microsoft and Yahoo!) are more vulnerable but it is hard to imagine Publicis Omnicom Group spending much time optimizing their spend here in the near term because it is simply not big enough to move the needle.
  Fallout, Next Steps and POG
  There will also be some inevitable fallout as a result of this merger and it seems almost overly obvious to state. The agencies share multiple rivals including Coke / Pepsi, McDonald's / Burger King and Nissan / Honda, and there will be some lost customers as a result. Furthermore, companies run by two CEOs rarely thrive and the personalities here only exacerbate the problem, so at a minimum I would expect many senior level departures over time (but to be fair with 130,000 employees it will be challenging to separate the signal from the noise).
  That all said, as with any multi-billion dollar merger and assuming that they clear any antitrust issues, change will happen but it will take time. The near term impact will be measured and will focused on the highest areas of leverage -- consolidating media spend (primarily against television and large digital sellers), creating unified data platforms across all media and committing to technology platforms in which they have long term upside.
  Lastly, as with anything important in the advertising industry these days, we have a new, awkward sounding acronym POG (Publicis Omnicom Group). On that front, there may not be any winners.
  Offering Basil Venitis a seat at the table of your Board of Directors will drastically increase your profits.
Silicon Valley used to do manufacturing, and didn't escape the pollution.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dave Winer's linkblog feed
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:47
  A revolution began here. And this is what is left over.
  Map tiles by Stamen Design, under CC BY 3.0. Data by OpenStreetMap, under CC BY SA.The precise center of Silicon Valley when it was the most important manufacturing region on Earth is now home to Super Space Self Storage.
  I was able to map this location thanks to Richard E. Schmieder, who drove 6,000 miles around Silicon Valley, collecting the addresses of more than a thousand corporate headquarters, branch offices, restaurants, and hotels. He published this exhaustive niche Yellow Pages as Rich's Guide to Santa Clara County's Silicon Valley in 1983.
  I discovered a copy of this rare book in Berkeley's library system and realized that it was a fantastic dataset: If I stuck all of the locations onto a map, I could reconstruct the Valley as it was 30 years ago, right before the Japanese manufacturers and the forces of globalization pulled and pushed chip production to East Asia. And though the idea of Silicon Valley does not allow for history, the place, itself, cannot escape it. The Valley we know now, the Paypal-Google-Facebook one, got built right on top of the original boom towns.
  In our Internet-happy present, it's easy to forget that up until the mid-1980s, Silicon Valley was an industrial landscape. Hundreds of manufacturers lined the streets of Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, Cupertino, Mountain View, and San Jose. This is the Silicon Valley when AMD, Apple, Applied Materials, Atari, Fairchild, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, National Semiconductor, Varian Associates, Xerox, and hundreds of other companies made their products right here in the Bay.
  The Valley was as important a manufacturing center as Detroit or Pittsburgh were. This was the place making the foundational technology of the era, and it brought prosperity to the region. Between 1964 and 1984, Santa Clara County added 203,000 manufacturing jobs, according to a report by the Association of Bay Area Governments; 85 percent of them were in high-tech. Another economist found that Santa Clara County's manufacturing growth had driven the economic well-being of the entire Bay Area during that period. Without the growth of Valley manufacturing, the San Francisco and Oakland's economies would have severely suffered, not to mention the rest of the country's. This was the industrial heartland of America, even if it was nestled against the San Francisco Bay.
  In other words, Rich's Guide, I realized, would let me map this first peak of Silicon Valley, the one that gave meaning to the term high-tech. With substantial help from my colleague on The Atlantic Wire, Philip Bump, we put this map together. If you worked in the Valley at the time, it should take you back to the days of Ampex, Varian Associates, and the Rusty Scupper. But there's plenty to see, even if you only know the area by reputation.
  For example, you'll find Apple headquarters at 20525 Mariana Ave, just across De Anza Boulevard from the current HQ at 1 Infinite Loop. They were part of a little cluster of companies just off Interstate 280, south of the hottest action up closer to Highway 101. Most of the rest have not survived -- Braegen Corp., Iconix, International Memories, Tymshare, Four-Phase Systems. Yet these same people would have all visited the Peppermill Lounge for some 80s-"fern bar" refreshment.
  After geocoding all these points -- i.e. finding all their latitudes and longitudes -- I could compute the average of all the locations on the map. In a meaningful sense, the spot was the very center of the corporate ecosystem that we call Silicon Valley in 1983.
  My math says it's located in Sunnyvale, south of 101 between North Wolfe Road and the Lawrence Expressway at precisely 37.38260152 degrees north, 122.0094996784 degrees west.
  As luck would have it, this spot was smack in the middle of the headquarters of chipmaker and long-time Intel rival, Advanced Micro Devices, or AMD, in a complex centered at 901 Thompson Place.
  The AMD headquarters in 1975 (David Laws)This is what it looks like now, in its self-storage incarnation:
  Google MapsWe can see the back of the Super Space Self-Storage. There is no sign of the AMD buildings that once stood here.
  I had to see for myself what had become of the center of the Valley, so I got in my car and headed across the Bay Bridge and down the peninsula. I'd use the single block surrounding the center of the old Valley to understand what had happened to this place not as a footnote in a history of the computing industry, but as a landscape. What I found was second-generation suburbia with a far more complex story than the standard Silicon Valley narrative about cherry orchards and the making of a glorious revolution.
  * * *
  As always, it was sunny in Sunnyvale. I got off at the exit for Moffett Field, the set of facilities that made this area a hotbed of early aerospace (and therefore computing) activity. After a few lights I made a left onto the Central Expressway and zoomed past endless town homes and old suburbs onto Arques Avenue. I parked the car at the Super Space Self-Storage, took out the memorial sign I'd printed, and walked across the street to take some wide-angle photographs of the building.
  There was nothing particularly interesting about it. Like most self-storage locations, the building is blocky and windowless. It's nestled in-between a massive Lowe's and Cheetah's, "a small neighborhood strip club," according to a Google Plus review. As I snapped away, a single pedestrian walked by, an Asian man in khakis and a tucked-in, short-sleeved collared shirt. Traffic came and went: a Camry, a Jeep, a Subaru, big white van. Just another part of the great California carscape, it would seem.
  The center of Silicon Valley, 1983 (Alexis Madrigal)As I walked back across the street, I found a big guy walking towards me. "Well, you got our curiosity piqued," he said, pointing to my camera. He had a soul patch and wore an checked Oxford monogrammed with the name of the self-storage place. All-in, he looked like Ted Danson, if Danson lifted weights. This was Geoffrey Taylor, manager of the facility.
  I explained myself to him, trying not to sound completely ridiculous. "And so, I calculated that, in 1983, this was the center of Silicon Valley, and I came down here to see it --"
  "And you ended up at a Superfund site," he said.
  I did?
  "This was AMD," Taylor continued. "They manufactured chips here."
  I went inside and met his staff, enjoying the air conditioning. They told me about the building's many amenities for the discerning self-storage customer: climate-control, special locks, security systems. "Who needs this type of service?" I asked.
  "I'd say 75 percent of our clientele is transient engineers working for the tech companies," Taylor told me. They were almost all from India and east Asia.
  I left my car in the parking lot and headed southeast. Past Cheetah's, there was a large office building being leased by two commercial real-estate brokers named Dixie Divine and Doug Ferrari.
  The businesses around were an odd melange: a Bank of America, two auto-body shops, the 5-Star School for Music, a semiconductor company called Synerchip, a signal-processing designer called Teledyne Cougar, and Sri Ananda Bhavan, a bustling south Indian restaurant. At the corner of Deguine Drive, a newly built retail space sat empty, looking almost precisely like the sad, shuttered video stores you see all over America.
  Deguine was wide. The landscaping was so regular, it mocked the idea of nature. Tree, door, tree. Here and there, a knoll created by a bulldozer, sodded with grass from Oregon.
  Empty office buildings and parking lots abounded. A couple gardeners wandered among them, working solo, carrying chemicals on their backs, ensuring the for-lease billboards looked nice.
  Tree, door, tree (Alexis Madrigal)"Gardening" (Alexis Madrigal)Heading up Deguine, I noticed that there was a steady stream of pedestrian traffic, largely older Asian women. Many were headed to and from Nine Star University, a Chinese medicine school located in an old office building it shares with an acupuncturist, a sports medicine group, and the China-focused Christian Leadership Institute.
  Right next door, Nine Star operates California University Silicon Valley, which caters to IT professionals with the pitch that you'll learn "from instructors with titles like CEO, CIO, CFO, COO, Sr Manager, Marketing SVP, Venture Fund Manager and other real industry positions." In a clear sign about who they're selling education to, their domain CUSV.org autoforwards to CUSV.in, as in India. The university certainly has Silicon Valley-level chutzpah. "Whether you are considering Harvard, Stanford, Santa Clara University, MIT, Georgia Tech, San Jose State, UCLA, or for that matter any other top grad school," they declare, "you will want to choose CUSV to ensure your competitive advantage and maximize the NPV of your expected career income stream."
  Nine Star University (Alexis Madrigal)Across the street, UMC, a very large Taiwanese semiconductor foundry, has its North American headquarters. I had to admire the symmetry of its building. Humans could only besmirch it.
  UMC (Alexis Madrigal)At the next intersection, I turned left. Across the street, a man talked on a cell phone in front of BioCurious, "your Bay Area hackerspace for biotech." What are they working on? For example: "We are attempting to insert these genes into other algae, Arabidopsis and Petunias to build a glow-in-the-dark plants. Avatar, here we come!" So that's going on there.
  To the right of BioCurious, there was a batterymaker for motorcycles called Shorai. To the left, a Mediterranean restaurant called the Agape Grill. If you were to have a gyro at Agape under the tall, tall palm trees or a Coca-Cola umbrella, you would look across the street at the America Chinese Evangelical Seminary, as well as the Sacred Logos Resource Center, which appears to be another Christian evangelical group catering to Chinese immigrants. These buildings were all beige with glass doors, one and a half floors. There are hundreds of thousands of structures that look just like these across the region and nation.
  An empty building (Alexis Madrigal)Another massive empty office building stood out for its hexagonal dark glass atrium and the sculpture just outside its locked doors, which looked like a sundial set permanently to noon.
  I found all the white people in a packed parking lot attached to a strange looking building that turned out to be a climbing gym and yoga studio called Planet Granite. I watched toned people go in and out for a few minutes, and then headed back towards my car, cutting through the loading area at the back of Lowe's.
  Between the massive blank walls, I was the only human around.
  Lowe's loading area (Alexis Madrigal)I could not parse this neighborhood. It didn't make sense.
  When I got home, I found out that for 30 years, and all around the block I'd surveyed, an intense remediation effort was underway. For as long as I've been alive, there has been a plume of chemicals underground at that spot, extending 4,000 feet north, up past 101. Everyone hoped these chemicals wouldn't make it to the water supply before it could be pumped out and treated.
  * * *
  In contemporary descriptions of Silicon Valley as it was being built, every writer seems to note the absence of smoke stacks. A miracle! A clean industry! A better industrial capitalism!
  The aesthetic was intentional. These factories of the future were designed to look like buildings on a college campus, which is to say, Stanford. The Stanford Industrial Park (later, the Stanford Research Park) set the visual standard from its founding in 1951 onward. There were rules governing which parts of the industrial apparatus could be visible, so as not to detract from the idea that these were locations for scholars, not laborers.
  "Companies had to follow strict building codes, which included 'complete concealment' of things like smokestacks, generators, transformers, ducts, storage tanks, and air conditioning equipment," environmental historian Aaron Sachs wrote in 1999.
  Other municipalities wanted to encourage similar developments, and as Sachs concludes, "Stanford Industrial Park essentially replicated itself several times over--each time spurring the construction of new expressways and strip malls in neighboring areas." What began as Stanford dean and Silicon Valley godfather Fred Terman's dream to build "a community of technical scholars" in pleasant industrial parks became the architectural standard for the entire high-tech manufacturing world.
  But the manicured look and feel had consequences. Storage tanks were placed underground, out of sight and out of mind. Until suddenly, in 1981, people in south San Jose living near Fairchild Semiconductor and IBM realized they were drinking water contaminated by the two firms' manufacturing plants.
  That touched off a search to see if similar leaks were occurring at other sites. "Anyone who looked for leaks found them," Will Bruhns of the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Board told the San Francisco Chronicle in 2004. The final count found that 75 of the 96 underground tanks in the south Bay had contaminated the ground and/or water around them.
  Superfund sites in the South Bay (California Regional Water Quality Control Board)Before the leaks were found, underground chemical storage was not regulated by any level of government. Or, in the current industry parlance, the semiconductor industry was regulating itself. And their methods for preventing and detecting leaks of known toxic chemicals were recklessly, absurdly ineffective.
  Planet Granite is located on a site contaminated by Philips Semiconductor. So is Lowe's. The empty octagonal glass building is a TRW Microwave Superfund site. I'd been walking on a paved-over environmental disaster zone, colonized by whoever wanted to benefit from lower leasing prices and a lack of NIMBY opponents.
  There are six Superfund sites within a couple miles where the Super Space Self-Storage now stands. Shockingly, Santa Clara County has more Superfund sites than any other county in the nation. By comparison, the entire state of Illinois only has 13.
  The cluster of contaminated sites, with the plume extending upwards in the area labeled "Offsite Operable Unit" (California Regional Water Quality Board)The contamination at the AMD site at Thompson is not the worst in the Valley. Toxic chemicals only reached aquifers near the surface, and did not hit the public water supply. Nonetheless, beginning in July of 1983 with the discovery of volatile organic compounds in both soil and water at the site, remediation began. The main contaminant of concern was tricholoroethene (TCE). Leaking acid neutralization systems were removed along with 217 cubic yards of soil. Groundwater was pumped out and through filtration systems with first one well, then three, then five. Thirty-eight more wells pump the commingled contamination from the AMD, Phillips, and TRW Microwave sites. They run roughly east-west along Duane Avenue, Carmel Avenue, Alvarado Avenue, and Highway 101. All this water gets released back into the water table after it is treated.
  The cleanup effort is massive. From the mid-1980s through 2008, 231 million gallons of groundwater were pumped up and treated. Beginning in 2005 (around the time the company sold the site to the people who built Super Space Self Storage), AMD began to deploy in-situ bioremediation, after realizing that the efficiency of the groundwater pumping system was declining. In essence, molasses (literally, molasses) is pumped into the subsurface to feed colonies of microbes, who can degrade TCE into harmless compounds.
  The California Regional Water Quality Control Board judged the bioremediation a success; it has managed to reduce TCE concentrations by 90 percent, though the process is on-going, according to the lead project manager with the Water Board, Max Shahbacian.
  "They are doing whatever they can," Shahbacian told me. "Some of that contamination you can't capture. Some is stuck to the clay soils. Some has gone off site. They are cleaning it up as best they can."
  "A lot of the big companies, except the big oil companies, they are pretty good about cleaning up," he said. "They've been cleaning this site for many years and they're going to continue to doing that."
  So, 30 years after the contamination was discovered in July 1983, it's probable that what remains of the plume of chemicals is unlikely to contaminate groundwater. A victory for our age.
  * * *
  And in the meantime, the people who live here are creating the lives they want on the carcass of this old industrial system, whether that's DIY biotech labs, south Indian restaurants, California University Silicon Valley, rock climbing gyms, or Chinese evangelical training facilities.
  What we see here is not simple suburbia. This is a landscape that industrialists, government regulators, and city planners sacrificed to create the computer industry that we know today. It has as much in common with a coal mine or the Port of Oakland as it does with Levittown or Google's campus. All of which should lead us to a simple conclusion: the Silicon Valley of today is a post-industrial landscape, like the lofts near downtowns across the country, like Lansing, Michigan, like Williamsburg, like Portland's Pearl District.
  What we see now is a surreal imitation of the suburban industrial parks and commercial spaces of yesteryear. They're built atop the past's mistakes, erasing them from our maps and eyes.
  And yet, as the humans eat dosas and climb fake mountains and learn acupuncture and buy lap dances, beneath the asphalt and concrete, the microbes eat toxic waste sweetened with molasses, cleaning up our mistakes.
  A revolution began here. And this is what's left over.
Ex-CIA officer: US allowed Italy kidnap case to shield others - Europe - Stripes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:40
  WASHINGTON '-- A former CIA officer has broken the U.S. silence around the 2003 abduction of a radical Islamist cleric in Italy, charging that the agency inflated the threat the preacher posed and that the United States then allowed Italy to prosecute her and other Americans to shield President George W. Bush and other U.S. officials from responsibility for approving the operation.
  Confirming for the first time that she worked undercover for the CIA in Milan when the operation took place, Sabrina De Sousa provided new details about the "extraordinary rendition" that led to the only criminal prosecution stemming from the secret Bush administration rendition and detention program launched after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.
  The cleric, Osama Mustapha Hassan Nasr, was snatched from a Milan street by a team of CIA operatives and flown to Egypt, where he was held for the better part of four years without charges and allegedly tortured. An Egyptian court in 2007 ruled that his imprisonment was "unfounded" and ordered him released.
  Among the allegations made by De Sousa in a series of interviews with McClatchy:
  The former CIA station chief in Rome, Jeffrey Castelli, whom she called the mastermind of the operation, exaggerated Nasr's terrorist threat to win approval for the rendition and misled his superiors that Italian military intelligence had agreed to the operation.Senior CIA officials, including then-CIA Director George Tenet, approved the operation even though there were doubts about Castelli's case '-- Nasr wasn't wanted in Egypt and wasn't on the U.S. list of top al-Qaida terrorists.Condoleezza Rice, then the White House national security adviser, also had concerns about the case, especially what Italy would do if the CIA were caught, but she eventually agreed to it and recommended that Bush approve the abduction.De Sousa said her assertions are based on classified CIA cables that she read before resigning from the agency in February 2009, as well as on Italian legal documents and Italian news reports. She denies that she was involved in the operation, though she acknowledges that she served as the interpreter for a CIA "snatch" team that visited Milan in 2002 to plan the abduction.
  "I was being held accountable for decisions that someone else took and I wanted to see on what basis the decisions were made," she said, explaining why she had delved into the CIA archives. "And especially because I was willing to talk to the Hill (Congress) about this because I knew that the CIA would not be upfront with them."
  "I don't have any of the cables with me. Please put that down," De Sousa added with a nervous laugh, her unease reflecting the Obama administration's unprecedented crackdown on leaks of classified information to journalists.
  De Sousa is one of only a handful of former CIA officers who've spoken openly about the secret renditions in which suspected terrorists overseas were abducted without legal proceedings and then interrogated by other nations' security services.
  More than 130 people were "rendered" in this way, according to a February 2013 study by the Open Society Justice Initiative, a U.S.-based group that promotes the rule of law. Many were tortured and abused, and many, including Nasr, were freed for lack of proof that they were hatching terrorist plots, said Amrit Singh, the study's author.
  Human rights groups and many legal experts denounce rendition as violating not only U.S. and international law, but also the laws of the nations where abductions occurred and of the countries to which suspected terrorists were sent. In December 2005, Rice defended renditions as legal, however, calling them a "vital tool" that predated the 9/11 attacks. She denied that the United State "transported anyone . . . to a country where we believe he or she will be tortured."
  The Bush and Obama administrations have never acknowledged U.S. involvement in the Nasr rendition, which makes De Sousa's decision to speak publicly about it significant, Singh said.
  "Any public account of what happened and who was ultimately responsible is of considerable interest," she said. "Despite the scale of the human rights violations associated with the rendition program, the United States hasn't held a single individual accountable."
  The CIA declined to comment, but a former senior U.S. intelligence official called De Sousa's narrative "fairly consistent" with the recollections of other former CIA officials with knowledge of the operation. He asked not to be further identified because the matter remains classified.
  "There was concern on the seventh floor about this operation," he said, referring to the executive offices at the CIA's headquarters in Langley, Va. "But they were reassured" by the Rome station and the agency's European directorate that "everything was OK and everyone was on board in the country in question."
  De Sousa accused Italian leaders of colluding with the United States to shield Bush, Rice, Tenet and senior CIA aides by declining to prosecute them or even demanding that Washington publicly admit to staging the abduction.
  Calling the operation unjustified and illegal, De Sousa said Italy and the United States cooperated in "scape-goating a bunch of people . . . while the ones who approved this stupid rendition are all free."
  The Senate and House intelligence committees enabled the cover-up, De Sousa added, by failing to treat her as a whistleblower after she told them of the lack of prosecutable evidence against Nasr and what she called her own mistreatment by the CIA that compelled her to resign in 2009.
  "Despite that, no one's been held accountable," she said.
  De Sousa, 57, a naturalized U.S. citizen from India's state of Goa, was one of 23 Americans convicted in absentia in 2009 by a Milan court for Nasr's abduction. She received a five-year sentence. An appeals court in 2011 added two more years, and Italy's Supreme Court upheld the sentence. Nineteen of the Americans, De Sousa said, "don't exist," because they were aliases used by the CIA snatch team.
  The case drew fresh attention this month when Panama detained Robert Seldon Lady, the CIA's former Milan station chief, whom the Italian court had sentenced to nine years in prison. But Panama released him within 24 hours and allowed him to fly to the United States, rather than wait for Italy to request his extradition.
  Another convicted American, Air Force Col. Joseph Romano, who oversaw security at Aviano, the U.S. base from which Nasr was flown out of Italy, received a seven-year term. But Italian President Giorgio Napolitano pardoned him in April under U.S. pressure.
  The Bush and the Obama administrations, however, have refused to ask Italy to do the same for De Sousa, who insists that she qualified for diplomatic immunity as a second secretary accredited to the U.S. Embassy in Rome.
  "It's always the minions of the federal government who are thrown under the bus by officials who consistently violate international law and sometimes domestic law and who are all immune from prosecution," De Sousa said. "Their lives are fine. They're making millions of dollars sitting on (corporate) boards."
  De Sousa's interviews with McClatchy are the first in which she's publicly disclosed her decade-long career in the CIA's undercover arm, the National Clandestine Service. She's discussed the case with news media before, but insisted in those interviews and in Italian legal proceedings that she was a diplomat.
  Her only connection to the rendition, she said, was translating between the CIA snatch team and officers from the Italian military intelligence service formerly known by the acronym SISMi.
  The translating stint "was legal at the time because SISMi was involved" in planning Nasr's rendition, although SISMi later refused to participate, she said. She said that she was away with her son on a skiing trip when Nasr was abducted.
  According to De Sousa, the Bush administration had two thresholds for an extraordinary rendition: A target had to be on a U.S. list of top al-Qaida terrorists who posed "a clear and imminent danger" to American and allied lives, and the nation where an operation was planned had to make the arrest.
  Neither occurred with Nasr, De Sousa said.
  A cleric who preached holy war against the West, Nasr was living in Italy under a grant of political asylum when he was accosted Feb. 17, 2003, by black-suited men on a Milan street as he walked to his mosque. He was bundled into a white van and driven to Aviano, from which he was flown to Germany and then to Egypt.
  A member of a banned Egyptian Islamist group, Nasr was being investigated at the time by an Italian anti-terrorist police unit known as DIGOS, which had a warrant to eavesdrop on him. He allegedly had close ties to al-Qaida and other Islamist groups and arranged for militants to travel to fight in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere.
  But DIGOS made no move to arrest Nasr, De Sousa said, because it had no evidence that he was plotting any attacks. He knew that he was being monitored, she said.
  Castelli, however, was eager to pull off a rendition, she said, explaining that after 9/11, "everyone around the world" was being pressed by CIA headquarters to "do something" against al-Qaida. Castelli, she said, was ambitious and saw a rendition as a ticket to promotion.
  "Castelli went to SISMi to ask them to work on the rendition program, and SISMi says no," De Sousa recounted. That, however, "didn't stop Jeff," she said.
  Neither did Lady's reservations, she said. Close to the DIGOS officer investigating Nasr, Lady often complained to De Sousa that the rendition "made no sense," because DIGOS had Nasr under surveillance. But the CIA station in "Rome kept constantly pressuring him to proceed with their plans," she said. Her assertion was corroborated by Lady in an interview with GQ magazine in 2007.
  Castelli "was hell-bent on doing a rendition," she said, and he pressed the director of SISMi at the time, Nicollo Pollari, throughout 2002 to agree, according to cables De Sousa found between Castelli and CIA headquarters.
  "This is very important, because there is a written trail of what was going on," she said.
  Pollari refused to budge, telling Castelli that the rendition would be "an illegal operation . . . unless the magistrates approved it," De Sousa said. Pollari, she said, wanted to wait until the Italian Parliament passed intelligence reform legislation that would have allowed SISMi broader counterterrorism powers.
  Castelli's superiors at the Langley headquarters insisted that SISMi and Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi had to agree to the operation, or "they couldn't go to Condoleezza Rice and the president of the United States" for authorization, De Sousa said.
  "So what does Castelli say? Castelli says, 'Well, I talked to Pollari and he's not going to put anything in writing. But wink, wink, nod, nod. You know, wink, wink, he's provided a tacit sort of approval. They are not going to put anything in writing,' " she said.
  In an "assessment cable" to CIA headquarters laying out his case for Nasr's rendition, De Sousa said, Castelli cited the cleric's suspected al-Qaida links and referred to a conversation recorded by DIGOS in which Nasr and another man mused about possibly attacking a bus belonging to the American School of Milan.
  Yet DIGOS wasn't "overly concerned because there really wasn't anything . . . to show that he was actually going to do this," De Sousa said. "If they thought he (Nasr) was going to go bomb something right away, they would have stopped him, right? It's not in the . . . Italians' interest . . . for anything to happen on Italian soil of that nature, because the majority of the students were Italian or nationalities other than American."
  "That happened in 2002, and Nasr wasn't rendered until 2003. So what imminent danger was that?" she asked.
  The rendition had another problem: There was no outstanding arrest warrant for Nasr from Egypt, she said. To resolve the issue, Castelli asked the CIA's Cairo station to request one from Omar Suleiman, the powerful intelligence czar for Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. The warrant was issued. Later, after Nasr had been turned over to the Egyptians, the CIA station in Cairo asked Castelli for the evidence the Egyptians needed to prosecute.
  "Castelli wrote back and said, 'I thought you had the information. That's why you issued the arrest warrant,' " De Sousa said. Cairo replied that Egypt had issued the warrant only "because you needed an arrest warrant."
  Despite concerns with the strength of Castelli's case, CIA headquarters still agreed to move forward and seek Rice's approval, De Sousa said. She recalled reading a cable from late 2002 that reported that Rice was worried about whether CIA personnel "would go to jail" if they were caught.
  In response, she said, Castelli wrote that any CIA personnel who were caught would just be expelled from Italy "and SISMi will bail everyone out."
  Of her CIA superiors, De Sousa said, "They knew this (the rendition) was bullshit, but they were just allowing it. These guys approved it based on what Castelli was saying even though they knew it never met the threshold for rendition."
  Asked which agency officials would have been responsible for reviewing the operation and agreeing to ask Rice for Bush's authorization, De Sousa said they would have included Tenet; Tyler Drumheller, who ran the CIA's European operations; former CIA Director of Operations James Pavitt and his then-deputy, Stephen Kappes; Jose Rodriguez, then the head of the CIA's Counterterrorism Center; and former acting CIA General Counsel John Rizzo.
  An Italian prosecutor began investigating the CIA's role in Nasr's disappearance in 2004, carefully building a case based on the CIA rendition team's sloppy use of cellular telephones and credit cards. By then De Sousa had returned to the United States and had assumed a new CIA position at headquarters.
  She was charged by Italian authorities in 2006 in the last of three sets of indictments.
  The Bush administration remained silent on the Italian charges and ignored De Sousa's pleas to invoke diplomatic immunity on her behalf. The CIA barred her from contacting her Italian state-appointed public defender, she said, and refused to pay for a private lawyer. The CIA also ordered her not to leave the country, an order she says she disobeyed to fly to India to see her father for the last time as he lay dying from cancer.
  De Sousa later learned that Rice, after becoming secretary of state, wanted to give her immunity, but that the CIA "told Rice not to" because doing so would have "been admitting that the rendition took place," De Sousa said.
  Meanwhile, Castelli, who has retired from the CIA, escaped conviction after an Italian judge conferred diplomatic immunity on him even though Washington hadn't asked for it, De Sousa said. Earlier this year, an appeals court revoked his immunity and sentenced him in absentia to seven years in jail.
  De Sousa said that she has tried for years to report what she said was the baseless case for Nasr's abduction and her shoddy treatment by the CIA and two administrations.
  Her pleas and letters, however, were ignored by successive U.S. intelligence leaders, the CIA inspector general's office, members and staff of the House and Senate intelligence committees, Rice, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Attorney General Eric Holder, said De Sousa.
  She briefly made headlines when she sued the CIA, the State Department and Clinton in 2009 in a bid to secure her diplomatic immunity, but lost. U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell, however, declared herself troubled by the government's treatment of De Sousa, which she said sent a "potentially demoralizing" message to U.S. employees serving overseas.
  De Sousa wanted to resign from the CIA earlier than she did, but, she said, her attorney persuaded her to wait for Barack Obama to take office because he might be more sympathetic to her case.
  "We thought, 'Hope and change.' But no hope and change happened," she said.
  "My life has been hell," De Sousa said, explaining that her Italian conviction left her career in ruins, crippled her ability to find a good paying private-sector job and left her liable to arrest abroad. Her resignation, which she submitted after the CIA barred her from visiting her ailing, elderly mother in Goa for Christmas and then refused to fly her mother to the United States, left her without a pension.
  "In addition to losing your pension, you're blacklisted in Washington," De Sousa said. "Anyone who has anything to do with the agency will never hire you. I lost my clearances."
  Asked why she'd agreed to be interviewed, De Sousa replied, "I find this cover-up so egregious. That's why I find it really important to talk about this. Look at the lives ruined, including that of Abu Omar. And I was caught in the crossfire of anger directed at U.S. policy."
  Now, she noted, she also could face prosecution in the United States for revealing what she has. "You've seen what's happened lately to anyone who has tried to disclose anything," she said.
  But her treatment, she said, provides a warning to U.S. employees serving around the world. If they get prosecuted while doing their jobs, she said, "You have no protection whatsoever. Zero."
USA TODAY poor!
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 06:38
  Debra McCown AP
  Four out of five U.S. adults struggle with joblessness, near poverty or reliance on welfare for at least parts of their lives.
  by Hope Yen, AP Business Writer
  WASHINGTON (AP) '-- Four out of 5 U.S. adults struggle with joblessness, near-poverty or reliance on welfare for at least parts of their lives, a sign of deteriorating economic security and an elusive American dream.
  Survey data exclusive to The Associated Press points to an increasingly globalized U.S. economy, the widening gap between rich and poor, and the loss of good-paying manufacturing jobs as reasons for the trend.
  The findings come as President Obama tries to renew his administration's emphasis on the economy, saying in recent speeches that his highest priority is to "rebuild ladders of opportunity" and reverse income inequality.
  As nonwhites approach a numerical majority in the U.S., one question is how public programs to lift the disadvantaged should be best focused '-- on the affirmative action that historically has tried to eliminate the racial barriers seen as the major impediment to economic equality, or simply on improving socioeconomic status for all, regardless of race.
  Hardship is particularly growing among whites, based on several measures. Pessimism among that racial group about their families' economic futures has climbed to the highest point since at least 1987. In the most recent AP-GfK poll, 63% of whites called the economy "poor."
  "I think it's going to get worse," said Irene Salyers, 52, of Buchanan County, Va., a declining coal region in Appalachia. Married and divorced three times, Salyers now helps run a fruit and vegetable stand with her boyfriend, but it doesn't generate much income. They live mostly off government disability checks.
  "If you do try to go apply for a job, they're not hiring people, and they're not paying that much to even go to work," she said. Children, she said, have "nothing better to do than to get on drugs."
  While racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to live in poverty, race disparities in the poverty rate have narrowed substantially since the 1970s, census data show. Economic insecurity among whites also is more pervasive than is shown in the government's poverty data, engulfing more than 76% of white adults by the time they turn 60, according to a new economic gauge being published next year by the Oxford University Press.
  The gauge defines "economic insecurity" as a year or more of periodic joblessness, reliance on government aid such as food stamps or income below 150% of the poverty line. Measured across all races, the risk of economic insecurity rises to 79%.
  Marriage rates are in decline across all races, and the number of white mother-headed households living in poverty has risen to the level of black ones.
  "It's time that America comes to understand that many of the nation's biggest disparities, from education and life expectancy to poverty, are increasingly due to economic class position," said William Julius Wilson, a Harvard professor who specializes in race and poverty. He noted that despite continuing economic difficulties, minorities have more optimism about the future after Obama's election, while struggling whites do not.
  "There is the real possibility that white alienation will increase if steps are not taken to highlight and address inequality on a broad front," Wilson said.
  '--'--'--
  Nationwide, the count of America's poor remains stuck at a record number: 46.2 million, or 15% of the population, due in part to lingering high unemployment following the recession. While poverty rates for blacks and Hispanics are nearly three times higher, by absolute numbers the predominant face of the poor is white.
  More than 19 million whites fall below the poverty line of $23,021 for a family of four, accounting for more than 41% of the nation's destitute, nearly double the number of poor blacks.
  Sometimes termed "the invisible poor" by demographers, lower-income whites generally are dispersed in suburbs as well as small rural towns, where more than 60% of the poor are white. Concentrated in Appalachia in the East, they are numerous in the industrial Midwest and spread across America's heartland, from Missouri, Arkansas and Oklahoma up through the Great Plains.
  Buchanan County, in southwest Virginia, is among the nation's most destitute based on median income, with poverty hovering at 24%. The county is mostly white, as are 99% of its poor.
  More than 90% of Buchanan County's inhabitants are working-class whites who lack a college degree. Higher education long has been seen there as nonessential to land a job because well-paying mining and related jobs were once in plentiful supply. These days many residents get by on odd jobs and government checks.
  Salyers' daughter, Renee Adams, 28, who grew up in the region, has two children. A jobless single mother, she relies on her live-in boyfriend's disability checks to get by. Salyers says it was tough raising her own children as it is for her daughter now, and doesn't even try to speculate what awaits her grandchildren, ages 4 and 5.
  Smoking a cigarette in front of the produce stand, Adams later expresses a wish that employers will look past her conviction a few years ago for distributing prescription painkillers, so she can get a job and have money to "buy the kids everything they need."
  "It's pretty hard," she said. "Once the bills are paid, we might have $10 to our name."
  '--'--'--
  Census figures provide an official measure of poverty, but they're only a temporary snapshot that doesn't capture the makeup of those who cycle in and out of poverty at different points in their lives. They may be suburbanites, for example, or the working poor or the laid off.
  In 2011, that snapshot showed 12.6% of adults in their prime working-age years of 25-60 lived in poverty. But measured in terms of a person's lifetime risk, a much higher number '-- 4 in 10 adults '-- falls into poverty for at least a year of their lives.
  The risks of poverty also have been increasing in recent decades, particularly among people ages 35-55, coinciding with widening income inequality. For instance, people ages 35-45 had a 17% risk of encountering poverty during the 1969-1989 time period; that risk increased to 23% during the 1989-2009 period. For those ages 45-55, the risk of poverty jumped from 11.8% to 17.7%.
  Higher recent rates of unemployment mean the lifetime risk of experiencing economic insecurity now runs even higher: 79%, or 4 in 5 adults, by the time they turn 60.
  By race, nonwhites still have a higher risk of being economically insecure, at 90 percent. But compared with the official poverty rate, some of the biggest jumps under the newer measure are among whites, with more than 76% enduring periods of joblessness, life on welfare or near-poverty.
  By 2030, based on the current trend of widening income inequality, close to 85% of all working-age adults in the U.S. will experience bouts of economic insecurity.
  "Poverty is no longer an issue of 'them', it's an issue of 'us'," says Mark Rank, a professor at Washington University in St. Louis who calculated the numbers. "Only when poverty is thought of as a mainstream event, rather than a fringe experience that just affects blacks and Hispanics, can we really begin to build broader support for programs that lift people in need."
  The numbers come from Rank's analysis being published by the Oxford University Press. They are supplemented with interviews and figures provided to the AP by Tom Hirschl, a professor at Cornell University; John Iceland, a sociology professor at Penn State University; the University of New Hampshire's Carsey Institute; the U.S. Census Bureau; and the Population Reference Bureau.
  Among the findings:
  '--For the first time since 1975, the number of white single-mother households living in poverty with children surpassed or equaled black ones in the past decade, spurred by job losses and faster rates of out-of-wedlock births among whites. White single-mother families in poverty stood at nearly 1.5 million in 2011, comparable to the number for blacks. Hispanic single-mother families in poverty trailed at 1.2 million.
  '--Since 2000, the poverty rate among working-class whites has grown faster than among working-class nonwhites, rising 3 percentage points to 11% as the recession took a bigger toll among lower-wage workers. Still, poverty among working-class nonwhites remains higher, at 23%.
  '--The share of children living in high-poverty neighborhoods '-- those with poverty rates of 30% or more '-- has increased to 1 in 10, putting them at higher risk of teenage pregnancy or dropping out of school. Non-Hispanic whites accounted for 17% of the child population in such neighborhoods, compared with 13% in 2000, even though the overall proportion of white children in the U.S. has been declining.
  The share of black children in high-poverty neighborhoods dropped from 43% to 37%, while the share of Latino children went from 38% to 39%.
  '--Race disparities in health and education have narrowed generally since the 1960s. While residential segregation remains high, a typical black person now lives in a nonmajority black neighborhood for the first time. Previous studies have shown that wealth is a greater predictor of standardized test scores than race; the test-score gap between rich and low-income students is now nearly double the gap between blacks and whites.
  '--'--'--
  Going back to the 1980s, never have whites been so pessimistic about their futures, according to the General Social Survey, a biannual survey conducted at the University of Chicago. Just 45% say their family will have a good chance of improving their economic position based on the way things are in America.
  The divide is especially evident among those whites who self-identify as working class: 49% say they think their children will do better than them, compared with 67% of nonwhites who consider themselves working class, even though the economic plight of minorities tends to be worse.
  Although they are a shrinking group, working-class whites '-- defined as those lacking a college degree '-- remain the biggest demographic bloc of the working-age population. In 2012, Election Day exit polls conducted for the AP and the television networks showed working-class whites made up 36% of the electorate, even with a notable drop in white voter turnout.
  Last November, Obama won the votes of just 36% of those non-college whites, the worst performance of any Democratic nominee among that group since Republican Ronald Reagan's 1984 landslide victory over Walter Mondale.
  Some Democratic analysts have urged renewed efforts to bring working-class whites into the political fold, calling them a potential "decisive swing voter group" if minority and youth turnout level off in future elections. "In 2016, GOP messaging will be far more focused on expressing concern for 'the middle class' and 'average Americans,'" Andrew Levison and Ruy Teixeira wrote recently in The New Republic.
  "They don't trust big government, but it doesn't mean they want no government," says Republican pollster Ed Goeas, who agrees that working-class whites will remain an important electoral group. His research found that many of them would support anti-poverty programs if focused broadly on job training and infrastructure investment. This past week, Obama pledged anew to help manufacturers bring jobs back to America and to create jobs in the energy sectors of wind, solar and natural gas.
  "They feel that politicians are giving attention to other people and not them," Goeas said.
  Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Growing uncertainty about breast cancer screening
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Conversation
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 05:32
  There's a deep uncertainty about both the benefits and the harms of breast cancer screening as it is practiced today. Tips Times/FlickrWhen they were introduced over 20 years ago, national breast screening programs were a milestone in public health. They were based on evidence from randomised trials that screening saved lives. But there are now serious doubts about what these programs can and have achieved.
  The first major challenge came with the Cochrane Collaboration's review of the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening in 2001.
  At that time, publication was delayed while the Cochrane reviewers and authors sorted out their differences. Meanwhile, The Lancet published the review, triggering a heated debate about the value of breast cancer screening that has continued ever since.
  The latest update of the review, however, went quietly by.
  In 2001, reviewers Peter Gotzsche and Ole Olsen pronounced mammography screening ''unjustified'' on the evidence from randomised trials. But an editorial in the same edition of The Lancet challenged their assertion.
  It noted that:
  Evaluation of the outcome of cancer screening at a national level is very much a long-term proposition.
  In the latest update, the summary from all the available randomised trials of mammography screening hasn't changed much. That's because, in the intervening decade, the result of only one more trial has been published.
  This hasn't changed the bottom line: taken together, the eight randomised trials found screening reduced breast cancer deaths by about 20%. But the three best-quality trials did not show a significant reduction, even after following up for 13 years.
  What is new in this review is a discussion of the evidence about breast screening that's accumulated from other sources since screening became common practice.
  Does breast screening save lives?First, it's clear that breast cancer treatment has advanced significantly in the last few decades. A 2012 meta-analysis found that polychemotherapy can reduce breast cancer deaths by about one third, and earlier work demonstrated the benefits of hormone therapy.
  A 2012 study assessing the impact of screening in Australia found that advances in treatment (rather than screening) were primarily responsible for the decline in breast cancer deaths seen over the last 20 years.
  So it's plausible that screening isn't as necessary now as it was back in the 1960s to 1980s, when most of the randomised trials of screening began.
  What's more, there's a very mixed picture emerging from non-randomised (observational) studies of screening, including screening program evaluations. BreastScreen Australia (established in 1991) reports that the national screening program has reduced breast cancer deaths by between 22% and 30%. It notes that the biggest effects are in areas where participation in screening is greatest.
  This is at odds with the Australian study described above. There, researchers found the benefit happened too early (before breast screening was fully implemented) to be attributed to screening, and was greatest among women between the ages of 40 and 49, who have the lowest participation in screening. It was lowest among women aged 60 to 69 years, who have the highest participation in screening.
  The Cochrane review outlines a similarly confused picture from international observational studies. Some claim screening has delivered expected declines in breast cancer deaths across Europe, the United Kingdom and the United States.
  A US analysis, for instance, estimated that between 28% and 65% of the decline in breast cancer mortality is due to screening with the rest coming from better treatment.
  But other studies show that declines in breast cancer death rates have been just as great or greater among women too young for screening, or in areas where screening has been limited or not provided at all. Increased breast cancer awareness '' or hyperawareness '' may also play a part.
  If screening works, it must do so by picking up breast cancers earlier so that there should be a drop in the rates of advanced breast cancer, as well as a drop in deaths. But there has been only an 8% decline in the rate of advanced (late stage, or metastatic) cancer in the United States over the last 30 years. This suggests that screening is having, at best, a small effect.
  This something is better than nothing, right? Not quite, because breast screening can also cause harm.
  How much harm does breast screening cause?The randomised trials did not adequately measure the harms of breast screening. For the most part, they didn't measure them at all. But evidence of harm has been steadily accumulating.
  The main harm is through over-diagnosis: harmless breast cancers found by screening are treated when without screening they wouldn't have been found at all.
  In contrast to the small decline in advanced cancer rates, early-stage breast cancer rates have doubled over the last 30 years, strongly suggesting over-diagnosis. An estimated 1.3 million US women are thought to have been over-diagnosed due to screening.
  The impact on these women's lives, on the lives of their families and the social and economic effects of over-diagnosis is worth serious consideration.
  While the frequency of over-diagnosis is still contested (estimates range from one-and-a-half to ten over-diagnosed cases for every breast cancer death prevented), its existence has been documented in countries including Canada, France, Australia, Norway and Sweden.
  Advocates of screening point out that even if some women are over-diagnosed, the side effects of early breast cancer treatment (surgery, radiotherapy, hormone therapy and chemotherapy) are worth it. Better to be safe than sorry.
  But evidence of unexpected side effects is also growing. We know now that radiotherapy increases women's risk of having and dying from heart attacks five to 20 years after treatment. It also increases the risk of lung cancer.
  Late effects of radiotherapy are important as most women with breast cancer have radiotherapy, and live for many years after it. It's especially important in light of over-diagnosis of screened women in their 50s and 60s.
  This uncertain picture of breast screening from 20 years of observational (non-randomised) studies isn't surprising. Observational studies provide only ''silver medal'' evidence about the benefit and harms of screening because they are very susceptible to bias.
  In particular, they suffer selection bias '' comparing groups of screened and unscreened women who are different in key ways, such as their risk of breast cancer, use of hormone replacement therapy, and lifestyle factors including diet, obesity, reproductive lives and alcohol consumption.
  This can lead to misleading conclusions about how many lives are saved by screening and how many cases of over-diagnosis are caused.
  Observational studies are also liable to length bias (the tendency of screening to find slow-growing cancers that have excellent prognosis, contributing to over-diagnosis) and lead-time bias (screening finds cancers earlier but may just advance the time of diagnosis rather than prevent death, giving people more ''disease time'' but no extra years of life).
  These are prone to make screening look more effective than it really is.
  This is why both the UK Independent Breast Screening Review Panel and the Cochrane Review continue to rely on the older randomised trials that date back to the 1960s. They may be old, but these randomised trials at least provide evidence with a much lower risk of bias.
  What do we do now?It's 50 years since the first breast screening randomised trial began, and ten years since the first Cochrane review spoke strongly of screening's harms.
  Evaluation of national breast screening programs has clearly been a long-term proposition but one that has failed to resolve our most important questions: does screening work today? And how much over-diagnosis does it cause?
  It's time to acknowledge the true depth of our uncertainty about both the benefits and the harms of breast cancer screening as it is practiced today.
  To resolve these questions, we need to do new randomised trials of modern breast cancer screening. New trials are needed because the practice (the quality of mammographic imaging has improved) and context (breast cancer treatments are so different now) of screening has changed so much that we can't reliably apply the results of the old trials any more.
  And we need to do randomised trials because more than ever we need ''gold medal'' evidence '' 20 years of observational studies has proved that observational studies are just not good enough to answer our fundamental questions about modern screening.
  The forthcoming expansion of screening to women aged between 70 and 74 is a rare opportunity for Australia to do just this. We may manage to find data that will be valued by the rest of the world.
  Sign in to Favourite Post a Comment
Highest in the Nation
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Second City Cop
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 05:31
  The average U.S. price of a gallon of gasoline has jumped eight cents over the past two weeks and Chicago is home to the highest average at $4.10 a gallon, 43 cents higher than the nation's average.Even in Los Angeles, California, a worse economic basket base than Illinois, the average price was around .06 cents lower than Chicago.
  We also find ourselves amused by the recent press events held by Emanuel touting how more and more bikes are being used around Chicago reducing congestion. No mention of how higher gas prices might be driving a minor bump in Public Transit usage and certainly no mention about how lower automobile usage is having the unintended side effect of less parking revenue and even less collection of gas taxes, which means less money for road projects and the like.
  Labels: money questions
Syrian army and Hizballah capture Homs - opening way to Aleppo and decisive Assad victory
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: DEBKAFile
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 05:30
  Syrian army and Hizballah capture Homs - opening way to Aleppo and decisive Assad victory
  DEBKAfile Exclusive Report July 29, 2013, 8:08 AM (IDT)
  Ravaged Homs falls to Assad's forces
  Three months after winning the strategic town of Al Qusayr, the combined Syrian and Hizballah armies have captured the historic Muslim Brotherhood city of Homs, 162 kilometers northeast of the capital Damascus. debkafile's military and intelligence sources report that Sunday, July 28, jeeps with recoilless guns, pick-up trucks with anti air guns - all loaded with defeated rebel Farouq Brigades fighters were to be seen fleeing the city. As they fled, Syrian and Hizballah army tanks facing no resistance rolled into the center of Homs, the old city and the Khladiyeh district and hoisted images of President Bashar Assad.
  The fall of Homs, which the rebels designated from the start of the uprising ''capital of the revolution,'' opens the way for Syrian-Hizballah forces to move north on Aleppo, Syria's largest city.
  Aleppo's capture would grant Assad a decisive victory in the civil war and confer on the Lebanese Shiite terrorist Hizballah for the first time the standing of an armed force with strategic capabilities, as well as giving the Iran-Syrian-Hizballah alliance a major boost.Early Monday, Syrian ground-to-ground missiles were pounding rebel fortifications Aleppo to soften their resistance, while Syrian air force helicopters struck Kurdish PYG units ranged along the Syrian-Turkish border. Although the helicopters flew over the frontier, they did not run into any interference from the Turkish air force, its artillery emplacements or the NATO Patriot anti-missile batteries deployed there.
  The Kurdish units were targeted to prevent them moving into Aleppo in defense of the city's Kurdish quarters against the Syrian army-Hizballah advance.After the fall of Homs and the fast approaching Syrian assault on Aleppo, Washington, Jerusalem and Ankara have run out of time for quibbling whether to step into the Syrian conflict. The critical decision facing them now is whether to save Aleppo from a savage Syrian army-Hizballah onslaught that will determine the final fate of the war, or continue to stand aside.
  The various tactics outlined by top US soldier Gen. Martin Dempsey last week for US military intervention at a cost of $1 billion per day have been overtaken by events. The Obama administration must now decide very quickly whether Assad and his Russian and Iranian backers should be allowed to win the Syrian civil war or stopped at Aleppo.
Low-level NSA analysts can spy on Americans '' Greenwald
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Conscious Life News
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 05:30
  Posted by cln_Featured_, Government, Spying and Surveillance, WhistleblowerSunday, July 28th, 2013RT | Jul, 28 2013
  NSA spying programs give access to US citizens' private data to low-level analysts with little court approval or supervision, says Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald, who broke the story on Washington's PRISM surveillance system.
  ''[PRISM] is an incredibly powerful and invasive tool,'' Greenwald told ABC's 'This Week.' The NSA programs are ''exactly the type that Mr. Snowden described. NSA officials are going to be testifying before the Senate on Wednesday, and I defy them to deny that these programs work exactly as I've said.''
  The NSA keeps trillions of telephone calls and emails in their databases which they can access anytime with simple screen programs, he said.
  ''And what these programs are, are very simple screens, like the ones that supermarket clerks or shipping and receiving clerks use, where all an analyst has to do is enter an email address or an IP address, and it does two things.''
  ''It searches that database and lets them listen to the calls or read the emails of everything that the NSA has stored, or look at the browsing histories or Google search terms that you've entered, and it also alerts them to any further activity that people connected to that email address or that IP address do in the future.''
  While the program conducts wiretapping with little court approval or supervision, there are ''legal constraints'' on surveillance that require approval by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, in which court judges can secretly review the government's plans to track suspected terrorists in advance.
  ''You can't target [Americans] without going to the FISA court,'' Greenwald stressed. ''But these systems allow analysts to listen to whatever emails they want, whatever telephone calls, browsing histories, Microsoft Word documents.''
  ''And it's all done with no need to go to a court, with no need to even get supervisor approval on the part of the analyst,'' he added.
  Greenwald will testify before a Congressional committee on Wednesday, along with NSA officials who have previously downplayed Snowden's claims about the agency's easy-access data.
  PRISM is a mass electronic surveillance data mining program operated by the NSA since 2007. The program was exposed by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden earlier this summer. Snowden leaked information about the program to the media, warning of a far greater extent of mass data collection than the public knew existed. The disclosures were published by The Guardian and The Washington Post on June 6.
  Snowden later leaked further information to Greenwald which pertained to mass security operations carried out across the world. He spoke of British spy agency GCHQ, which uses the Tempora surveillance program. The whistleblower also shared information regarding Germany's cooperation with US intelligence, which reportedly combs through half a billion German phone calls, emails, and text messages on a daily basis.
  The call for increased oversight and transparency for surveillance programs has been growing, even among supporters of the NSA.
  ''I do think that we're going to have to make some change to make things more transparent,'' Senator Saxby Chambliss, vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told ABC.
  Former federal judge James Robertson, who used to grant surveillance orders, said he was shocked to hear of changes to allow broader authorization of NSA programs '' such as the monitoring of US phone records. He urged for a reform which would to allow counter-arguments to be heard.
  ''What FISA does is not adjudication, but approval,'' Robertson said, speaking as a witness during the first public hearings into the Snowden revelations. ''This works just fine when it deals with individual applications for warrants, but the 2008 amendment has turned the FISA court into an administrative agency making rules for others to follow.''
  However, government officials have defended the surveillance initiatives as authorized under law, claiming they are necessary in order to guard the country against terrorist threats.
  Following Snowden's revelations on NSA surveillance, President Barack Obama assured US citizens in June that ''nobody is listening to [their] telephone calls.''
  He said the surveillance programs monitor phone numbers and the durations of calls, adding that if there are any suspicions and ''if the intelligence community then actually wants to listen to a phone call, they've got to go back to a federal judge, just like they would in a criminal investigation.''
  President Obama added that America is ''going to have to make some choices'' between privacy and security, warning that the highly publicized programs will make it harder to target terrorists.
  Meanwhile, deputy FBI Director Sean Joyce said that the ''program is not intentionally used to target any US citizens'' and is ''key in our counter-terrorism efforts.''
  Testifying on Capitol Hill before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in June, NSA director Gen. Keith Alexander claimed that the NSA's storage of millions of phone records has thwarted more than 50 terror attacks in more than 20 countries since September 11, 2001. However, evidence of the prevented attacks has not been revealed
  This post appeared at RT
  More from RT
KQ?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Radio Artisan
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 05:26
  Did you ever hear a DX station calling KQ, all stuck together like a prosign, instead of calling CQ? I've heard this several times in recent years and I've wondered what's up with that. Is it too difficult to throw the extra dit in there?
  But I digress'....
  Like this:LikeLoading...
The Cock Jihadist
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Lame Cherry
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 05:24
  For all the Noel Sheppard types who are such good boyz they can not fathom why Huma Wiener stays married to Anthony Wiener, that excuses for her are she is staying in it to be Queen of New York in a political strange bedfellows.............Let us recall that Hillary Clinton stayed married to rapist Bill Clinton, and numerous women on the left stay married to fagsexuals and child molesters, not for power as Mrs. Clinton was so charged with.......but revisit the Dame of the left in Jackie Kennedy.
  Mrs. Kennedy was married to a pervert and liked it. When the pervert had his head blown off, she sold herself to a billionaire Greek as his personal whore.....and not being able to get enough of that, she was the coquette cortesan of another infidelity adulterer to her final breath.
  Huma Wiener like all these liberal women is married to a sperm donor Anthony, while she is off sucking the dew off Hillary's lily. Muchelle Obama is in bed with Val_erie Jarrett as Obama butt sexed little black boys from Kenya.
  Huma Wiener is where she is at, because she gets off in being married to a pervert like Anthony who is a sex maniac.
  Huma likes it and gets off on it, just like Anthony likes being the perve floor show for her.
  It is not about New York. It is about being a fucking perv and getting off on who is getting off on getting off on your perverted spouse.
  Some perverts really get off on sharing the spouse in the most disgusting ways possible. Married to a man whore is what Huma Wiener desired and that is why she stays.
  Huma Wiener is a Cock Jihadist. She make war on other women using her husband's erection.
  The things Noel Sheppard likes watching as a voyeur in Sarah Palin being politically gang raped as Camille Paglia whispers in his hear, that Sarah likes it.
  Huma Abedin hosting first 'Women for Weiner' fundraiser party for ...www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Huma-Abedin-hosting-Women-Weiner-fundraiser...Women for Weiner: Author and socialite Jill Isco, left, and Huma Abedin's sister Heba,Women for Wiener......she gets off on it this Islamic tart.nuff said
  agtG
Scripting News: Another JLG story.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dave Winer
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 05:22
  I'm discussing a project with my friend Jason Pontin at MIT Technology Review. He was lamenting how he has to go around his own people to get this done. That reminded me of a Jean-Louis Gassee story, the legendary former head of product at Apple in the late 80s.
  Jason, you're in good company.
  In 1988, I had lunch with my friend Jean Louis-Gassee at Apple. He was in charge of products.
  He wanted me to do a scripting language for the Mac.
  I said "But Uncle Jean-Louis, you are head of the biggest greatest tech innovator in all the land, why don't you just command your minions to create a scripting language for the Mac?"
VIDEO-Pentagon: Who We're At War With Is Classified
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:20
  In a major national security speech this spring, President Obama said again and again that the U.S. is at war with ''Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and their associated forces.''
  So who exactly are those associated forces? It's a secret.
  At a hearing in May, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., asked the Defense Department to provide him with a current list of Al Qaeda affiliates.
  The Pentagon responded '' but Levin's office told ProPublica they aren't allowed to share it. Kathleen Long, a spokeswoman for Levin, would say only that the department's ''answer included the information requested.''
  A Pentagon spokesman told ProPublica that revealing such a list could cause ''serious damage to national security.''
  ''Because elements that might be considered 'associated forces' can build credibility by being listed as such by the United States, we have classified the list,'' said the spokesman, Lt. Col. Jim Gregory. ''We cannot afford to inflate these organizations that rely on violent extremist ideology to strengthen their ranks.''
  It's not an abstract question: U.S. drone strikes and other actions frequently target ''associated forces,'' as has been the case with dozens of strikes against an Al Qaeda offshoot in Yemen.
  During the May hearing, Michael Sheehan, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Special Operations and Low-Intensity Conflict, said he was ''not sure there is a list per se.'' Describing terrorist groups as ''murky'' and ''shifting,'' he said, ''it would be difficult for the Congress to get involved in trying to track the designation of which are the affiliate forces'' of Al Qaeda.
  Sheehan said that by the Pentagon's standard, ''sympathy is not enough'.... it has to be an organized group and that group has to be in co-belligerent status with Al Qaeda operating against the United States.''
  The White House tied Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and ''elements'' of Al Shabaab in Somalia to Al Qaeda in a recent report to Congress on military actions. But the report also included a classified annex.
  Jack Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law who served as a legal counsel during the Bush administration and has writtenon this question at length, told ProPublica that the Pentagon's reasoning for keeping the affiliates secret seems weak. ''If the organizations are 'inflated' enough to be targeted with military force, why cannot they be mentioned publicly?'' Goldsmith said. He added that there is ''a countervailing very important interest in the public knowing who the government is fighting against in its name."
  The law underpinning the U.S. war against Al Qaeda is known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force, or AUMF, and it was passed one week after the 9/11 attacks. It doesn't actually include the words ''associated forces,'' though courts and Congress have endorsed the phrase.
  As we explained earlier this year, the emergence of new or more loosely-aligned terrorist groups has legal scholars wondering how effectively the U.S. will be able to ''shoehorn'' them into the AUMF. During the May hearing, many lawmakers expressed concern about the Pentagon's capacious reading of the law. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., described it as a ''carte blanche.''
  Obama, in his May speech, said he looked forward ''to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF's mandate.'' But he didn't give a timeframe. On Wednesday, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., introduced an amendment that would sunset the law at the end of 2014, to coincide with the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan. It was voted down the same day, 185 to 236.
  The AUMF isn't the only thing the government relies on to take military action. In speeches and interviews Obama administration officials also bring up the president's constitutional power to defend the country, even without congressional authorization.
  Also on HuffPost:
Russia Prepares For War After Historic Obama-Bush-Clinton African Meet
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:15
  World's Largest English Language News Service with Over 500 Articles Updated Daily
  "The News You Need Today'...For The World You'll Live In Tomorrow."
  What You Aren't Being Told About The World You Live In
  IronMountainApocalypse: The True Story Of 2013
  A ''must have'' book for those seeking to understand the true events surrounding the most troubled years of our modern times. (Continued)
  Picking up the Pieces: Practical Guide for Surviving Economic Crashes, Internal Unrest and Military SuppressionBy: Sorcha Faal ''In the span of less than 3 months gasoline prices will rise 500%. The prices of both food and shelter rise over 300%. (Continued)
  Partisans Handbook:By: Sorcha Faal ''Essential Survival Guide For Resisting Foreign Military Occupation, Escape And Evasion Techniques, Surviving Interrogation, Facing Execution, Wilderness Survival (Continued)
  July 29, 2013
  RussiaPrepares For War After Historic Obama-Bush-Clinton African Meet
  By:Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers
  A truly grim Federal Security Services (FSB) report circulating in the Kremlin today is confirming that the 13 July snap military drills ordered by President Putin involving nearly 200,000 Russia troops was in ''direct response'' to information obtained from US fugitive Edward Snowden; information that further caused the historic meeting of three American Presidents in Africa during the past few weeks in their effort to hide the truth of our worlds nearing destruction.
  According to this report, Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) tactical forces were able to extricate Snowden from Hong Kong on 23 June within hours of his planned assassination by a CIA ''hit squad'' sent by the Obama regime to silence this person who is now known as the most wanted man in the world.
  The saving of Snowden's life, this report continues, was ordered by Putin after the 18 June assassination of American journalist Michael Hastings whose vehicle was destroyed by a US drone strike in Los Angeles [new video showing drone strikeHERE] as he was attempting to flee to safety while preparing a story on information given to him by Snowden.
  Further information relating to Putin's decision to save Snowden, this report says, was the Obama regimes attack on two Los Angeles police detectives investigating Hastings assassination, and which has, so far, pushed them into silence.
  Confirming Putin's wisdom in saving Snowden's life, FSB analysts in the report say, was the Obama regimes assassination of famed New Zealand hacker Barnaby Jack in San Francisco on 25 July just days before he was to appear before the Black Hat Briefings computer security conference in Las Vegas where he was set to prove ''beyond all doubt'' that the aircraft used in the 11 September 2001 attacks on America were being remotely controlled by US intelligence agencies.
  The evidence provided to Barnaby Jack to confirm this fact, this report says, was given to this ''white hat hacker'' by Snowden after the first computer genius he, Snowden, had approached was likewise assassinated by the Obama regime.
  In ''deep background,'' FSB analysts in this report say, Snowden, when he first became aware of the stunning facts behind the US governments actions against not only their own people, but the entire world, contacted the noted computer genius and Internet activist Aaron Swartz in early January (2013) to assist him in explaining the most highly technical aspects of the top secret reports he was seeing.
  Within days of Snowden contacting Swartz, however, this report says, the Obama regime assassinated Swartz by ''suicide'' on 11 January, though US intelligence agencies weren't able, at that time, to discover where Swartz had obtained his information.
  Most stunning in this report is the absolute terror being exhibited by US President's Barack Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton, all of whom rushed to Africa for a series of secret meetings on 27 June and 1 July after Snowden had been brought under the protection of the Kremlin just days before.
  According to the GRU addendum to this FSB report, Clinton arrived in the African nation of Senegal immediately prior to Obama where the two held a series of secret meetings on 27 July. From Senegal, this report continues, Clinton traveled separately to Dar es Salaam (Tanzania's largest and richest city) where he met up with Obama and Bush for another series of secret meetings on 1 July.
  As to the content of these historic meetings between three US Presidents in Africa kept from the American people by their propaganda media organs, this FSB report concludes, was how they were going to be able to contain the even more catastrophic information held by Snowden he has yet to release, but has vowed to do.
  Important to note, and as we had detailed in our 1 July report ''Snowden Revelations Strike Fear Into Putin,'' the Obama regime is now in ''full panic mode'' over what is to come, and as evidenced this past week by the US Federal Government ordering all Web firms toimmediately hand over the passwords of all American citizens.
  Even more ominous for the American people, the Obama regime this past Friday completely removed from the Internet Obama's Change.gov website he established in 2008 to lay out his promises, which, in fact, he never honored anyway.
  And in a move this report calls ''stunning,'' the Obama regimes defense department told the US Senate this past week that neither the US Congress, nor the American people, had a right to know who their own country was at war with because it is ''classified.''
  The GRU addendum to this FSB report, however, cryptically states that for the ''truest meaning'' of Snowden's information revealing who the US is really at war with, and the fears of Obama-Bush-Clinton, lies in the 9 December 2009 ''Norway Spiral Warning'' giving to our Earth on the eve of Obama receiving his 10 December 2009 Nobel Peace Prize'...a warning, mind you, that has not been heeded.
  The same, however, cannot be said of Russia as the 5,000 additional bomb shelters ordered in 2010 by Putin to be built by the end of 2012 have now been completed, and with each passing day many more thousands of Russian troops are preparing for war.
  July 29, 2013 (C) EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BYandGFDL.
  [Ed. Note: Western governments and their intelligence services actively campaign against the information found in these reports so as not to alarm their citizens about the many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal strongly disagrees with in believing that it is every human beings right to know the truth. Due to our missions conflicts with that of those governments, the responses of their 'agents' against us has been a longstanding misinformation/misdirection campaign designed to discredit and which is addressed in the report ''Who Is Sorcha Faal?''.]
  Snowden Revelations Strike Fear Into Putin
  Apocalypse Slams Into America, Few Notice
  You May Already Be To Late'...But It Has Begun!
  They Are Going To Come For You'...Why Are You Helping Them?
  Return To Main Page
Jimmy Savile: Celeb arrests could soar after police discover DJ's secret lair at record shop - Mirror Online
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 28 Jul 2013 23:19
  Stunned officers chipped away plaster at a ­record shop wall and unveiled a hidden list of names thought to belong to young victims of Jimmy Savile.
  The vile register, which contained the names, ages and a disgusting ratings system seemingly used to mark their sexual performance, was scrawled on a secret wall buried behind layers of wallpaper and plaster.
  A source revealed: ''The wall looked like something straight out of a horror movie. There were lists and lists of names of the victims '' it's a shocking discovery.''
  The list of girls and young women is thought to identify ­hundreds of potential new victims abused at the hands of the BBC DJ and it raised fears Savile was at the centre of a celebrity paedophile ring.
  Police believe the major breakthrough could lead to further arrests '' including other well-known celebrities.
  The wall also appeared to contain the names of girls the sick group hoped to target in the future.
  Officers who raided the shop in ­Greater Manchester after a tip-off will now try to trace the alleged victims.
  A source said the raid had provided the clearest evidence yet to show Savile was part of a larger group of monsters.
  The source said: ''Savile appeared to be using the room above the record store as some kind of secret HQ to plan his vile acts.
  ''There appears to be some suggestion that he was not acting alone either.
  ''There were others who appear to be involved, several others, some of whom are household names.''
  As the specialist officers ripped away the layers from the wall, the names of up to 200 new ­people they believe he and accomplices attacked or planned toattack during the 1980s and 1990s were ­gradually revealed.
  At least one other well-known BBC figure and several celebrities are now being linked to the probe. Suspects face being quizzed in the coming weeks.
  The source added: ''Police think there might be hundreds of new female victims that needed to be spoken to as a result of the record shop raid.
  Earlier this year it was suggested there were around 450 victims of Savile's depraved actions.
  ''This looks like an under-estimation. If the evidence on the wall is anything to go by, we could be talking in the region of 650 victims in all. It's shocking.''
  Criminologist Professor David Wilson from Birmingham City University said the register was a way for the predators to boast about their conquests.
  Margaret Thatcher with Jimmy Savile
  PA
  He said: ''In the age before the internet made it possible for paedophiles to ­communicate with each other and write about who they could abuse and the form that abuse may take, they found other methods.
  Paedophiles are constantly evolving ways of communicating.
  ''By putting it on a wall they are making it public, but by hiding it, it is private. The public nature is because they are proud of it. It is a boasting system.
  It is a form of saying 'this is what I've done. I've done more than you.'
  It's about them displaying their own sexual success in being able to abuse these children.
  ''They also recognise this could lead to arrest, so they had to be careful about their sexual preferences.
  ''At the time this was said to have taken place paedophiles used contact magazines and groups of associates to get in touch with each other.
  We are beginning to see how widespread Savile's abuse was.
  ''The significance of it having been found in a record shop is that at the time this was where all the young people went to buy their records and hang out.
  Now they download songs on the internet.''
  Police carried out the raid a few weeks ago. The findings potentially raise the depravity of disgraced Savile '' who died at 84 in October 2011 '' to new levels.
  A joint police and NSPCC report published in January declared that with at least 450 victims, he was one of Britain's most ­prolific sex offenders.
  Commander Peter Spindler said Savile ''groomed the nation'' as he raised millions for charity while using his status as a platform for abuse.
  Leeds-born Savile had links with ­Greater Manchester stretching back to the 1950s when he managed a ballroom in the city.
  His first known attack took place in ­Manchester in 1955. Investigators who revealed the scale of his abuse said he used his appeal to target the vulnerable.
  In 1964, Savile's name was mentioned to police investigating allegations that men were exploiting girls from Duncroft ­Approved School in Surrey.
  Police arrested two men in London and a ledger showed Savile was a regular ­visitor there. Following his death, 28 police forces recorded 214 crimes ­committed by the presenter, including 34 rape claims. The latest allegation against him was from 2009 when he was aged 82.
  The report said he targeted children as young as eight and sexually attacked at least 23 of his victims on BBC premises.
  In 1972 during a break in filming, Savile groped a 12-year-old boy and felt the breasts of the youngster's two friends.
  Investigators also found he carried out abuse in at least 14 hospitals between 1955 and 2009, including Great Ormond Street and one hospice.
  Savile was stripped of his knighthood when dozens of women came forward to say he attacked them during his 54-year campaign of abuse.
  Officers launched Operation Yewtree to probe the claims and there are now three strands to the investigation. One concerns Savile's crimes ­exclusively, while another relates to allegations against Savile and others.
  The third concentrates on ­accusations unconnected to Savile but which emerged following publicity.
  A host of soap stars, DJs and TV ­presenters have been arrested during nationwide probes into historical sex offences in cases not connected to Savile.
  BBC presenter Stuart Hall had his prison sentence for a series of assaults on girls doubled to 30 months on Friday.
  Three Appeal Court judges ruled his original 15-month term was ''inadequate''. The former It's A Knockout host, 83, ­admitted sexually assaulting 13 girls aged nine to 17 over nearly 20 years.
  Coronation Street star Bill Roache is one of the best-known actors to be held over allegations in the aftermath of the Savile scandal. He was charged in May with raping a ­teenage girl in 1967.
  Roache has been bailed until his next court appearance on September 2 when he will enter formal pleas.
  The actor, who has played Ken Barlow in the ITV1 soap since its launch, also faces charges of five indecent assaults­ ­involving four girls aged between 11 or 12 and 16. He denies all the claims.
  His fellow Corrie star Michael Le Vell, who plays mechanic Kevin Webster, has been taken off air after being charged with 19 offences against a child, including rape, indecent assault and sexual activity.
  Police have been inundated with calls following coverage of Savile's depraved legacy.
  It is claimed more of those ­allegedly abused are now finding the courage to come forward because the police are taking a new approach '' giving potential victims hope their cases will be treated seriously.
  Dozen of other arrests so far include Gary Glitter and comedian Freddie Starr.
  Comic Jimmy Tarbuck was ­arrested at his home in South West London in May in ­connection with a historic child sex abuse claim.
  And PR guru Max ­Clifford has been charged with 11 indecent assaults allegedly committed ­between 1966 and 1985.
  The 70-year-old has vowed to clear his name. All those who have been ­arrested have vehemently ­denied any wrongdoing.
  View gallerymirrorpix
  Inside Jimmy Savile's sex caravan
  View gallery
VIDEO-U.S. will not seek death penalty for Snowden
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:13
  STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  NEW: Snowden's father asks the president to dismiss the complaint against his sonSnowden's father talks about the U.S. intelligence leakerLon Snowden says his son did what he knew was rightThe FBI and security officials in Russia are discussing his case(CNN) -- The U.S. Justice Department will not seek the death penalty for U.S. intelligence leaker Edward Snowden, Attorney General Eric Holder wrote to Russian authorities in a letter dated July 23.
  In the letter, Holder says Snowden's arguments for temporary asylum in Russia are without merit.
  Snowden is seeking asylum because he claims he will be tortured and face the death penalty if returned to the United States.
  But the death penalty is not an option given the current charges against Snowden, and even if additional charges are filed, the United States would still not seek capital punishment, Holder wrote.
  Once back in the United States, Snowden would not be tortured and would face a civilian trial with a lawyer appointed to him, the attorney general wrote.
  "We believe that these assurances eliminate these asserted grounds for Mr. Snowden's claim that he should be treated as a refugee or granted asylum," Holder wrote.
  Snowden did not access 'crown jewels' of NSA intel, official says
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  Sharing secrets: U.S. intelligence leaks
  HIDE CAPTION
  He also said it is untrue that Snowden cannot travel because his U.S. passport was revoked. Snowden is still a U.S. citizen and is eligible for a limited-validity passport that would authorize a direct return to the United States.
  "The United States is willing to immediately issue such a passport to Mr. Snowden," Holder wrote.
  Father asks Obama to rein in Holder
  In a letter released Friday, Snowden's father called on President Barack Obama to order Holder to dismiss the criminal complaint filed against his son.
  Lon Snowden defended his son's actions, comparing them to acts of civil disobedience.
  "We are also appalled at your administration's scorn for due process, the rule of law, fairness and the presumption of innocence as regards Edward," the letter said.
  Earlier in the day, Lon Snowden said on NBC's "Today" that Snowden did the right thing by leaking U.S. intelligence and helping Americans see the truth.
  "I think my son, when he takes his final breath, whether it's today or 100 years from now, (will) be comfortable with what he did," he said. "He did what he knew was right. He shared the truth with the American people. What we choose to do with it is up to us as a people."
  Lon Snowden expressed his disappointment with the recent House vote that continued funding for the spy program that Edward Snowden exposed.
  There is a need for a strong intelligence community, Lon Snowden said, but many who voted for continued funding for the program are really looking out for the special interests that will benefit.
  "It's all about the money," he said.
  The father said he has not been in direct contact with his son, but there has been indirect contact through intermediaries.
  The intermediaries do not include WikiLeaks, Lon Snowden said, but he added that he is thankful to that group for aiding his son.
  "I'm thankful for anybody at this point that is providing him with assistance to keep him safe and secure," he said.
  U.S., Russian officials continue talks
  Meanwhile, the Kremlin said that the Russian security agency FSB is talking to American officials.
  "The situation around Snowden is not being discussed at the top level. There's a discussion between heads of FSB and FBI," the Kremlin press office said.
  A spokesman for Vladimir Putin said the Russian president "expressed a firm intention to not allow" further damage to U.S. interests, including a pledge by Snowden not to release any more intelligence. "And I have no doubt this is how it will be, no matter how the situation develops," the spokesman said, according to the Russian news agency RIA Novosti.
  The many mysteries of Snowden's transit zone
  Snowden isn't yet allowed to step outside the Moscow airport where he's been confined for weeks. He is waiting for permission to stay elsewhere in Russia while his request for temporary asylum is considered.
  He has been searching for a place to settle after the United States charged him with espionage.
  The former National Security Agency contractor, who admitted last month to revealing sweeping U.S. electronic surveillance programs to the news media, left Hong Kong for Moscow on June 23.
  Snowden may remain stuck in the transit area for weeks and maybe months, the head of Russia's migration service, Vladimir Volokh, told the Russian news agency Interfax. The maximum length of time Snowden can spend at the airport is six months, he said.
  CNN's Nancy Baker and Alla Eshchenko contributed to this report.
Defense.gov News Article: Pentagon Spokesman: Public Affairs Must Change With Times
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 28 Jul 2013 15:09
  Top LinksSubscribe
  TwitterAFPS BlogsFacebookFlickrRSSPodcastsWidgetsE-MailSecretary of Defense
  SpeechesMessagesBiographyPress
  Today in DoDNews ReleasesPress AdvisoriesPublicationsTranscriptsPhotos
  Imagery ArchiveHighlightsPhoto EssaysWeek in PhotosDoD Info
  Post 9/11 GI BillTransferabilityCommunity RelationsStars & StripesRecovery ActSite MapAmerican Forces Press Service
NBC Announces Mini-Series on Hillary Clinton - NYTimes.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:12
  LOS ANGELES '-- Well in advance of the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Rodham Clinton is a big story.
  NBC announced here on Saturday that it was preparing a four-hour mini-series based on the life of Mrs. Clinton and hoped to broadcast it before any possible formal declaration that she was running. That would avoid the possibility of other candidates demanding equal time, said Robert Greenblatt, NBC's top entertainment executive.
  Mr. Greenblatt said NBC bought the project even though it had no script yet, though the deal came with a star attached: Diane Lane, who was nominated for an Academy Award in 2003 for her leading role in the film ''Unfaithful.'' The Clinton project will be written and directed by Courtney Hunt, who was nominated for an Oscar for writing the film ''Frozen River.''
  NBC's release described the project as a mini-series that would ''recount Clinton's life as a wife, politician and cabinet member from 1998 to present.'' That would include her run for the presidential nomination in 2008.
  The NBC release also said, ''The script will begin with Clinton living in the White House as her husband is serving the second of his two terms as president. In the years following, she would eventually become a United States senator, run for president and, ultimately, serve the country as secretary of state.''
  Mr. Greenblatt said the project would most likely include aspects that were both critical of Mrs. Clinton and supportive of her.
  Nick Merrill, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton, said the former secretary of state was unaware of the miniseries. He declined comment otherwise.
  ''We literally just closed the deal,'' Mr. Greenblatt, the NBC executive, said. But he said he did not expect her to comment on the project. ''I don't think she will endorse it,'' he said.
  Michael D. Shear contributed reporting from Washington.
Hacker Barnaby Jack dies in San Francisco aged 35
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:10
  Jack was due to speak at the Black Hat conference, which starts Saturday in Las Vegas. Photograph: Isaac Brekken/AP
  Barnaby Jack, a hacker who was due to present his findings on the security vulnerabilities of implanted medical devices, has died.
  The San Francisco medical examiner's office said Jack, 35, died in the city on Thursday '' but did not provide details on the circumstances surrounding his death.
  Jack had exposed a security flaw in insulin pumps that could be made to dispense a fatal dose by a hacker 300ft away, pushing some medical companies to review the security of these devices.
  He was also a popular and respected figure in the information security scene. Within that small scene, reverse engineers are especially close, said Matthieu Suiche, a friend of Jack's and chief scientist at CloudVolumes Inc in an email. "We pretty much all know each other, or have lots of common friends," Suiche said. "It's almost like we all grew up together."
  He added: "There isn't much to say except that Barnaby was one of the rare people in InfoSec who was a brilliant researcher but also a good friend to many of us."
  Suiche met Jack at the Black Hat conference a few years ago and said they had been really good friends since. He said he had drinks with Jack and his girlfriend in San Francisco just over a week ago.
  He called his friend "brilliant", and said Jack's latest research on medical devices could help save the lives of many people. "In this world full of people fearfully complying and worrying, very few people are crazy enough to challenge the rules, to approach life in an unconventional paradigm and to speak up to contribute to change this world," Suiche said.
  Jack was due to speak at the Black Hat conference, which starts Saturday in Las Vegas. His presentation, "Implantable medical devices: hacking humans," would have explained how these devices could be compromised and would have suggested ways to improve device security.
  Black Hat said the room his discussion was meant to take place will instead be used as a place for his friends and colleagues to gather and remember him on 1 August, when the session was set to take place.
  Black Hat said in a statement:
  We have lost a member of our family. Everyone would agree that the life and work of Barnaby Jack are legendary and irreplaceable. Barnaby had the ability to take complex technology and intricate research and make it tangible and accessible for everyone to learn and grow from. Beyond his work in our industry, Barnaby was an incredibly warm hearted and welcoming individual with a passion for celebrating life. We all have a hilarious and upbeat story about Barnaby. He is truly a shining example of what we love about this community.
  Black Hat will not be replacing Barnaby's talk on Thursday, Aug. 1. No one could possibly replace him, nor would we want them to. The community needs time to process this loss. The hour will be left vacant as a time to commemorate his life and work, and we welcome our attendees to come and share in what we hope to be a celebration of his life. Barnaby Jack meant so much to so many people, and we hope this forum will offer an opportunity for us all to recognize the legacy that he leaves behind.
  Our deepest sympathies go out to Barnaby Jack's family and loved ones. Words cannot adequately describe how much he will be missed, but it is certain that Barnaby will NEVER be forgotten.
  At the time of his death, Jack was director of embedded security research at security firm IOActive. On Twitter, the company said: "Lost but never forgotten our beloved pirate, Barnaby Jack has passed. He was a master hacker and dear friend. Here's to you Barnes!"
McAfee puts Barnaby Jack on car-jacking hackers' case ' The Register
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 28 Jul 2013 14:09
  Magic Quadrant for Enterprise Backup/Recovery
  McAfee has put together an elite team of researchers to investigate how to go about protecting car systems from next-generation hacking attacks.
  Members of the team include Barnaby Jack, the security researcher best known for demonstrating ways that crooks can force ATMs to spit out cash and for highlighting security shortcomings in insulin pumps.
  Modern cars increasingly rely on embedded processors. Security researchers have already demonstrated how these embedded systems might be hacked to generating bogus tire blowout warning messages or pull off other dangerous exploits. Attack scenarios include injecting malware using via on-board diagnostics systems, wireless connections and booby-trapped CDs.
  No such attacks have ever taken place in the real world but car manufacturers and auto industry associations are already aware of the possible risk.
  SAE International, a global association of more than 128,000 engineers and related technical experts in the aerospace, automotive and commercial-vehicle industries, has put together a number of technical papers that look into information security risks that look beyond potential concerns about hacking into electronic vehicle access systems, which have been an issue for several years.
  "Vehicles include more and more electronic systems and open communication channels based on public standards, making them vulnerable to a variety of attacks," the abstract to one recent SAE technical paper explains. "Security mitigation mechanisms are implemented in software and might be supported by a controller with basic security features," it adds.
  "Any cyber security breach carries certain risk," said Jack Pokrzywa, SAE's manager of ground vehicle standards, the Daily Techreports. "SAE Vehicle Electrical System Security Committee is working hard to develop specifications which will reduce that risk in the vehicle area."
  Meanwhile Ford and Toyota have both recruited information security experts to look into the potential problem. Ford, for example, has hired infosec experts to make its SYNC in-vehicle communications and entertainment system more resistant against hackers and malware.
  The McAfee team will be assigned to looking into much the same issues but with a slightly different mandate, geared towards developing security software and other protection technologies suitable for car-based embedded computing systems.
  Bruce Snell, a McAfee executive managing the firm's research on car security, told Reuters via PCPro. "If your laptop crashes you'll have a bad day, but if your car crashes that could be life threatening.
  "I don't think people need to panic now. But the future is really scary," he added. ®
  Requirements Checklist for Choosing a Cloud Backup and Recovery Service Provider
INTERNET FILTER
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: aangirfan
  Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:40
  The Chinese firm Huawei controls the internet filter praised by the UK Prime Minister David CameronAnonymous comments:The artificial debates between Capitalism and Communism, "nationalised" central banks and private ownership, democracy and dictatorships are deceptions.
  Obviously it does not matter who owns a corporation:
  Who secretly controls it rules.
  "Huawei strongly denies having close ties with the Chinese government, pointing out it is 98.6% owned by its employees - with the remaining amount held by Mr Ren" "Huawei's founder Ren Zhengfei, a former officer in China's People's Liberation Army, visited Downing Street last year after his company made a £1.3bn investment into its UK operations."
  Does it matter if all our communications are watched by the USA military's NSA or China's military Huawei corporation ?Total surveillance is aimed against us.
  "Even when TalkTalk subscribers turn filtering completely off, their traffic is still routed through Huawei's system."
  "Illegal websites - including ones showing images of child abuse - are blocked for all customers with the help of a list maintained by the non-profit Internet Watch Foundation."
  So in effect we can now only see sites approved by the worldwide police state.
  UK Porn Filter Will Censor Other Content Too, ISPs reveal
  Instead of putting child porn site operating criminals in prison, the secret rulers finance them to enslave and terrorise us.
  Fast and Furious. (Fast and Furious - The U.S. government sent thousands of firearms to the Mexican drugs gangs.)
  Hard to believe, is it not ?
  Pedophilia, and (Islamist or home-grown) terrorism, practiced by the ruling death cult, are used as labels to enslave us.
  Just like the war on drugs and cancer are used to kill us.
Off To Rehab
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: JustOneMinute
  Sun, 28 Jul 2013 10:00
  Anthony Weiner has vowed that he is a changed man. He's turned his life around. To show how serious he is about this, he has revamped his campaign, starting with a new slogan.
  Anthony Weiner: New York City Needs a NewD irection
  Posted by: hit and run | July 27, 2013 at 10:37 AM
  Did you see? Spitzer attacked Weiner for being a bad husband. This is now officially beyond parody.
  Posted by: clarice | July 27, 2013 at 10:52 AM
  After that, Filner can come out as gay. The sexual harassment of women was just a cover for the shame a herteronormative society made him feel as a Gay-American.
  Of course, no one will believe that the harassment was faked. He was really, really into those women.
  So then it's transgender-surgery. Ever since he was a young boy, Bob Filner has identified as a (lesbian) female.
  Posted by: hit and run | July 27, 2013 at 10:56 AM
  Clarice, maybe Clinton can explain how to be a good husband to the rest of the Dems.
  Happy cruise(s) to Clarice, Jane, & Caro!
  Posted by: henry | July 27, 2013 at 10:57 AM
  Via Iowahawk, another writer who should be working for the Onion. On meeting Huma:
  "She approached in a knit white top and navy-blue business skirt, her dark, almost black hair down to her shoulders. She wore bright-red lipstick, which gave her lips a 3-D look, her brown eyes were pools of empathy evolved through a thousand generations of what was good and decent in the history of the human race. The harsh, cheap buck lighting in the coffee shop couldn't lay a glove on her. By the time she sat down, the harmony of angels had vanquished the tinny background music from every corporate space on the planet. Of course, you'd seen pictures before. But you'd also seen pictures of the Taj Mahal. It didn't quite come up to actually being there."
  And there's more.
  http://nymag.com/news/features/anthony-weiner-2013-7/index5.html
  I wonder how New York magazine feels about devoting 8 pages to this wonderful couple a week before Weinergate II broke out.
  Posted by: jimmyk | July 27, 2013 at 11:09 AM
  James D., it's encouraging that the writer in that WaPo trash is getting fisked in the comments.
  Posted by: jimmyk | July 27, 2013 at 11:12 AM
  Reposted from old thread:
  First chance to check in since last weekend with Caro. Never had a chance to talk about Norway, because we had such a full plate absorbing Montana. The flights over and back were spectacular. Best visibility in countless trips I've flown. Great being able to point out places where we had each been and then tell a story about it. (Three of the four of us had many connections.)Re Grieg's place, I've been to a cousin's place a couple of times where we could look directly across the water to his place. There is no boring scenery anywhere in Norway. And with North Sea oil revenues, there is little sign of any poor living conditions that was evident 30+ yrs ago.If I get s chance later, I'll write about our wake experience Saturday.
  Posted by: Manuel Transmission | July 27, 2013 at 11:36 AM
  Ah, Jacobson, has a history, he was the one who tried to rehabilitate Frank Lucas, the drug kingpin, who was sympathetic to the Ground Zero Mosque, yet couldn't find a single person who was sympathetic to Sarah, when they sent him up their after the election, he also wrote a terrible Godzilla novel, years ago.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 11:41 AM
  "pools of empathy evolved through a thousand generations of what was good and decent in the history of the human race."
  Words fail.
  Posted by: MarkO | July 27, 2013 at 11:42 AM
  From that Huma hagiography:
  A few days later, I saw Huma again, this time in the couple's apartment, a nifty, reportedly $3.3 million spread owned by a longtime backer of the Clintons.
  Must be nice to be able to deliver that level of patronage to one's supporters. Not implying that there's any graft involved, of course. [/eyeroll]Posted by: Cecil Turner | July 27, 2013 at 12:32 PM
  Wonder if they will keep it Cecil if Huma gets indicted and Weiner doesn't win.
  Posted by: Jane -walk like an Egyptian | July 27, 2013 at 12:40 PM
  No fair-minded grand jury could indict a woman whose eyes are pools of empathy evolved through a thousand generations of what was good and decent in the history of the human race.
  Wouldn't be prudent.
  Posted by: MarkO | July 27, 2013 at 12:47 PM
  No fair-minded grand jury could indict a woman whose eyes are pools of empathy evolved through a thousand generations of what was good and decent in the history of the human race.
  LOL - sadly you are probably right. We wouldn't want to target the Muslim Brotherhood when there are so many "white hispanics" we can go after.
  Posted by: Jane -walk like an Egyptian | July 27, 2013 at 01:05 PM
  One wonders if Teneo is returning the favor, and flacking for her, we know Anita Dunn's firm, specializes in this sort of claptrap.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 01:08 PM
  Two weeks? How is he gonna change in two weeks? Maybe they're gonna go medieval on him...with a pair of pliers and a blow torch
  I don't know who "he" is, but I can think of a lot of candidates for this specific treatment.
  Posted by: Frau Folterknecht | July 27, 2013 at 01:17 PM
  I just threw up at the Huma quote. How could Carlos Danger ever cheat on such a saint/hottie? She sounds like a combination of Mother Teresa and Ava Gardner.
  The Noonster is keeping the heat on the IRS very nicely.I am simply amazed at the Administration's three card monty with these scandals.
  They are pushing the Trayvon "Stand Your Ground" meme so hard it is going to blow up in their faces, I think. Listening to National Progressive Radio on the way home last night it was all Martin, all the time. The map of participants in the phony assault on SYG is a roamap of the Left's nuttery. And Holder is right in the middle of it like Cab Calloway leading the band.
  Disgraceful people.
  Posted by: matt | July 27, 2013 at 01:21 PM
  So, did the same cunninglinguist write this crotch kissing Huma-fest as went down on Mrs. Chinless Ophthalmologist for Vogue?
  Posted by: Ignatz | July 27, 2013 at 01:25 PM
  Different weasel, has a soft spot for drug kingpins, imam frontmen, and 9/11 denialists.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 01:34 PM
  Re: SYG and guns in the city. Cleoville's mayor--elected by the council and not the town folk--declined to sign Bloomberg's 'Mayors Against Illegal Guns' claptrap and other members wanted to have the mayor pro tem sign in his place just so they could jump on the latest bandwagon carpola. This is so disgusting and insulting as the mayor, a *real* Kenyan birth certificate and all, is one of two no nonsense people on our sustainability ship of fools council.
  Not all mayors are dupes of Bloomie. I read yesterday that some mayors have figured out the movement is against *all* guns and have pulled out of the group.
  Posted by: Frau Folterknecht | July 27, 2013 at 01:35 PM
  Some good and bad news.
  The Bad: Megan McCain is getting her own TV show.
  The Good: It is a network no one has ever heard of.
  "Raising McCain" will debut on Pivot, a general entertainment network that launches Aug. 1. It's described as a documentary-talk series for viewers ages 15 to 34. McCain will star and serve as executive producer.
  Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha - "general entertainment" - snort.
  Most 15 year olds will not watch her. The 34 year olds (still living at home) probably will.
  Posted by: centralcal | July 27, 2013 at 01:35 PM
  And Holder is right in the middle of it like Cab Calloway leading the band.
  I'm sorry but I can't stand for a talented and entertaining individual like Cab Calloway to be mentioned in the same sentence as the boring and droning chinless skidmark.
  Posted by: Captain Hate | July 27, 2013 at 01:49 PM
  "Raising McCain"
  A documentary of the Mav's poor parenting skills in raising such an entitled, slutty and ignorant brat? What has My Friendsh been a bigger failure as: Father, Senator, Presidential candidate or pilot?
  Posted by: Captain Hate | July 27, 2013 at 01:56 PM
  One recalls when she thought 'Julianne's Bender' would be a fair representation of the campaign, surprise, she found out.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 02:00 PM
  Steve Malanga has a devastating Op Ed in the Journal, about what Young did to Detroit, (alas it's behind the paywall)
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 02:04 PM
  You still can't get to the piece, Young extorted Detroit, hampered his successor Dennis Archer's reform plans, I thought Robocop was fiction, apparently not.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 02:14 PM
  Speaking of sick bastards...
  I was drunk and lonely: Geraldo explains his half-naked selfie
  "There I was, 2:30 in the morning on Sunday morning. You know, I do the show Saturday night, I did a great show on black-on-black crime and race relations and the Trayvon Martin fallout and federal charges ... and I get home and there's no one to talk to, everyone's asleep...''And you just sit around, I had a drink and, you know, I had taken that picture Saturday morning and I was looking at it, just going through and I said 'you know, I gotta tweet this thing.
  Posted by: daddy | July 27, 2013 at 02:21 PM
  Odd. I searched for "wsj malanga" and clicked on the link, and it took me right to the complete article. But when I click on the link I provided (which came from the search) it didn't work.
  So if you want to read it, I suggest you do the search yourselves and click on what you find.
  Posted by: DrJ | July 27, 2013 at 02:21 PM
  narciso, that's the same link I provided. It seems you have to search for it and click from that. The link itself, if transmitted, hits the paywall. Splat!
  Posted by: DrJ | July 27, 2013 at 02:34 PM
  You have to you use those search terms, the link runs into the deflector shield.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 02:40 PM
  If Malanga thinks a grifter like Norquist is an improvement, Detroit needs to be flushed ASAP and the ground beneath it salted.
  *Norquist, standard Dem mayor who got caught in bed with an underling after chasing pointless baubles (Miller Park) paid for by others while chasing businesses (Miller Beer) out of the city.
  Posted by: henry | July 27, 2013 at 02:40 PM
  Just one example;
  Young's divisive brand of governing extended to economic policy, such as it was. When General Motors agreed to build a new plant in the 1980s to help the city's revival, Young and GM targeted the still vibrant, largely white ethnic neighborhood of Poletown to locate the facility. In one of the nation's most infamous cases of eminent domain, the city sued in 1981 to raze some 1,500 homes and 144 businesses and displace 3,500 people.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 02:43 PM
  Had to post this classic comment from the WSJ's Best Comments link, credit to Pete Tentler:
  "I heard George Zimmerman is going to change his name to Ben Ghazi, so Obama and the media will never mention him ever again."
  Posted by: Patriot4Freedom | July 27, 2013 at 02:47 PM
  "Not all mayors are dupes of Bloomie. I read yesterday that some mayors have figured out the movement is against *all* guns and have pulled out of the group."
  I rather think it was the inconvenience of leaving the city for a 20 oz soda.
  Posted by: twin falls | July 27, 2013 at 02:49 PM
  You wonder why anyone would ever invest there;
  As some Poletown residents hung on, hoping that court challenges would overturn the takings, Young withdrew services. Residents lived among demolition crews by day and looters by night. Documentary filmmaker George Corsetti described the chaotic last days of Poletown in a 2004 article in CounterPunch: "The night air was always smoke-filled and people slept with guns nearby."
  It's like Athens on the Great Lakes.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 02:49 PM
  Time for a bit of light editing:
  She approached while wearing clothing, and she had hair. Her lipstick transformed the flatness of her mouth in an effect also seen in certain fast food chain mascots, her brown eyes were pools of empathy evolved through a thousand generations of what was good and decent in the history of the human race, and then evolved into a generation or two of people who want to murder literally every Jew on the planet, then evolved right back into the empathy pools in time to land in the appropriate holes in her skull. The harsh, cheap buck lighting in the coffee shop produced by those horrible expensive toxic new bulbs that everybody hates but the government makes people buy anyway couldn't lay a glove on her. By the time she sat down, the harmony of angels had vanquished the tinny background music from every corporate space on the planet, so if you were on hold last Tuesday and thought your cell phone dropped the call, that was probably just us. Especially if you heard the harmony of angels at the same time, which was all like, "LAAAAAAAA!" Of course, you'd seen pictures before. But you'd also seen pictures of the Taj Mahal, an enormously expensive palace and nifty spread in its own right built for the personal use of the Muslim emperor of a land filled with starving peasants of other religions. It didn't quite come up to actually being there.
  All else in the universe seemed to fall away in her presence; you could scarcely credit the existence of yourself as an observer external to her. But as you fought against your own wishes to maintain awareness of the world outside of Huma Abedin, you could see the table between you, and her husband sitting beside her, cell phone pointed at his lap, furiously masturbating.
  Posted by: bgates | July 27, 2013 at 03:32 PM
  The Noonster is keeping the heat on the IRS very nicely.I am simply amazed at the Administration's three card monty with these scandals.
  As one of Dame Peggy's most consistent critics she'll never get her reputation back as far as having any insight into anything with her witless infatuation in 2008 with Gaylord Focker and catty dismissal of Palin. But if she continues to bang away at this IRS story she'll deserve some amount of praise for her doggedness in doing so. Extra credit if she goes on ScarredRINO's show and explains it effectively enough for bird brained Meeka to comprehend it well enough to at least recite some of it back like a slow parakeet.
  Posted by: Captain Hate | July 27, 2013 at 04:50 PM
  Yeah, she's been persistent over the period, she deserves some credit, whereas Katherine Parker is completely useless.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 04:55 PM
  It gives me a great amount of pleasure that Client 9's former co-host is insanely jealous of Palin.
  Posted by: Captain Hate | July 27, 2013 at 05:03 PM
  Well ditto, the same for 'Norma Desmond' but she's thoroughly useless as a pundit, hence the Washington Post employs her.
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 05:13 PM
  If I was "drunk and lonely". The very last thing I would do is tweet a half naked picture of myself.
  And I mean the very last...
  Posted by: Jane on Ipad hi there NSA | July 27, 2013 at 05:18 PM
  narc, that entire page of Rupert's gazette was outstanding: the railroaded West Pointer by Taranto, the Coleman Young chronicles and Gaylord's mangling of Ho's history by Radosh.
  Posted by: Captain Hate | July 27, 2013 at 05:27 PM
  I meant to bring up the Cromartie case, it's rare than they score a 10, I think there was a silly piece by Zuckerman, but still a very good selection,
  Posted by: narciso | July 27, 2013 at 05:35 PM
  --Bgates, you need to publish to a wider audience.--
  He was, but Althouse lost her mind. :)
  Posted by: Ignatz | July 27, 2013 at 05:59 PM
  What happened to make Ann take her ball and go home?I missed it.Show up one day and it's all "No comments for you littles."
  Posted by: anonamom | July 27, 2013 at 06:29 PM
  Ann or Anne, anonamom? (Yes, there is a difference!)
  A random, completely unrelated to anything comment, but - I love Megyn Kelly. But, seriously - Thatcher Bray Brunt???? Seriously?
  Posted by: centralcal | July 27, 2013 at 06:36 PM
  --Thatcher Bray Brunt--
  Must have been the first firm that hired her out of law school.
  Better than Solitary, Poor, Nasty, Brutish and Short.
  Posted by: Ignatz | July 27, 2013 at 06:48 PM
  Something tells me we're going to learn shortly that anonamom is a ditzy broad and possibly a slimy Jew.....and since I pointed out Anne's probable comments, we'll relearn that my wife is a mythical being and I need a psychiatrist.
  Posted by: Ignatz | July 27, 2013 at 06:52 PM
  Maybe if I tell Extraneous he's a psychopathic sockpuppet and DoT he's a doddering old fool it will serve as a sort of dead virus vaccine to inoculate the place from that particular germ.
  Posted by: Ignatz | July 27, 2013 at 06:56 PM
  I'm confused--anonamom was talking about Ann Althouse, not our Ann.
  Is there a name that really goes well with Brunt? Therein lies the problem, I think.
  Posted by: jimmyk | July 27, 2013 at 06:57 PM
  I dunno, Iggy, I was traumatized by watching the movie "Exorcist" when I was moderately young, so I imagine a low, growling moan through gritted teeth, a spinning head and the mother-to-be harshing out "Thatcher Bray Brunt," right at the point of delivery in the labor room.
  Posted by: centralcal | July 27, 2013 at 07:01 PM
  Ooops, sorry Jimmyk - now that I re-read that comment I see exactly what she was saying. I have been only hit and miss on comments and I was thinking "Evil Anne," not Ann Althouse. My bad!
  Posted by: centralcal | July 27, 2013 at 07:03 PM
  --I'm confused--anonamom was talking about Ann Althouse, not our Ann. --
  Oh well, if you're going to go all perceptive and reading and understanding other people's comments then I'm taking my ball and going home.
  BTW I don't necessarily endorse the preceding editorial comments.
  Posted by: Ignatz | July 27, 2013 at 07:14 PM
  No problem, cc, I was also confused by Iggy's reference to A***.
  Perfect, bgates.
  Posted by: jimmyk | July 27, 2013 at 07:15 PM
  Washington area homes fly off the listings fast
  Homes in the $300,000 to $600,000 price range are selling the most quickly '-- usually in a week, according to June data '-- making the market particularly hard to navigate for first-time home buyers who want to live close to the District. Just a year ago, those homes sat around for at least three weeks.
  How to comment on this? We suck? That's all I can come up with.Posted by: Extraneus | July 27, 2013 at 07:23 PM
  Speaking of rehab - one in and one out. Mrs. Raisins-n-Gin has been released and will make no further (???) comments about her seizures.
  Posted by: Frau Genever | July 27, 2013 at 07:28 PM
  I am a fan of somewhat unusual names. My girls have old-fashioned ones that you don't hear much nowadays - Harriet and Judith (Judy). But I think if the last name is Brunt you go with something a little more traditional. Or a lot more traditional. Bill Brunt, Fred Brunt, Tom Brunt, Ed Brunt.
  Of course, something traditional might sound incongruous with Yates and Yardley.
  Posted by: Porchlight | July 27, 2013 at 07:31 PM
  How to comment on this? We suck?
  Somehow this image came to mind (sorry if it doesn't size right):
  Posted by: jimmyk | July 27, 2013 at 07:34 PM
  I play a doctor on JOM and I say old lady Kerry had a serious stroke. Or, she had nothing and was admitted to take the heat off of Johnny for his then-current idiocy. (Conducting foreign policy from his yacht and lying about it.) I can't even type it without laughing.
  Yes, fans, conducting foreign policy from a yacht.
  Posted by: MarkO | July 27, 2013 at 07:34 PM
  Yes, fans, conducting foreign policy from a yacht.
  And surely Thurston Howell the Turd bought said yacht with Lovey's money. And by "Lovey's money" I mean the jack which her deceased Republican husband left her.
  Posted by: Captain Hate | July 27, 2013 at 07:41 PM
Michael Hastings: New Surveillance Video Shows Fiery Crash
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: EconomicPolicyJournal.com
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:53
  A new video shows the final moments before journalist Michael Hastings' Mercedes Benz exploded into flames.The video is here.
  (ht Travis Holte)
Leno: Obama Says We're Distracted By Phony Scandals, Time to Get Distracted By Phony Recovery
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:52
  MRC TV is an online platform for people to share and view videos, articles and opinions on topics that are important to them -- from news to political issues and rip-roaring humor.
  MRC TV is brought to you by the Media Research Center, a 501(c) 3 nonprofit research and education organization. The MRC is located at: 325 South Patrick Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.
  Copyright (C) 2013, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.
Twitter faces boycott after 'inaction' over rape threats against feminist bank notes campaigner.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dave Winer's linkblog feed
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:49
  The popular social networking site Twitter is facing a major backlash over claims it is failing to deal with threats of sexual abuse made on its site.
  A host of MPs and other leading public figures have threatened a boycott after a feminist campaigner highlighted numerous threats of rape and other violent acts being sent to her on Twitter. Caroline Criado-Perez, who finally won her fight to have prominent women represented on Britain's bank notes this week, claimed that her complaints to the site have been ignored.
  A petition was soon set up demanding more robust action from the site and attracted more than 6,000 signatures within three hours. That figure had passed the 11,000 mark this afternoon.
  ''It is a problem involving a certain type of man who can't cope with a woman being vocal and being in the public eye. They deal with it by shutting women up with threats of sexual violence. It is nothing new, it has been going on for millennia; this is just its most recent incarnation,'' said Ms Criado-Perez.
  The campaign of hatred against her began during her bank note fight. Ms Criado-Perez, who also runs the Women's Room campaign to promote women in the media, played a pivotal role in ensuring that Jane Austen would feature on the £10 note.
  And she said that, once the decision was announced by new Governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney, the abuse escalated and began to attract the attention of fellow Twitter users. She reported it to the police and claims that she tried to alert Twitter's manager of journalism & news Mark Luckie. But his response appeared to be to simply set his account to private, making his updates invisible to most users. Ms Criado-Perez said she is still awaiting a substantive response.
  She added: ''The internet makes it very easy to make this sort of threat, and sites that don't make it easy to report abuse like this make men like those who have been threatening me feel like there will be no comeback. I told some of them they would not get away with it and they just laughed; at the moment, they are right.
  ''There has been a deafening silence from Twitter. The accounts of the men who said those things are still active. There needs to be a massive culture shift at Twitter.''
  A host of people threatened to boycott Twitter on 4 August in protest at its perceived inaction. Journalist Caitlin Moran wrote: ''We could all leave on August 4th - International Friendship Day, kind of apt.'' And, referring to the act of posting provocative messages online '' known as ''trolling'' - she added: ''[We should] tweet the holding message 'Waiting for a troll solution.'''
  She received support from actress Rebecca Front and comedian Dara ' Briain, among others. But some pointed out that the abuse meted out to Ms Criado-Perez went beyond simple trolling and constituted a serious criminal offence.
  MPs Stella Creasy, Yvette Cooper, Diane Abbott and John Woodcock all expressed disgust at the abuse. Ms Creasy said: ''What Caroline has had to deal with in the past day is not only disgusting, but criminal. A quick look at Twitter this morning shows that women are not prepared to stand by and take this kind of abuse. Twitter needs to get its house in order, and fast.''
  John Coventry, spokesman for Change.org - which is hosting the petition to have a more effective reporting system installed '' said: ''Caroline's shown already this week with the Bank of England that campaigning works - it will be fascinating to see how Twitter responds - thousands signing a petition in one morning is a significant backlash.''
  Kim Graham, who started the petition, said: ''I couldn't believe what I was reading yesterday. Caroline's campaign was phenomenal and now she's facing a relentless barrage of violent threats. I set up this Change.org petition because Twitter must take some responsibility for this.''
  A Twitter spokesman refused to comment on an individual account. The spokesman added: ''However, we have rules which people agree to abide by when they sign up to Twitter. We will suspend accounts that once reported to us, are found to be in breach of our rules. We encourage users to report an account for violation of the Twitter rules by using one of our report forms.''
  The site has always maintained that it exists to offer an open platform for free expression but it does have a record of suspending users who use Twitter to abuse others.
  Read moreCaroline Criado-Perez: Rape threats on Twitter won't get women to shut up up. If we shout back we'll win
Was Three Mile Island an accident?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Atomic Insights
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 19:46
  Galen Winsor makes a startling statement in the above video; he claims that the Three Mile Island event was no accident. He states that the ''GE Three'' of Gregory C. Minor, Richard B. Hubbard, and Dale G. Bridenbaugh wrote the script for both The China Syndrome and for Three Mile Island. He also claims that there was a written prediction that the event would happen available a year before it actually occurred.
  Winsor's statements would sound incredibly far-fetched without the following additional thoughts:
  The historical record proves that the likelihood of reactor accidents is very low. The likelihood of a reactor accident happening at the same time there is a movie with a similar scenario playing in its first run in the theaters is absurdly low.There is a line in The China Syndrome about ''contaminating an area the size of Pennsylvania''. Coincidentally, that is the state that is the home of the Three Mile Island nuclear power station.Isolation valves for the backup feed pump were found shut, preventing the backup pump from supplying water to the steam generator. If the valves had not been shut, the steam generator would have never emptied and the relief valve would have never lifted. That valve would have never stuck open and the event would have never happened.Despite numerous detailed investigations, the official reports of the accident still attribute that highly unusual condition to a ''maintenance error''. If that is true, why didn't the operators know that the valves were shut? Even in the pre-TMI era, plant operators were required to maintain status logs and to be aware of maintenance taking place in their plant. http://www.iaea.org/ns/tutorials/regcontrol/assess/assess3233.htmIMHO '' it is at least remotely possible that Winsor is correct.
  Others have noticed the highly unlikely coincidences over the years, but the normal reaction is dismissal, often in a tone like the one used in Agitprop for Fun and Profit.
  So you want to make a left-wing propaganda movie? Then let's see what we can learn from the most successful propaganda movie in history, to judge by actual political results, The China Syndrome. It was released in 1979, after more than a decade of steady building of nuclear power plants. Since then not a single new permit for a nuclear plant has been issued in the United States.
  Correlation is not causation, and to be fair, The China Syndrome benefited from the best timing any movie has probably ever had. Three Mile Island, the worst industrial accident in history with zero casualties, followed the release of The China Syndrome by twelve days. One of the characters even muses about ''contaminating an area the size of Pennsylvania.'' You just can't buy that kind of publicity.
  (Emphasis in the original.)
Many people will never know what hit them
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Northeast Intelligence Network
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 18:09
  By Douglas J. Hagmann
  27 July 2013: On Tuesday, May 14, 2013, the financial insider known as ''The Guerrilla Economist''' and by his first initial ''V,'' appeared with author and researcher Steve Quayle on The Hagmann & Hagmann Report and made an unexpected and extremely troubling claim. He stated unequivocally that Deutsche Bank was not only in trouble, but was going to go ''belly up.'' (For the link to May 14, 2013 broadcast in mp3 format, click here).
  The following day, his claims were the subject of an article written by Kenneth Schortgen, Jr. on the widely popular Examiner website under the title Banking insider: Deutsche Bank in danger zone and will go belly up (link to Examiner article here). The Examiner article quoted ''The Guerrilla Economist''' as follows:
  ''Deutsche Bank. Big bank. Biggest bank in Germany, and one of the biggest banks in the Euro Zone'... they're going to go belly up. Watch it. Watch it, I said it, it's going to happen.
  They are in such a danger zone, they don't know what to do. Deutsche Bank's derivative debt is greater than the global economy. That is one bank. $72 trillion in derivative exposure. The entire global economy, all the countries in the world is only $66 trillion GDP.''
  Following that show, we received hundreds of e-mails from people who mocked and laughed at the claim, asserting that Deutsche Bank is not in trouble and will never fail. Last Wednesday, two months after that May 14, 2013 revelation on The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, well known economist Max Keiser tweeted the following:
  ''My Geneva fund contact: Deutsche Bank is officially on suicide watch. DB will be the next 'Lehman' moment that triggers new collapse..''
  Jim Willie CB, financial & economic analyst holding a Statistics PhD from Carnegie Mellon University and having 23 years of experience in three fields of statistical practice, recently published the following:
  ''The best information coming to my desk indicates that three major Western banks are under constant threat of failure overnight, every night, forcing extraordinary measures to avoid failure. They are Deutshe Bank in Germany, Barclays in London, and Citibank in New York. Judging from the ongoing defense from prosecution and cooperation (flipped) with Interpol and distraction of resources, the most likely bank to die next is Deutsche Bank.'' (Emphasis mine '' read the entire article at this link).
  Aside from pointing out the two-month advance warning to by The Guerrilla Economist to listeners of The Hagmann & Hagmann Report, it is important to note the significance of this news now gaining traction.
  Considering that the results of a recent poll published in The New York Times on Friday, July 26, 2013 indicates that consumer confidence in America is at its highest level since 2007, I suspect that most people will never know what hit them when the entire global financial system is collapsed. Most people are blissfully ignorant of the cold, hard facts that the globalists are enslaving us and our offspring into a perpetual state of debt via the criminal ''banksters.''
  Citing Jim Willie from his previously referenced article, his statement is a sufficient summary of what is to come:
  ''The tragedy is that many people will lose life savings, duped to the end, demonstrating limited mental acuity.''
  The orchestrated collapse of the American economy, the global economy, is a ''mathematical certainty.''
  For more information on what is to come, please tune in to a very special update from Steve Quayle and ''V,'' the financial insider known as ''The Guerrilla Economist''' on a special broadcast of The Hagmann & Hagmann Report beginning at 9:00 p.m. ET on Monday, July 29, 2013. Listen live to get tomorrow's headlines today.
  Click above ''Listen Live''button during broadcast time: Monday, July 29, 2013 9:00 p.m. '' midnight ET
  Broadcast URL: http://www.blogtalkradio.com/cfp-radio/2013/07/30/the-hagmann-hagmann-report
  Click here to save this article in PDF format
Appointments and Resignations - Ambassador to Denmark: Who Is Rufus Gifford? - AllGov - News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 18:07
  President Barack Obama has nominated one of his top fundraisers to serve as the next ambassador to Denmark. Rufus Gifford, who most recently served as finance chair of the Presidential Inaugural Committee, raised millions for Obama's two presidential runs, especially among the gay community, where he and his former partner were dubbed ''Obama's Gay Gold Mine'' in 2008. If confirmed by the Senate, Gifford would succeed Laurie Fulton, who served in Copenhagen from 2009 to 2012.
  Born circa 1974 in the Boston area, Gifford grew up in a wealthy home, son of banker Chad Gifford, who ran some of Boston's biggest financial institutions, including the Bank of Boston. After graduating St. Paul's School in Concord, New Hampshire, in 1992, Gifford earned a double major in American Civilization and Theater at Brown University in 1996, where he was a classmate of Alexandra Kerry, daughter of another St. Paul's alumnus, John Kerry, who at the time was the junior Senator from Massachusetts.
  Moving west to work in the movie industry, from 1998 to 2004 Gifford was creative executive for Davis Entertainment, an independent film company in Los Angeles. Although some of his films were commercially successful, many were panned by critics. His credits include Dr. Doolittle 2 with Eddie Murphy, First Daughter with Katie Holmes, and Life or Something Like It with Angelina Jolie.
  Growing discontented with his work, in 2003 Gifford got in touch with classmate Alexandra Kerry and did some ''low level'' finance work for John Kerry during the 2004 presidential primaries. After Kerry won the nomination, Gifford quit Hollywood and went to work for Kerry as deputy finance director for the western region, where he supervised the raising of more than $30 million.
  Gifford worked as a political consultant in California from 2004 to 2008, signing on to work for Barack Obama in 2007. Since that time, he has held a series of job titles focused on fundraising. Together with his romantic partner of the time, Jeremy Barnard, Gifford raised almost $80 million from California for the Obama's presidential campaign, the largest amount from any state.
  From 2008 to 2009, he was the California finance director for the Presidential Inaugural Committee, from 2009 to 2011 Gifford was finance director for the Democratic National Committee, and he was finance director for Obama for America from 2011 to 2012.
  Gifford is a federal club member of the Human Rights Campaign and a partner in conservation for the World Wildlife Fund.
  -Matt Bewig
  To Learn More:
  Banker's Son Mines Gold for Obama (by Donovan Slack, Boston Globe)
  Rufus Gifford: The Man Behind Obama's Historic Fundraising Machine (by Jennifer Bendery, Huffington Post)
  Obama fundraising director said to be headed to Denmark (by Al Kamen, Washington Post)
Obama Promises Disappear from Web - Sunlight Foundation Blog
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 18:05
  Change.gov, the website created by the Obama transition team in 2008, has effectively disappeared sometime over the last month.
  While the front splash page for Change.gov has linked to the main White House website for years, until recently, you could still continue on to see the materials and agenda laid out by the administration. This was a particularly helpful resource for those looking to compare Obama's performance in office against his vision for reform, laid out in detail on Change.gov.
  According to the Internet Archive, the last time that content (beyond the splash page) was available was June 8th -- last month.
  Why the change?
  Here's one possibility, from the administration's ethics agenda:
  Protect Whistleblowers: Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing government employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out. Such acts of courage and patriotism, which can sometimes save lives and often save taxpayer dollars, should be encouraged rather than stifled. We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance. Barack Obama will strengthen whistleblower laws to protect federal workers who expose waste, fraud, and abuse of authority in government. Obama will ensure that federal agencies expedite the process for reviewing whistleblower claims and whistleblowers have full access to courts and due process.
  It may be that Obama's description of the importance of whistleblowers went from being an artifact of his campaign to a political liability. It wouldn't be the first time administration positions disappear from the internet when they become inconvenient descriptions of their assurances.
  Obama's vision for lobbying transparency has similarly been discarded along the way, but the timing here suggests that the heat on Obama's whistleblower prosecutions has led the administration to unceremoniously remove their previous positions.
Feds tell Web firms to turn over user account passwords - CNET Mobile
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 15:04
  Secret demands mark escalation in Internet surveillance by the federal government through gaining access to user passwords, which are typically stored in encrypted form.
  The U.S. government has demanded that major Internet companies divulge users' stored passwords, according to two industry sources familiar with these orders, which represent an escalation in surveillance techniques that has not previously been disclosed.
  If the government is able to determine a person's password, which is typically stored in encrypted form, the credential could be used to log in to an account to peruse confidential correspondence or even impersonate the user. Obtaining it also would aid in deciphering encrypted devices in situations where passwords are reused.
  "I've certainly seen them ask for passwords," said one Internet industry source who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We push back."
  A second person who has worked at a large Silicon Valley company confirmed that it received legal requests from the federal government for stored passwords. Companies "really heavily scrutinize" these requests, the person said. "There's a lot of 'over my dead body.'"
  Some of the government orders demand not only a user's password but also the encryption algorithm and the so-called salt, according to a person familiar with the requests. A salt is a random string of letters or numbers used to make it more difficult to reverse the encryption process and determine the original password. Other orders demand the secret question codes often associated with user accounts.
  "This is one of those unanswered legal questions: Is there any circumstance under which they could get password information?"--Jennifer Granick, Stanford University
  A Microsoft spokesperson would not say whether the company has received such requests from the government. But when asked whether Microsoft would divulge passwords, salts, or algorithms, the spokesperson replied: "No, we don't, and we can't see a circumstance in which we would provide it."
  Google also declined to disclose whether it had received requests for those types of data. But a spokesperson said the company has "never" turned over a user's encrypted password, and that it has a legal team that frequently pushes back against requests that are fishing expeditions or are otherwise problematic. "We take the privacy and security of our users very seriously," the spokesperson said.
  A Yahoo spokeswoman would not say whether the company had received such requests. The spokeswoman said: "If we receive a request from law enforcement for a user's password, we deny such requests on the grounds that they would allow overly broad access to our users' private information. If we are required to provide information, we do so only in the strictest interpretation of what is required by law."
  Apple, Facebook, AOL, Verizon, AT&T, Time Warner Cable, and Comcast did not respond to queries about whether they have received requests for users' passwords and how they would respond to them.
  Richard Lovejoy, a director of the Opera Software subsidiary that operates FastMail, said he doesn't recall receiving any such requests but that the company still has a relatively small number of users compared with its larger rivals. Because of that, he said, "we don't get a high volume" of U.S. government demands.
  The FBI declined to comment.
  Some details remain unclear, including when the requests began and whether the government demands are always targeted at individuals or seek entire password database dumps. The Patriot Act has been used to demand entire database dumps of phone call logs, and critics have suggested its use is broader. "The authority of the government is essentially limitless" under that law, Sen. Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat who serves on the Senate Intelligence committee, said at a Washington event this week.
  Large Internet companies have resisted the government's requests by arguing that "you don't have the right to operate the account as a person," according to a person familiar with the issue. "I don't know what happens when the government goes to smaller providers and demands user passwords," the person said.
  An attorney who represents Internet companies said he has not fielded government password requests, but "we've certainly had reset requests -- if you have the device in your possession, than a password reset is the easier way."
  Source code to a C implementation of bcrypt, a popular algorithm used for password hashing.
  (Credit: Photo by Declan McCullagh)Cracking the codesEven if the National Security Agency or the FBI successfully obtains an encrypted password, salt, and details about the algorithm used, unearthing a user's original password is hardly guaranteed. The odds of success depend in large part on two factors: the type of algorithm and the complexity of the password.
  Algorithms, known as hash functions, that are viewed as suitable for scrambling stored passwords are designed to be difficult to reverse. One popular hash function called MD5, for instance, transforms the phrase "National Security Agency" into this string of seemingly random characters: 84bd1c27b26f7be85b2742817bb8d43b. Computer scientists believe that, if a hash function is well-designed, the original phrase cannot be derived from the output.
  But modern computers, especially ones equipped with high-performance video cards, can test passwords scrambled with MD5 and other well-known hash algorithms at the rate of billions a second. One system using 25 Radeon-powered GPUs that was demonstrated at a conference last December tested 348 billion hashes per second, meaning it would crack a 14-character Windows XP password in six minutes.
  The best practice among Silicon Valley companies is to adopt far slower hash algorithms -- designed to take a large fraction of a second to scramble a password -- that have been intentionally crafted to make it more difficult and expensive for the NSA and other attackers to test every possible combination.
  One popular algorithm, used by Twitter and LinkedIn, is called bcrypt. A 2009 paper (PDF) by computer scientist Colin Percival estimated that it would cost a mere $4 to crack, in an average of one year, an 8-character bcrypt password composed only of letters. To do it in an average of one day, the hardware cost would jump to approximately $1,500.
  But if a password of the same length included numbers, asterisks, punctuation marks, and other special characters, the cost-per-year leaps to $130,000. Increasing the length to any 10 characters, Percival estimated in 2009, brings the estimated cracking cost to a staggering $1.2 billion.
  As computers have become more powerful, the cost of cracking bcrypt passwords has decreased. "I'd say as a rough ballpark, the current cost would be around 1/20th of the numbers I have in my paper," said Percival, who founded a company called Tarsnap Backup, which offers "online backups for the truly paranoid." Percival added that a government agency would likely use ASICs -- application-specific integrated circuits -- for password cracking because it's "the most cost-efficient -- at large scale -- approach."
  While developing Tarsnap, Percival devised an algorithm called scrypt, which he estimates can make the "cost of a hardware brute-force attack" against a hashed password as much as 4,000 times greater than bcrypt.
  Bcrypt was introduced (PDF) at a 1999 Usenix conference by Niels Provos, currently a distinguished engineer in Google's infrastructure group, and David Mazi¨res, an associate professor of computer science at Stanford University.
  With the computers available today, "bcrypt won't pipeline very well in hardware," Mazi¨res said, so it would "still be very expensive to do widespread cracking."
  Even if "the NSA is asking for access to hashed bcrypt passwords," Mazi¨res said, "that doesn't necessarily mean they are cracking them." Easier approaches, he said, include an order to extract them from the server or network when the user logs in -- which has been done before -- or installing a keylogger at the client.
  Sen. Ron Wyden, who warned this week that "the authority of the government is essentially limitless" under the Patriot Act's business records provision.
  (Credit: Getty Images)Questions of lawWhether the National Security Agency or FBI has the legal authority to demand that an Internet company divulge a hashed password, salt, and algorithm remains murky.
  "This is one of those unanswered legal questions: Is there any circumstance under which they could get password information?" said Jennifer Granick, director of civil liberties at Stanford University's Center for Internet and Society. "I don't know."
  Granick said she's not aware of any precedent for an Internet company "to provide passwords, encrypted or otherwise, or password algorithms to the government -- for the government to crack passwords and use them unsupervised." If the password will be used to log in to the account, she said, that's "prospective surveillance," which would require a wiretap order or Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act order.
  If the government can subsequently determine the password, "there's a concern that the provider is enabling unauthorized access to the user's account if they do that," Granick said. That could, she said, raise legal issues under the Stored Communications Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.
  Orin Kerr, a law professor at George Washington University and a former federal prosecutor, disagrees. First, he said, "impersonating someone is legal" for police to do as long as they do so under under court supervision through the Wiretap Act.
  Second, Kerr said, the possibility that passwords could be used to log into users' accounts is not sufficient legal grounds for a Web provider to refuse to divulge them. "I don't know how it would violate the Wiretap Act to get information lawfully only on the ground that the information might be used to commit a Wiretap violation," he said.
  The Justice Department has argued in court proceedings before that it has broad legal authority to obtain passwords. In 2011, for instance, federal prosecutors sent a grand jury subpoena demanding the password that would unlock files encrypted with the TrueCrypt utility.
  The Florida man who received the subpoena claimed the Fifth Amendment, which protects his right to avoid self-incrimination, allowed him to refuse the prosecutors' demand. In February 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit agreed, saying that because prosecutors could bring a criminal prosecution against him based on the contents of the decrypted files, the man "could not be compelled to decrypt the drives."
  In January 2012, a federal district judge in Colorado reached the opposite conclusion, ruling that a criminal defendant could be compelled under the All Writs Act to type in the password that would unlock a Toshiba Satellite laptop.
  Both of those cases, however, deal with criminal proceedings when the password holder is the target of an investigation -- and don't address when a hashed password is stored on the servers of a company that's an innocent third party.
  "If you can figure out someone's password, you have the ability to reuse the account," which raises significant privacy concerns, said Seth Schoen, a senior staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
  Last updated on July 26 at 12 p.m. PT with comments from Orin Kerr. A previous update added comment from Yahoo, which responded after this article was published.
  Disclosure: McCullagh is married to a Google employee not involved with this issue.
WEEKLY ADDRESS: A Better Bargain for the Middle Class
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:23
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 27, 2013
  WASHINGTON, DC'-- In this week's address, President Obama told the American people about his speech at Knox College on Wednesday, where he discussed the cornerstones of what it means to be middle class, including having a good job, a home that is your own, quality education, a secure retirement, and affordable health care. While we have laid the foundation for stronger, more durable economic growth, there is more work to be done, and that is why over the coming weeks the President will continue to lay out his plan for growing the economy from the middle out, and create a better bargain for the middle class.
  The audio of the address and video of the address will be available online at www.whitehouse.gov at 6:00 a.m. ET, July 27, 2013.
  Remarks of President Barack ObamaWeekly AddressThe White HouseJuly 27, 2013
  Hi everybody. On Wednesday, I spoke about what we need to do as a country to build a better bargain for the middle class '' to make sure everyone who works hard has a chance to get ahead in the 21st century economy.
  You see, over the past four and a half years, America has fought its way back from the worst recession of our lifetimes. We saved the auto industry, took on a broken health care system, invested in new American technologies to reverse our addiction to foreign oil, and changed a tax code too skewed in favor of the wealthiest at the expense of working families.
  As a result, our businesses have created 7.2 million new jobs over the past 40 months. We produce more renewable energy than ever, and more natural gas than anyone. Health care costs are growing at the slowest rate in 50 years. Our deficits are falling at the fastest rate in 60 years.
  Thanks to the grit and resilience of the American people, we've cleared away the rubble of crisis and begun to lay a new foundation for stronger, more durable economic growth.
  But as any middle-class family will tell you, we're not yet where we need to be. Trends that have been eroding middle-class security for decades '' technology that makes some jobs obsolete, global competition that makes others moveable, growing inequality and the policies that perpetuate it '' all these things still exist, and in some ways, the recession made them worse.
  Reversing these trends must be Washington's highest priority. It sure is mine. But over the past couple of years in particular, Washington has taken its eye off the ball. An endless parade of distractions, political posturing and phony scandals shift focus from what needs to be done. And as Washington prepares to enter another budget debate, the stakes could not be higher. The choices we make now will determine whether or not every American has a fighting chance in the 21st century.
  If we don't make the investments necessary to make America a magnet for good jobs '' in education, and manufacturing, and research, and our transportation and information networks '' we might as well hit the ''pause'' button while the rest of the world forges ahead in a global economy. And that's certainly not going to fix what ails the middle class.
  Here's what will: a strategy that builds on the cornerstones of what it means to be middle class in America, and what it takes to work your way into the middle class. Good jobs that pay good wages. An education that prepares our children and our workers for the global competition they'll face. Homeownership that's based on a solid foundation, where buyers and lenders play by the same set of rules. Affordable health care that's there for you when you get sick. A secure retirement even if you're not rich. More chances for folks to earn their way into the middle class as long as they're willing to work for it.
  Over the next several weeks, in cities and towns across the country, I'll continue to lay out my ideas in each of these areas. Because reversing the forces that have conspired against the middle class for decades will require more than short-term thinking; it will require a long-term American strategy, based on steady, persistent effort.
  I know there are members of both parties who understand what's at stake, and I'm open to ideas from across the political spectrum, as long as they meet the test of strengthening the prospects of hard-working families. But repealing Obamacare, gutting critical investments in our future, threatening to default on the bills this country has already racked up, or shutting down the government just because I'm for keeping it open '' none of those thing add up to an economic plan. None of that will take this country where it needs to go.
  We can do this if we work together. It won't be easy, but if we take a few bold steps '' and if Washington is willing to shake off its complacency and set aside some of the slash-and-burn partisanship we've seen in recent years '' our economy will keep getting stronger.
  And as long as I have the privilege of holding this office, I will spend every minute of every day doing everything in my power to make this economy work for working Americans again; to build that better bargain for the middle class; to make sure that the American Dream is something that's achievable for everybody '' not just today, but for decades to come.
  Thanks, and have a great weekend.
  ###
Class-action suit against Pfizer Canada over anti-smoking drug Champix to proceed
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:20
  Class-action suit against Pfizer Canada over anti-smoking drug Champix to proceed
  Facebook | Twitter | Email | Instapaper
  Canadian PressFriday, Jul. 26, 2013
  Pfizer says there is no reliable scientific evidence proving that Champix causes these adverse reactions. Graham Hughes/The Canadian Press
  OTTAWA '-- A class-action lawsuit against pharmaceutical giant Pfizer Canada over its anti-smoking drug Champix will proceed, an Ontario Superior Court has ruled.
  The Ontario court certified the class-action lawsuit in June 2012, but Pfizer sought leave to appeal the certification order.
  On Friday, lawyers for the plaintiffs, including Toronto-based firm McPhadden Samac Tuovi LLP, announced a judge has dismissed Pfizer's appeal.
  The judge made the ruling in November, but lawyer Bryan McPhadden says it was not made public until now because the two sides were in negotiations over how the class members should be notified.
  The plaintiffs allege the drug maker failed to warn Canadians taking the drug that they could suffer psychiatric side effects such as depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts.
  The allegations have not been proven in court.
  Pfizer says there is no reliable scientific evidence proving that Champix causes these adverse reactions.
  ''The court's ruling is procedural only and no ruling has been made on the merits of the claim,'' Pfizer said in a statement.
  ''The Company stands behind Champix and Pfizer Canada provided appropriate and accurate information to regulators, physicians and patients about the safety and efficacy of Champix.''
  The lawsuit represents Canadians who took the drug between April 2, 2007 and May 31, 2010 and suffered certain adverse reactions.
  The Canadian Press
  Posted in:Legal Post Tags:Pfizer Canada
VIDEO-Global Pandemics
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 09:51
  The recent outbreaks of some of the diseases that we heard about '-- H7N9 coming out of China, the Middle East respiratory syndrome coming out of Saudi Arabia and other countries '' has really underscored the lessons that we've learned since the SARS outbreak about a decade ago. Some of the challenges that we've met and some of the areas that we still need to improve. When we look at the H7N9 activities that took place, the United State was tremendously impressed with the actions that China took, in terms of providing samples very quickly, sharing immediate updates on what's going on, getting the information out to those people who could use it. And I think that set a very good tone for the overall reactions across the region for H7N9.Those activities are really part of the broader effort. That came about through some work of the WHO who we are working with very closely.
  A couple of years ago, two years ago in fact, we concluded through the World Health Organization the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework. That framework lays out some of the responsibilities and of those countries but also other elements of civil society of what they will do in the event of pandemic. In the activities that China undertook, and that the United States and other governments have been cooperating with, are very much in line with what is called for in that '' we call it the PIP Framework: Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework. That frame work, just to give you an example or two, calls for not only governments to take action, but individual companies to take action. And what we have done is we created through this PIP Framework a network of what we call collaborating centers. Those centers are located, by the way, in Australia, Japan, China, the United Kingdom, and the United States. And those networks '' those centers '' create a network of scientists, epidemiologists, of people involved in the study of the diseases, and the response. And as I was mentioning, so that '' one of the responsibilities that companies have, is the companies contribute now as a result of this recently concluded effort through the WHO '' they contribute to some of the operation costs of maintaining that network. Companies also are responsible for, in the event of a pandemic, potentially providing things like diagnostic kits and even vaccines for those companies that manufacture them. So we really made some great strides over the past few years.
  Back to Top
U.S.-Japan Satellite Cooperation
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 09:51
  The Unites States and Japan have a long history of working together in space cooperation. And that cooperation has led to a whole range of benefits to both our societies. I give you a couple of examples. In the area of the global navigation satellite systems, it turns out the GPS has a whole array of activities: whether it's precision agriculture to deliver pesticides directly where you want them, so you don't overuse pesticides; mobile banking so that you can get money on the go; heart monitoring and all kinds of health applications so that your doctor can know in case you have an emergency '' that sort of thing. A whole range of applications that go far beyond what people traditionally associate with the word GPS.Both our countries are fundamentally committed to understanding the way the Earth and its weather systems work. This is directly related to our goals on climate change, which we both share trying to find solutions to the climate challenges that we face. We've been working together on what we call Earth observation '' where we use satellite systems to better monitor all kinds of atmospheric and weather issues. And based on that kind of cooperation, we collect a whole range of data that allows for better prediction, it allows for better understanding of climate models, and frankly, if you can't understand the climate system, there is no way you would be able to develop solutions. So, this is an absolute linchpin our cooperation together on Earth observations to understanding the climate system and ultimately solving some of the challenges of climate change.
  Back to Top
BBC News - Elite hacker Barnaby Jack dies ahead of Black Hat event
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 09:13
  26 July 2013Last updated at11:44 ETAn elite hacker who was due to demonstrate how heart implants could be hacked has died unexpectedly in San Francisco.
  Barnaby Jack died on Thursday, the city's medical examiner's office told Reuters, but did not give more details.
  He had been due to give a presentation into medical device vulnerabilities at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas taking place next week.
  He had said one technique could kill a man from 30 feet (nine metres) away.
  IOActive, the security firm at which Mr Jack was director of embedded devices, said it was preparing a statement.
  In a tweet, the company said: "Lost but never forgotten our beloved pirate, Barnaby Jack has passed."
  His sister Amberleigh Jack, who lives in New Zealand, told Reuters news agency he was 35.
  Mr Jack became one of the most famous hackers on the planet after a 2010 demonstration in which he hacked a cashpoint, making it give out money. The technique was dubbed "Jackpotting".
  'Social media flood'More recently, he emerged as a leading expert in the weaknesses that could be found in medical technology.
  Last year, he told the BBC about how he had discovered flaws in widely-used insulin pumps which allowed him to compromise the devices.
  The hack made it possible to control them and administer a fatal level of insulin, Mr Jack said.
  "My purpose was not to allow anyone to be harmed by this because it is not easy to reproduce," he told the BBC during an interview in April 2012.
  "But hopefully it will promote some change in these companies and get some meaningful security in these devices."
  Mr Jack's expertise and vivid demonstrations of his knowledge at events like Black Hat earned him the respect of many security professionals.
  Amberleigh Jack thanked those who have been posting messages of sympathy online.
  "So humbled by the social media flood of people that loved @barnaby_jack," she tweeted.
  "Thank you all so much for your kind words."
Galen Winsor asks '' Who owns the plutonium? How much is it worth?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Atomic Insights
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 09:01
  Galen Winsor was a hands-on nuclear expert in the fullest sense of the phrase. Before irrational radiation protection rules were imposed, he and his colleagues directly handled used fuel. They limiting their exposure time and depended on just one of the ''time, distance and shielding'' trifecta of radiation protection. According to his story, Winsor and his colleagues knew enough about the material that they were handling to prevent most skin burns, but they had a job to do and did not allow a desire to lower doses below the level of immediate risk to impede their successful accomplishment.
  During his more than 30 years of professional involvement in handling nuclear materials, Winsor stubbornly refused to change his habits. He considered the used fuel pool at the Morris, IL recycling plant to be his personal ''warm swimming hole'', he gave talks during which he licked uranium dioxide off of the palm of his hand and he once filled a two liter bottle from a used fuel pool and kept that water on his office desk for a daily drink.If you pay close attention, you should come away with the impression that Winsor was not foolhardy; he was well aware of the real behavior of the materials that he measured. In Winsor's opinion, imposition of unreasonably tight rules associated with radiation protection has been a cost-increasing strategy akin to the ''feather bedding'' practices of railroad engineers.
  Winsor passed away a few years ago. He was in his 80s and his death was apparently from the normal kinds of natural causes that afflict people of a certain age.
  Throughout Winsor's talk, he points out the physical value of the irradiated material that some people insist on calling high level waste. He asks the final important questions '' ''Who owns the plutonium?'' and ''How much is it worth?'' He recognizes that using it beneficially threatens a number of powerful interests.
  Unfortunately, Winsor's message did not receive widespread attention in the 1980s when he gave his talks. He did not live in the internet era and did not have access to tools like blogs and YouTube. Fortunately for us, someone saved video tapes of his talks and converted them to a digital format. A couple of days ago, an Atomic Insights reader sent me a link to a longer, 1.5 hour compilation video hosted by Liberty in Our Time. That video has been on the web for a year and has been seen by just 25,000 people; that number needs to grow rapidly.
  I would be remise if I did not discuss the idea that Winsor's message might have gained some detractors from its overly conspiratorial tone. As a Naval Academy graduate and retired Commander, I'm a card carrying member of ''The Establishment''. I can testify based on a three decade-long career that there is no need to assume that some kind of secretive agreement must exist in order to encourage people with aligned interests to successfully work without any coordination to discredit a common enemy.
  There are plenty of people that have long recognized that atomic energy directly threatens their interests by offering a superior product that can permanently capture profitable customers. Their interest in slowing nuclear energy development has been matched by those who have recognized that it is easier to build enormous infrastructures and obtain valuable contracts when people are confused, fearful or purposely kept ignorant through secrecy.
  Unnecessarily stringent radiation protection regulations leads to huge contracts for what we used to call ''digging and filling'' on the military bases where I worked for several decades. Both construction contractors and hydrocarbon suppliers continue to be aided by media interests that carry their advertising messages, by financial institutions that make money by lending to gargantuan projects, by transportation industries that carry their massive quantities of daily deliveries, and by politicians that accept political contributions (sometimes bordering on bribes), employee votes and post government employment.
  The gradual imposition of ever tighter regulations enforced by the kinds of employment threats that Winsor describes in the above video helped to increase profits and also reinforced the public fear factor by building an ever growing body of compliant workers taught to have a questioning attitude that defaulted to extreme conservatism while blindly following stringent rules, even without any physical evidence of harm.
  A large and growing body of documents, personal testimony and anecdotal stories has convinced me that the world has wrongly accepted incorrect information about the relative hazard of atomic radiation compared to many other casually accepted materials and influences. Watching Winsor's talk reminded me of a practically-minded senior chief petty officer named Tess who once demonstrated to me how he would simply wipe his hands on his pants if he found a little contamination. It reminded me of numerous occasions when Ted Rockwell repeated that money spent on radiation protection did not disappear into a rat hole, it disappeared into some rats' pockets.
  It also reminded me of my conversations with Ray Haroldsen, the electrical technician who told Atomic Show listeners stories (The Atomic Show #068 '' Ray Haroldsen, Atomic Tinkerer who has tested the limits and The Atomic Show #069 '' Ray Haroldsen, Experimental Breeder Reactor 1 stories) of picking up the pieces from the BORAX destructive test. When I spoke with Ray just two years ago, he was still in good health, even though he was an adult nuclear energy professional in 1951, more than 60 years ago. The risk from moderate doses of radiation or ingestion of radioactive material has been highly exaggerated for very logical, but greed driven reasons.
  It is long past time to aggressively fight back and challenge the status quo. My burning desire for more widely distributed prosperity and my need to strive to help reduce the risk of dramatic climate change demands that I promote the truth. Please join me in the effort to tell the world that atomic fission is a great way to boil water to provide useful power to an ever growing number of happy and healthy customers.
  On a related note, Jerry Cuttler highly recommended that I share a link to Wade Allison's paper about the Goiania accident and what it should teach us about the minuscule health hazards from the materials released at Fukushima and any future, probably less severe accident. Here is a sample quote:
  In the 25 years since 1987 there has been no case of cancer due to radiation among those contaminated '' none at all. This observation is compared with measurements from Fukushima and elsewhere in the Table below. As shown in the third column the lowest measured internal radioactivity for any casualty at Goiania was far more than 1000 times greater than the largest internal radioactivity measurement for any resident in a large survey of those affected in Japan [9]. For children this ratio was even larger. At Goiania one woman, already four months pregnant, got a significant dose and gave birth normally; and another who had received one of the highest internal doses gave birth to a healthy child four years on.
  (Emphasis added.)
  Please go now and read Allison's footnoted paper. Your comments are always welcome.
Dr. Germacide's Terror Attack on the American Midwest
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Lame Cherry
  Sat, 27 Jul 2013 08:49
  Upon inquiry, the midwest experienced a biological terror attack these past weeks, due to the Obama regime not propping up the Egyptian Muslim Brohood, getting Europeans to put Hezbollah on a terror watch list and not going scorched earth in turning over Syria to al Qaeda as they did Libya.
  The Lame Cherry matter anti mater exclusive continues with the following tracking.
  This is the work of Dr. Germ, the male Mideast biologist who created and unleashed the new Obama West Nile Plague of 2012 as reported here, which jumped into daytime mosquitos from nocturnal bloodsuckers.
  Dr. Germ's labs, and yes he has two labs are in Beirut Lebanon and the infamous Bekaah Valley. The biological agents were delivered in two diplomatic shipments, one from Libya and the other from Egypt in the Muslim Brohood al Qaeda connections which were serving the Obama regime.Birther Hussein did not know of this operation just as Benghazi homo farted all over his machinations in 2012.
  The shipments arrived in Boliva, and with the help of narcocommunists in South America, they were then salted into Chile, for their point of origin, and transported then into these United States.
  This was the solitary attack and at this juncture no further operations are planned.
  This is what takes place when the Birther was running al Qaeda and narcommunists out of 1600 Penn, goes tits up, the Jinn heads up Murder Incorporated, and when the terrorists are hung out to dry in Egypt and Lebanon, they contract for a germ, which is designed and makes people sick in America.
  This strain is quite toxic as it brings on dizziness and nausea, making the person weak, and it lasts for days.
  This is GERMACIDE and has been a method of attacking America all during the Bush43 years, but as Obama handed over the dope trade to al Qaeda with promises of nations from Libya, Egypt and Syria, al Qaeda being managed out of Europe was assisting the Obama regime in progressing all of this world feudal state in exchange for the Caliph.
  The reality is Dr. Germ is a European conduit, in he has worked in Germany, France and Italy, and by government exchange this biologist has gained access to American stores via agents providing him with research materials, and he has gained 51 biological agents.He has hybridized them and weaponized them. What has been released in America is not his deadliest creations.
  This is no longer the pet food killer toxins nor the "toxic" pepper of a few years ago in attacks. This is a next generation Lebanese contractor who is connected to top labs in the west.......this is not Russian oriented, and has an entire germ farm capable of turning out sophisticated weaponry and delivering it with effect.
  106 sick; Cyclospora outbreak grows in Midwest | barfblogbarfblog.com/2013/07/106-sick-cyclospora-outbreak-grows-in-midwest/'ŽJul 15, 2013 - 106 sick; Cyclospora outbreak grows in Midwest. Posted on July 15, 2013 ... An additional 35 people are reported sick in Nebraska. Authorities ...This came out of American stores, went to Europe and was produced in Lebanon, no longer the home of counterfeit currency and narcotic production alone.Cyclospora cayetanensis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaen.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclospora_cayetanensis'ŽCyclospora cayetanensis is a protozoan that causes disease in humans, and ... The protozoan lives out its lifecycle intracellularly within the host's epithelial cells ...Do not make the assumption that in this case Dr. Germ had some high tech breeding program, because what he did was feed cyclospora to seven Islamic male volunteers who used their intestines as the breeding lab.The excrement was gathered, the organism isolated to a concentrated form and then shipped by diplomatic courier to South America for inoculation on fruit.So Rosie O'Donnell nor Whoopie Goldberg are not in consternation over this, no Muslims were killed in the making of this project. They literally are using humans as biological factories and these Islamists in Lebanon are willing.That should be enough of the exclusive so that you know what is really going on and why this story is being suppressed again by the regime running these terrorists as such a reality might just start Americans to waking up in knowing they are once again under WMD attack inside America and it is once again your grocery which is the ground zero.
  Yes the summer of 2013, a Birther in the morgue, a Jinn at the Oval O, and Hezbollah imports setting American brush afire as Dr. Germ shits on your fruity fruit......of course you are not being told and you rich who do not donate, well now you did not know about any of this, so I hope you all got a good dose of it to wake your asses up.
  Not so bright now are you in not donating the hundreds of thousands so I would not be distracted and could have warned the lot of you earlier.
  Yes do not donate to Lame Cherry, but buy human shit to eat which came out of a Lebanese Islamist's ass. Oh who was it that told you over a year ago about that Osseiran Obama connection in Lebanon in the merchants laundering money into Europe and America, buying up businesses which have piles of toxic chemicals.......oh yes Lame Cherry!!!!!!
  Enjoy your feces salad you rich children as next time I suspect Dr. Germ will have a next time which will be worse. Perhaps it will be something you can not flush down the toilet and they bury you.
  nuff said
  agtG 241
Criticism Alters US Drone Program In Pakistan
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Conscious Life News
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:03
  ISLAMABAD (AP) '-- The United States has drastically scaled back the number of drone attacks against militants in Pakistan and limited strikes to high-value targets in response to growing criticism of the program in this country.
  Those actions appear to have temporarily appeased Pakistan's powerful generals, who publicly oppose the covert CIA strikes, U.S. officials said. But some officials are still worried about pushback from Pakistan's new civilian leaders, who took power in June with a strong stance on ending the attacks altogether.
  The future of the drone program is likely to be a key item on the agenda during U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry's visit to Pakistan, which is expected soon.
  Only 16 drone strikes have taken place in Pakistan so far this year, compared with a peak of 122 in 2010, 73 in 2011 and 48 in 2012, according to the New America Foundation, a U.S.-based think tank.
  The CIA has been instructed to be more cautious with its attacks, limiting them to high-value targets and dropping the practice of so-called ''signature strikes'' '-- hitting larger groups of suspected militants based purely on their behavior, such as being armed and meeting with known militants, said a current U.S. intelligence official and a former intelligence official briefed on the drone program.
  The CIA embraced the measures, feeling the drone program may be under threat from public scrutiny, the officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the classified program publicly.
  Two other senior American officials said the U.S. scaled back the number of attacks and tightened up its targeting criteria as a concession to the Pakistani army, considered the most powerful institution in the country and the final arbiter on the future of the drone program.
  Senior Pakistani army officers made it clear that the program could not continue at the tempo it was being carried out and expressed concern that civilian casualties were breeding more militants, said the U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the media.
  The circumstances surrounding a strike on July 3 in Pakistan's North Waziristan tribal area illustrated Washington's intention to go after well-identified targets only, said one of the officials. The attack on a house, which killed at least 16 suspected militants, was backed up by ''hugely detailed'' intelligence laid out in a 32-page PowerPoint presentation.
  The intelligence indicated the target was a gathering of militants from the Haqqani network who were plotting a second attack on the Ariana Hotel in the Afghan capital of Kabul, said the official. The Ariana Hotel has long been suspected of being used by the CIA as a listening post.
  President Barack Obama signaled the administration's new approach to drones in a landmark speech in May in which he said attacks would be carried out only on ''terrorists who pose a continuing and imminent threat to the American people'' and when there is ''near-certainty that no civilians will be killed or injured.''
  Senior U.S. officials insist they continue to have a secret agreement with Pakistan, or at least from the army, to conduct drone strikes.
  But even that agreement seems to be based more on Pakistan's fear of what would happen if it stood up to the U.S. on drone strikes, rather than a real desire to see the program continue. Pakistan relies on the U.S. for hundreds of millions of dollars in civilian and military aid, and even more importantly, for support in getting a $5 billion bailout the country desperately needs from the International Monetary Fund.
  The two senior U.S. officials said Pakistani army chief Gen. Ashfaq Parvez Kayani recognizes that the White House views drone attacks as vital to its campaign against al-Qaida and the Taliban, but looks forward to a day when they can stop altogether.
  The Pakistani army denied the allegation that Kayani consents to the strikes, calling it an attempt to malign the country and its security agencies.
  Some Pakistani officials say the drone program has been useful in the past in killing militants but now draws too much attention and controversy, especially after the covert U.S. raid that killed Osama bin Laden in 2011 outraged Pakistanis who saw it as a violation of the country's sovereignty.
  These officials believe Pakistan must be given greater participation in the strikes, or they must be replaced by attacks carried out by the Pakistanis themselves '-- either with drones given to them by the Americans or their own F-16s.
  But past attempts to work more closely with Pakistani intelligence, or let the Pakistanis carry out attacks themselves, have resulted in militants being tipped off before strikes occur.
  Pakistan's request that drone technology be transferred to the country is a non-starter because of U.S. fear that highly classified information would make its way to China, a close ally of Islamabad.
  U.S. officials often point to Pakistan's failure to shoot down the slow-flying drones as evidence that they aren't sincere in wanting the program to stop, although this would likely cause a huge crisis in relations between the two countries. They also point to the failure of Pakistan to push the issue aggressively with the United Nations or other international organizations.
  But some U.S. officials are worried that Pakistan's new civilian leaders, especially Interior Minister Chaudhry Nisar Ali Khan, may spark a crisis over the drone program. Khan said this month that Pakistan has conveyed to the U.S. that the drone strikes could lead to a ''direct standoff'' and ''could have serious implications on the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, as well as the post-withdrawal scenario,'' according to Pakistan's state news agency.
''Urban Warfare Training'' and the Militarization of America
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WTF RLY REPORT
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 07:01
  Global ResearchBy Bill Van Auken
  This week's deployment of Blackhawk helicopters in Chicago is only the latest in a series of ''urban warfare training'' exercises that have become a familiar feature of American life.
  As elsewhere, this exercise was sprung unannounced on a startled civilian population. Conducted in secrecy, apparently with the collusion of local police agencies and elected officials, Democrats and Republicans alike, the ostensible purpose of these exercises is to give US troops experience in what Pentagon doctrine refers to as ''Military Operations on Urban Terrain.''
  Such operations are unquestionably of central importance to the US military. Over the past decade, its primary mission, as evidenced in Afghanistan and Iraq, has been the invasion and occupation of relatively powerless countries and the subjugation of their resisting populations, often in house-to-house fighting in urban centers.
  The Army operates a 1,000 acre Urban Training Center in south-central Indiana that boasts over 1,500 ''training structures'' designed to simulate houses, schools, hospitals and factories. The center's web site states that it ''can be tailored to replicate both foreign and domestic scenarios.''
  What does flying Blackhawks low over Chicago apartment buildings or rolling armored military convoys through the streets of St. Louis accomplish that cannot be achieved through the sprawling training center's simulations? Last year alone, there were at least seven such exercises, including in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, Tampa, St. Louis, Minneapolis and Creeds, Virginia.
  The most obvious answer is that these exercises accustom troops to operating in US cities, while desensitizing the American people to the domestic deployment of US military might.
  Preparations for such deployments are already far advanced. Over the past decade, under the pretext of prosecuting a ''global war on terror,'' Washington has enacted a raft of repressive legislation and created a vast new bureaucracy of state control under the Department of Homeland Security. Under the Obama administration, the White House has claimed the power to throw enemies of the state into indefinite military detention or even assassinate them on US soil by means of drone strikes, while radically expanding electronic spying on the American population.
  Part of this process has been the ceaseless growth of the power of the US military and its increasing intervention into domestic affairs. In 2002, the creation of the US Northern Command for the first time dedicated a military command to operations within the US itself.
  Just last May, the Pentagon announced the implementation of new rules of engagement for US military forces operating on American soil to provide ''support'' to ''civilian law enforcement authorities, including responses to civil disturbances.''
  The document declares sweeping and unprecedented military powers under a section entitled ''Emergency Authority.'' It asserts the authority of a ''federal military commander'' in ''extraordinary emergency circumstances where prior authorization by the president is impossible and duly constituted local authorities are unable to control the situation, to engage temporarily in activities that are necessary to quell large-scale, unexpected civil disturbances.'' In other words, the Pentagon brass claims the unilateral authority to impose martial law.
  These powers are not being asserted for the purpose of defending the US population against terrorism or to counter some hypothetical emergency. The US military command is quite conscious of where the danger lies.
  In a recent article, a senior instructor at the Fort Leavenworth Command and General Staff College and former director of the Army's School of Advanced Military Studies laid out a telling scenario for a situation in which the military could intervene.
  ''The Great Recession of the early twenty-first century lasts far longer than anyone anticipated. After a change in control of the White House and Congress in 2012, the governing party cuts off all funding that had been dedicated to boosting the economy or toward relief. The United States economy has flatlined, much like Japan's in the 1990s, for the better part of a decade. By 2016, the economy shows signs of reawakening, but the middle and lower-middle classes have yet to experience much in the way of job growth or pay raises. Unemployment continues to hover perilously close to double digits '...''
  In other words, the Pentagon sees these conditions'--which differ little from what exists in the US today'--producing social upheavals that can be quelled only by means of military force.
  What is being upended, behind the scenes and with virtually no media coverage, much less public debate, are constitutional principles dating back centuries that bar the use of the military in civilian law enforcement. In the Declaration of Independence itself, the indictment justifying revolution against King George included the charge that he had ''affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.''
  Side by side with the rising domestic power of the military, the supposedly civilian police have been militarized. An article published by the Wall Street Journal last weekend entitled ''The Rise of the Warrior Cop'' graphically described this process:
  ''Driven by martial rhetoric and the availability of military-style equipment'--from bayonets and M-16 rifles to armored personnel carriers'--American police forces have often adopted a mind-set previously reserved for the battlefield. The war on drugs and, more recently, post-9/11 antiterrorism efforts have created a new figure on the US scene: the warrior cop'--armed to the teeth, ready to deal harshly with targeted wrongdoers, and a growing threat to familiar American liberties.''
  The article describes the vast proliferation of SWAT (Special Weapons and Tactics) units to virtually every town in America, fueled by some $35 billion in grants from the Department of Homeland Security, ''with much of the money going to purchase military gear such as armored personnel carriers.''
  This armed force was on full display in April when what amounted to a state of siege was imposed on the city of Boston, ostensibly to capture one teenage suspect. The entire population of a major American city was locked in their homes as combat-equipped police, virtually indistinguishable from troops, occupied the streets and conducted warrantless house-to-house searches.
  Underlying this unprecedented militarization of US society are two parallel processes. The immense widening of the social chasm separating the billionaires and multi-millionaires who control economic and political life from American working people, the great majority of the population, is fundamentally incompatible with democracy and requires other forms of rule. At the same time, the turn to militarism as the principal instrument of US foreign policy has vastly increased the power of the military within the US state apparatus.
  Both America's ruling oligarchy and the Pentagon command recognize that profound social polarization and deepening economic crisis must give rise to social upheavals. They are preparing accordingly.
  Via Global Research
Amateur Radio Newsline Report 1876 – July 26 2013
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: QRZ Forums
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:58
  Amateur Radio Newsline' Report 1876 '' July 26 2013
  Amateur Radio Newsline report number 1876 with a release date of July 26 2013 to follow in 5-4-3-2-1.
  The following is a Q-S-T. Ham radio will share a ride to space on a pair of joint mission satellites; a pico balloon remains aloft for over 70 hours; Massachusetts looks to enact an anti pirate radio law and Lithium battery safety is once again a major concern. Find out the details are on Amateur Radio Newsline' report number 1876 coming your way right now.
  (Billboard Cart Here)
  **
  RADIO NEAR SPACE: HAM RADIO TRACKED PICO BALLOON ALOFT MORE THAN 70 HOURS
  A possible new record for the flight of a ham radio tracked pico balloon. Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF, is in the Newsroom with more:
  --
  Flying pico balloons appears to be the latest interest by ham radio operators and other near-space explorers. A pico balloon is essentially one of those silverized party balloons fitted with an ultra-light-weight amateur radio payload and designed for long distance medium altitude flight. And now comes word that a pico balloon launched in the United Kingdon managed to stay aloft for some 70 hours while it floated across the English Channel, made several north to south round trips in France before its signal was lost about 80 miles North-East of Paris.
  Dubbed simply B 6 the tiny craft was launched from Silverstone in the UK at 18:40 UTC on Sunday, July 14th. It initially headed south approaching Paris before it changed direction and headed north again. On the evening of July 16th it was still aloft and transmitting over northern France, at an altitude of about 11,000 feet. It then turned south once again, before doing yet another loop and then going East and passing just North of Paris before radio contact was lost.
  The B 6 payload weighed in at just 20.2 grams. It contained a GPS receiver along with the 10 milliwatt transmitter on 434.500 MHz running the amateur radio Domino EX 16 data mode. Power was supplied by a single AA size battery which in itself may also prove to be an endurance record of sorts for a single cell powering a long distance flight. But for that we will have to see what those who keep the record books have to say.
  For the Amateur Radio Newsline, I'm Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF, in the Newsroom in Los Angeles.
  --
  Leo Bondar who launched the pico balloon tells Amateur Radio Newsline that he is not himself a radio amateur but has long been an avid shortwave listener. He adds that ballooning has rekindled his interest in ham radio and radio equipment building so he just press ahead and get a license after all those years spent just listening. Also, a posting on the balloon flight website indicates that he did work with some four dozen hams from the U-K, France and several other European nations who were involved in tracking the flight in real time. More information on its epic voyage including any late updates is on the web at tinyurl.com/balloon-b6. (Southgate, Leo Bondar)
  **
  HAM RADIO IN SPACE: JOINT SCIENCE AND HAM RADIO TRANSPONDER PAYLOADS TO LAUNCH 2014
  A consortium headquartered in the United Kingdom plans to launch a set of shared purpose ham radio and scientific research cubesats early next year. Amateur Radio Newsline's Norm Seeley, KI7UP, reports:
  --
  It was announced during the QB 50 presentation at the recent AMSAT-UK International Space Colloquium that two CubeSats, carrying SSB, CW and FM voice transponders could be launched into a 600 km or 370 mile orbit in the first half of 2014.
  The QB 50 project team says that on July 19th, it had signed a Memorandum of Understanding with AMSAT-UK, AMSAT-Francophone, and AMSAT-NL to enable two amateur radio payloads to fly on a pair of CubeSats. These are mission precursor mini-satellites which whose purpose is to permit the testing of key satellite and payload components ahead of the full QB 50 mission.
  The primary objective of the QB 50 mission is the study the temporal and spatial variations of a number of key parameters in the Earth's lower thermosphere doing so with a network of about 40 double CubeSats. These mini-birds will be launched into a 320 kilometer or 210 mile high circular orbit. They will be separated by a few hundred feet and carry identical science sensors. These will monitor parameters that will greatly increase our knowledge and understanding of this little explored region of the E and F layers of the Ionosphere.
  QB 50 will also study the re-entry process by measuring a number of key parameters during re-entry and by comparing predicted and actual CubeSat trajectories and orbital lifetimes.
  At the beginning of the mission, the various payloads onboard the spacecraft will be operated in an alternating fashion. Later on the amateur radio transponders will be operated as the primary mission once all QB 50 related experimentation has been concluded.
  For the Amateur Radio Newsline, I'm Norm Seeley, KI7UP, watching the nighttime sky from Scottsdale, Arizona.
  --
  By combining the ham radio and scientific missions together it means that both will reach orbit at a cost affordable. More information about the QB 50 project can be found at www.qb50.eu(AMSAT UK, Southgate)
  **
  HAM RADIO IN SPACE: UKUBE ONE GIVEN TENTATIVE OCTOBER LAUNCH DATE
  In a related story the Amsat News Service reports that the UKube-1 CubeSat carrying an amateur radio transponder as a part of its payload could launch in late October. As previously reported, UKube-1 will carry a set of AMSAT-UK designed FUNcube-2 boards. These will provide the ham radio community with a 70 centimeter up and 2 meter downlink linear transponder for SSB/CW operation along with a 1200 bps BPSK telemetry beacon on 145.915 MHz. The actual satellite is being constructed in Scotland by Clyde Space with its launch to take place from Kazikstan on-board a Russian Soyuz 2 orbital booster. (ANS)
  **
  RADIO POLITICS: BI-PARTISAN REQUEST TO NTIA TO ASSURE THE FREEING UP SPECTRUM
  In a rare bi-partisan move, Senators Mario Rubio of Florida and Mark Warner from Virginia have asked National Telecommunications and Information Agency chief Larry Strickling for answers on what the agency is doing to free up government spectrum. This in light of President Obama's June 14th memo on motivating wireless innovation and in light of a Government Accounting Office study from April 2011 that concluded NTIA cannot ensure that spectrum is being used efficiently by federal agencies and has limited ability to monitor federal spectrum use.
  In a letter to Strickling dated July 19th, a copy of which was supplied to the press by Warner's office, the two wanted that question and severa others answered. The letter also notes that '' and we quote: ''without effective NTIA management and oversight, we have serious reservations about the agency's ability to maximize spectrum efficiency and relinquish portions of federal spectrum."
  The FCC is preparing to auction as much as 120 MHz of commercial spectrum reclaimed from broadcasters but this is likely to be reduced to 80 MHZ or less given Canadian and Mexican border issues. This matter is also of importance to the ham radio community because much of the spectrum it has at 420 MHz and above is on a secondary basis and is shared with government and military users. (Published news reports)
  **
  RADIO LAW FOLLOW-UP: DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS AT STANDOFF ON FCC REFORM
  A follow-up to last weeks report on another congressional attempt to streamline the FCC The House Communications Subcommittee wrapped up its FCC reform hearing Thursday, July 11th, but continuing partisan politics seem still be standing in the way of any meaningful change. Amateur Radio Newsline's Heather Embee, KB3TZD, has the details:
  --
  The subject of the hearing was Republican backed draft measures similar to legislation that passed in the House last year only to fail to get Senate attention.
  On one side of the bills were Republican legislators who argued that they were necessary to speed FCC decision making, tie it to a cost-benefit analysis of any new regulations, improve transparency and limit the FCC's ability to impose merger conditions that they suggest are a vehicle for backdoor regulations.
  On the other side are Democrats who in effect said the committee was wasting its time debating bills similar, and even more burdensome, than ones that had failed to get a legal toehold in the past.
  Committee ranking Democrat Henry Waxman was quoted as saying that the legislation was a way to undermine the FCC's ability to adopt new rules and protect consumers. He said that the only thing it would efficiently speed up would be endless legal challenges. Waxman also noted that the dozen new mandates in the proposed law would, among other things, would remove the public interest standard and slow the FCC process to a crawl.
  For the Amateur Radio Newsline. I'm Heather Embee, KB3TZD, in Berewick, Pennsylvania.
  --
  Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden, W7EQI, is the one who called the hearings. He said that the communications sector is one of the few that is firing on all cylinders, but that the current FCC process threatens the health of this segment of the economy. That said, in this congressional session there is little sign that Republicans and Democrats can come together to reach an accord. (Connect2.com and other published news reports)
  **
  BREAK 1
  We are the Amateur Radio Newsline, heard on bulletin stations around the world including the W0EF repeater serving Minneapolis, Minnesota.
  (5 sec pause here)
  **
  HAM TECHNOLOGY: BROADBAND-HAMNET' SOFTWARE WINS INTERNATIONAL AWARDS
  An interesting ham radio communications concept developed mainly by hams in Texas interested in automated emergency communications has been awarded a pair of important prizes. Jim Davis, W2JKD, has the story:
  --
  Broadband-Hamnet, formerly HSMM-MESH firmware, developed by amateur radio operators to provide hams with a high-speed digital wireless communication mesh network, has won both US and global awards from the International Association of Emergency Managers.
  The USA Council of the designated Broadband Hamnet as a Division 2 Technology and Innovation Award winner. It then went on to win the International Association of Emergency Managers Global Technology and Innovation Award in the same division.
  Broadband-Hamnet as ''a high-speed, self-discovering, self-configuring, fault-tolerant, wireless computer network. It has very low power consumption and a focus on emergency communication. The firmware itself is available at no charge via the project website hsmm-mesh.org
  For the Amateur Radio Newsline, I'm Jim Davis, W2JKD.
  --
  The awards will be presented to Broadband-Hamnet in October at the International Association of Emergency Managers annual conference in Reno, Nevada. A demonstration of how it works can be seen in the ARRL video The DIY Magic of Amateur Radio. It's on the web at tinyurl.com/ham-radio-diy-magic (ARRL)
  **
  RADIO LAW: MASSACHUSETTS LOOKS TO ENACT ANTI PIRATE RADIO LAW
  Massachusetts is the latest state to follow the lead of Florida, New York and New Jersey to enact laws that would permit the prosecution of unlicensed broadcast radio station operators. This with word that State Representative Steven Walsh has introduced H.R. 1679, which would give the state attorney general the power to seek action against radio pirates, including seizing equipment and seeking heavy money damages.
  Specifically, the measure would prohibit any unauthorized radio telecommunication or emission to, or interference with, a public or commercial radio station licensed by the Federal Communications Commission. The key to excluding other services such as police, fire and even amateur radio from inclusion under the proposal seems to be the words licensed by the Federal Communications Commission.
  As previously reported, last January the U.S. Attorney's Office for Massachusetts seized transmission equipment from an unlicensed station operating in the city of Roslindale. The FCC then escalated the case into a forfeiture action and that's when the office of the U.S. Attorney for Massachusetts became involved. (RW, Broadcast Daily, others)
  **
  ENFORCEMENT: BROADCAST TRANSMITTER CREATES SPURS IN AVIATION BAND IN NEW ZEALAND
  A recent investigation of interference to communications between pilots and the control tower for aircraft approaching Auckland airport in New Zealand, highlights the risk of unintended signals being generated as an unwanted side effect of radio broadcasting. Amateur Radio Newsline's Jim Meachen reports from down-under:
  --
  The investigation took several weeks to complete because of the low signal level and intermittent observations of the interference. Locating it involved considerable staff resources from the New Zealand Radio Spectrum Management agency as well as their renting an aircraft and pilot to locate the source from the air.
  When found the problem proved to be an unwanted spurious emission from an FM broadcast transmitter in a community to the north of Auckland. The problem was quickly repaired by the broadcaster.
  In this case the interference was not considered to be an immediate safety risk because of the availability of alternative aircraft radio communications channels. It did however present a significant annoyance and distraction to pilots flying into and out of the city.
  A recent study by the New Zealands's neighbor across the Tasman Sea confirms the same problem exists in VK land. According to the Australian Communications and Media Authority about 28% of the transmitters it checked showed the production of unwanted emissions with many radiated in the aeronautical radio-communication band. As such these spurs do hold a potential risk to the safe operation of aircraft.
  For the Amateur Radio Newsline, I'm Jim Meachen, ZL2BHF, in Nelson, New Zealand.
  --
  Auckland Airport is a major airline hub in New Zealand. It serves domestic airline flights as well as a transfer point for passengers going on to other locations. (Southgate, ARNewsline')
  **
  RESCUE RADIO: GOV.DELIVERY TO DISCONTINUE DISSEMINATING NWS WEATHER ALERTS
  If you are involved in emergency communications activities and use the GovDelivery e-mail service service listen up. GovDelivery has announced that it will discontinue disseminating National Weather Service weather alerts effective July 31, 2013.
  GovDelivery is a self-subscription service used to deliver e-mail and SMS/text notifications to the general public and has contracts with many government agencies. The National Weather Service began using GovDelivery in 2008 but terminated its contract with GovDelivery in November of 2012, due to budget constraints.
  At the time of the National Weather Service contract termination GovDelivery continued distribute weather alert information using a similar e-subscription service. NWS subscribers were notified about the change and offered the opportunity to subscribe to GovDelivery's free service as well as to other third party weather alert services. However, due to the substantial costs of providing a high reliability messaging service at this scale GovDelivery cannot continue the free service.
  More information on the discontinuance of GovDelivery NWS alerts and several free alternatives to it are on the web at tinyurl.com/gov-delivery-ends. (NOAA)
  **
  RADIO BUSINESS: ALINCO NOW REPRESENTED BY REMTRONIX
  George Howard, NW4G, who is the Amateur Radio Division Manager at GigaParts says that he has received word that Alinco is back up and running and its products began shipping on July 17th.
  In a posting to QRZ.com, Howard says that distribution is now being handled by a company called Remtronix Incorporated with a website at www.remtronix.com. A web search shows Remtronix to be located in Hayward California not that far from San Francisco.
  Howard also says that he has received word of several price reductions as well as announcement of the launch of the new Software Defined Radio based DX-SR9T high frequency transceiver. (NW4G via QRZ)
  **
  NAMES IN THE NEWS: VE3CWP NAMED RAC CORPORATE SECRETARY
  Radio Amateurs of Canada has named Alvin Masse, VE3CWP, as its new Corporate Secretary. In making the announcement, Geoff Bawden, VE4BAW, who is the national society's President and Chairman said that Masse brings with him a wealth of organizational skills, history and wisdom and will be a great benefit to the organization. VE3CWP replaces Linda Friars, VE9GLF, who served as Acting Corporate Secretary until Masse's appointment. (RAC)
  **
  HAM HAPPENINGS: SARL TO EXHIBIT AT ESKOM EXPO FOR YOUNG SCIENTISTS
  The South African Radio League will be an exhibitor at the 2013 Eskom Expo for Young Scientists. The event takes place from September 25th to 28th and will include both an operational High Frequency as well as a VHF station. The South African Radio League will also be sponsoring a special award at the Expo for best final entry in the field of RF and electronics.
  The Eskom Expo was founded by the late Dr. Derek Gray in 1980. Since then it has provided an opportunity for school students from primary to grade 12, who have an interest in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics to exhibit their projects and to be judged on their skills and enthusiasm for science. (SARL)
  **
  HAM HAPPENINGS: MICROWAVE UPDATE 2013 SEEKS PRESENTERS
  Microwave Update or MUD 2013 which takes place October 18th and 19th at Morehead State Space Science Center in Moorehead, Kentucky. The planners have put out a call seeking papers to be presented at the event. Papers can be up to 10 pages in length. If you wish to be a presenter please send your proposal to mud (at) downeastmicrowave (dot) come before August 30th. (WA3ZKR)
  **
  HAM HAPPENINGS: NEW FACEBOOK PAGE TO SCHEDULE SKEDS
  A new group has been formed on Facebook for hams wishing to schedule contacts with other amateurs world-wide. If you need a particular contact for an award, or just a chat, then go to facebook.com/groups/hamsked and have a look. (GB2RS)
  **
  BREAK 2
  With you 52 weeks a year, every year since 1977, we are the Amateur Radio Newsline with links to the world from our only official website at www.arnewsline.org and being relayed by the volunteer services of the following radio amateur:
  (5 sec pause here)
  **
  EMERGING TECHNOLOGY: LITHIUM BATTERY SAFETY
  Much of today's latest portable electronics including ham radio gear is powered by Lithium or Lithium Ion batteries. But these same batteries have also become a safety concern as we hear from Graham Kemp, VK4BB:
  --
  Lithium batteries are undoubtedly popular going by their wide use in consumer products, and even higher powered models in electric vehicles. However they have been linked to fires, illicit drug makers and medical problems.
  The recent death of a toddler in Queensland, Australia and others injured after swallowing them, has again focused attention on the common power source.
  From January 2013 stricter regulations for the carriage of Lithium batteries by air travelers were introduced best check with your airline for the rules.
  A battery can also be a convenient source of lithium metal used in illegal methamphetamine laboratories. Sales of larger quantities are restricted for this reason in some areas.
  International industry standards for button batteries are soon to be introduced as an urgent safety measure. These are likely to include strengthened consumer education about the dangers and child-restraint packaging for the cell batteries.
  For the Amateur Radio Newsline, I'm Graham Kemp, VK4BB. Of the WIA News, in Australia.
  --
  The bottom line is that when using these Lithium batteries as a source of power for anything electronic that it is important to think safety first. (VK3PC, WIA News)
  **
  WORLDBEAT: 2ND INTERNATIONAL YOUTH MEETING FRIEDRICHSHAFEN
  IARU Region 1 reports that the 2nd International Youth Meeting was held on Saturday, June 29th. The event featured several lectures including one by Tommy Degrande, ON2TD. He is the Belgian Youth Coordinator of that nations national Amateur Radio Society the UBA. He spoke about youth activities in Belgium
  Other presenters included Remko Welling, PE1MEW, who servers as the Scouting Jamboree on the Air Coordinator in the Netherlands and Mari Nikkila, OH2FPK, who is the Finnish Amateur Radio Youth Coordinator.
  The International Youth Meeting was timed to coincide with the 2013 Ham Radio Convention held on the shores of Lake Constance in Friedrichshafen, Germany. More can be found on the web at www.iaru-r1.org (IARU Region 1)
  **
  HAM RADIO IN SPACE: ISS CONTACT PLANNING SOFTWARE GETS UPDATE BY NASA INTERN
  The Amsat News Service reports that the ARISS software has been upgraded by a student named Nolan Replogle who interned with the Education Projects Office at NASA's Johnson Space Center in Houston from January to April of this year.
  During his stay his assignment was to update the planning software for the Amateur Radio on the International Space Station which is used to help schedule contacts and events. The original software's lack of a user interface meant that people needed to input data directly into text files, and then run the program to see if it worked. Replogle, a computer engineering major at Oklahoma State University used his programming skills to create a more user-friendly interface for the software.
  Replogle named the upgraded software ARISS Assistant or ARRISA for short. With his updates, there is now a graphic user interface that allows users to click on buttons to enter information into text boxes. This automated feature is more intuitive and requires a lot less data entry.
  Replogle has not yet had the chance to speak with an astronaut on-orbit, but he says that he would like to. Now thanks in part to the work he did as a NASA intern, other students around the world will have a better chance to have live contacts with International Space Station and its ham radio astronauts. (ANS)
  **
  HAM RADIO IN SPACE: INDIA HOLDS SMALL SATELLITE WORKSHOP
  India's National Institute of Amateur Radio was co sponsor of a Small Satellite Developer Workshop event organized by Dhruva Space held July 8th to the 13th. Satellite experts had engineering models on display to help participants understand the challenges found in designing and developing the subsystems of small satellites. A full report on this gathering can be found on the web at tinyurl.com/SmallSatelliteWorkshop2013. (NAIR)
  **
  HAM RADIO IN SPACE: SCOTLAND PORTABLE SATELLITE OPERATION IN AUGUST
  Paul Robinson, 2E1EUB, will once again be on the air from Scotland as 2M1EUB for 14 days beginning August 5th. He will be driving around that nation while listening out for anyone looking for grid squares that they have not worked yet, especially on the satellites. His operation will be several ham radio birds including AO-7 running modes B to A as well as on 160, 80 and 2 meter SSB. Robinson says that he will arrange skeds to work him. To arrange one e-mail him at 2e1eub (at) amsat.org. Check out QRZ.com under 2M1EUB for more information and the latest updates. (ANS)
  **
  DX
  In DX, word that the ARRL has announced several Colvin Award grants to help support three upcoming DXpeditions. The recipients are the K9W Wake Atoll operation scheduled for September through October and the T33A Banaba Island for November. Also named is the FT5ZM Amsterdam Island DXpedition planned for January through February of 2014.
  PH2M will be active as PJ4M from the island of Bonaire between September 13th to the 26th. Operations will be on the High Frequency bands. QSL via his home callsign direct or via the bureau\
  N0TG, AA4VK and N1SNB will be active stroke FS from St. Martin between October 24th to the 31st. This operation will likely mirror probably their PJ7 DXpedition which was described as a suitcase operation on 40 through 10 meters using CW and SSB, with wire antennas and 100 watts. QSL all operators via AA4VK.
  IZ1DPS will be operational stroke HC from Ecuador through January 12th, 2014. Activity will be on the HF bands. QSL via IK2DUW, direct, by the Bureau or Logbook of the World only.
  A team composed of six French DXers will be operating as TM2NOI from Noirmoutier Island from August 9th to the 11th. The team will try to be active from 160 through 10 meters using CW, SSB and several digital modes. Particular interest will be paid to the Islands on the Air calling frequencies. QSL direct or via the bureau to F4FVI.
  Lastly, Members from the F6KOP Radio Club team will be active as TO7CC from Reunion Island between February 5th to the 17th, 2014. Their operation will be on all bands and modes, with an emphasis on the lower bands and RTTY. The group says that more details will be forthcoming.
  (Above from various DX news sources)
  **
  THAT FINAL ITEM: SEND A PERSONAL MESSAGE TO THE MOON
  And finally this week, have you ever thought of sending your own spacecraft to the Moon? Well until now such a trip was out of the reach of almost everyone here on planet Earth. But that's all changing thanks to a new citizen oriented space project as we hear in this report from the Wireless Institute of Australia:
  --
  A new project to give thousands of people the opportunity to design, build and launch personalised spacecraft and send them to the moon has begun.
  Now anyone can become a citizen space explorer at a cost of USD159,explorers who back the project will be able to personalise their ownspacecraft by adding a picture or message direct from their favouritesocial media or game profile or create their own unique design.
  Pocket Spacecraft are disks with flexible electronics, smaller than a CD and as thin as a piece of paper, that will be loaded into an Interplanetary CubeSat mothership to hitch a ride into space on a commercial rocket. The mothership will then set off to the moon and when it arrives many months later, the fleet of Pocket Spacecraft will be photographed as they are released to land on the moon to complete their mission.
  Anyone can take part in the mission via the crowd-funding sitePocketSpacecraft.com
  The campaign ends on August 26, 2013.
  --
  Anyone can take part in the mission via the crowd-funding web site PocketSpacecraft.com. And who knows? If this idea works as planned you could be the first ham radio operator on your block or in your community to vicariously make a trip to the Moon. Well at least, kind of. (WIA News)
  **
  NEWSCAST CLOSE
  With thanks to Alan Labs, AMSAT, the ARRL, the CGC Communicator, CQ Magazine, the FCC, the Ohio Penn DX Bulletin, Radio Netherlands, Rain, the RSGB, the Southgate News, TWiT-TV and Australia's WIA News, that's all from the Amateur Radio Newsline'. Our e-mail address is newsline (at) arnewsline (dot) org. More information is available at Amateur Radio Newsline's' only official website located at www.arnewsline.org. You can also write to us or support us at Amateur Radio Newsline', 28197 Robin Avenue, Santa Clarita California, 91350
  For now, with Bill Pasternak, WA6ITF, at the editors' desk, I'm Skeeter Nash, N5ASH, near Houston, Texas, saying 73 and we thank you for listening.
  Amateur Radio Newsline' is Copyright 2013. All rights reserved.
Obama's Death and Taxes Economy
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: FrontPage Magazine Â» FrontPage
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:52
  It's an iron law of nature as certain as the one about an angel getting its wings every time a bell rings or a snowstorm blanketing the area every time Al Gore comes to town to remind the carbon puffing infidels about global warming: every time Obama gives a speech, a thousand businesses go out of business.
  On July 24th, Obama delivered yet another economic speech in which he castigated Republicans in Congress for the sequester that he proposed, promised big economic benefits for the entire country from green energy and illegal immigration and promised to spend every one of his remaining days trying to help working people; at least those days when he isn't on the golf course, on vacation at Martha's Vineyard or delivering useless speeches.
  An economics speech, a creature that Barack Obama has been unleashing on the taxpayers, lawmakers and layabouts since his post-election days in 2008 of pretending to be president complete with an imaginary seal with the motto ''Vero Possumus'' (which can be translated very loosely as ''God Help Us All''), is an entirely familiar breed.
  It's an FDR-on-crack assemblage of crackpot social plans masquerading as economic plans and homey testaments to American exceptionalism wrapped around bankrupt Euro ideas about how to run a country into the ground. And in the year 2013, the whole thing smells like last year's leftovers.
  There are the warnings about all the old bridges threatening to fall down and kill the trolls living under them. Despite a second term in office, a stimulus plan, a plan to stimulate the stimulus plan and years of assorted pork, there are apparently now more Damocles bridges in the land than there ever were before.
  In 2009, Obama promised to fix all the crumbling roads and bridges with a $787 billion stimulus plan full of ''shovel-ready jobs.'' Two years later he joked to the Council on Jobs and Competitiveness, led by GE CEO Jeff Immelt, whose company is the 15th biggest government contractor, that the shovel-ready jobs were not shovel-ready. It would have been nice to know that before we spent the $787 billion.
  And then there are the promises that we can fix all our problems with a green energy revolution that drives up electricity rates for everyone in order to buy windmills and solar panels from China. The green energy revolution has done a lot for Red China's middle class while further eviscerating the standard of living for American middle class families who are just trying to keep the lights on.
  And no Obama speech on the economy would be complete without urging us to invest more in education in order to get our hands on tomorrow's jobs. ''If you think education is expensive,'' Obama said, borrowing his line from a bumper sticker, ''wait until you see how much ignorance costs in the 21st century.''
  But we don't have to choose. As Detroit shows us, we can have both. Detroit has 5,000 teachers to 88,000 students. Its biggest challenge has been trying to win back another 5,000 students who escaped to charter schools to justify not laying off all the extra teachers. Its billion-dollar school budget is all the more shocking in a city that is deep in debt and suffers from a 47 percent illiteracy rate.
  The education system fosters incredibly expensive ignorance. And that ignorance can not only be found in public schools in Detroit's ghettos, but in the Ivy League alma maters of Obama and his financial advisers.
  Obama's 6 trillion dollar debt is a testament to the high price of ignorance; as are his economic speeches calling for more green energy, more education and more taxes to solve all of our ills. In his latest speech, he vowed that making ''preschool available to every four year-old in America'' would make America competitive in the ''ocean of tomorrows'' and ''a sky of tomorrows.''
  About the only thing in Obama's entire 5,000-word speech that was at all interesting was in its opening as he pivoted from discussing the loss of middle class jobs to inveighing against the income inequality of the 1 percent. It was a convenient dodge that his average supporter was incapable of noticing, but it's at the heart of what's wrong with Obama's economic logic.
  Obama's speech stayed in familiar class warfare territory. Its implication was that if the wealthy were made to pay their fair share, the lost manufacturing jobs would somehow come back. The economic logic of that is absurd. Even if we assume that the wealthy are the villains of the piece, taxing them at Hollandaise rates seems as likely to bring back the jobs as constructing cardboard factories in a cargo cult ceremony to summon the spirits of the lost jobs would.
  But Obama, like most of his Socialist brethren, isn't really interested in repairing the broken relationships of the economy. The logic running through his speech is that forcing the rich, or at least those of their class who haven't written their timely checks to Organizing for America, to pay more will allow the government to create more jobs.
  Obama's perpetual motion tax machine is offering the same empty social welfare promises that more social services, more preschools, more free Internet, more green energy, more Obamacare, will turn the economy around, while shamelessly claiming that it has already done as much.
  There are still the occasional nods to all the nation's broken bridges that are just about to fall down, but mostly it's the same empty Socialism that proposes to tax a country to death because it's right and just to do so.
  ''In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes,'' Benjamin Franklin wrote to a French correspondent around the time that the United States Constitution took effect. Some two centuries later, government has combined death and taxes into one by taxing the economy to death.
  Taxing economies to death is one thing that we have in common with the French. President Hollande began his disastrous term in office with a proposed 75% tax rate. France's move to tax its economy to death hit a snag when its budget minister, a member of the Socialist Party in good standing, who was supposed to lead the crusade to make the rich pay their fair 75 percent share, admitted to hiding some $790,000 in a secret Swiss bank account.
  Obama has squandered money like Louis XVI and then pledged to lead a revolution to find where the rest of the money is. Surrounded by some of the most corrupt billionaires in the country, whose think-tanks help write the policy proposals that the teleprompter feeds into his brain, he inveighs against the 1 percent. And he tops it all off by claiming his disasters as successes.
  Obama taxes Americans. He taxes their incomes, their lifebloods and their patience. He has put his entire faith in taxes, in grubbing up enough money to serve as collateral for his latest scheme. And the road that his paradise of amnesty for illegal aliens, green energy for electric poverty and more government employees to administer the whole mess leads to is Detroit.
  Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
The Radical Hijacking of the Zimmerman Verdict
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: FrontPage Magazine Â» FrontPage
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:50
  A number of radical groups '-- including Marxist, Socialist, and other groups whose goal is the overthrow of the American system '-- have seized on the Trayvon Martin verdict and are now organizing events and rallies trying to instigate anger over the verdict to serve their own agenda.
  The Party for Socialism and Liberation (PSL) organized a rally in San Francisco that drew several hundreds within hours of the verdict. PSL is also holding a number of events related to police brutality, which they've augmented to focus on the Trayvon Martin verdict. In Chicago, they held a study group titled ''Stand Up Against Police Brutality and Justice for Trayvon Martin'' on July 23, 2013. A similar event will be held in San Francisco on July 26, 2013. A major rally against police brutality in Syracuse, New York is slated for August 21, 2013.
  According to PSL and groups with a similar ideological bent, the police are merely tools of the capitalists, used to suppress the working class, which PSL declares has been given the shaft by America's capitalistic system. Eugene Puryear is an organizer with PSL and he explained the group's view in the most recent issue of Liberation News, the magazine published by PSL.
  Militarized policing became the status quo, creating a massive apparatus that keeps itself going by always creating new ''wars''. What started as a war on revolutionaries switched to the so-called ''War on Drugs'' and now the ''War on Terror.'' Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the suppression of the radical wing of the social movements of the era significantly weakened those who would have been the principal obstacles to the mass incarceration policies and police repression against Black America, trends that intensified in the 1980's and continue to this day.
  PSL and groups like it see the Trayvon Martin affair as another example of misplaced priorities and inherent racism in the criminal justice system.
  The New Black Panther Party will use the Trayvon Martin verdict as the main theme of its annual ''Million Youth March,'' which will be held in Harlem, New York on September 7, 2013. On its website announcing the event, the New Black Panthers proudly proclaim that they've been in favor of vigilante justice in this case for months.
  We responsibly identified our constitutional rights to offer a $10,000.00 reward for anyone that could keep up with this Zimmerman whom we fear would try to leave the country. We also, under the United States Constitution, gave the city of Sanford, Florida and the United States Attorney General, our brother, Eric Holder that we were following protocol of issuing a citizen's arrest and that we could prove probable cause. We would make it our mission to bring in the murderer George Michael Zimmerman, who is still with his father and mother, Robert and Gladys Zimmerman.
  The National Alliance Against Racism and Political Repression (NAARPR) issued a statement as well, condemning the verdict as another example of the racism inherent in the justice system. The NAARPR favors a total abolition of America's prison system. The statement from the NAARPR also indicated that the verdict is another example of the inherent racism in our justice system.
  Two things have occurred in the past month which indicate that African Americans have no rights that white law makers, police and racist vigilantes are bound to respect. The first was the U.S. Supreme Court gutting of the Voting Rights Act, characterizing it as ''perpetual racial entitlements'' and thereby perpetually entitling white representatives of ruling elites to disenfranchise African Americans in an effort to bring back Jim Crow. The second was the acquittal Saturday of George Zimmerman, murderer of Trayvon Martin.
  The Socialist Worker, the newspaper of the International Socialist Organization, also dedicated an entire section in its last newspaper to the Martin verdict.
  At nearly every rally related to the Trayvon Martin case, one can find radical groups like the above passing out literature and hoping to ride the coattails of the controversy to advance their own agenda. Their agenda includes the complete overhaul of the USA, into something that resembles a Marxist or anarchist state. Will they gain converts to the cause?
  Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.
'Ronnie Tober is een happy camper en laat dat in 30 duizend tweets weten'
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: VK: Home
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:48
  OPINIE - C(C)cile Narinx '' 26/07/13, 07:31
  (C) Twitter, @ronnie_tober. Screenshot van het Twitterprofiel van Ronnie Tober.
  column Columnist C(C)cile Narinx heeft een goede tip voor mensen met een slecht humeur: volg zanger Ronnie Tober op Twitter. 'Ronnie is een happy camper en laat dat al zo'n 30 duizend tweets lang weten aan zijn 3.704 followers.'
  Iedereen die last heeft van weltschmerz, een chronisch pestpokkehumeur of een rotdag zou ik van harte willen aanbevelen @ronnie_tober te volgen op Twitter. Tober omschrijft zichzelf als: 'Zanger/Entertainer. Zong voor NL op Eurovisie SF 1968. Zing Ned & Engels repertoire. Ik hou van mensen en van het leven. Geniet van elke dag, het is zo voorbij!'
  Helaas voor Ronnie zijn er al weer een heleboel dagen voorbij sinds hij triomfen vierde als polder-Cliff Richard en Ciska Peters geloofwaardig liet zingen: 'Hee Ronnie, m'n Ronnie / ik heb papa beloofd / om jou niet te kussen / voordat we zijn verloofd' - terwijl iedereen toch aan zijn water voelde dat Ronnie zich never nooit met een vrouw zou verloven. Geen idee of en hoe Tober ooit uit de kast is gekomen, maar volgens zijn Engelstalige Wikipediapagina is hij al sinds 1968 met Jan Jochems, met wie hij na dertig jaar verkering trouwde - vreugdevolle levensevenementen die zijn Nederlandstalige Wiki-pagina gek genoeg niet gehaald hebben.
  Happy camperMaar wat zou het! Ronnie is een happy camper en laat dat al zo'n 30 duizend tweets lang weten aan zijn 3.704 followers. Ronnie volgen is alsof je elke morgen een Hallmark-kaart met rozen en strikken op je deurmat vindt, en elke avond een attent kattenbelletje op je nachtkastje. Elke ochtend twittert hij zoiets als: 'Lieve vrienden, ik wens jullie allemaal een super mooie dag toe!' Meteen gevolgd door: 'Good morning dear friends around the globe, have a wonderful day!' 's Avonds klinkt het: 'Hallo allemaal, ik wens jullie een SUPER mooie avond toe!' Met daarachteraan: 'From the Netherlands wishing you all a great afternoon/evening/night!'
  Gedurende de dag laat Ronnie gezellige posts achter over optredens op pleinfeesten en voert hij gesprekjes met collegae @margabult, @alpenzusjes en @gerardjoling. Foto's plaatst Ronnie ook graag: een tijdens het Ronnie Tober Foundation Gala genomen groepsportret met Ren(C) Froger en Rita Verdonk bijvoorbeeld. Of haringpartykiekjes, met Erica Terpstra en Hanja Maij-Weggen, waar hij dan onder schrijft: 'Erica Terpstra is een geweldige vrouw, ik mag haar heel graag, maar mevrouw Hanja May-Weggen is ook TOP!'
  ApetrotsEen onverwoestbaar stralend humeur, kortom. Geen wonder dat Ronnie 45 jaar na dato nog steeds apetrots is op zijn deelname aan het Eurovisiesongfestival, ""k al werd hij zestiende. Bewonderenswaardig dat hij moeite en tijd neemt zijn positiviteit en activiteit zo hoogstpersoonlijk te delen.
  Toen mijn man laatst moest fotograferen op een societyparty liep hij daar pardoes Tober tegen het goedgeluimde lijf. 'Hee Ronnie', zei hij (m'n Ronnie, dacht hij erachteraan). 'Ik hoor dat je zo enthousiast twittert. Complimenten hoor!' 'Dankjewel', zei Ronnie, wellevend als altijd. 'Maar dat doe ik niet zelf. Daar heb ik iemand voor.' Toen ik dat hoorde was mijn dag op slag verpest.
  C(C)cile Narinx is hoofdredacteur van Elle en schrijft deze zomer columns voor de Volkskrant (Twitter @elleeditor).
Second-Largest Dutch City Bans Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Conscious Life News
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:47
  Posted by cln_Featured_, World NewsThursday, July 25th, 2013Elizabeth Renter | Naturalsociety | July 25th, 2013
  Some cynics write off citizen action including petitions and sign-carrying protestors. They don't believe such small efforts can make any big difference. But the more than 600,000 people of Dutch city Rotterdam disagree. Their efforts, which began with a petition, have led to a ''green initiative'' in their city including the banning of Roundup, Monsanto's flagship product.
  The petition campaign was called ''Non-toxic Sidewalks for Our Children.'' With support from that country's Green Party, concerned citizens were able to make a significant change for their city and their future.
  As we know, Roundup (glyphosate) is a dangerous pesticide that is used all over the world. Though its maker, Monsanto, would have you believe there's nothing to be afraid of, research says differently. As a matter of fact, glyphosate has been connected to numerous health problems including respiratory distress, cellular damage, and even cancer. Check out this article which outlines just 7 nasty effects of pesticides.
  ''It is bad stuff and I'm glad we're giving it up,'' says Emile Cammeraat, Green party leader in the council. ''The producer Monsanto also provides genetically engineered seeds, Monsanto's own plants are the only thing RoundUp doesn't kill. In such a business district as you want to be, no Roundup is simply necessary, as there are organic alternatives.'' (Translated by Fritz Kreiss)
  Global consumers are getting wise to the dangers of Roundup and the GMO seeds designed to resist it. They don't want Monsanto and other GMO-seed giants taking over the global food supply and have started grassroots resistance movements around the world. The problem lies in getting enough people to take actual action against the seed giants and local, state, and federal lawmakers who support them in one way or another.
  Collectively, the people of Rotterdam were able to make their voices heard, essentially eliminating glyphosate from their local environment. There's no reason similar cities in other areas of the world couldn't do the very same thing.
  Comically, the U.S. government has recently decided to increase the allowable amount of glyphosate in U.S. food crops, just as another place bans the substance. The new rule allowing for even greater use of this damaging ingredient would take existing limits on glyphosate and dwarf them with new, higher ones. These limits would truly only work to benefit the interests of one, and it's not the American people, but Monsanto '' the giant corporation who is making millions off of genetically modified crops and the destruction of agriculture and human health.
  In addition to the Roundup ban, Rotterdam's green initiative will provide new parks and play areas, and even get the city involved in planting fruit trees. There will be more flowers and environments to support bees and wildlife, and more places for the urbanites to take in nature without fear of contamination by Monsanto's evil poster child.
  This post appeared at Naturalsociety
  More from Naturalsociety
VIDEO-Conversations With America: Technology as a Tool in the Fight Against Human Trafficking
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:31
  NARRATOR: Welcome to the U.S. Department of State. This is Conversations with America, a discussion between top State Department officials and NGO leaders, where you can watch and participate in the exchange of ideas with moderator Cheryl Benton, Deputy Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Public Affairs.MS. BENTON: Hello. I'm Cheryl Benton, Assistant Secretary in the Bureau of Public Affairs, and I'd like to welcome you to Conversations with America. Today, we are here to discuss the role of technology in the fight against human trafficking. I'd like to introduce the experts who are joining me today for this discussion.
  We are privileged to have with us Luis CdeBaca, Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons; Todd Park, U.S. Chief Technology Officer at the White House; and Claire Schmidt, Director of Programs at THORN. Thank you all so much for participating in this program.
  Trafficking in persons, also known as human trafficking and modern slavery, is a crime that undermines basic human rights and affects as many as 27 million persons around the globe. People fall victim to human trafficking for many, many reasons. Some may simply be seeking a better life, a promising job, or even an adventure. Others may be poverty stricken and forced to migrate for work, or they may be marginalized by their society. Those who work to combat trafficking have begun to harness technology as a tool to raise public awareness, stop traffickers, and help victims.
  The United States Government is committed to the global fight against contemporary forms of slavery and has shown so by appointing Luis CdeBaca as Ambassador-at-Large to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons. Ambassador, welcome. You were sworn into this position in May of 2009. Could you tell us a little bit about some of your top priorities and why the connection between technology and human trafficking is important for us to consider?
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: Well, first of all, thank you, Cheryl. I think that the notion of Conversations with America really goes to the heart of why we think that we have to use new technological platforms in this fight against modern slavery. My office was created at the end of the Clinton Administration and was taken on as something that was a quintessentially American value by the Bush Administration. We've now taken it hopefully to an even more intense fight under President Obama, and I think it just shows that you've got administrations that don't always see eye to eye on things, but human trafficking and the fight against modern slavery, making it through those transition periods '' I think it shows this is a bipartisan fight, it's quintessentially an American fight.
  And I think that's one of the reasons why technology is so important, because if we look at the original American fight against slavery to do away with the chattel slavery, legal slavery, where not only was somebody owned, but their children were owned, people could take a lease out on somebody, people could take insurance out on the person they owned, you had to register your slaves at the courthouse. I mean, it's just '' when you think about not just the effect on families, the effect on people who lived in slavery, but the way that society was all arranged around slavery in this country for 300 years, and suddenly, the telegraph, the steamship, and the railroad come and people who had escaped slavery can suddenly be in your town giving a lecture about what had happened to them. Editorials and stories suddenly are showing up in newspapers because this communications technology of the telegraph suddenly brings it into your home, and for the first time, people in the United States started confronting the reality of slavery. It wasn't something that just happened over there down in the South. It was '' these people just came to town on this train and they're telling me what the horrors of slavery are.
  Disruptive technology is not a new thing. It's just that these technologies are new. But I think that we have to look at the disruptive technologies of the first abolitionist movement to figure out what this modern abolitionist movement does. And you've got two people here who are working on that who really are on the cutting edge, so we're just so excited about being able to harness their goals and their expertise in this joint American fight.
  MS. BENTON: Very good. Thank you, Ambassador. I wanted to ask Todd, you have truly taken a leadership role on this issue in the technology field. Can you tell us a little bit more about the anti-trafficking work that your office is doing at the White House? And welcome.
  MR. PARK: Thank you so much. Thanks for having me over.
  MS. BENTON: Absolutely.
  MR. PARK: It's a pleasure to be here. I just wanted to also thank Ambassador CdeBaca for his incredible leadership in this fight, and it's such a tremendous privilege and honor to be partnered with you and the whole team here in this critically important movement.
  So as you know, the President has challenged everyone in his Administration to redouble their energies in the fight against modern-day slavery. And so taking up that challenge, what my CTO office did last year, working with the First Lady's Office, the Council on Women and Girls, is we convened a workshop at the White House where we invited about 50 amazing people '' trafficking survivors, advocates, amazing tech innovators from Silicon Valley, law enforcement to brainstorm ways that tech can be used to fight trafficking. As I think everybody knows, unfortunately, traffickers have been very effective using technology themselves to actually scale trafficking. And what the President wants to do is actually turn the tables on the traffickers and use tech to fight back.
  So this group came up with amazing ideas. The President subsequently, a couple months later at his landmark speech at Clinton Global Initiative, issued a public challenge to turn the table on traffickers using tech. And people like Claire and Thorn Foundation and others have just done phenomenal work, phenomenal work in this space building tools that help identify what online advertisements are more likely to be minors so that law enforcement can actually prioritize their efforts to rescue victims, helping victims connect to services that can help them, all kinds of new ways to actually take the fight to the traffickers and help victims use tech to really scale the fight against trafficking to new heights. So it's incredibly exciting to see.
  One of our favorite laws of the universe is something called Joy's Law. It was coined by the co-founder of Sun Microsystems, Bill Joy, who's a legendary figure in Silicon Valley. And one of the things he said, no matter who you are, you have to remember that most of the smartest people in the world work for somebody else, right? (Laughter.) So our strategy hasn't been ''Okay, I'm going to think really hard and my team's going to, like, build the tools ourselves.'' We said, ''You know what? Actually, let's ask all the other smart people in the world who know a lot more about this than we do, right, to mobilize their energies and team up and fight back.'' And I think Thorn and the work that Thorn's doing is a perfect case example of what happens when you do that.
  MS. BENTON: Great. Thank you. And so I wanted to turn to Claire over at Thorn. First of all, is that an acronym?
  MS. SCHMIDT: No, it is not an acronym. We see ourselves as the protectors of children who are the most vulnerable members of our society, and we protect them the same way that a Thorn protects a rose, so --
  MS. BENTON: That is great.
  MS. SCHMIDT: -- that's what it means.
  MS. BENTON: That's great. So just tell me a little bit about the work that you do at Thorn because I know you're here meeting with some organizations in D.C.
  MS. SCHMIDT: Mm-hmm, yes. So we have been around since 2009, and when we were founded, we started as more of an awareness-raising organization and we focused on letting people know that slavery and trafficking were still happening in this country, which still surprises a lot of people.
  But in March 2010, we had a big meeting of technology companies up in the Bay Area and we told them about what was happening, and we said some of your tools are being used to facilitate this crime. How can we use your tools and how can you use your tools to fight back? And ever since that meeting, we '' people were very passionate about getting involved and really wanting to help. And ever since then, we've convened about 25 to 30 tech companies up in the Bay Area about twice a year, and we bring them information about how trafficking is changing, how child sex trafficking in particular is changing and how traffickers are sort of evolving the way that they use technology. And they're very, very excited to sort of have that, like, field understanding of the crime.
  And at the same time, we bring them together with one another to share best practices, and then we ask them '' in the same way that Todd mentioned, we ask them to brainstorm, okay, where do you see these technologies going and how could they be used to fight back, how can we get one step or two steps ahead of the traffickers, and how can we use technology to help survivors reach out for help? And so a big part of our work has been convening those task force meetings over time and then using the findings and learnings to inform program development.
  MS. BENTON: Wow, that's pretty exciting. So in order to enslave their victims, traffickers constantly change how they operate and have learned how to utilize the tools available to them, including technology, to target, recruit, and exploit victims.
  First, I think it would be helpful for our viewers to know, what are the most common ways traffickers target their victims? And I'd like to ask Todd to tell us what steps can we do to make it more difficult for traffickers to do this.
  MR. PARK: Well, so, technology can be used in all kinds of ways to help. I mean, I have to stress, though '' and this is kind of odd coming from a chief technology officer '' but I don't think technology by itself solves any problem, right. It's been very rare in my experience that it actually has.
  MS. BENTON: It's (inaudible.)
  MR. PARK: (Laughter.) Yes, I know it is. Technology can be a very useful aid, right, in the hands of victims, in the hands of victims services, activist organizations, law enforcement, to help fight trafficking. But it's very important to think of technology as a tool and not as a solution, right.
  So that being said, it can actually be used in all kinds of ways to disrupt the traffickers, right. And so one example actually is work that Claire should talk more about, to help law enforcement be equipped with a tool that actually morphs and shifts and changes as traffickers shift their behavior to basically help begin identify online through the online advertisements that traffickers use to exploit their victims, right, who might actually be, for example, a child, right. That law enforcement should prioritize for rescue, right, and help build cases across multiple ads that they can use to take traffickers out, right.
  Another example is educating children about the ways they might be exploited, right, and helping them actually be better prepared for that, and helping victims actually connect using technology, right, in very effective, scalable, secure ways, connect to help that can actually help get them out of their situation and help them get on the path they really want to be on.
  So a lot of the same characteristic technology that traffickers have used to exploit their victims, right, the ability to scale or the ability to actually find folks online, right '' those characteristics actually can be used to scale the fight against the traffickers, but again, in the hands of law enforcement, in the hands of victims, in the hands of activist organizations, in the hands of victim services, who are absolutely critical, right, to be partnered up with the technology for technology to really work.
  MS. BENTON: Right. Ambassador, what types of efforts has the anti-trafficking community fostered to harness technology as a tool to fight trafficking?
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: I think there's been several things, and it does break down, as Todd suggests, I mean, that notion of everything from the very basic. I think that we're down to the point where we just assume everybody has a computer and so databases aren't thought of as being cutting-edge technology. But I remember when I was in the DA's office back in the '80s, and suddenly our ability to just keep track of our cases on a database, not a network online or anything, we just networked in our own office. That was '' again, that was transformative.
  And the notion of being able to do that with an anti-trafficking unit in a developing country, so they actually know where the victims are, what's happening in the court room. Even something that's as what we would think of as rudimentary, not cutting edge, as a good database, is something that we're trying to make sure that we can get out to the field.
  But also that notion of the linkages '' traffickers are quick to exploit technology because it allows them to help find a market. They can find the men for whom they're going to be offer prostitutes, whether it's child prostitutes or adults, on various online fora. And then looking at how that could be disrupted, whether it's through the service provider themselves or whether it's governmental action, or whether it's some combination of all of that together to put pressure on that so it's harder for them to find the market. If it's harder for them to find the market, they then have to do other things and then they're out in the open where law enforcement can find them.
  So part of it is with any kind of organized crime fight, you want to figure out what their patterns are and then how you disrupt those patterns, because that gives you a few months '' not forever '' it gives you a few months in which while they're trying to establish new patterns, that's when you can pick them off. And I think that that's one of the things that we're seeing. It's incredible to me to see even something '' again, we think of cell phones as being kind of normal, many of us here in America, and yet the notion of cell phones as a disruptive technology for the first time.
  We've had people who are able to call out of a factory in Jordan where they're being exploited and abused and they're calling back to Bangladesh and saying what happened to them? And then the Bangladesh, their families go to an NGO or a labor organization who then talk to us because we've got folks in out embassies who have those relationships. And so you're talking about within six hours you go from a call for help to the U.S. Government going back to the Jordanian Government.
  I mean, taking that around the world as opposed to languishing for years wondering if anybody cares. And that's what technology can do. It can speed things up in some pretty amazing ways.
  MS. BENTON: Wow. So Claire, can you tell us a little bit about you'd mentioned earlier that you have brought tech companies together in the bay area. So can you talk to a little bit about the Tech Task Force that you work with at Thorn?
  MS. SCHMIDT: Yeah. So the Tech Task Force is made up of about 25-30 tech companies '' Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Twitter, AOL '' there are a number of major tech companies that are involved and working very closely with us on a daily basis. But then we also have brought in smaller startups because one value that we think that we bring to this is getting companies who have never thought about trafficking, have never thought about child sexual exploitation at all to think about it for the first time and to see how their tools and platforms could actually be used to exploit children '' and not to scare them, but just to say here are some of the ways in which Microsoft and Google and some of the bigger companies have already thought about addressing this problem, and we want them to share that knowledge with you. Because while some of these companies may be competitors in sort of a normal business sense, they're not in this area at all.
  And then one example of the kind of information that we share with them, as opposed to just facilitating information sharing between them is we recently '' or we're still in the midst of conducting a survivor survey, a nationwide domestic minor sex trafficking survivor survey in which we ask these individuals how technology was or was not used to recruit them, whether they met their trafficker online, what platforms were being used, how technology may have been used to sort of advertise them in the sort of online forums and advertising spaces that Ambassador CdeBaca mentioned, and if so, which sites and how were the advertisements worded. And then ultimately whether technology played a role in their escape at all, and if not, how could it have? Because it's really important to bring the survivor's voice into this conversation and to let these major tech companies hear about how their platforms may have been used, so that they can start to address that proactively. So that's just one example of the way that we work with those companies.
  MS. BENTON: That's great. I know, Ambassador, you were talking about ways that you're flushing this out because of technology has helped you. Are we making real good progress? Are we making progress? How has that played out so far?
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: Well, I think we're making progress. I'll get back to you when we make real good progress.
  MS. BENTON: Okay. (Laughter.)
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: Twenty-seven million victims around the world, and while we've had an increase in victims identified over the last year '' 20 percent increase '' you're still talking about only 47,000 people identified worldwide by governments as victims. Now NGOs, service providers, others, are working with other people. But that is by any stretch of the imagination a ridiculously low number.
  I think that it's perhaps in some ways the other side of technology that will allow us to shrink that bigger number. When we're looking at something like slaveryfootprint.org where people can go, consumers can go, and say what's the life that I'm living, what do I own, what do I buy, what do I eat, and thanks to the folks at the economics faculty at Berkeley and others, the algorithm at slavery footprint will actually tell you a rough estimation of how many slaves does it take? How many people in forced labor around the world does it take to sustain the lifestyle that each of us lives?
  I work every day to fight modern slavery and I can't tell you where the coffee comes from, where the cocoa comes from, the cotton in my shirt '' I don't know those things. And if I don't know them, then most consumers won't.
  MS. BENTON: Surely don't know.
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: But I think that this notion of Slavery Footprint is a perfect example then of a platform that allows consumers not only to find that out, make it personal, but then also to circle back to the companies and say I care. I want to know if the precious metals that make my cell phone work without overheating, if those were mined by children and enslaved villagers in the Eastern Congo. And the tech company then might think, oh, well, we don't deal in commodities. We don't have servants and we aren't going to prostitutes, so we're fine. Well, that tech company is using that platform of the mobile telephone or the handheld computing that probably does have sourcing of some of the minerals from slavery in it.
  And so only through us shining a light on that, I think, can the end users '' the companies '' can then start saying, well, we aren't going to source from them. So it's a cultural change. It's rejecting the demand for commercial sex; it's reflecting the demand for this cheap labor. But we can only know that with information. I think that's one of the places where technology helps to close that information gap between consumer and what's happening out in the field.
  MR. PARK: Just to build on that, it's '' I actually didn't know the magnitude of the trafficking problem until I scrubbed into it last year. And then the moment I learned about it, my head exploded, and I said I'm going to do everything I possibly can, everything my team possibly can to be of any help we possibly can to end this evil. Right? And the experience that I had is whenever I expose someone else to knowledge of the issue, their heads explode and they get highly mobilized. Right?
  So the challenge is not getting people to care, right? Because they care the second they know about it. I think challenge is getting people to know about it, right? And so awareness of this issue is globally and nationally still quite low. And one of the things we're really interested in amplifying is the use of technology to help get the word out about this evil because I think that will directly result in exponentially more people mobilizing in all kinds of ways to fight and end the evil. So and again kind of true to form, like, we're not going to do that ourselves. (Laughter.) We're actually '' we're going to work with people like Thorn, et cetera, to mobilize a whole (inaudible) of folks, who can actually get the word out. But I think that's going to generate tremendous returns in terms of success in the fight.
  And I wonder whether, as well, that that notion of not just '' we always talk about new technology, but a lot of what Thorn's doing for instance is going into folks who have technology and saying how do we tweak what you're doing so that it can help this particular population.
  My '' we had folks that were in a shrimp processing factory in Thailand on a visit, and of course they talked to some of the workers and they said, oh yeah, we always love it when the Americans come because they tell us two days before that you're coming and then we're not supposed to bring our kids to work. So that's some issues on itself.
  But one of the things that was amazing is that the shrimp exporting industry, which is like a $6 billion industry had been saying, well, we can't trace down to the boat. We're selling shrimp and we know there's these boat captains that are enslaving people, but we can't trace all the way back down. And my folks were in the factory and they looked over and here's somebody hitting the side of the little cartons that each of the shrimp processers were having to clean, hitting that with a laser and bar coding. And so Alice went over and she's like, ''What's the barcode for?'' And they're like, ''Oh, we have to do this in case there's a health issue.''
  And so the very people who had been saying we can't trace it back to the boat and hold that '' to hold the U.S. company accountable for what that boat captain did to the crew, at the same time you can trace that bag of shrimp all the way back to the boat, if you're looking at health issues.
  Now I think part of it is because the health issues not only are you going to have the regulation of the health ministries '' whether the U.S. or other countries are going to '' if there's an outbreak. But then there's also going to be liability issues. And so the notion of getting the plaintiffs lawyers involved has provided an incentive for them to use that technology to be able to trace. Same thing with the spinach, you get these e-coli outbreaks and they'll tell you even which quadrant of the field the spinach came from.
  But they'll tell you, oh, well we don't know who the crew leader was. So I think that part of it is we have to figure out this technology that's there, it's already being used, and then how do we incorporate the human trafficking into it as well.
  MS. BENTON: That's right. Claire, where do you see the role of technology having the greatest impact in efforts to combat human trafficking? I direct that to you, but obviously everyone can jump in.
  MS. SCHMIDT: Yeah, I think one of the programs that I'm most excited about is the one that Todd mentioned, which would really allow law enforcement to use their time as effectively and efficiently as possible in trying to rescue children who are being exploited. And actually, as you mentioned, it's using an existing technology in a different way.
  So we're working with a tech company that does semantic analysis for the Department of Defense, and we're actually just deploying that same technology on the online classified sites and the escort services section of those sites where children and adults alike are being advertised. And the real question that we asked is: Can an algorithm really detect an ad that is more likely to be a minor? And then in some ways surface that to law enforcement so that they have that information right away and can act upon it? So the ability would be for law enforcement to rescue victims more quickly.
  And so I think that's one way in which technology is really essential, because it allows this sort of messy, unstructured dataset to be organized and structured and then acted upon, which is the most important part. So yeah, we're really excited, and that's sort of in the testing phases right now. I mean, we've seen some good initial results, and so we're excited about that.
  MS. BENTON: Oh, very good. We've received a number of questions from DipNote, which is the Department's official blog, on the topic today, so I wanted to just get right to those.
  Rachel from Washington, D.C. asks: Do you think programs like USAID-funded MTV EXIT and others which raise awareness of how young people can prevent themselves from being trafficked, go far enough and engage the right audiences to make a difference long-term?
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: Well, I can certainly '' I mean, part of it is they had me out on stage at their big concert in Burma last year, so since I've been in front of --
  MS. BENTON: You're on MTV?
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: Exactly. I've been in front of those 60,000 people or whatever with them. Not only is it a great concert, but I think it showed the seriousness with which MTV has been approaching this. What they've decided to do is early on they had some concerts, they had some awareness raising, but they had no idea whether or not anything was coming of it. And so what they've done since then is they're using the gathered folks to have people texting to a particular number so they can capture 50,000 phone numbers, so that they can do the kind of follow-on research as to is somebody coming to one of the concerts, or is somebody coming to one of the outreach events, then going to have an impact six weeks later or six months later, et cetera.
  And so that notion of using technology to start to do the monitoring and evaluation and seeing that a lot of the kids that come to these events are '' even six months later are still interested in and active in the fight against human trafficking. I don't think that the concerts and the outreach was as sticky in the early years, and I think that they've been not just using technology, but they've been using a lot of follow-up work. It's worked with the governments, it's worked with ASEAN, which is the regional forum in Southeast Asia. And to their credit, they haven't expanded.
  I think that's one of the things that's so important, whether it's for an NGO, for government efforts, et cetera, is to figure out when is scaling necessary, and when should you resist it. And I think that by MTV keeping its focus on Southeast Asia, they were able to go into Burma then in a way that built upon what was happening in Thailand, and since a lot of the victims in Thailand are Burmese, the work that they're doing in northern Burma now with people about how to protect yourself, that's having a spillover effect in Thailand. If they had decided now we need to go into Russia because we've got a Russian pop star who wants to be involved, now we are going to go into Africa, because we've got all these singers who want to do MTV EXIT concerts '' which people are knocking on their door constantly, and I think that it's been good that they've resisted that. Now we have to figure out how to '' we do need to scale it, but it's figuring out when the right time to scale it is so that you can actually make that kind of impact.
  But it's USAID's project, not the State Department's, but it's something that I think that we as an Administration should be very proud of, because I think they are making a big difference. When you get a Burmese general up on stage dancing with a couple of young girls with guitars, you realize how fast the cultural shift is happening.
  MS. BENTON: Okay. Yeah. Good. So how can the public assist in the fight against human trafficking? And I wanted to start with you, Ambassador, because your role at the State Department has you interface a lot throughout the world, and then I want to get Claire and Todd to jump in on that.
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: I think two things very quickly. I mean, first of all, everybody should go and take the slaveryfootprint.org test. This is something that's only about 15 minutes. The Canadians are ahead of us right now on people who start to take the survey and then actually complete it because the folks that run Slavery Footprint are able to do the analytics on who goes on the site, looks at things, and then doesn't take the survey, who starts the survey and then doesn't end it, et cetera, and I hate to see the fact that the Canadians are completing the surveys at a higher rate than the Americans. Trust me, I hear about this from our Canadian diplomatic ''
  MS. BENTON: Right. Oh, I bet. (Laughter.)
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: -- colleagues. So that is kind of the let's beat Canada on taking the surveys, but also it's not just knowing what your slavery footprint is; it's the doing something about it. And if somebody is in the medical professions, you can volunteer to help the anti-trafficking movement in your community by giving medical services. Dentists, dental is one of the things that is usually the highest priority for folks coming out of slavery, because they haven't been able to get that kind of ongoing care that you need whether it's dental, gynecological, et cetera.
  But also, somebody's who's a lawyer can volunteer helping people not just in court, but also with financial planning. If somebody's in the money business, they can help teach people how to do a budget. I mean, there's '' anything that any of us do, we can do that for the benefit of trafficking victims. And I think that it's getting involved with your local service providers, getting involved with your local churches, and then harnessing whatever it is that makes you special or makes you interesting and available for this type of service. Put it to work for the trafficking victims, walk with them as they become survivors.
  MS. SCHMIDT: I would also add I think it's really important that people just get informed about the facts about how trafficking is playing out in this country and around the world and what some of the realities are, the average age of entry into the sex trade, who these individuals are, and how they sort of get brought into the life, and so '' and then telling other people about it, and it's sort of '' I've found that I've had some really interesting conversations with people who had no idea, which then mobilized them to get involved in different ways.
  And I would also say there are so many organizations doing incredible work, and each of them need something different from the public. We just spent the last two days at an organization here in D.C. called Courtney's House, and they're doing incredible work providing direct services to survivors, and they need things like clothes and shoes and metro cards and stuff like that, and so it could be as small as foregoing your expensive cup of coffee one day and instead using it to buy someone a metro card. So I think just getting informed, doing the research about the issue and educating other people and then '' and figuring out which organizations resonate with you in your area or otherwise and doing what they need help with.
  MS. BENTON: Very good. We're actually getting to the end of the program, but I do have a question. Who is the target trafficking '' now, who are the victims? I mean, is there a particular population? Is there a particular age range? Is there a particular ethnic group that is the target of traffickers? Or is this an equal opportunity offender?
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: I think that because trafficking is really the combination of vulnerability and greed and cruelty, the vulnerabilities often take the same forms. The vulnerabilities are often somebody is an ethnic minority or a '' somebody from the margins of society. There's gender issues, there's immigration or language issues that render them vulnerable.
  So here in the United States, it could be a newly arrived immigrant that doesn't know how things work, that's vulnerable because of that, or it could be a child who is in an abusive home who wants so desperately to get out and to have some other meaning in his or her life, that when someone comes and says, ''Come with me, I love you, oh, and you need to do this for me,'' that they're vulnerable to that. So I think we see victims in the United States who are white, who are black, Hispanic, Asian, Native American, we see people who are men, women, adults, children. And I think that one of the things is to try to figure out '' this is why I think it's wonderful that we have groups that work with immigrants who work with trafficking victims. We have groups that work with American citizens who work with trafficking victims, some who say, ''Well, I want to work with children, and that's where I find my group best used,'' others that say, ''I want to work with adults.'' All of that together becomes a movement, and I think that all of that together then allows us not to overlook a victim when we see them.
  People were amazed a few years ago when the Justice Department arrested some folks in Kansas for enslaving some white men on a farm, because the notion of a white man who spoke English as being vulnerable in America is not something that people were thinking about, but these men were schizophrenic, these men had a mental illness, and it rendered them vulnerable. So I think we have to look through our own assumptions, find that vulnerability, because unfortunately there was a trafficker who found that vulnerability.
  MS. BENTON: Absolutely. That's a very good thought.
  Well, this is my least favorite part of the program, and it's actually time to conclude this session of Conversations with America. Beginning with Ambassador CdeBaca, would you just share with us your final thoughts, and then I'd like to go to Claire and to Todd as we wrap this segment up.
  AMBASSADOR CDEBACA: Well, first, my final thought is I want to thank Claire and Todd. The work that we've seen from Thorn as kind of the representative of civil society, and this is something that cannot be done by government alone. It has to be done by government, because only government can punish the traffickers as they deserve, but it's society coming together, rejecting the demand for commercial sex, rejecting the demand for these cheap goods, and saying, ''We want something better.'' And I think that that's got to be outside as well as inside of the government.
  And Todd kind of, as the stand-in for the entire White House, I mean, we have had such great support from the White House from President Obama on down, and that's given, I think, lift not just to the State Department's efforts, but to the EEOC, to the Department of Justice, Department of Labor, everybody coming together and harnessing their jurisdiction in a new way to be able to work on behalf of the vulnerable. I work for a government that actually pays me to help free slaves. What better can you say than that?
  MS. BENTON: It's pretty amazing.
  Todd, could you share your final thoughts with us?
  MR. PARK: This is a fight we can win. It's a fight we can win, it's a fight we must win. And my hope, the hope of all of us is that it's a defining characteristic of what our generation did. All of our generations here who inhabit our country and planet right now is that we band together across the public sector, the private sector, the citizens sector, the academic sector, the tech sector, every sector, the faith sector to stop this evil and end it. It's a big fight, it's a challenging fight, but just in the year that I've been working on this, just meeting incredible people like Ambassador CdeBaca and Claire and so many others, it's a fight I know we can win, and we will.
  MS. BENTON: Well, very good.
  Claire.
  MS. SCHMIDT: Yeah. I mean, I would echo what both of them have said, and also I think it's really important if you're working in this space to just think about how to best collaborate with other organizations, because we don't want to be doing the same work that someone else is doing and duplicating efforts. I think it's really important to share information and share insights, and that's a big part of what drives the work that we do, and I think it's critical to being able to fight back.
  MS. BENTON: Well, good. Well, I'd like to thank Ambassador CdeBaca, Todd Park, and Claire Schmidt for sharing their work and their knowledge with us. I'd also like to thank each of you for joining us today. We hope that Conversations with America will continue to inform citizens about the Administration's efforts to address the challenges of the 21st century. We look forward to engaging with you again soon. Thank you.
Agenda 21 In One Easy Lesson | American Policy Center
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:26
  Awareness of Agenda 21 and Sustainable Development is racing across the nation as citizens in community after community are learning what their city planners are actually up to. As awareness grows, I am receiving more and more calls for tools to help activists fight back. Many complain that elected officials just won't read detailed reports or watch long videos. ''Can you give us something that is quick, and easy to read that we can hand out,'' I'm asked.
  So here it is. A one page, quick description of Agenda 21 that fits on one page. I've also included for the back side of your hand out a list of quotes for the perpetrators of Agenda 21 that should back up my brief descriptions.
  A word of caution, use this as a starter kit, but do not allow it to be your only knowledge of this very complex subject. To kill it you have to know the facts. Research, know your details; discover the NGO players in your community; identify who is victimized by the policies and recruit them to your fight; and then kill Agenda 21. That's how it must be done. The information below is only your first step. Happy hunting.
  What is Sustainable Development?
  According to its authors, the objective of sustainable development is to integrate economic, social and environmental policies in order to achieve reduced consumption, social equity, and the preservation and restoration of biodiversity. Sustainablists insist that every societal decision be based on environmental impact, focusing on three components; global land use, global education, and global population control and reduction.
  Social Equity (Social injustice)
  Social justice is described as the right and opportunity of all people ''to benefit equally from the resources afforded us by society and the environment.'' Redistribution of wealth. Private property is a social injustice since not everyone can build wealth from it. National sovereignty is a social injustice. Universal health care is a social injustice. All part of Agenda 21 policy.
  Economic Prosperity
  Public Private Partnerships (PPP). Special dealings between government and certain, chosen corporations which get tax breaks, grants and the government's power ofEminent Domain to implement sustainable policy. Government-sanctioned monopolies.
  Local Sustainable Development policies
  Smart Growth, Wildlands Project, Resilient Cities, Regional Visioning Projects, STAR Sustainable Communities, Green jobs, Green Building Codes, ''Going Green,'' Alternative Energy, Local Visioning, facilitators, regional planning, historic preservation, conservation easements, development rights, sustainable farming, comprehensive planning, growth management, consensus.
  Who is behind it?
  ICLEI '' Local Governments for Sustainability (formally, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives). Communities pay ICLEI dues to provide ''local'' community plans, software, training, etc. Addition groups include American Planning Council, The Renaissance Planning Group, International City/ County Management Group, aided by US Mayors Conference, National Governors Association, National League of Cities, National Association of County Administrators and many more private organizations and official government agencies. Foundation and government grants drive the process.
  Where did it originate?
  The term Sustainable Development was first introduced to the world in the pages a 1987 report (Our Common Future) produced by the United Nations World Commission on Environmental and Development, authored by Gro Harlem Brundtland, VP of the World Socialist Party. The term was first offered as official UN policy in 1992, in a document called UN Sustainable Development Agenda 21, issued at the UN's Earth Summit, today referred to simply as Agenda 21.
  What gives Agenda 21 Ruling Authority?
  More than 178 nations adopted Agenda 21 as official policy during a signing ceremony at the Earth Summit. US president George H.W. Bush signed the document for the US. In signing, each nation pledge to adopt the goals of Agenda 21. In 1995, President Bill Clinton, in compliance with Agenda 21, signed Executive Order #12858 to create the President's Council on Sustainable Development in order to ''harmonize'' US environmental policy with UN directives as outlined in Agenda 21. The EO directed all agencies of the Federal Government to work with state and local community governments in a joint effort ''reinvent'' government using the guidelines outlined in Agenda 21. As a result, with the assistance of groups like ICLEI, Sustainable Development is now emerging as government policy in every town, county and state in the nation.
  Revealing Quotes From the Planners
  ''Agenda 21 proposes an array of actions which are intended to be implemented by EVERY person on Earth'...it calls for specific changes in the activities of ALL people'... Effective execution of Agenda 21 will REQUIRE a profound reorientation of ALL humans, unlike anything the world has ever experienced'... '' Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Save Our Planet (Earthpress, 1993). Emphases '' DR
  Urgent to implement '' but we don't know what it is!
  ''The realities of life on our planet dictate that continued economic development as we know it cannot be sustained'...Sustainable development, therefore is a program of action for local and global economic reform '' a program that has yet to be fully defined.'' The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.
  ''No one fully understands how or even, if, sustainable development can be achieved; however, there is growing consensus that it must be accomplished at the local level if it is ever to be achieved on a global basis.'' The Local Agenda 21 Planning Guide, published by ICLEI, 1996.
  Agenda 21 and Private Property
  ''Land'...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth, therefore contributes to social injustice.'' From the report from the 1976 UN's Habitat I Conference.
  ''Private land use decisions are often driven by strong economic incentives that result in several ecological and aesthetic consequences'...The key to overcoming it is through public policy'...'' Report from the President's Council on Sustainable Development, page 112.
  ''Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class '' involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work air conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable.'' Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN's Earth Summit, 1992.
  Reinvention of Government
  ''We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better decisions, more rapid change, and more sensible use of human, natural and financial resources in achieving our goals.'' Report from the President's Council on Sustainable Development
  ''Individual rights will have to take a back seat to the collective.'' Harvey Ruvin, Vice Chairman, ICLEI. The Wildlands Project
  ''We must make this place an insecure and inhospitable place for Capitalists and their projects '' we must reclaim the roads and plowed lands, halt dam construction, tear down existing dams, free shackled rivers and return to wilderness millions of tens of millions of acres or presently settled land.'' Dave Foreman, Earth First.
  What is not sustainable?
  Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paves and tarred roads, logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic systems that fail to set proper value on the environment.'' UN's Biodiversity Assessment Report.
  Hide Agenda 21's UN roots from the people
  ''Participating in a UN advocated planning process would very likely bring out many of the conspiracy- fixated groups and individuals in our society'... This segment of our society who fear 'one-world government' and a UN invasion of the United States through which our individual freedom would be stripped away would actively work to defeat any elected official who joined 'the conspiracy' by undertaking LA21. So we call our process something else, such as comprehensive planning, growth management or smart growth.'' J. Gary Lawrence, advisor to President Clinton's Council on Sustainable Development.
The Boy Scouts Of America Just Made Me Want To Vomit | Daron D. Fraley
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:25
  This blog post has nothing to do with their stance on homosexuals in scouting.
  No . . . this news flash is something quite different. Did you know that the BSA has added a new merit badge, unveiled at the Jamboree? And the merit badge is REQUIRED? Actually it's an option'... you get to pick one of two required badges:
  1. Environmental Science (every scout's favorite)or2. SUSTAINABILITY.
  Yeah. Sustainability. The code word for the United Nations Agenda-21 Program.
  What? You don't know what Agenda-21 is? Here's a primer for you: Agenda-21 In One Easy Lesson
  Now that you have read that, let's talk about some other buzz-words'... How about the phrase CARBON FOOTPRINT? You recognize that one from news about Al Gore? What about population control? Urbanization?
  Are you getting warm fuzzies yet?
  Here are some highlights for the Sustainability Merit Badge: (Link to the Merit Badge Calendar on the Scouting Magazine site)
  4d. Species decline. Explain the term species (plant or animal) decline. Discuss the human activities that contribute to species decline, what can be done to help reverse the decline, and its impact on a sustainable environment.
  4e. World population. Learn how the world's population affects the sustainability of Earth. Discuss three human activities that may contribute to putting Earth at risk, now and in the future.
  4f. Climate change. Find a world map that shows the pattern of temperature change for a period of at least 100 years. Share this map with your counselor, and discuss three factors that scientists believe affect the global weather and temperature.
  Yes, the Boy Scouts of America have done exactly what I predicted. They have swallowed an entire olympic-sized-pool of Kool-Aid from the United Nations Agenda-21 program, and spiked it with liquid delirium from the inventor of the internet, Al ''carbon-footprint'' Gore.
  I really want to vomit. This is one more manifestation of the New World Order that intends to destroy the freedoms of all nations, tongues, and peoples. And now it's in the Scouting organization? You have got to be kidding me.
  For this supremely foolish mistake, my dear Boy Scouts, I am done. Consider this your walking papers. You will never get one dime from me again. I will not collect Friends of Scouting for you. I will not contribute. And as more patriots who love liberty get wind of this, be prepared to watch your leaking ship break asunder and go straight to the bottom like the Titanic.
  Sincerely,
  Daron D. FraleyEagle Scout, Son of Liberty, extremely ticked-off Patriot
KTVU fires three over Asiana Airlines pilot gaffe | The Desk
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 06:16
  San Francisco FOX affiliate KTVU-TV has fired three employees stemming from an investigation into an erroneous and embarrassing report broadcast on July 12.
  Three producers '-- Brad Belstock, Christina Gastelu and Roland DeWolk '-- were let go by the station on Saturday, San Francisco media journalist Rich Lieberman reported.
  The employees were let go following an investigation into a July 12 newscast in which news presenter Tori Campbell misidentified four pilots aboard a plane that crashed at San Francisco International Airport as Captain Sum Ting Wong, Wi Tu Lo, Ho Lee Fuk and Bang Ding Ow.
  An on-air retraction follow the report in which Campbell claimed the station had confirmed the names with an official at the National Transportation Safety Board in Washington. The official was a summer intern, the NTSB later said.
  Asiana Airlines, the operator of the plane that crashed at the airport on July 6, had threatened to sue KTVU over the report, claiming the gaffe caused damage to its reputation. Shortly after hiring a U.S.-based law firm, the airliner reversed its decision to file a lawsuit.
  On Saturday, The Desk reported that Belstock was the producer on duty when the erroneous names were read. Belstock, who had worked at KTVU for seven years, included ''making necessary phone calls to confirm information with sources'' and ''ordering and creating appropriate graphics for stories'' as some of his responsibilities at the station.
  Minutes after the names were read on-air, Belstock tweeted ''Oh sh*t.'' Hours later, his Twitter profile was deleted.
  Gastelu was the executive producer for special projects at KTVU. DeWolk was an investigative producer at the station. It is unclear what role both played in the Asiana Airlines gaffe that led to their termination.
  Lieberman, citing an unidentified source, said the firings came after a ''major'' investigation by KTVU's parent company Cox Media Group. More firings were possible as the investigation continues, Lieberman reported.
  On Friday, KTVU began submitting copyright infringement notices with YouTube seeking the removal of videos depicting the erroneous report. Two videos uploaded by The Desk to a YouTube account were among those initially removed. On Tuesday, both videos were restored after The Desk filed counter-notifications with the service.
  Comments
Google disconnects Chromecast's Netflix deal
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: CNET News
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:29
  Barely 24 hours after the debut of the Web-to-TV streaming dongle, Google cuts the cord on its related Netflix promo.
  Google wasn't sure how much of a hit its Web-to-TV streaming dongle, Chromecast, would be. So to sweeten the deal, it included three months of Netflix for free. But Google has put a halt to the deal, only one day after the device debuted, because it was too popular.
  Google told the Los Angeles Times in a statement, "Due to overwhelming demand for Chromecast devices since launch, the three-month Netflix promotion (which was available in limited quantities) is no longer available."
  The Netflix deal was quite the sweetener. While the Chromecast retails for $35, three months of Netflix's streaming service normally costs $23.97, and Netflix made it available to both new and current subscribers.
  But less than an hour after the Chromecast was introduced, it was backordered by a week. And a day after Google unveiled the device, people were paying more than $100 for it on eBay.
  It's not clear that the Netflix deal was driving much demand for the Chromecast, but this looks like a small misstep for Mountain View. It's generally considered poor form to offer an incentive and then snatch it away, like Lucy pulling away her football in the Peanuts comic.
  Update, 4:11 p.m. PT: A source close to the matter at Google says that the deal ended because the company ran out of the Netflix promotional codes, and not because it was scuttling the offer.
US rules Morsi's ouster not 'coup'; country braces for clashes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: ynet - News
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:28
  Day before violent clashes expected between Morsi backer, supporters of army, White House moves to find compromise regarding defining ouster as 'coup', which would force US to cut aid, potentially triggering mayhem in MideastNews Agencies
  Egypt's army threatened on Thursday to shoot those who use violence in a stark warning before what both sides expect will be a bloody street showdown between Islamists and opponents of deposed President Mohamed Morsi.
  Meanwhile, the Obama administration told lawmakers Thursday that it will not declare Egypt's government overthrow a coup, US officials said, allowing the United States to continue providing $1.5 billion in annual military and economic aid to the Arab world's most populous country.
  Related stories:
  Egypt's army has summoned Egyptians into the streets on Friday in an intended turning point in its confrontation with followers of Morsi, the elected leader the generals removed on July 3.
  Clashes in Cairo (Photo: EPA)
  An army official said the military had set Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood an ultimatum, giving it until Saturday to sign up to a plan for political reconciliation which it has so far spurned.
  The Muslim Brotherhood, which has maintained a street vigil for a month with thousands of supporters demanding Morsi's reinstatement, has called its own crowds out for counter-demonstrations across Egypt in a "day to remove the coup".
  'Day to remove coup' (Photo: AFP)
  Both sides have dramatically escalated rhetoric before Friday's demonstrations. The Brotherhood accused the army of pushing the nation towards civil war and committing a crime worse than destroying Islam's holiest site.
  In a Facebook post, the army said it will not "turn its guns against its people, but it will turn them against black violence and terrorism which has no religion or nation".
  A military official said the army had given the Brotherhood 48 hours from Thursday afternoon to join the political process. He did not say what would happen if it refuses.
  Anti-Morsi protest (Photo: MCT)
  Army chief General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has called on Egyptians to take to the streets and give him a "mandate" to act against the violence that has convulsed Egypt since he shunted its first freely elected president from power.
  Meanwhile, Sheikh Youssef al-Qaradawi, an influential Egyptian cleric based in Qatar, issued a religious edict broadcast on Al Jazeera television urging soldiers to disobey orders to kill.
  The main anti-Morsi youth protest group, which has backed the army, said it would go to the streets to "cleanse Egypt".
  The West is increasingly alarmed at the course taken by Egypt, a strategic hinge between the Middle East and North Africa, since protests in 2011 brought down Mubarak and ended decades of autocratic rule in the most populous Arab state.
  Signaling its displeasure, Washington has delayed the delivery of four F-16 fighter jets to Cairo. On Thursday, the White House urged the army to exercise "maximum restraint and caution".
  Sisi's coup? (Photo: Gettyimages)
  However, the Obama administration told lawmakers Thursday that it will not declare Egypt's government overthrow a coup, allowing the US to continue providing $1.5 billion in annual military and economic aid to the Arab world's most populous country.
  William Burns, the State Department's No. 2 official, held a closed-doors meeting with House members and was to brief senators later Thursday in the US first act regarding Egypt since Morsi's fall.
  The administration has been forced into difficult contortions to justify not declaring a coup d'etat, which would prompt the automatic suspension of American assistance programs under US law. Washington fears that halting such funding could imperil programs that help to secure Israel's border and fight weapons smuggling into the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, among other things seen as critical to US national security.
  It's unclear what specific arguments it presented Thursday, but officials said Burns explained how the administration hasn't declared the power change a coup and doesn't plan to in future as Egypt moves to restore civilian governance and hold new democratic elections. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the private meetings.
  Many from both parties in Congress sympathize with the administration's view and the need to back a military that has safeguarded Egypt's peace with Israel for three decades.
  Receive Ynetnews updates directly to your desktop
Goldman And JPMorgan Probed Over Metals Warehouse Manipulations
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:25
  Following our initial uncovering of the manipulation and monopolization of the metals warehousing business two years ago, the last few days have seen the public's attention grabbed by the reality of what the banks are actually doing. Following this week's hearing, as the Fed reconsiders banks roles in non-banking businesses (and the 'societal benefit'), it seems the CFTC has woken up. As the WSJ reports, the Department of Justice has opened an initial probe into the metals warehousing industry and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission has also sent letters to some firms telling them to preserve documents, in what is likely the beginning stages of an investigation.
  Via WSJ,
  ...
  The probe comes amid growing concern in Washington over banks' ownership of metals warehouses and other commodity assets.
  ...
  Banks that trade physical commodities have come under attack by government officials, companies and consumer groups, who worry about the ability of the financial sector to exert influence over markets for raw materials.
  ...
  Mr. Brown held a hearing on the subject this week at which some company officials alleged banks are deliberately creating shortages of aluminum and other raw materials for financial gain.
  The Federal Reserve has said it is reconsidering the permission it granted to banks over the past decade to participate in physical commodity markets. The permission expires later this year.
  Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
Al-Qaeda's Syrian Branch Hosts Family Fair In Rebel-Held Aleppo, Complete With Ice Cream And Jihad'...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Weasel Zippers
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:24
  Fun for the whole family!
  Via WaPo:
  Nothing says wholesome family fun like al-Qaeda, which is why the group's Syrian and Iraqi branches held a festival in a rebel-held neighborhood of Aleppo. The bizarre event, captured on video, is part of a broader effort to show Syrian civilians a softer, cuddlier side to the militant jihadist movement, which has been seizing territory in Syria.
  The event was hosted by two al-Qaeda-allied groups: Jabhat al-Nusra, an extremist Syrian rebel group, and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which is based in Iraq and claimed responsibility for a recent jailbreak that freed hundreds of insurgents there. The groups have earned a reputation for fearsome fighting against President Bashar al-Assad's regime in Syria, but also for their severe rule over areas under their control. According to Syrian rights groups, Jabhat al-Nusra recently executed a 14-year-old boy in Aleppo for referencing the prophet Muhammad in a manner they deemed disrespectful.
  The groups appear to be hoping that they can clean up their image and make friends with regular Syrians by, for example, hosting this Ramadan family fair. It's a way to build support '-- regular Syrians are suffering terribly in the fighting, with food scarce and work virtually nonexistent '-- and to show that the groups can do things with young people other than shoot them. According to the Independent's story on the Aleppo fair, here a few of the very creepy-sounding events:
  ' A Koran recitation contest for girls.
  ' A tug of war between Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State members, video of which has also since been removed from YouTube
  ' Distribution of pamphlets, flags and ''other propaganda-type products'' meant to promote jihadism, according to a terrorism analyst who spoke to the Independent.
  ' Distribution of food, most importantly bread.
  And you can bet there was some preaching as well.
  The videos clearly shoedw a crowd gathered, although it's not clear if there are hundreds of people or just a few dozen, with lots of kids crowded up front. It's a strange turn for a group accustomed to operating in the shadows and speaking primarily to fellow ideological extremists.
  ' An ice-cream-eating contest for boys. A video of the contest, since deleted, showed Islamic State jihadist flags hanging in the background.
PROOF! GIRLS KICK ASS!
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Uploads by MOXNEWSd0tC0M
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:22
What up with all these Canadian terrorists?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The View From Falling Downs
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:21
  While we've never seen a successful terror operation in Canada, and the supposed "terror plots" that have come to trial have all failed the most generous of sniff tests, there's been a lot of hoo-ha recently about Canadians going abroad on terror missions.Depending on what you read and where you read it, that gas plant attack in Algeria was the handiwork of a couple of Canadian high school students cum terror masterminds.
  That in itself should tell you something. A couple of middle class Canadian kids fresh out of high school head off into the great blue yonder and within two years they are executing one of the most brazen Al Qaeda attacks in recent memory?
  What that should tell you is that Al Qaeda is one easy organization to infiltrate. If it can be that quickly infiltrated by a couple of non-Arabic-speaking Canadian teenagers, how deep into the organization do you suppose the tentacles of Mossad or the CIA would reach?
  Now we have Hassan El Hajj Hassan presented to us as another "Canadian" terrorist. He is supposedly linked to both Hezbollah and the bus bombing in Bulgaria last year.
  Lebanon, like Hong Kong, is one of those countries where lots of folks like to keep a Canadian passport in the bottom drawer of the nightstand just in case things ever go too far sideways. It's considered an insurance policy.
  Back when Israel invaded Lebanon the Canadian government paid to evacuate tens of thousands of "Canadians" out of the country, most of whom had never spent more than a few months here. Hassan seems to be one of that cohort.
  I'm willing to wager that his ties to Hezbollah are as tenuous as his ties to Canada, but nonetheless this Canadian Hezbollah Terrorist story does make for a nice headline.
Bradley Manning a traitor who set out to harm US, prosecutors conclude
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Guardian World News
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:20
  Prosecution lawyers cast Manning and Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, as 'information anarchists'. Photograph: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
  The US government has completed its case against Bradley Manning, the source of the massive WikiLeaks trove of state secrets, accusing the 25-year-old soldier of being a traitor who used his training and skills to deliberately and systematically harm the US and provide assistance to al-Qaida.
  Major Ashden Fein, the lead prosecutor, unleashed a wave of rhetoric against the army private at the conclusion of his closing arguments in Fort Meade, Maryland, where the trial is in its eighth week. At the culmination of almost four hours in front of the judge, Fein sought to press home the most serious and contentious charge against Manning '' that he knowingly "aided the enemy" by transmitting state secrets to WikiLeaks.
  "He was not a humanist; he was a hacker who described his fellow soldiers as 'dykes' or 'global idiots'. He was not a troubled young soul; he was a determined soldier with the ability, knowledge and desire to harm the US. He was not a whistleblower; he was a traitor."
  Fein cast Manning and Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, as "information anarchists". While the soldier's defence team has sought to portray Manning as naive and well-intentioned, the prosecutor countered that "he acted in a calculated manner for his own purposes '' the only naivety he showed was that he actually thought he would get away with what he did and not get caught."
  Manning faces 21 counts relating to his transmission in 2009-10 of more than 700,000 official documents to WikiLeaks, including war logs from Iraq and Afghanistan, diplomatic cables, detainee files from Guantanamo and a video of an Apache helicopter attack that killed civilians in Baghdad. He faces a maximum sentence of life in military jail plus 154 years, on top of up to 20 years in custody for a lesser version of the charges to which he has already pleaded guilty.
  The prosecution team reserved its most forceful denunciation of Manning for the "aiding the enemy" charge '' the most severe charge that has been widely criticised for potentially sending a chill across freedom of the press in the US. To make the charge stick, the US government has to prove that the soldier had an evil intent to disclose information knowing that it would be accessed by enemy groups such as al-Qaida and al-Qaida in the Arabian peninsula (Aqap).
  Fein said that Osama bin Laden had personally asked for and received elements of the WikiLeaks documents including Afghan war logs and US diplomatic cables. Manning was fully aware in his training "who the enemy was and what type of information they sought, he knew the enemy used the internet and that WikiLeaks was helpful to our enemies."
  He continued that Manning "had a general evil intent. The US has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that his voluntary actions to disclose more than 700,000 documents would lead to them being in the hands of the enemy."
  The prosecutor drew on the testimony of more than 80 state witnesses to attempt to show that the Army private was fully aware of the consequences of his actions. Fein screened training presentations that Manning had been shown during his induction as an intelligence analyst that explained various classification levels and his own personal responsibility for guarding the secrets.
  "He was trained that the enemy used the internet, and anything that the enemy used against the United States should be protected. He had actual knowledge that the enemies of the US used the internet and WikiLeaks to gather information to be used against this country," Fein said.
  In earlier testimony from defence witnesses, Manning's legal team has attempted to define WikiLeaks as a journalistic enterprise equivalent to established news outlets such as the New York Times or the Washington Post. The distinction between such outlets and other activist groups is important, as it would help the defence rebut the charge that Manning "aided the enemy".
  But the chief prosecutor in the case attempted to paint a very different picture of WikiLeaks and its founder, Assange. Fein quoted from web chats between Manning and Assange that remain classified, alleging that within two weeks of having gained access to secret databases in Iraq the soldier had begun actively searching for information that WikiLeaks wanted to disclose.
  "PFC Manning saw WikiLeaks as anything but a traditional journalistic organisation '... He identified WikiLeaks as the first intelligence agency for the general public."
  In one part of the web chats, Manning wrote to Assange: "Government organisations can't control information, the harder they try the more violently the information wants to get out."
  Fein continued that setting aside the argument that "sending classified information to an established journalistic organisation such as the New York Times would be a crime, that is not what happened in this case. He disclosed information to WikiLeaks knowing that WikiLeaks would release information in the form that it received it. WikiLeaks was merely the platform to make sure all the information was available to the world including the enemies of the United States."
  The prosecutor tried to discredit the defence testimony from Yochai Benkler, a Harvard law professor and expert in social media, who previously told the court that WikiLeaks was indeed a journalistic organisation. Fein decried Benkler's evidence as having been "faulty" and based on "bias and misinformation".
  Once the prosecution has completed its closing arguments, Manning's leading defence lawyer, David Coombs, will have his chance to persuade the judge. The US government may then have an opportunity to rebut defence closing arguments, before Lind retires to consider her verdict which could come in a matter of days.
@BarackObama's latest plan to help middle class 'retire with dignity': The re-tweet
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Twitchy Â» US Politics
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:18
  Generally speaking, a well-balanced retirement portfolio will consist of 35 percent stocks, 35 percent bonds, and 30 percent re-tweets of empty slogan-of-the-day hashtags from @BarackObama.
  Suffice to say, a bit of mockery and criticism ensued:
  The administration that has seen food stamp dependency continue to skyrocket on its watch while the median family income has dropped, all while Americans' are falling shorter on retirement savings is going to help people retire with dignity? Unfortunately ''dignity'' might be a best case scenario, because it sounds like they've given up on the middle class retiring with money.
The Days of SEAL Team Six
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Lame Cherry
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:09
  My children in another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.I am not pleased in being right and proven right now about the mass murder of the Team Six Navy SEALS or Obama Seals as they have been defined here, but the families of the SEALS have now made public the things this blog first posted on in the SEALS were set up to be murdered.
  What follows are the machinations behind all of this in what was the driving force of their mass murder, which all started with Birther Hussein purchasing the corpse of Ossama bin Laden from China to divert attention from Jerome Corsi's expose' on the Obama Birth Abstract Fraud.bin Laden's "bagging" was supposed to have taken place in the autumn of 2012, but Benghazi was structured to take it's place. As you will note, numbers of Americans have been murdered due to all of this Obama regime OCREEP manipulations, and it all is at source a guilt of Congress, Secretaries of each State for not certifying Obama legally in vetting his forged documents and the Supreme Court of these United States, with conspirators all through the media.
  SEAL Team Six was made a political device of assassination. They willingly took this operation violating chain of command that Sec. Panetta was agitated about. The chain of command was broken as this was about Birther Obama producing a game changer about his forged documents, and he needed a trophy bin Laden to do that.Andrew Breitbart was murdered in part of the discoveries and revelations of this very subject, that a stand in was set up in Pakistan to be murdered in a SEAL raid all to save Barack Hussein Obama's political life.
  What I come to now is something never before revealed in the last Days of SEAL Team Six.
  The families are now learning and providing information to the public of the exclusives posted here that the SEAL's were set up to be murdered. The helo they were mass loaded into was not designed for the assault operations intended in being a big slow hanging ball just waiting for a SAM to knock it out of the park.There was no cover fire. There was no suppression fire. This battle had the entire valley lit up, and the approach route of the helo was directly where the waiting terrorists were stationed to knock that bird out of the air.
  Those are the realities the families are finally learning from military sources. This blog of course posted on those realities immediately.
  In the days following the murder of bin Laden's corpse, a great fury was brewing in Obama's good terrorists as the top man in al Qaeda, their heart and soul was dead, and reprisals were being screamed for.
  Ask yourself now in al Qaeda's number one was executed, and except for a few threats, al Qaeda never struck back at America, why is that?
  The reason lodges in the reality that al Qaeda had been busy rebuilding and they contracted with three foreign powers in Iran, Pakistan and North Korea to construct for them atomic bombs.al Qaeda does have an arsenal of 22 such bombs of the Hiroshima heavy class along with two artillery rounds which the Soviets sold Iran and Iran repackaged.
  As was exclusively covered here, you will remember the threats about "arming narco terrorists" in South America with weapon's grade uranium being sold by Iran during the Bush years, and the Bush41 went ballistic immediately in knocking off all the leaders in FARC? That is the basis in all of this in al Qaeda contracted for bombs to be made, and they were in 10 from Iran, 6 from Pakistan and 4 from North Korea in repackaged Soviet era material, so none of this would trace back to the contractors.There are 90 plus radioactive dirty bombs in the al Qaeda arsenal also.
  10 devices were brought into New York under Iranian diplomatic travel. These were 10 atomic bombs in the pipeline and it was that threat which was issued to the Obama regime that they would be detonated in an October 2012 surprise if certain conditions were not met.The main conditions were the payment of the Obama regime installing al Qaeda at the head of numerous Nationalist Muslim nations. Mubarak and Col, Khadaffi were both destroyed all in response to the threat from al Qaeda using WMD's and exposing the reality of the bin Laden corpse murder.Additional conditions were the deaths of the Navy SEALS, and that information was provided in a staged operation which involved their mass murder.
  The reality that Afghani operatives were switched out at the last moment all reveals that this was played close to the vest, and it was an inside operation where it was deemed better to have SEALS murdered than 10 metro military areas on America vaporized and atomically polluted with a revelation that it all took place when chest thumper Barry Chin had an actor shot in Pakistan by the SEALS.
  Joe Biden in this, in outing the SEALS was his typical self in providing intelligence to the enemy, and it is not like al Qaeda does not have a pipeline of sympathizers working in the Obama regime. It is not information which would not have been provided the Obama terrorists and Joe simply helped move things along a bit faster.
  All of the Birther reality is what is behind all of this. Those 10 nuclear bombs are still in America and only require activation. They are the "walk softly" as al Qaeda uses a big stick at Benghazi and in poison food dumps to make Fang Jinn now react to save it's position.
  This blog warned of this from the start in Day One, that this regime was in bed with terrorists, using quid pro quo and that all of this was going to turn out bad.
  I have been making these exclusives public for some time, and every time I am mocked, in the time which follows the facts start coming out in a year, that this blog was correct again by God's Grace. The SEAL families have now absolute proof a hanging ball was thrown to al Qaeda to murder their family members in retaliation for the murder of bin Laden's corpse. What they and the public do not know is why Col. Khadaffi, Andrew Breitbart and Chris Stevens were all murdered for the same reason as this blackmail of the Obama regime grew over the Birther issue.
  Yes al Qaeda has 10 nuclear atomic bombs in America, by major US military metro areas. Yes the regime knows and no they do not know their locations. There were two of these atomic bombs in America during 9 11 which were neutralized by Bush43. These 10 are still operational and have a dozen other fat men to replace them with.
  Barack Hussein Obama though has left the building and the Jinn which feeds off of mass death has no reason to stop their use. In an amusing reality, the Jinn as stated here has problems connecting with humans, has now watched the Obama approval ratings tank since June 13, as the Jinn can not make the connection with voters who do not even realize they are sensing a change in something is wrong.
  As stated, I am not pleased with the reality of the confirmation in the murder of the SEAL's, but confirmed or not this blog was right a year ahead of the game. It is the point though that Congress, Justice, the media to the Mark Levin's who kept all of this around and were salivating over the bin Laden farce and did nothing when Andrew Breitbart was murdered, only have themselves to blame and those nuclear devices are all sitting in their high population military regions.
  SEAL Team Six would be alive if they had not been so Obama gung ho and instead when Lt. Col. Terry Lakin needed help, rescued him over the Birther railroading he was destroyed by.
  As my Beloved Uncle used to say, "You know the Marines take allot of credit for doing things when the Army was already there".I make no secret of my affinity and devotion to the Combat Infantry and the Combat Engineers. They do not need titles like Rangers, SEALS or Delta Force to do the same job on land, sea and air.
  What happened to SEAL Team Six is what happens when the military starts answering to political minders and going into operations for political reasons, as you then become politically expendable.The reality is no one in this world can ever hurt Birther Hussein ever again. Jinn's just take on new forms. Sheik bin Laden has left the building. The SEALS cut their own throats, and that reality is, Americans are left with this entire mess to die from yet, as America is nothing but a terror vacation camp for the Obama regime's terror allies.
  Once again enough of this or more poor people will be donating to keep the blog running to save rich people's asses. Hot coals eh? Maybe nuclear fires, but I never did inquire about that......yet.So you Limbaugh types just keep hanging onto those donations, as I'm sure all that electronic money will keep you safe from the day boom and doom starts falling down.
  nuff said
  PS: I really was going to post to Terry about some cool Filipino recipe that TL's Mom fixes. Will do the draft thing for the future, but God bless both of you to make the people pay their bills.It used to be a matter of honor and pride that Americans paid for things.
  agtG 242
Statement by the Press Secretary on H.R. 2289
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:09
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 25, 2013
  On Thursday, July 25, 2013, the President signed into law:
  H.R. 2289, which renames a subsection of the Internal Revenue Code allowing married individuals filing a joint return to claim the maximum deduction for each spouse's qualified contribution to an individual retirement plan as the "Kay Bailey Hutchison Spousal IRA" in honor of the former U.S. Senator from Texas.
VIDEO-Spain train crash video: At least 78 people killed and 140 injured in Santiago de Compostela derailment | Mail Online
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 26 Jul 2013 00:03
  The passenger train derailed outside city of Santiago de CompostelaAll eight carriages of the Madrid to Ferrol train derailedThe train was carrying 218 passengers when it smashed into the wallMany were travelling to the area on the eve of a Christian festivalForeign Office confirmed a British citizen is among the injuredDriver posted picture of train speedometer at 125mph in March last yearSpanish PM has visited scene and declared three days official mourningBy Steve Nolan, Jill Reilly and James Rush
  PUBLISHED: 16:06 EST, 24 July 2013 | UPDATED: 16:02 EST, 25 July 2013
  3,585shares
  1,197
  Viewcomments
  A driver of the Spanish train which hurtled off the tracks and smashed into a wall, killing at least 80 people, previously boasted of speeding on his Facebook page.
  Francisco Jose Garzon, one of the drivers on the train which crashed, leaving up to 141 people injured including one Briton, is reported to have posted a picture on the site of a train speedometer at 125mph last year.
  According to reports he also boasted about how fast he was going. The webpage has disappeared after images appeared on Spanish TV and newspaper websites.
  Alongside the photo, which was published in March last year, he wrote: 'What joy it would be to get level with the police and then go past them making their speed guns go off. Ha ha!.'
  It came after a Spanish court said one of the drivers of the train was being held in custody in hospital.
  Scroll down for video
  Terrifying: A horrifying video has been released of the moment the train hurtled off the tracks near the city of Santiago de Compostela last night
  Moment of impact: The train hurtled off the tracks and smashed into a wall, leaving at least 80 people dead and up to 141 were injured
  Francisco Jose Garzon (left), one of the drivers on the train which crashed, is reported to have posted a picture on Facebook in March last year of a train speedometer at 125mph (right)
  Rescue: A fireman carries a wounded victim from the wreckage of the train crash near Santiago de Compostela
  The Supreme Court of the Galicia region, which did not say which driver was being questioned, said: 'The judge has ordered the police to take a statement from the driver, currently under formal investigation, in the hospital where he is being held in custody.'
  A terrifying video meanwhile has emerged which captured the moment the train crashed.
  All eight carriages of the Madrid to Ferrol train derailed near the city of Santiago de Compostela last night.
  Dramatic video footage from a security camera shows the train careering into a concrete wall as it came off the rails on the bend, before flipping onto its side and hurtling down the railway line with its terrified passengers on board.
  Deadly: The train which had 218 passengers and an unspecified number of staff on board at the time of the accident hurtles down the track after falling on to its side
  Admission: One of the drivers told railway officials by radio that he took the bend at 190 kilometres (118 miles) per hour in an urban zone with a speed limit of 80 kph, daily El Pais reported
  Moment high-speed passenger train derails and crashes
  One of the drivers was trapped in his cabin and told the railway station by radio that the train entered the bend at 190 kilometres per hour (120 mph), reported newspaper El Pais.
  The speed limit on that section of track is 80km/h (50mph).
  'We're only human! We're only human!' he told the station, the newspaper said, citing sources close to the investigation. 'I hope there are no dead, because this will fall on my conscience.'
  Police have put an unnamed train driver under formal investigation - the Galicia government said one driver was in hospital.
  Newspaper reports cited witnesses as saying driver Francisco Jose Garzon,who helped rescue victims, had shouted: 'I've derailed! What do I do?' into a phone.
  The accident is the worst train accident in 30 years and television footage showed one wagon pointing upwards into the air with one of its ends twisted and disfigured.
  Another carriage that had been severed in two could be seen lying on a road near the track.
  State-owned train operator Renfe said in a statement that 218 passengers and an unspecified number of staff were on board at the time of the accident.
  Clearance: Rescue workers at the accident site at the entrance of Santiago de Compostela Station
  Aftermath: Rail personnel clear the area and fix the track at the site of the accident
  Wreckage: Part of the train is carried away following the horrific crash
  Twisted: The accident is the worst train accident in 30 years and television footage showed one wagon pointing upwards into the air with one of its ends twisted and disfigured
  Accident: The train jumped the tracks on a bend just before arriving in the northwestern shrine city of Santiago de Compostela
  Horrifying: At least 80 people have been killed and up to 141 injured including one Briton after a packed Spanish passenger train derailed on a bend last night
  Derailed: All eight carriages of the Madrid to Ferrol train came off the tracks near the city of Santiago de Compostela
  Tragic: Emergency crews work to help those who were injured in the Spanish train crash which happened just outside Santiago de Compostela
  Train crash leaves at least 80 dead in Spain
  Renfe said the derailment happened at 8.41pm local time on a high-speed section that was inaugurated two years ago.
  After the crash, bodies were seen covered in blankets next to the tracks and rescue workers tried to get trapped people out of the train's carriages, with smoke billowing from some of the wreckage.
  Some passengers were pulled out of broken windows, and one man stood on a carriage lying on its side, using a pickaxe to try to smash through a window.
  Belongings: Police officers collect baggage at the scene of a train crash
  Relatives of the victims of a train accident reacts outside the Cersia building for more information
  Harrowing: Families wait for further information during the identification of the bodies
  Difficult: Friends and family waited anxiously for news of their loved ones
  Public visit: Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy (centre), Public Works Minister Ana Pastor (right), and Galician Regional President Alberto Nunez Feijoo (second left) visit the scene of a train accident in Santiago de Compostela
  Declaration: The Spanish Prime Minister declared three days official mourning throughout Spain
  Wrecked carriages at scene of Spanish train disaster
  TVE showed footage of what appeared to be several bodies covered by blankets alongside the tracks next to the damaged train wagons and rescue workers entering toppled carriages through broken windows.
  The crash happened about an hour before sunset after the train emerged from a tunnel and derailed on the curve - sending cars flying off the tracks.
  As casualties were taken to hospitals in Santiago and two other cities in the region, authorities appealed for people to donate blood.
  Removal: A carriage is lifted at the scene of a train crash
  Surveying the scene: The crash happened about an hour before sunset after the train emerged from a tunnel and derailed on the curve - sending cars flying off the tracks
  Statement: State-owned train operator Renfe said in a statement that 218 passengers and an unspecified number of staff were on board at the time of the accident
  Terrifying: A general view of the train crash. The incident happened as Catholic pilgrims converged on Santiago de Compostela to celebrate a festival honouring St James, the disciple of Jesus whose remains are said to rest in a shrine
  Investigation: Emergency personnel work through the debris at the scene
  Cause: An official inspects the train engine amongst the wreckage of a train crash
  Ownership: The train, which belongs to the state-owned Renfe company, was not an AVE high speed train, but it was a relatively luxurious version that uses the same track as Spain's fastest expresses
  Terrible scene filmed on camera phone after train crashes in...
  CYBER CROOKS TARGET CRASHCyber crooks attempted to capitalise on the devastating rail disaster by sending out a stream of bogus news emails pertaining to be CNN updates in a scam to steal bank details.
  Fraudsters are believed to have targeted millions of people as the death toll rose following the tragedy in Santiago de Compostela.
  They launched their campaign just a day after sophisticated criminals attempted to cash in on the birth of the Royal baby.
  A 'steady flow' of messages designed to look like emails from CNN have been sent out this week, according to analysts at web security firm Appriver.
  In each case, the fraudsters rely on recipients clicking on links in the fake emails which claim to direct them to updates from the American news organisation.
  But instead, unwitting readers are lured onto a webpage where their computer can be infected by a virus designed to steal their bank details.
  A CNN spokesman said: 'Our security team is currently investigating these latest emails and we will continue to do everything possible to combat attempts to use our brand in this way'.
  Neighbours responded to calls from the police to bring blankets and sheets to the scene along with bottles of water.
  As darkness fell, generators and emergency lighting were brought in to help the rescue teams.
  Alberto Nunez Feijoo, president of the region of Galicia, described the scene as 'Dante-esque'.
  One of the passengers, Sergio Prego, said: 'The train travelled very fast and derailed and turned over on the bend in the track.
  'It's a disaster. I've been very lucky because I'm one of the few to be able to walk out.'
  Another passenger, Ricardo Montero, said: 'When the train reached that bend it began to flip over, many times, with some carriages ending up on top of others, leaving many people trapped below.
  'We had to get under the carriages to get out.'
  Lidia Cannon, who previously lived in the city and was visiting for the local fiesta celebrating St James, said she saw a woman who had lost a foot as a result of the train crash.
  She told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'We heard a big bang, like, we thought it was an air crash, I thought it was a car crash, other people thought it was a bomb. It was very, very loud, the noise.'
  Ms Cannon said people went to help and told of one man's experience of visiting the crash site.
  People living nearby rushed to the scene with bottles of water and blankets
  Devastation: At least 80 have died and rescue efforts went on through the night
  Carnage: People look down from the rail bridge on the aftermath of a devastating train crash in north west Spain
  Injured: A woman is carried from the wreckage of the train on a stretcher as emergency service workers try to rescue survivors
  Emergency: Rescue workers carry victims on stretchers away for treatment. More than 70 bodies are reported to have been removed from the wreckage
  Two victims with head wounds - one with his arm in a sling - are helped by a rescue worker
  WORST SPANISH TRAIN CRASH FOR DECADESThe Spanish train crash is the worst the country has experienced since a terrible three-train accident in a tunnel in Leon province in 1944. Due to heavy censorship at the time, the exact death toll for the Leon disaster has never been established. The official figure was given as 78 dead, but it is thought that as many as 250 may have been killed.
  There was another serious accident in Spain 1972 when a Madrid to Cadiz express collided head-on with a local train on the outskirts of Seville in the south west of the country. A total of 77 people died, with more than 100 injured.
  The Madrid train bombings of March 2004 produced a death toll of 191- but this was a terrorist outrage and not an accident. There were 10 explosions aboard four commuter trains, with the attacks being directed by an al Qaida-inspired terrorist cell.
  The latest incident comes less than two weeks after six people were killed and scores injured in a train crash just south of Paris.
  Recent bad train crashes in Europe include one in February 2010 in Buizingen in Belgium which claimed the lives of 18 people, a September 2006 crash of a magnetic levitation train on a test track in the Emsland area of Germany which killed 23 people, and a derailment of a packed train outside the Montenegro capital of Podgorica in January 2006 in which 46 people died.
  In Britain, no passenger has been killed in a train accident since 84-year-old Margaret Masson from Glasgow died following the Virgin West Coast Pendolino train derailment at Grayrigg in Cumbria in February 2007.
  In terms of deaths, the worst rail crashes in recent times in the UK were outside Paddington in west London in October 1999 when 31 people died in a two-train collision after one of them had gone through a red light, and at Clapham in south London in December 1988 when 35 people were killed in a three-train crash.
  Britain's worst peace-time crash was in 1952 at Harrow and Wealdstone in north west London when 112 people died in a three-train disaster.
  The worst rail disaster in Britain was at Quintinshill near Gretna Green in Scotland in 1915 during the First World War in a multiple-train smash in which a troop train caught fire, killing more than 220 people.
  She said: 'He couldn't cope with it. He said he was there 20 minutes but he took out a man that was asking for his wife and his wife was inside, dead. A boy was looking for his girlfriend and she was inside the train, dead.
  'He was taking out people that had mobile phones in their pockets ringing all the time. He couldn't cope with it because policemen and doctors and everyone was crying and he had to leave.
  'I saw a woman who had lost one foot. But instead of crying or shouting or whatever because of the pain she was looking very, very serious. They were carrying her away and she had her sight, her eyes, were looking to one point - she was in shock.'
  Miguel Morado, journalist at local newspaper La Voz de Galicia said: 'Everything points to inadequate [sic] speed - the train driver who survived the crash, when he was being rescued didn't know that people had died, and admitted going too fast with the train...
  'He gave a figure he said he was going at 190 km/h - this is part of a network where the speed limit is 80.
  'Although it's clear that it was human error, that the driver made a mistake, there's also the question of the line in that part of the network.Galicia is distant from the centre, it's never been well connected with Madrid... The people who made the decisions were too hasty.'
  Officials said they believed the crash was an accident but declined to offer more details, saying an investigation was under way into the cause.
  Renfe said that it - and track operator Adif - were collaborating with a judge who has been appointed to probe the accident.
  Passenger Ricardo Montesco said: 'It was going so quickly .'‰.'‰. it seems that on a curve the train started to twist, and the carriages piled up one on top of the other.
  The accident occurred near the station in Santiago de Compostela, 60 miles south of El Ferrol.
  The train, which belongs to the state-owned Renfe company, was not an AVE high speed train, but it was a relatively luxurious version that uses the same track as Spain's fastest expresses.
  It was Spain's deadliest train accident in decades.
  In 1944, a train travelling from Madrid to Galicia crashed and killed 78 people. Another accident in 1972 left 77 dead on a track to south-western Seville, according to Spanish news agency Europa Press.
  Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, who was born in Santiago de Compostela, the capital of Galicia region, visited the site and the main hospital on this morning.
  He declared three days of official national mourning for the victims of the disaster
  A man covered in dirt and blood is stretchered away
  Horror: A woman is evacuated by emergency workers
  A passenger with a head wound is helped by a policeman
  A man comforts a victim of the crash. A man who was on the train told reporters that the train started to twist, and the carriages piled up one on top of the other
  Support: A citizen and a local policeman rescue an injured survivor
  The incident happened as Catholic pilgrims converged on Santiago de Compostela to celebrate a festival honouring St James, the disciple of Jesus whose remains are said to rest in a shrine.
  The city is the main gathering point for the faithful who make it to the end of the El Camino de Santiago pilgrimage route that has drawn Christians since the Middle Ages.
  The feast day festivities were cancelled, town hall spokeswoman Maria Pardo told Spanish National television TVE.
  Foreign Secretary William Hague said: 'I was very saddened to hear of the terrible train accident near Santiago de Compostela in Spain last night.
  'My thoughts are with all those affected and their friends and family.
  Search effort: Rescue efforts were continued throughout the night following the train crash
  Emergency: Injured passengers are given treatment close to the side of the track where the train derailed
  Desperate effort: Emergency crews on the scene checking for survivors of the crash
  'The British Embassy team in Spain are working closely with the Spanish authorities as they respond to this tragedy.
  'We know that one British citizen was injured in this accident and the embassy has been providing consular support.'
  Keith Barrow, associate editor of International Railway Journal, whose editorial offices are in Falmouth in Cornwall, said today: 'Spanish railways' safety record is pretty good.
  'Major accidents have been extremely rare. A lot of money has been poured into the system and passenger numbers were rising before the 2008 recession, which has hit Spain particularly badly.
  'There has been a big reduction in fares lately to try to get more passengers to use the railways. A number of lines have been electrified and there are plans to allow private companies to operate services.'
  Mr Barrow said the train involved in the Santiago accident was a Class 730 high-speed train.
  He went on: 'Investigators will want to recover the data recorder from the train's cab so they can establish just what happened.
  'People in Spain will obviously be shocked by what has happened. It's the worst crash they have had in many years. But I don't think people will be put off travelling by train.'
  Share or comment on this article
VIDEO-Ex-FISA Judge Proposes a Better Surveillance Court - The Takeaway
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 23:59
  The revelations of NSA mass surveillance projects by Edward Snowden last month, which were authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, raised the question of legitimacy for this secret court that oversees intelligence activities.
  FISA'--or the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act'--created the court in 1978 to oversee requests for surveillance warrants against suspected foreign intelligence agents located within the US.
  Controversy has surrounded the court since Snowden's revelations. Some have argued that the court is too subservient to the government, which explains why they authorize so many of the government's requests for surveillance.
  A former FISA court judge disagrees. And he also has his own solution for improving the court.
  James Carr is currently a senior federal Judge for the northern district of Ohio. He served on the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court from 2002 to 2008 and joins The Takeaway to discuss the history of the FISA court and possible solutions to make it work better.
  Stay up to date with The Takeaway'--become a Facebook fan & follow us on Twitter!
IL PRINCIPE
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: aangirfan
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:04
  Kate's doctor Alan Farthing and the murdered BBC presenter Jill DandoAlan Farthing was part of the medical team responsible for the birth of Kate and William's new baby.He is the Queen's Gynaecologist.Alan Farthing was the fiance of the BBC TV presenter Jill Dando who was murdered.
  Cliff Richard was a close friend and confidante of Jill Dando.
  Savile and William's mother Diana.
  Jill Dando's BBC colleague Nick Ross is married to Sarah Caplan the cousin of Jimmy Savile's friend Esther Rantzen.Caplan and Rantzen founded the controversial charity called Childline.
  There has been speculation that the murder of Jill Dando is linked to "a VIP paedophile ring which was operating within the BBC and in Elm Guest House and various children's homes."
  Jacintha Saldanha's family in mourningIn December 2012, Jacintha Saldanha, a nurse at the hospital where Kate Middleton was staying, 'was found dead.'The official story was that she had committed suicide.Some reports suggested that she had been murdered to shut her up.'An early version of surrogacy' for Elizabeth Bowes Lyon, mother of the Queen.One theory is that William and Kate rented the womb of a surrogate."Gestational surrogacy involves implanting the externally fertilized embryo of the biological mother (Kate) and the biological father (William) into a surrogate woman's uterus so she can carry the couple's baby full term and deliver it for them."helpfreetheearth.com/news_kate.
  Royal Baby Scam "Since the 'in vitrio' conception occurred on December 3rd, 2012, the baby is due around September 5th, 2013 - unless it is delivered prematurely by caesarian section."
Statement by the President on Student Loans
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 16:02
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 24, 2013
  A better bargain for the middle class means making a college education available to every single American willing to work for it. That's why I applaud the wide bipartisan majority of Senators who passed a bill to cut rates on nearly all new federal student loans, rolling back a July 1st rate hike and saving undergraduates an average of more than $1,500 on loans they take out this year.
  This compromise is a major victory for our nation's students. It meets the key principles I laid out from the start: it locks in low rates next year, and it doesn't overcharge students to pay down the deficit. I urge the House to pass this bill so that I can sign it into law right away, and I hope both parties build on this progress by taking even more steps to bring down soaring costs and keep a good education '' a cornerstone of what it means to be middle class '' within reach for working families.
  ###
BREAKING'.....Eurobanks 'heavily exposed to Detroit and other US cities' | The Slog. 3-D bollocks deconstruction
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 15:49
  What always makes me laugh in a vaguely nervous way is when I hear soundbites/watch videos/read interviews with the Wanksters, where they claim that all their derivative debts ''are netted''.
  Let me explain something here. Not even Lloyd Blankfein with a direct feed from Jehovah has the faintest bloody clue whether his 103 times leveraged Goldin Sacks is netted with a Chinese takeaway or an Aussie saltwater crocodile.
  In the last 24 hours, it has begun to be apparent that several eurozone banks have large exposures to the Detroit collapse, through complex certificates of participation. The startlingly unlovely UBS sold such certificates over a long period '' up to a total of around one and a half billion dollars. Most of this sub-sub prime bogpaper ended up with European banks, all of whom of course knew what they were doing. Not.
  One particular trail involves Hypo-Real Estate, stranded with $200m of this bollocks via Irish subsidiary Depfa, as well as Dexia. The last of these, says the Wall Street Journal, is the proud owner of 'essentially worthless paper'. The complex technical structures of this Andrex investment also include an interest rate swap for new improved bamboozlement among all those suckers who bought it.
  As most general and specialist US media are now confidently predicting at least another dozen or so Detroits in short order, I'd imagine that almost anything could happen from here on. It would be acidically ironic, would it not, if these cockups led to the collapse of a major in Europe. Then two side-by-side arguments could continue far into the future, about (1) whose fault was it globally '' the EU or the US? and (2) whose fault was it in the US '' Democrats or Republicans? It wuzz dem pesky Democrat europhiles, honest injun. Or dem Republican isolationist neoliberals, sure was. Well, one of the two anyway.
  If one keeps things elegantly simple, they work better. If you deliberately make them complex, they fail the purchaser'....but as ever, give the vendor umpteen ways to avoid prison.
  Hence the global complication. The madness goes on.
  Earlier at The Slog: Why do Governments employ so many crooks?
  About these ads
BIG CHANGES: SYRIA AND EGYPT
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: aangirfan
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:11
  THE TIDE turned in Syria as early as May 2013,when the BBC started criticising the rebels.The CIA and Pentagon would appear to have a new policy.
  "You've probably noticed the change in tone of the Atlanticist press on the Syrian issue.
  "The 'rebels', these 'champions of Freedom', have suddenly turned into fanatical terrorists who tear each other apart." According to Thierry Meyssan, "Washington has simply abandoned the idea of '‹'‹overthrowing Assad... "Next step: the loss of French influence in the region."'Soon, no more obstacles to the new Sykes-Picot', by Thierry Meyssan, Voltaire Network, 22 July 2013,www.voltairenet.org/article179521.html
  Secretary of State, John Kerry
  According to Thierry Meyssan:
  "The Atlanticist press has discovered with horror that the armed opposition in Syria is composed of fanatics hated by the vast majority of Syrians...
  "The Free Syrian Army and the Al-Nusra Front, instead of fighting against Damascus troops, are waging a merciless war against each other..."
  Syria
  Thierry Meyssan writes:
  "What I wrote [1], which was labeled as 'conspiracy theory' by the mainstream press, is becoming obvious ten months later...
  "CIA director, John Brennan and Vice President Joe Biden, have convinced Congress behind closed doors that they should not send decisive weapons to Syria...
  "The Geneva II Conference, discussed for the past year, is coming into focus."
  Syria
  So, there have been changes of leadership in Qatar, Egypt and Iran.
  France and the United Kingdom used to share the Middle East.
  After the coming Geneva II Conference:
  "The United States and Russia will divide North Africa and the Levant, at the expense of France, dividing the region into zones sub-contracted by the Saudis (Sunni) or the Iranians (Shi'ites)."
  ''Soon, no more obstacles to the new Sykes-Picot'', by Thierry Meyssan, Voltaire Network, 22 July 2013, www.voltairenet.org/article179521.html
  Egypt's Sissi now compared to Nasser, a nationalist. Israel and the CIA would appear to have somewhat different views on the Muslim Brotherhood.
  Israel believed that it could use the Muslim Brotherhood to break up Egypt and its neighbours.The CIA believed that it could use the Muslim Brotherhood to control the Islamic World and to destabilise China and Russia.
  The CIA now seems to have decided that its original policy of backing Morsi was not working?
  Proposed US House bill keeps Egypt military aid, amid steep cuts
  The Saudis have backed the toppling of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
  We assume that the Saudis are backing the Pentagon?
  F. William Engdahl refers to the Saudis' Unprecedented Break with Washington over Egypt.
Can nuclear energy save Detroit?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Atomic Insights
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:09
  In 1966, the Fermi I nuclear power plant, the only liquid metal cooled breeder reactor that provided commercial electricity in the United States, suffered a partial melt when an internal reactor component moved and partially blocked coolant flow.
  Fermi I was repaired by 1970 and restored to operating status for a couple of years, but its performance was not good. As a one of a kind reactor, its costs were not competitive, so it was decommissioned in 1972. (In 1972, power companies could buy oil for $2 per barrel.) The partial melting of the reactor, which was located about 30 miles from Detroit, became the subject of a popular antinuclear book by John Fuller, published by Reader's Digest titled We Almost Lost Detroit.
  On Thursday, July 18, 2013, the city of Detroit filed for bankruptcy, saddled with $18 billion worth of obligations with few ways of raising the funds required to pay them. The once great industrial city has suffered from several decades worth of massive exodus of both people and businesses; its population is about half of what it was 20 years ago. It is literally withering away.
  On Tuesday, July 23, 2013, American Atomics, a company that almost no one has ever heard of, issued a press release offering to come to Detroit and help the city rebuild its former prosperity.
  American Atomics is presenting a plan to community leaders in Detroit, Michigan, offering to locate the company's new factory and other operations in that economically strapped city. The plan, claimed to generate between 500,000 and 1 million new jobs in Detroit over the next 10 years, includes building the world's largest factory, as well as guaranteeing to supply Detroit with electricity at a flat rate of 2 per kilowatt-hour for both businesses and residences, beginning in 5 years.
  Full details about the somewhat audacious plan are available at An Offer To The City Of Detroit. Interestingly enough, the technology that the company plans to develop into mass produced small nuclear power plants uses liquid metal cooling, something that has not been used in commercial nuclear plants in the United States since Fermi 1. (It has been used in a number of prototype and test reactors including the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) and the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR)).
  I'll have more about this later, but I'd like to leave you with a music video with a haunting refrain '' ''We almost lost Detroit '' this time''. I'm sure there are at least some Atomic Insights readers who remember what the city was like when it was a booming manufacturing powerhouse. Perhaps the audacious American Atomics plan will help it recover.
  PS '' Audacity is not necessarily a negative word. When big changes are needed, people with audacious ideas and the drive to turn them into reality are often the only ones who can succeed.
Metadata Liberation Movement
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:01
  ' Invalid email address.
  ' You can't enter more than 20 emails.
  ' Seperate multiple addresses with Commas.
  ' Must enter an email address.
  ' You must enter the verification code below to send.
  ' Invalid entry: Please type the verification code again.
SEC Rules Will Clip the Wings of Angel Investors
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 11:35
  ' Invalid email address.
  ' You can't enter more than 20 emails.
  ' Seperate multiple addresses with Commas.
  ' Must enter an email address.
  ' You must enter the verification code below to send.
  ' Invalid entry: Please type the verification code again.
Nederlanders zetten CO2 om in stroom | Duurzaam Bedrijfsleven
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 10:41
  Nederlanders zetten CO2 om in stroom
  Nederlandse onderzoekers in Leeuwarden hebben een techniek ontwikkeld om stroom te winnen uit het schadelijke broeikasgas CO2.
  Bij de productie van grijze stroom in energiecentrales komt wereldwijd jaarlijks 12 miljard ton CO2 vrij. De verwarming van huizen en commercile gebouwen produceert nog eens 11 miljard ton. DuurzaamBedrijfsleven.nl maakte eerder al een infographic over de wereldwijde uitstoot van broeikasgassen. Die CO2 gaat niet alleen verloren, het is de belangrijkste factor in de opwarming van de aarde.
  In Leeuwarden vroeg men zich af of CO2 niet juist een nuttige toepassing kon krijgen. Kan schadelijk afval niet een nuttige grondstof worden? Bij Wetsus, een center of excellence voor duurzame watertechnologie, zagen ze de potentie van CO2 als stroombron. In een laboratorium is dat nu gelukt. De onderzoekers van Wetsus beschrijven hun resultaten in het wetenschappelijk tijdschrift Environmental Science & Technology Letters.
  MembranenBert Hamelers, de leider van het onderzoek, bedacht het idee om CO2 door een tank met water te pompen. In deze tank bevinden zich membranen: aan de ene kant van de tank een membraan dat alleen positief geladen ionen doorlaat, aan de andere kant een membraan dat alleen toegang bood aan negatief geladen ionen.
  Als CO2 in water wordt gepompt splitst het zich in positieve waterstofionen en het negatief geladen bicarbonaat. Uit het ladingsverschil dat ontstaat aan verschillende zijden van de tanks kan vervolgens een stroom van elektronen '' oftewel elektriciteit '' worden gecreerd.
  OpbrengstIn het artikel beschrijft Hamelers dat er een enorme hoeveelheid stroom te winnen is uit alle CO2 die wordt geproduceerd in gebouwen en elektriciteitscentrales. Het team uit Leeuwarden schat de opbrengst op ongeveer 1.570 terawattuur per jaar. Dat staat gelijk aan 400 maal de opbrengst van de Hoover-dam in de VS. Daarbij komt er geen CO2 meer vrij in de atmosfeer.
  De volgende stap is om het proces dat nu alleen nog in het lab heeft plaatsgevonden op te schalen.
  Bron: American Chemical Society
  Foto: Gordon Wrigley via Flickr.com
  Categorie:Nieuws, Energie| Tags:Innovatie, Wetsus| Gelezen: 63 keer
  Door: Redactie DuurzaamBedrijfsleven.nlElke dag selecteert de redactie van DuurzaamBedrijfsleven.nl het belangrijkste duurzame nieuws voor het bedrijfsleven. We schrijven korte, puntige artikelen over de nieuwste mogelijkheden in duurzaam ondernemen.
  Gerelateerde artikelen
Endgame, Inc: Inside The Company Inside Your Cell Phone | FDL News Desk
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 09:04
  The contractor the NSA pays to help hack your cell phone has an interesting history woven within the larger story of the explosive growth of cyberwarfare companies in the Post 9/11 era. The massive growth of the cyberweapons industry has been driven by governments, principally the United States, who in the name of defense have instigated an arms race for offensive weapons.
  The start of Engame begins at Internet Security Systems (ISS) which was started in 1994 and acquired by IBM in 2006 for $1.3 billion. ISS developed an array of products perhaps most notably a highly successful systems scanner that performs a vulnerability assessment on a computer system. In 2010 former executives from ISS and former executives at the CIA started Endgame, Inc. with investments from Bessemer Venture Partners, Columbia Capital, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, and TechOperators totaling $29 million.
  In 2011 the company was, due to a hack by Anonymous, revealed to be selling vulnerabilities to systems unknown even to the manufacturer or ''zero-day exploits'' '' a business of questionable legality.
  In an early email to [HB Gary CEO] Aaron Barr, Endgame Systems made it clear that they had ''been very careful NOT to have public face on our company''. The CEO of Endgame Systems was clear: ''Please let HBgary know we don't ever want to see our name in a press release.''
  So what exactly do the secretive Endgame Systems do? The company started by ex ISS and CIA executives promises (in private) ''to provide our customers with the highest quality offensive CNA/CNE (Computer Network Attack/Computer Network Exploitation) software in the world''.
  Notice the term offensive. The hundreds of billions of dollars that have flowed into the cybersecurity sector from the federal government '' that Endgame gets a piece of '' were supposed to be for defensive purposes. But it is not hard to understand why Endgame has such a belligerent and nefarious strategy when you look at who runs the company.
  The Endgame Board of Directors is led by Christopher Darby of CIA backed In-Q-Tel and includes the former Director of the NSA, Kevin Minihan. Quite a well connected team. Methinks they may know a few people in the intelligence community who make recommendations for federal contracts.
  Endgame is part of the new wave of cyberweapons firms making ridiculous amounts of money off the taxpayers while helping to instigate a war where they stand to benefit from increased business. Palantir Technologies is another firm doing well taking federal money to datamine the internet, though it recently expanded its operations to helping create license plate tracking technology. Due to the Anonymous hacking scandal HB Gary is now part of ManTech International, a firm that received a $300 million federal contract to support US forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Business is good.
  While the government is secretly interpreting the Patriot Act it is also outsourcing some of its lawbreaking to private firms '' cashing in on their government connections with government contracts. What could go wrong?
  fatster contributed to this report.
kevin laye - Google Search
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 08:39
  uk.linkedin.com/pub/kevin-laye/5/883/738- CachedNewport, Shropshire, United Kingdom - Owner, Progress Therapy and Cameltrain
  View Kevin Laye's (United Kingdom) professional profile on LinkedIn. LinkedIn isthe world's largest business network, helping professionals like Kevin Laye ...
Hackers Reveal Nasty New Car Attacks--With Me Behind The Wheel (Video) - Forbes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 07:45
  Log in with your social account:Or, you can log in or sign up using Forbes.New Posts+1 posts this hourMost PopularMost Valuable Sports TeamsListsAmerica's Top CollegesVideoThe Cost Of CollegeGet 2 FREE Issues of ForbesHelp|Connect
  |Sign up|Log in
New research suggests human papilloma virus increases risk of oesophageal cancer - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 25 Jul 2013 07:40
  Professor Ian Frazer's breakthrough Gardasil vaccine targets HPV.
  New research suggests the human papilloma virus (HPV) could significantly increase the risk of oesophageal cancer.
  Scientists at the University of New South Wales have published research showing people with the virus are three times more likely to develop oesophageal cancer.
  Professor Ian Frazer, whose research linked HPV with cervical cancer, says his vaccine - known as Gardisil - could help in the treatment of other cancers caused by HPV.
  "We're gradually realising that papilloma virus is a lot more than just a virus that causes cervical cancer," he said.
  "Members of the papilloma virus family contribute to a number of cancers, including cancer of mouth and throat and cancer in some parts of the skin.
  "I am surprised that we keep finding new ones, but the nature of the virus is such that it's likely to promote cancer anywhere it affects."
  Audio 3:06 Listen to Eliza Harvey's reportAMHPV does not cause cancer for everyone. Some people will only get symptoms like genital warts.
  Others with the infection will notice no symptoms.
  Human Papilloma Virus is a sexually transmitted infectionUp to 80 per cent of adults will be infected at some pointMore than 120 HPV viruses are known to infect skin and mucous membranesMany carriers do not know they are infected and fight off the infection without symptomsSome HPV types cause warts '' such as flat warts, genital warts and plantar warts20 HPV virus types cause cancers including cervical, head and neck cancer, penile, anal, skin, as well as cancer of the vulva and vaginaNot everyone infected with these HPV types develops cancerMost of these cancer cases are caused by HPV16 or HPV18In 2002, the World Health Organization estimated HPV caused 5.2 per cent of all cancers worldwideThere are two types of HPV vaccine available; both protect again HPV16 and 18Source: ABC Health & WellbeingProfessor Raina McIntyre, who led the University of NSW's research into HPV and oesophageal cancer, says HPV may be passed on by oral sex.
  "That is one of the theories," she said.
  "Certainly it has been found in the oral cavity ... and there's been a recent study that's come out by another group overseas which shows that the vaccine prevents virus acquisition in the mouth.
  "That's the obvious theory of how it gets in there."
  Professor McIntyre says oesophageal cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death around the world.
  "It's the most common type of cancer worldwide and in some countries like China, South Africa and Iran, it's actually one of the leading causes of cancer deaths," she said.
  "In other countries like Australia it's a fairly rare cancer but it's a cancer that has a very high fatality rate."
  Professor Frazer says he will investigate a link between the papilloma virus and skin cancer.
  "We're very interested in the common skin cancer that occurs in Australia," he said.
  "We know that sunshine is an important contributing factor to that but many people who get exposed to the sun do not get these cancers and we're interested in seeing if the papilloma virus is adding to the burden."
THE PRINCE
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: aangirfan
  Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:10
  Royal baby. William told the media: "He's a big boy, he's quite heavy. We are still working on a name so we will have that as soon as we can.It's the first time we have seen him reallyso we are having a proper chance to catch up."BBC News - William and Kate present baby princeWilliam and Kate have a mentor called Sir David Manning.Sir David Manning is on Kate and William's staff.Manning was in New York on 9 11 and saw the fall of the Twin Towers.Manning saw the smoke coming from the World Trade Center.(New Statesman - NS Profile - David Manning)
  Sir David Manning, 'part of the Kosher Nostra.'Manning, who is Jewish, was Tony Blair's security advisor."In 2008 he became a director of Lockheed Martin... and joined the advisory board of Hakluyt & Company, an intelligence company partly staffed by former MI6 officers.[4]"PRINCE WILLIAM'S JEWISH MENTOR, WHO HAS LINKS TO 9 11 /One of the Secret Rulers of the World - Sir David Manning
  Kate Middleton's mother, Carole Goldsmith, has Jewish ancestry.One source says that Princess Diana's mother, Frances Shand Kydd, was Jewish - born Frances Ruth Burke Roche, a Rothschild.According to a story in the Daily Mail, Princess Diana was conceived during her mother's affair with the Jewish banker Sir James Goldsmith.There is a striking resemblances between Princess Diana and Sir James Goldsmith's three children, Zak, Ben and Jemima Goldsmith.
  If Diana had a Jewish mother (Frances Ruth Burke Roche aka Rothschild) and a Jewish father (Sir James Goldsmith), then William would have Jewish roots.
  Big baby, with hair.... comments:"I've said for sometime that it often appears as if she's been wearing a pregnancy suit (fake boobs and bump). "Today we were proved right. "The size of the baby, the size of her empty bump, proves it! "The fact she was in labour for 12 hrs and is up and about on high-heels within 36 hrs proves it. "The way she hardly looks or touches the baby while on the stairs of St Mary's proves it. "Her slim ankles prove it! As mad as it sounds, the woman just did not give birth yesterday. "I've worked in a maternity ward and that's why I'm feeling positive about this obviously fake baby bump!"
  "William appears to make a Freudian slip (BBC News) when he says: 'It's the first time we've seen him.'..."
Ron Paul Forums / Liberty Forest
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:08
  Congressmen Radel, Amash, Massie and Salmon Introduce Two Amendments to NDAA Strengthening Civil Liberties for all AmericansWashington, Jun 11 | 0 comments f t # eWashington, DC '' Today, Congressman Trey Radel (FL-19) along with co-sponsors Congressman Justin Amash (MI-03), Congressman Thomas Massie (KY-04) and Congressman Matt Salmon (AZ-05) introduced two amendments to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).The first NDAA amendment offered by the group prohibits the federal government from using lethal military force, specifically the use of unmanned aircrafts, on American citizens on American soil. This amendment mirrors legislation introduced earlier this year by Reps. Radel, Amash and Massie.The second NDAA amendment from the group requires the Secretary of Defense to submit to Congress an annual report on US citizens subject to military detention. The report will include their names, the legal justification for their detention and the steps being taken to provide each with due process of law. This amendment holds the executive branch accountable by shining light into the military detention process.
  ''The government should be a vigilant defender of our civil liberties,'' said Rep. Radel. ''These amendments add yet another layer of protection to the rights of American citizens, granting them the due process they deserve when it comes to the use lethal military force and military detentions.''
  ''The Constitution protects Americans from being killed or imprisoned by their own government without due process,'' said Rep. Amash. ''Our amendments ensure that Americans do not have to fear that lethal military force will be used against them here in the United States and that Members of Congress and the public will know when the President is using the unconstitutional authority provided in the 2012 NDAA to indefinitely detain Americans without charge or trial.''
  "The NDAA is another example of legislation that Congress continues to pass without regard for our Constitution," said Rep. Massie. "These amendments ensure our Fifth Amendment rights are observed, and I look forward to working with Rep. Radel, Rep. Amash, and Rep. Salmon to protect Americans' civil liberties."
  ''Protecting U.S. civil liberties and our constitutional right to due process is not up for debate,'' said Rep. Salmon. ''That's why it is important to clarify our laws and ensure these protections for U.S. citizens are never infringed upon.''
  CLICK HERE for text of no use of lethal military force against Americans on American soil amendment.
  CLICK HERE for text of military detention accountability amendment.
Statement by the Press Secretary on the Amash Amendment
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Wed, 24 Jul 2013 07:06
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 23, 2013
  In light of the recent unauthorized disclosures, the President has said that he welcomes a debate about how best to simultaneously safeguard both our national security and the privacy of our citizens. The Administration has taken various proactive steps to advance this debate including the President's meeting with the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, his public statements on the disclosed programs, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence's release of its own public statements, ODNI General Counsel Bob Litt's speech at Brookings, and ODNI's decision to declassify and disclose publicly that the Administration filed an application with the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. We look forward to continuing to discuss these critical issues with the American people and the Congress.
  However, we oppose the current effort in the House to hastily dismantle one of our Intelligence Community's counterterrorism tools. This blunt approach is not the product of an informed, open, or deliberative process. We urge the House to reject the Amash Amendment, and instead move forward with an approach that appropriately takes into account the need for a reasoned review of what tools can best secure the nation.
VIDEO-BBC News - Online pornography to be blocked by default, PM announces
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 24 Jul 2013 05:24
  22 July 2013Last updated at10:16 ETPlease turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
  David Cameron: "In the balance between freedom and responsibility we have neglected our responsibility to children"
  Most households in the UK will have pornography blocked by their internet provider unless they choose to receive it, David Cameron has announced.
  In addition, the prime minister said possessing online pornography depicting rape would become illegal in England and Wales - in line with Scotland.
  Mr Cameron warned in a speech that access to online pornography was "corroding childhood".
  The new measures will apply to both existing and new customers.
  Continue reading the main storyAnalysisSeven years ago David Cameron told a Google conference that politicians should encourage companies to change, not over-regulate them.
  Today, he announced he had reached agreement with the four biggest ISPs on pornography filters, after some behind the scenes tussling.
  But he hinted that if search engines like Google didn't agree to a blacklist of search terms, he would legislate.
  From Downing St, he can supplement the art of persuasion with the smack of firm government.
  Back in his opposition days, Cameron made waves presenting himself as a man on the side of parents against firms that sold chocolates at checkouts and children's bikinis.
  If he can mould a similar image in Downing St, as a PM doing battle with big business on behalf of fellow parents, he will be more than happy.
  Mr Cameron also called for some "horrific" internet search terms to be "blacklisted", meaning they would automatically bring up no results on websites such as Google or Bing.
  He told the BBC he expected a "row" with service providers who, he said in his speech, were "not doing enough to take responsibility" despite having a "moral duty" to do so.
  He also warned he could have to "force action" by changing the law and that, if there were "technical obstacles", firms should use their "greatest brains" to overcome them.
  'Innocence'In his speech, Mr Cameron said family-friendly filters would be automatically selected for all new customers by the end of the year - although they could choose to switch them off.
  And millions of existing computer users would be contacted by their internet providers and told they must decide whether to use or not use "family-friendly filters" to restrict adult material.
  The filters would apply to all devices linked to the affected home Wi-Fi network and across the public Wi-Fi network "wherever children are likely to be present".
  Customers who do not click on either option - accepting or declining - will have filters activated by default, Tory MP Claire Perry, Mr Cameron's adviser on the sexualisation and commercialisation of childhood, told the BBC.
  The UK's biggest internet service providers have agreed to the filters scheme meaning it should cover 95% of homes.
  Other measures announced by the prime minister included:
  New laws so videos streamed online in the UK will be subject to the same restrictions as those sold in shopsSearch engines having until October to introduce further measures to block illegal contentExperts from the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre being given more powers to examine secretive file-sharing networksA secure database of banned child pornography images gathered by police across the country will be used to trace illegal content and the paedophiles viewing itMr Cameron also called for warning pages to pop up with helpline numbers when people try to search for illegal content.
  He said: "I want to talk about the internet, the impact it is having on the innocence of our children, how online pornography is corroding childhood.
  "And how, in the darkest corners of the internet, there are things going on that are a direct danger to our children, and that must be stamped out.
  Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
  Claire Perry MP: "We have asked companies to help families install family friendly filters"
  "I'm not making this speech because I want to moralise or scaremonger, but because I feel profoundly as a politician, and as a father, that the time for action has come. This is, quite simply, about how we protect our children and their innocence."
  But former Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre boss Jim Gamble told BBC Radio 4's Today programme it was important to "get to the root cause" of illegal pornography, by catching those responsible for creating it.
  He added: "You need a real deterrent, not a pop-up that paedophiles will laugh at."
  But Ms Perry argued filters would make a difference, saying that the killers of schoolgirls April Jones and Tia Sharp had accessed legal pornography before moving on to images of child abuse.
  She added: "It's impossible to buy this material in a sex shop... but it's possible to have it served up on a computer every day."
  In his speech, Mr Cameron said possession of online pornography depicting rape would be made illegal.
  Continue reading the main story''Start QuoteThe coalition government has pledged to prevent abuse of women and girls, so tackling a culture that glorifies abuse is critical for achieving this''
  End QuoteHolly DustinDirector, End Violence Against Women CoalitionExisting legislation only covers publication of pornographic portrayals of rape, as opposed to possession.
  "Possession of such material is already an offence in Scotland but because of a loophole in the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008, it is not an offence south of the border," Mr Cameron said.
  "Well I can tell you today we are changing that. We are closing the loophole - making it a criminal offence to possess internet pornography that depicts rape."
  The move has been welcomed by women's groups and academics who had campaigned to have "rape porn" banned.
  Holly Dustin, director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said the group was "delighted".
  "The coalition government has pledged to prevent abuse of women and girls, so tackling a culture that glorifies abuse is critical for achieving this," she said.
  "The next step is working with experts to ensure careful drafting of the law and proper resourcing to ensure the law is enforced fully."
  'No safe place'Mr Cameron, who has faced criticism from Labour over cuts to Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre's funding, insisted the centre's experts and police would be given the powers needed to keep pace with technological changes on the internet.
  Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
  Claire Lilley, NSPCC: "In every single child abuse image there is a victim, a child who has been abused"
  "Let me be clear to any offender who might think otherwise: there is no such thing as a safe place on the internet to access child abuse material," he said.
  A spokesman for Google said: "We have a zero tolerance attitude to child sexual abuse imagery. Whenever we discover it, we respond quickly to remove and report it.
  "We recently donated $5m (£3.3m) to help combat this problem and are committed to continuing the dialogue with the government on these issues."
  According to some experts, "default on" can create a dangerous sense of complacency, says BBC technology correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones.
  He says internet service providers would dispute Mr Cameron's interpretation of the new measures, insisting they did not want to be seen as censors.
The NSA Says It Can't Search Its Own Email : The Two-Way : NPR
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 24 Jul 2013 05:09
  A new National Security Agency (NSA) data center in Bluffdale, Utah. The center, a large data farm, is set to open in the fall of 2013.
  George Frey/Getty ImagesA new National Security Agency (NSA) data center in Bluffdale, Utah. The center, a large data farm, is set to open in the fall of 2013.
  George Frey/Getty ImagesOver the past weeks, we have learned the National Security Agency has the capability to collect and sift through massive amounts of electronic data produced throughout the world.
  Today, ProPublica reports that when it comes to parsing email sent by its own employees, the United States' spy agency does not have the technology for it.
  At least that's what the investigative outfit said the NSA told them in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.
  ProPublica reports:
  "'There's no central method to search an email at this time with the way our records are set up, unfortunately,' NSA Freedom of Information Act officer Cindy Blacker told me last week.
  "The system is 'a little antiquated and archaic,' she added.
  "I filed a request last week for emails between NSA employees and employees of the National Geographic Channel over a specific time period. The TV station had aired a friendly documentary on the NSA and I want to better understand the agency's public-relations efforts.
  "A few days after filing the request, Blacker called, asking me to narrow my request since the FOIA office can search emails only 'person by person,' rather than in bulk. The NSA has more than 30,000 employees."
Cyber Defense Exercise 2011 - NSA Video Transcripts - NSA/CSS
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:38
  ((Pensive piano and strings music))
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: Battle stations everyone.
  JOHN CHRIS INGLIS, NSA DEPUTY DIRECTOR, NSA: We're not just fighting a kinetic war but we're actually in the midst of a cyberwar. That's why you're here. You could have done a lot of other things, but I assure you that there's no greater outcome that you could commit yourself to than the stuff that we do here.
  ((Piano and strings continue to play))
  Go to town. Make them shake.
  ((Music builds))
  All is quiet on the Western Front but we don't know how long that's going to last.
  ((Music continues))
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: So they're hitting it.
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: Did you make the website?
  FRANTIC VOICE OFF SCREEN: I need you here now!
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: They're trying to hit our web server pretty good. If there's any SNORT or BARNYARD issues we've got a problem.
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: Stay Vigilant! I need confirmation that that was five. Ohhh snap! We have a full XE... DGPC one G. Awww F--
  ((Ominous drum beats))
  My name is Marc Abbott. West Point 2009. I participated in the CDX for 3 years.
  ...Connect into the web server on HTTPS. It failed for some reason. What CDX taught me is we had to work together. You had to plan in advance. You had to be ready for everything.
  ((Guitar begins new music))
  FEMALE VOICE: We spent the last quarter building a network and now the NSA gets to take a crack at it. Can they get in, and once they're in how fast can we get them off.
  ((Music continues playing))
  MALE VOICE OFF SCREEN: Teams from the different service academies, as well as a Canadian team and some post graduate schools create a network.
  ((Music continues playing))
  It's going to be a big work weekend this weekend making sure everything is good to go. Game on. We're just trying to get everything working. If we can beat AFIT I'll be happy. It's going to get pretty ugly soon though.
  The Gray Cell definitely is a different challenge that we have to face.
  We really have to watch them and see that they're not opening up anything malicious. Coast Guard is going to win this year. We've got Kenny.
  Kenny is kind of our go-to-man. The brain-trust of the whole network. He is one of the best with computers out of the Electric Engineering major.Sir- we've got too many ones and not enough zeroes. Oh. Kenny's been at a SANS course this past week so that's had kind of an impact on what we're doing. It'd be nice if he was here. We're doing the best we can. So close.
  ((Music ends))
  NSA PRODUCER: What was it like to lose to Army by such a close margin last year?
  AIR FORCE PARTICIPANT: Uh, no comment.
  ((New music begins))
  ECHOED MALE VOICE: The academy winner in 2011 for the Cyber Defense Exercise is... The United States Military Academy at West Point.
  ((Cheering from West Point CDX Team 2011))
  I'd have to think a little bit to be diplomatic on this one... um...
  ((New music continues))
  Needless to say I was a bit let down when we found out we didn't win but putting that behind us, it's water under the bridge and we are just working hard to try to make sure that we're prepared for this year.
  MALE VOICE: We won 6 out of the past 11 years and it'll be 7 out of 12 pretty soon so there's not much to lose sleep over.
  ((echoes))
  ...not much to lose sleep over...
  ((Music ends))
  ((Ominous drum beat))
  Good afternoon and welcome to the 12th annual Cyber Defense Exercise. My name is Debora Plunkett and as the Information Insurance Director here at NSA, it is my great pleasure to kick off our 12th annual Cyber Defense Exercise.
  Let the games begin.
  ((Ominous drums continue))
  ((New music begins))
  MALE VOICE: Of course we're going to win this year.
  MALE VOICE: Oh, we're absolutely going to win this year. We have it in the bag. Ahhh we'll see. It's still early. Uh you know, to all those competing against us, good luck. You're going to need it. We don't want to be last. No way.
  ABBOTT: You know, you prepared for months. There's always that feeling "Did I miss something?" They're coming at you and this is game time. So normally what we do is we start off slow. We're not doing that this year. So uh, at about 10 o'clock this morning we activated a message that told all of our Windows pre-planted malware to start calling back to us...
  ...and the lucky winner of the school this year that was the first to call back was...
  ((Fast drum beats))
  We may have left a huge gaping hole in our firewall. That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. We've lost 75% of our points from our token agent from Gray Cell already, right?
  ((Music speeds up))
  I understand what you're saying. Allow everything out on all ports also allow out 80 to this and 80 to this and - I understand what you're saying. Like all connections out are valid. That's explicitly what I was told to do. I had it the other way and they said change that. But it - so wait...
  ((Laughing))
  I guess they have won.
  ((Music intensifies))
  This morning we, uh, thought we had our proxy locked down and that uh we basically could regulate all of the traffic that is coming out of our Grey Cell users with that and that actually completely backfired.
  ((Music intensity ends))
  We're not getting near as many callbacks as we should right now so far it's only been West Point. But yeah, we did get the number one school from last year so we're feeling pretty good about that right now.
  MALE VOICE: Let's go ahead and see if we can allow explicit hosts for passive and then as those FTP tests fail, we'll knock them out and redo them. Enter, enter.
  ((Music Continues))
  When you mess something up then you have to pay for it. It hurts, but you just have to kind of bounce back and keep going. They have won the last- what did they say this morning? 6 out of the last 11 years or something crazy like that. Oh hey, Air Force. Okay, alright. Alright, we'll see. It's day one.
  ((Ominous drum beats))
  ((New intense music))
  Josh, I need you here now. White Cell and Commander dot P7B are files and our Gray Cell Dot P7B is a directory.
  What?!?
  ((Intense music continues))
  Everybody was coming online at about the same time. We had to make sure that connectivity issues weren't our fault or maybe they were our fault and we had to fix them.
  Our FTP proxy is too slow. If this is protecting us from Red Cell doing something...
  ...it may be worth it.
  We can make the rules to go to just each individual IP address. We lose a lot when we do that. Because now FTP is an unconstrained exfiltration channel for Red Cell. That's true.
  ((Intense music stops))
  MALE VOICE: We didn't sleep at all Monday night!
  ((Guitar plays slow music))
  ABBOTT: You're sleep deprived, and you haven't slept all weekend and you've been working on one computer and one service for a month. Delirium.
  ((Laughs))
  ((Slow music continues playing))
  NSA has managed to compromise two of our workstations pretty much completely. Our domain controller doesn't work which isn't helping us control the workstations which are actively getting owned by Red Cell. It's more like warfare against ourselves so far. Right now it's okay. They haven't really broken into any of our servers. That we know of. Oh god. That's a big one. Well we were having a lot of problems with the scoring. Both the tokens and the, um, what's the other one? Can't even remember. It's been a long day. We're still not last, which is pretty good feeling. We're beating Navy whose strategy seems to be pretty "My Little Pony" uh oriented.
  ((Alternative rock music begins))
  Everyone is in to the ponies, they just don't know it yet.
  NSA PRODUCER: Which one is that?
  NAVY PARTICIPANT: Thisis Princess Celestia.
  NSA PRODUCER: Princess what?
  NAVY PARTICIPANT: Celestia. PWNIES is like POWNING or to hack a computer. So in the internet subculture, on a lot of hacker forums you have the "ponies"... just playing on the word "Pwoning". They're just saying "hi" to everyone on the outside world. "Hello Red Team".
  RED CELL: You're Pwond again. If you'd like to take a look up here um... we have one of the systems from Navy and it looks like they have antivirus installed which is not allowed during this competition. White Cell was actually like "Hey, so you have an antivirus going on" and we were like "Oh..."
  So it's kind of just like "surprise!" And it decided to make itself act as a service and we have some issues getting that service off now.
  ((Music Ends))
  NSA PRODUCER: So what's the resolution for something like that?
  NAVY PARTICIPANT: Pray. Pray a lot.
  ((Ominous drum beat))
  ABBOTT: The most glaring gaps in vulnerability will be obvious the first day. So that first day is "What did we miss?" And then once you clean it out "Okay, when is the next trap going to spring?"
  ((New upbeat music))
  Everything is working exactly as expected so far. That's probably the biggest surprise.
  ((Laughter))
  NSA PRODUCER: So tell us what you just did there as far as AFIT. Rapheal Mudge was able to get a java implant into the boxes of AFIT 1 and AFIT 2.
  ((Music continues)) We've got the first java inject. Here it comes.
  MALE VOICE: We know that all of the workstations are infected with this. 10.2.71.173 All of the malware is coming from there.
  What we're trying to do right now is actually escalate those privileges into something more meaningful that we can actually utilize.
  They're calling out on Port 53 now. 70 to 10.2.38.169 Good luck. I'm just giving you a heads up, they're trying.
  We're freaking out right now, but our systems are working. Our firewall has got it, don't worry about it. It's a beautiful thing. Great success.
  ABBOTT: There's the old saying: "A soldier's life is sheer boredom punctuated bymoments of sheer terror."
  ((Ominous drum beats))
  ((New music))
  So today's Wednesday and it's going really really stressful. Oh, I can play f------ freecell instead of getting there and watching their logs.
  Our network monitoring team wasn't monitoring the network.
  The assumption is no longer "everything I'm doing is working we're good". The assumption is now "everything is broken let me ensure that it's fixed."
  Yeah that pretty much sums it up.
  ((Music continues playing))
  MALE VOICE: So far there are a few schools that have been hit pretty badly. Uh the Naval Academy for example.
  I think it's going pretty well. I feel great right now. I am fully aware of what's going on and I no longer have my splitting headache. Air Force has a huge lead on us right now. Army- I think we're catching up to but so hopefully we'll be either really close to them or ahead of them by the end of the day.
  MALE COAST VOICE: I don't really think they've gotten into any of our servers. So things aren't so bad. Because we're awesome.
  Coast Guard is pretty vulnerable right now. We have a couple implants in several of their boxes and we're working right now to maneuver through their network. So there's still a lot to do, if you will.
  ABBOTT: If you look to the scoreboard you see your number either go higher or lower, there's different levels of panic.
  ((New music begins))
  We're also going to dump the General's Laptop on them today. The General's Laptop is a virtual machine that was sent to us by the "Department of Defense".
  MALE VOICE: General is coming, he wants to get on, you got to do it. You have this amount of time. I am over here setting up the General's Laptop. The idea is by 11:30 we should have this up and running. It's meant to replicate a surprise visit from a General. We're going as fast as we can. The General's Laptop is infected with all sorts of stuff. What the hell has happened to this mouse?
  What the hell is happening?
  Each one of those costs us 200 points. So it's not going so smooth. We're supposed to be up and running at 1:30 but, uh, I don't think we had email working until about almost 3:00. We ran a lot of tests, we were pretty thorough. So we should be good. Probably within half an hour of setting that laptop up uh we got hit for our confidentiality. So that gives us more hooks to get in. I love laptops. I mean add more stuff to the network, it's more for us to attack.
  We had to really scramble to get that set up. We didn't have any time at all to even breathe before we got that thing up and running. I don't think I cleaned it up very well. I did my best but... c'est la vie.
  Our team is athree-prong team. And right now the Food Team is probably doing the best out of all three. You can't expect to do good work without good food.
  ((Guitar begins playing))
  The Army has always run on a diet of typically cigarettes and coffee. Now we're trying to make sure that we have a more healthy approach. Teryaki Chicken shish kabob with pineapples, onions, peppers, and mushrooms. I'm trying to, trying to get together a uh a pulled pork for dinner tonight. I've got steak right here. How can you lose when you're cooking pulled pork, steak and ribs? I mean, it's hard not to win.
  This is the next 12 we're putting on right now. Barbecue, chili powder, of course you have to have garlic with just about anything you make. A whole pan of ground beef, we're going to throw on the grill and season here in a couple hours. So just hoping to keep it up, fill my boys' stomachs and to make sure that Air Force is looking like that pork roast downstairs-good and broken.
  ((Music ends))
  Today we're working on USAFA. We're making some pretty good progress. We're throwing just tons of packets at them trying to confuse them but they're doing a great job, I have to admit.
  ((New music begins))
  The biggest threats that we face from Red Team tend to involve malware. We are working on a cocktail.
  We actually have a member of the team who's really good at malware analysis and reverse engineering.
  ((loudly))
  Hey Luke! He's like right there. Oh sorry, there you are...
  Boo!
  Hi!
  [Laughs]
  Every single time we get something, we just go grab it and send it to him. He reverse engineers it, tells us where it's trying to dial home to, and we can block it on the firewall as malicious.
  ...And it has all of their exploits. We stumbled upon this website that happened to have every single bad thing that Red Cell had prepared for us that day. There we go, now we're going. Okay. And so we're just downloading all of the malware that they were going to send us?
  ((laughter))
  Uh- Red Cell I guess got lazy and didn't lock down the directory. So as soon as we saw that, we immediately grabbed everything from there as we could and we sent it over to Luke. I'm actually still figuring out the evilness but we've already told the IPs to block for the dial backs. Once we protected against those attacks, about half an hour later we could see those attacks getting thwarted at the firewall. We do feel special.
  ((Music Ends))
  ((Ominous Drum beat))
  ((New music begins))
  Air Force has not had a significant breach of their network yet. Who do you think the Red Cell is going to be targeting today?
  I think Red Cell's strategy is: "Get Air Force."
  NSA PRODUCER: Who's doing really well?
  RED CELL TEAM LEAD: USAFA. USAFA is doing really well. And they are still the only ones that we haven't scored a token on. Which is unfortunate. Multibrowser explains... Actually, actually just the Air Force Academy is the only school we have not been on their computers yet. So our Thursday morning report is all quiet on the western front, but we don't know how long that's going to last. So allegedly uh Air Force has been defaced. Via their webpage, we decided to change some stuff.
  Do you know how to do a proxy?
  Yes.
  There's ping session and there's hover-over. Yeah I think that that's bad.
  They have a nice little picture of Justin Bieber. Hold on. Saying that is who they're fighting for. Don't worry about it. So we're actually looking at our web server to make sure that that has not happened to us. I think we're alright.
  ((music ends))
  ((New music begins))
  My name is Marc Abbott, West Point 2009, and now I'm on the other side, Red Cell. It's quite a change. Our website was calling out to a website looking for a file. It ended up being a PDF file with an embedded piece of malware in it.
  (slyly) Devilish. So it's a form of attack called cross-side scripting. So they were able to modify our page when clients went to it. Air Force forgot to clean it up. Hole. Owned. Just like that. I'm not really a fan of Justin Bieber, especially on my website.
  The fact that it happened, while it was amusing to us, it taught them how to do this right. So when they go out and they become administrators if they're defending a network, they know how to stop it in the future. They will never, ever forget that. Clever little monkeys.
  ((Music Ends))
  The actual web attack itself uh is a lot of fun it's very visual. Uh but where the scoring will be hit is when people go to their site, whatever university whatever school goes to their site, will be subjected to the same malware. We've got some malware on these things that are just hammering our proxy server and web server and we're trying to get it to stop.
  ((New music continues playing))
  They hacked the forum. Our webpage is down right now so we're rebooting it.
  Black screen reboot.
  The web is not 100 percent available so that's an availability issue. So we're trying to figure out why that is. Hello Red Team. Doing good, doing not as bad as the other teams but not too good either. You should check out West Point.
  They tried to pull our password file off our web server using like cross-side scripting but it failed.
  We're in third still. Yeah. We are about 10 points off Army. Almost exactly 10 points. Now it's just a matter of waiting and hoping that something terrible happens to one of the other teams. I mean we're in last by far.
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: USAFA is spanking Army! To tell you the truth, it's too close to call. I know AFIT 1 has done really well so they're a little ahead of us. The token agent was just, it's simulating that we were rebooting when we weren't. We lost a lot of points. They're doing exactly what I expect them to do. I'm going to have them browse to that page. That's, just throw everything at us all at once and see where it gets.
  ((New music begins))
  Oh they're still trying. That's good.
  I'm really tired.
  I just want to go to bed.
  I haven't slept.
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: Just over 10 minutes.
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: Stay vigilant, 5 minutes.
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: 1 minute.
  15 seconds.
  10 seconds. 9...8...
  The CDX victory for USAFA would mean a lot to all of us.
  7...6...5...
  We're confident that we're going to beat everybody else.
  4...3...
  A loss would be devastating.
  2...1...
  End Ex.
  Happy ending.
  Whooo!
  [Cheers]
  I'm not kissing you! I'm not kissing you. No.
  ((Ominous drum beats))
  Towards the end of the exercise we got a notice from White Cell headquarters saying that Air Force's availability scores had been more than twice what it should have been.
  ...They're going to go
  down from what they are...
  VOICE OFF SCREEN: Hell yes! And we're going in to go fix it, they have too many points right now that they shouldn't be having. So that's going to drastically change their final scores. They went from about 75 percent down to 35 percent.
  I see nothing different.
  ((Single ominous drum beat))
  ((New music building))
  ((voices from a speaker phone))
  IAD DIRECTOR DEBORA PLUNKETT: Welcome everybody back again. This is Debbie Plunkett the Information Insurance Director. I'd like to start off by thanking all of you for participating in the CDX this year. You are the next generation of cyber warriors. And you are leaving this exercise we believe better prepared for the realities that await you. So now a drum roll...
  This year's winner of the graduate schools is AFIT 1. Congratulations. Whooo! Yeah!
  ((applause))
  Next the finalist between the service academies, again it was a wonderful wonderful race all week, and this year's winner is...
  US Air Force Academy. Congratulations!
  ((Wild Cheering))
  I think the real key to our success this year was we all worked together really well. Everybody this year did their job on the team keeping the Red Team at bay and taking the punches that we got so I'd say that was the real key. We were able to capture malware that NSA was sending to us and reverse engineer it. It was absolutely an amazing job by our forensics team. What I think won this competition was availability and having really good solid connectivity and that is something that Air Force continued to do better than us and any of the undergraduate institutions.
  ((roar of jet planes))
  The airplanes that just passed by were 20th century warfare, but cyber is going to be 21st century warfare.
  ((Music ends))
Weiner Appears With Wife to Downplay New Sexts -- Daily Intelligencer
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Wed, 24 Jul 2013 04:31
  Carlos Danger, better known as mayoral candidate Anthony Weiner, held a press conference this evening co-starring his supportive wife, Huma Abedin, and said that he will remain in the race after another round of dirty chats and dick pics '-- sent after his resignation from Congress and the birth of his son '-- surfaced. "To some degree, with 49 days left until primary day, perhaps I'm surprised that more things didn't come out sooner," said Weiner in his first public appearance since the latest leak on a site called the Dirty. "I'm responsible for that behavior that's led us to be in this place, but in many ways things aren't that much different than they were yesterday."
  In a statement this afternoon, following hours of silence about the fresh sexts, Weiner said, "Some things that have been posted today are true and some are not." But he insisted, "This behavior is behind me." He remained vague about the timeline of events, although the anonymous woman claimed the messages lasted between August and November of 2012. Speaking tonight, Weiner confirmed, "Some of these things happened before, some of them happened after." He added, "It's in our rearview mirror, but it's not far."
  Abedin, who said she was "very nervous," followed up her husband's statement with one of her own. "When we faced this publicly two years ago it was the beginning of a time in our marriage that was very difficult. And it took us a very long time to get through it," she said, looking solemn. "Our marriage, like many others, has had its ups and its downs. It took a lot of work and a whole lot of therapy to get to the place where I could forgive Anthony."
  "It was not an easy choice in any way," Abedin continued. "But I made the decision that it was worth staying in this marriage. That was a decision I made for me, for our son, and for our family. I didn't know how it would work out, but I did know that I wanted to give it a try. Anthony's made some horrible mistakes both before he resigned from Congress and after, but I do very strongly believe that that is between us and our marriage."
  "We discussed all of this before Anthony decided to run for mayor, so really what I want to say is: I love him, I have forgiven him, I believe in him, and as we have said from the beginning, we are moving forward."
  Weiner's lesser-known rivals, nearly all trailing him in the polls up to this point, used today to stomp on his name. "Enough is enough," said Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, who called on Weiner to withdraw from the race. Comptroller John Liu said Weiner's "propensity for pornographic selfies is a valid issue for voters." Former Councilman Sal Albanese also recommended Weiner withdraw, while Republican candidate John Catsimatidis added, "Anthony Weiner should do what is right for his family and our city and drop out of the race for mayor so we can end this soap opera." Christine Quinn has yet to comment.
NSA growth fueled by need to target terrorists - The Washington Post
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 22 Jul 2013 14:37
  Twelve years later, the cranes and earthmovers around the National Security Agency are still at work, tearing up pavement and uprooting trees to make room for a larger workforce and more powerful computers. Already bigger than the Pentagon in square footage, the NSA's footprint will grow by an additional 50 percent when construction is complete in a decade.
  And that's just at its headquarters at Fort Meade, Md.
  The nation's technical spying agency has enlarged all its major domestic sites '-- in Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Texas and Utah '-- as well as those in Australia and Britain.
  Since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, its civilian and military workforce has grown by one-third, to about 33,000, according to the NSA. Its budget has roughly doubled, and the number of private companies it depends on has more than tripled, from 150 to close to 500, according to a 2010 Washington Post count.
  The hiring, construction and contracting boom is symbolic of the hidden fact that in the years after the Sept. 11 attacks, the NSA became the single most important intelligence agency in finding al-Qaeda and other enemies overseas, according to current and former counterterrorism officials and experts. ''We Track 'Em, You Whack 'Em'' became a motto for one NSA unit, a former senior agency official said.
  The story of the NSA's growth, obscured by the agency's extreme secrecy, is directly tied to the insatiable demand for its work product by the rest of the U.S. intelligence community, military units and the FBI.
  The NSA's broad reach in servicing that demand is at the heart of the controversy swirling around the agency these days. Both Congress and the public have been roiled by the disclosure of top-secret documents detailing the collection of U.S. phone records and the monitoring of e-mails, ­social-media posts and other Web traffic of foreign terrorism suspects and their enablers.
  Lacking a strong informant network to provide details about al-Qaeda, U.S. intelligence and the military turned to the NSA's technology to fill the void. The demand for information also favored the agency's many surveillance techniques, which try to divine the intent of people by vacuuming up and analyzing their communications.
  ''There was nothing that gave you more insight into the inner workings of these organizations as the NSA,'' said Michael Leiter, former director of the National Counter­terrorism Center. ''I can't think of any terrorist investigation where the NSA was not a pre­eminent or central player.''
  One top-secret document recently disclosed by former intelligence contractor Edward Snow­den, who is on the run from U.S. authorities, revealed that 60 percent of the president's daily intelligence briefing came from the NSA in 2000, even before the surge in the agency's capabilities began.
  ''The foreign signals that NSA collects are invaluable to national security,'' the agency said in a statement released Friday to The Post. ''This information helps the agency determine where adversaries are located, what they're planning, when they're planning to carry it out, with whom they're working, and the kinds of weapons they're using.''
I am Very Happy in the Back Seat, Thank You
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Fabulous Geezersistersâ€™ Weblog
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 22:13
  So my husband and I got a new car. Traded in both our old cars and, miraculously, found a single car we both liked and could share. A midsize Audi.
  I liked the way it drove '-- kind of sporty. I'm not sure my husband waited that long before he fell in love with it, though. The minute the salesman started talking about all the car's high-tech gizmos and doo-dads, my husband was a goner.
  ''Wait'll you see this,'' the salesman said. He punched a slew of buttons in the console and said, ''Find the closest coffee shop.''
  The navigation system lit up with an alarming number of possibilities. Coffee next 150 feet. Coffee in two blocks. Coffee around the corner, coffee on the access road, coffee in the strip mall. Never fear, you do not have to drive a block without opportunities for multiple caffeine transfusions. Bring us your tired and huddled drivers and we will put exclamation marks in their eyes!
  ''Pretty cool, huh?'' the salesman said.
  ''Just incredible,'' my husband said raptly. I hadn't heard him so excited since Richard Nixon died. ''Wow. Amazing!''
  I sat in the backseat rolling my eyes. At least, I think I was in the backseat, but maybe if it was just the metaphorical backseat. There's something about high-tech frou-frou male junkies that commandeers all surrounding air space and makes you feel like a flat tire that should be stashed in the trunk.
  ''And, look, you can put all your music here,'' the salesman continued, punching more buttons. ''All of it.''
  ''That's just great,'' my husband said.
  He kept on listening and asking questions with the kind of laser focus you only find in open-heart surgery or sporting events. The two of them got more and more excited about how the car could support umpteen laptops and how the GPS gives you a 3D view of the world that, evidently, makes looking out the window unnecessary and old-fashioned.
  Resigned to my flat-tire status, I added silent punctuations to the ongoing high-tech frenzy, such as, ''So what?'' and, ''Who cares about this shit?'' and ''Big deal!'' I thought we'd been buying a vehicle to drive from A to Z, but, as it turns out, I'd been wrong. We were buying a fucking spaceship. Who cared about little things like mpg when your car could talk to you?
  Anyway, that's all debris under the bridge. We bought the car, we both like it, and so far, we haven't gotten into any fistfights over sharing it.
  But those great masculine dreams of high-tech nirvana and oneness with the Internet while careening on the interstate at 70 mph? Well, I regret to say, they haven't been realized. Not yet, anyway.
  The first night we had the car, my husband retreated to the parking garage to familiarize himself with all the new systems. He came back half an hour later in a mood I could only describe as snappish. The next day, he suggested I take the little voice-recognition tutorial so that I, too, could commune with the car and ask its advice.
  Every time we got in the car, he went all OCD, twirling buttons, punching buttons, swearing, yelling. This led to my suggestion I do all the driving so he could sit in the passenger's seat and devote his full attention to the console. It was similar to chauffeuring a tantrum-prone three-year-old with a very foul and sophisticated vocabulary.
  I didn't know why he couldn't adopt my enlightened, zenlike idea that there was a universe of machinery out there I would never conquer because frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn. But no. He fumed, he poked, he raged.
  Worse, he bragged to everyone how high-tech our new car was. ''Listen to this,'' he announced to our son when he was in our car the first time. ''You're not going to believe this.''
  ''Call Nick,'' my husband said confidently.
  No answer.
  ''Call Nick.''
  ''I am sorry,'' the automated voice said. ''I do not have that song in the jukebox.''
  ''CALL NICK!''
  ''I am sorry,'' the voice said again. ''I do not '-- ''
  ''Goddammit!'' Garbled screams and swearing followed. The scene was so memorable that our son managed to capture it on Facebook.
  ''Did Dad show you our high-tech car?'' I asked our daughter when she arrived in town.
  ''All the way home from the airport,'' she reported. ''It never did work. He screamed at it a lot.''
  When the dealership called to announce we should bring our car in so they could put on our new license plates, my husband suggested we both take it in so we could get a ''refresher'' course on the high-tech cockpit.
  ''We?'' I said.
  By the time the weekend rolled around, my husband's brother and his wife were in town. I urged the two guys to go to the car dealership together, since I had better things to do like breathing and drinking coffee. ''The car's ridiculously complicated,'' I told my brother-in-law. ''You can connect a ludicrous number of laptops to it. Eleven, I think '-- ''
  ''Twelve,'' my husband corrected me.
  He and his brother left our place for the dealership in a state of high high-tech anticipation. My sister-in-law and I went shopping.
  We didn't have to ask her car one damned question en route. We already knew exactly where to go.
  (Copyright 2013 by Ruth Pennebaker)
  Read more about my dysfunctional relationship with machines that talk to me
  Tagged as: audi, autos, cars, family, high technology, high-tech, marriage, men, women
SEC accuses Texas man of running Bitcoin Ponzi scheme - CNET Mobile
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 22:12
  "Fraudsters are not beyond the reach of the SEC just because they use...virtual currency to mislead investors and violate federal securities laws," the SEC says, as it files charges against a Texas man.
  A Texas man is in trouble with the feds for allegedly ripping off investors via a Bitcoin-inspired Ponzi scheme.
  The SEC announced on Tuesday that it has charged Trendon Shavers, the founder and operator of Bitcoin Savings and Trust, with several violations of federal law.
  Shavers reportedly raised at least 700,000 Bitcoin in investments through his company in 2011 and 2012. At that time, his Bitcoin investments were worth $4.5 million. Today, they're worth more than $60 million.
  The government accuses Shavers of generating all that money by promising investors 7 percent in interest each week for buying Bitcoin "off the radar" or in large amounts. But in actuality, says the SEC, Shaver was running a Ponzi scheme in which he used Bitcoin from his new investors to cover interest payments and withdrawals on outstanding investments. Further, Shavers allegedly used the Bitcoin from his investors to trade in his own personal account and to pay off his own personal expenses.
  "Fraudsters are not beyond the reach of the SEC just because they use Bitcoin or another virtual currency to mislead investors and violate the federal securities laws," Andrew Calamari, director of the SEC's New York Regional Office, said in a statement. "Shavers preyed on investors in an online forum by claiming his investments carried no risk and huge profits for them while his true intentions were rooted in nothing more than personal greed."
  The SEC is seeking a court order to freeze the assets of Shavers and his company. The agency is also looking for permanent injunctions, financial penalties, and the disgorgement of the ill-gotten gains with prejudgment interest, which means Shavers would have to return all the money he obtained along with interest should he be found guilty.
Report: New Sexting Chats From Anthony Weiner Surface, Goes By The Name ''Carlos Danger'''...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Weasel Zippers
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:40
  That has to be his porn name.
  Via Mediaite:
  ''Exclusive: Anthony Weiner is a sexual predator luring his victims,'' blares the inflammatory headline at the gossip website,TheDirty.com. A new set of unverified images from a chat session in which Weiner allegedly engaged in sexually explicit conversations with another woman from last summer threaten to derail Weiner's campaign for mayor of New York City. BuzzFeed.com reached out to the Weiner campaign for comment but, as of this writing, not yet responded to the explosive new claims of impropriety.
  ''My source is solid,'' the bombshell post at TheDirty.com begins. ''She really thought Anthony Weiner and her were in love, they spoke on the phone daily multiple times a day for 6 months. Anthony Weiner played with her emotions and mind. Most calls were phone sex.'' [...]
  The images taken from Facebook and the social network Formspring are blurred but are alleged to be Weiner going by the handle ''Carlos Danger.''
  Keep reading'...
  Update: The key thing to note here is these new texts are from last summer, one year after he resigned from Congress and supposedly cleaned his act up.
  Weiner's full statement:
  ''I said that other texts and photos were likely to come out, and today they have. As I have said in the past, these things that I did were wrong and hurtful to my wife and caused us to go through challenges in our marriage that extended past my resignation from Congress. While some things that have been posted today are true and some are not, there is no question that what I did was wrong. This behavior is behind me. I've apologized to Huma and am grateful that she has worked through these issues with me and for her forgiveness. I want to again say that I am very sorry to anyone who was on the receiving end of these messages and the disruption that this has caused. As my wife and I have said, we are focused on moving forward.''
MSNBC's Finney Brings ObamaCare Rebate On Air, Gushes: 'I Got a Check'
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: MRCTV - News & Politics
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:40
  If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.
  MSNBC host Finney spent several minutes touting the benefits of ObamaCare on Sunday's Disrupt, excitedly holding up a rebate she received from her health insurance provider, gushing: ''I got a check.'' As President Obama explained in a Thursday speech at the White House, individuals can receive a rebate check from their insurance provider if the insurer spends less than 80 percent of their customers's premiums on health care.
What is a fanboy?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dave Winer
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:07
  Like art, I know a fanboy when I see one.
  Having been an active participant in The Internets since I was a grad student in the late 70s, I've met more than one or two. I swear I am not myself a fanboy for anything. But that doesn't mean I don't enjoy a good fanboy rant. I've come to appreciate it as an art. An evolving thing.
  Why is this a current topic? Well, the other day I saw a tweet by Marco Arment that struck me as a prototype. Apple had just experienced some kind of security breach. A fluid situation. Marco found the silver lining. No matter how bad it looks, there's some good news in there. I remarked that a fanboy always finds a silver lining. I felt this observation was worth a tweet. To me a tweet is like a Kleenex. Not something that requires a lot of forethought. I hoped, if it offended, it would be lightly brushed aside with a smile perhaps.
  He seemed to take offense. I was slightly surprised. Because inside me I think of Marco as a master of the art. Of all the fans of Apple, he and John Gruber stand head and shoulders above the rest. They're so good at it. It's their business model, in fact.
  The Urban Dictionary site defines a fanboy as: "A passionate fan of various elements of geek culture but who lets his passion override social graces."
  My opinion is the negative part of that is obsolete. We live in times of extreme behavior and social graces aren't what they once were. The NSA lacks social graces a billion times more than Apple fanboys do. Drones! $10 million weddings. Thomas Friedman lacks social graces. The Republican Party.
  There's definitely an art to the way people appreciate Apple. If their amateur promoters aren't fanboys, what are they?
Why Google Reader died.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Dave Winer
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:06
  Buzzfeed has the story, and it's remarkably short, and has the ring of truth to it.
  It's worth noting because this is how decisions are really made in tech, and probably every other industry.
  1. Larry Page says Meh! to RSS and readers. He doesn't use Google Reader.
  2. When it comes up at meetings, if it ever does, the person who brought it up is the subject of jokes.
  3. It keeps running for months if not years on its own, with no one working on development.
  4. Every time there's a cleanup, Google Reader is at the top of the list. Someone says "Oh but there are a lot of users and a bunch of them are reporters." So they keep it running for a little while longer.
  5. Then, to make a point that he wants people to focus, a first-level report of Page's puts it on the shutdown list, despite the objections. Everyone shrugs.
  6. They write a blog post with some BS about how everyone gets news now on their Android phone, something that's sure to make LP happy if he ever sees it.
  7. A few months later it shuts down. Google survives.
Statement by the President and Mrs. Obama Congratulating Their Royal Highnesses The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:58
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  July 22, 2013
  Michelle and I are so pleased to congratulate The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge on the joyous occasion of the birth of their first child. We wish them all the happiness and blessings parenthood brings. The child enters the world at a time of promise and opportunity for our two nations. Given the special relationship between us, the American people are pleased to join with the people of the United Kingdom as they celebrate the birth of the young prince.
Royalty disputes strike sour note in streaming music
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: LIVE@LEEDS
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:32
  Mike Snider, USA TODAY 07/21/13Streaming music is growing in popularity, but some artists are feeling short-changed in the new digital music ecosystem.
  Consumers are getting in tune with streaming music, but the artists who produce the tunes are growing louder in their complaints about the music services.
  Most recently, Radiohead lead singer Thom Yorke struck a defiant chord when he and collaborator Nigel Godrich pulled from Spotify the recent album Amok from their side project band Atoms for Peace. Also removed: Yorke's 2006 solo album The Eraser.
  Last month, classic rockers Pink Floyd criticized Pandora for trying to persuade artists to support reduced royalty rates on the Internet radio service. It's the second shot taken recently at Pandora.
  Last month, David Lowery griped the service was paying him only $16.89 in the first quarter of 2013, during which a song he co-wrote was played more than 1.1 million times. Lowery co-wrote the song Low with two other members of the band Cracker, for their platinum 1992 album Kerosene Hat.
  Both services say that they're paying significant sums for music that is streamed. But for music lovers '-- many of whom have embraced streaming '-- sorting out the debate is no easy feat.
  Spotify and Pandora are different in that Spotify delivers on-demand tracks '-- for free with ads, and $9.99 monthly for ad-free listening on portable devices '-- while Pandora streams themed radio stations for free and premium subscriptions.
  Meanwhile, royalties can differ depending on whether an artist wrote or performed the song '-- or both '-- and what type of service the song is played on. Because the industry and the law treat different technologies differently, the royalty paid when the same song plays on terrestrial radio, satellite radio or on the Internet may vary.
  Pandora and Spotify pay different performance royalties because Pandora is a non-interactive service, in that you can't choose a song on-demand, as you can on Spotify.
  That just scratches the surface of the intricacies in the evolving digital music ecosystem. ''What does it mean to own a piece of music in 2013? That is the question for copyright owners. Will people download to own, or will they simply pay for, or steal, access to music in the cloud?'' says Shelly Palmer, author of Digital Wisdom: Thought Leadership for a Connected World. ''Today, digital music rights fees (such as those paid by Pandora and Spotify) represent the lion's share of revenue that recorded music companies make.''
  The artists charge companies are making millions by paying pennies to artists. ''It's bad for new music,'' Godrich tweeted July 14. ''It's an equation that just doesn't work.''
  However, many music fans seem to like the medium. Digital music sales are estimated to make up a growing chunk of total music spending as it rises from about $7.2 billion in 2012 to $8.1 billion in 2017, according to estimates from Strategy Analytics. Despite download sales dominating the digital music store, streaming is steadily making up a larger percentage of digital music sales, rising from about 12.5% in 2012 to 15.8% in 2017.
  So Spotify, Pandora and other music services such as Rdio and Apple, which has a new iTunes Radio in the works, are trying to develop a successful business model.
  Spotify has 6 million paying customers and 24 million active users globally, the firm says. Online music tracker Eliot Van Buskirk at Evolver.fm estimated that Spotify could soon take in $1 billion in revenue annually.
  At Pandora, even though it grew listenership to more than 200 million U.S. registered users, the publicly traded company lost $38 million during the fiscal year that ended in March.
  The surviving members of Pink Floyd '-- David Gilmour, Nick Mason and Roger Waters '-- noted that Pandora raised $235 million in its 2011 initial public offering, in the band's June 23 editorial on USATODAY.com. ''Nearly 90% of the artists who get a check for digital play receive less than $5,000 a year,'' they wrote. ''Everyone deserves the right to be paid a fair market rate for their work, regardless of what their work entails.''
  Pink Floyd also charged Pandora founder Tim Westergren with deceiving artists by urging them to sign a ''letter of support'' for Internet radio that actually would cut Pandora's royalty rates. Westergren countered by saying that Internet radio is threatened by a convoluted and unbalanced royalty-setting process that can include individual deals between labels and broadcasters.
  Pandora might only pay $1,370 in royalties for a million spins of a song, he says, but each spin may be only heard by one person. Meanwhile, if that same song is played on a popular FM station, thousands, even millions, could hear it.
  ''If major market FM stations paid the same rates as Pandora, based on audience, some would be paying thousands of dollars for every song they played,'' Westergren wrote in a blog post. ''How much do they pay performers right now? Zero.''
  Similarly, Spotify CEO Daniel Ek noted on Twitter that ''we're paying out more than $500 (million) this year. That's real money.''Pandora plans to continue to push for Congress to pass a bill enacting lower royalty rates. Meanwhile, music services, labels, publishers and artists will hash it out.''We're dealing with antiquated laws for different types of music that don't quite make sense any more,'' says Paul Resnikoff, publisher of DigitalMusicNews.com. ''It is so complex (because) it has to do with antiquated rules that never quite got revised, and everyone has piece of the pie, and they are going to protect that piece of the pie.''
  Among the oddities in these streaming showdowns are that Yorke and Godrich, the longtime producer for Radiohead, were able to get their music pulled from Spotify. But Radiohead's catalog, which is owned by Warner Music, remains on Spotify and other music services. And Atoms for Peace plans to make its live performances Thursday and Friday available on video site Soundhalo.com.
  Pandora continues to offer a ''Pink Floyd'' radio station that includes the band's songs such as Another Brick in the Wall, Pt. 2 followed by tracks from other bands such as Dire Straits and Led Zeppelin.
  The digital music evolution has become ''a paradox,'' says Resnikoff, ''in which consumers have about 100 times more enjoyment and access than they have ever had, but the only problem is that the value of those plays '... (what) goes back to artists has decreased. That causes all sorts of problems.''
  Like this:LikeLoading...
  Tags: Digital music sales, digital streaming, Pandora, royalties, Spotify
  This entry was posted on July 22, 2013 at 9:40 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
The American Police State
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Lame Cherry
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:30
  This blog alone has been detailing the nightmare which is the American Police State in a reality, which has been glossed over deliberately by Mockingbird propaganda in the Alex Jones din, for the express purpose of not alerting you to the reality of you are in a Police State Gulag, and you do not even know it.
  Mention SPRAY AND PRAY, and people will not have a clue that the reality is police are taught to empty a clip and if it kills civilians, it does not matter as it is in the line of duty one is shooting at "criminals".
  Who are the criminals?
  Florida Nurse Terrorized by US Marshals in Warrantless Raid...
  WSJ: Militarization of American policing...
  Delaware officials admit tax snooping; Won't identify Christine O'Donnell as target...Why it is you the Citizen.
  I was in a major metro area this past week and a Beaner Cop was sitting there as deputy sheriff as I drove by, and that thug just glared at me, as if I was a criminal on the loose. That is the mentality of all of these state police thugs.The reality is Sheriff Joe of Arizona is a lone officer among a sea of federally trained thugs, who teach police to shoot first with murderous intent, and not ask questions later.
  I will repeat that in police are trained nationwide in SWAT military tactics, and their first response is to shoot people dead.
  Our mailman had a rather strange son, not all there. He was fine if you just did not bother him. Some people rented his land to farm, and then as big farmer pricks decided they could hunt on it too, even if he did not want them too.The guy showed up with a pitchfork or something and ran them off. The big farmers of course called the police as that is what asses do. A deputy showed up, and when this guy approached with a bat or something, the cop shot him dead. No he did not try and disable him, but with a 12 gauge shotgun and buckshot blew this mentally disturbed person to death as a first response.
  Want the kicker in this? This cop left the job and is now working in some urban area.
  I saw this thug in walking on the road for a walk. This ass made certain to drive out of his way to "check on us". Yes real criminals in an elderly woman and a child. Yet that is what this psycho thug was.
  I actually was cited by a maniac cop in Iowa of their state patrol. This lunatic got me by driving over 100 miles per hour BEHIND motorists to catch them.I know he was driving that as months later this loon went around me, and he almost lost his car as it was floating on the pavement as he went around.
  That is the state police in America, and the military is just as off the wall with all the sex and dope running through their veins. They are not bright enough to not realize that Obama put them into slaughter pits overseas and was using them as an assassination squad. They serve while only a Terry Lakin was man enough to stand up for America.
  Your tax dollars trains psychotic goons who are hired by the goon squad to beat on you and murder you just like King George's police state did in 1776.I have told you before, that every person reading this does a gut check when they see a cop now, because they know these uniform wearers are thugs and they are not there to protect and serve, but to prosecute and sever you from life.
  The last thing anyone wants is the authorities of any kind looking at them. That is why I tell you all to behave, pay your taxes, not threaten anyone and to just pay allegiance to any flag they offer. You can not stand against any of this, and there are not enough George Zimmerman attorneys to get you off.....and you note that the regime is not going to stop with him, until Zimmerman is a dead Hispanic.
  None of this is new, and your local police are now all federalized too, to answer to Eric Holder, which is about as comforting as knowing Howard Bates is behind that shield.
  I am serious when I posted that I want all police put on foot and disarmed. Having this mob around does nothing to stop crime, so why even bother paying billions of dollars for it when all it is doing now is terrorizing the Citizen.
  The American Police State is nothing but an intimidation mob used to keep the mob from their rights and to murder the Citizens who stand against it. There is a reason when one sees all these shaved head, fear of the sun cops standing around along with the fat donut cops, as these thug minorities are prowling around with payback on their scowls against America.
  What America has now are COPS. The New York term people gave the thugs who ruled there for the elite of long ago in wearing copper badges, and beat the living hell out of anyone with a club who was not connected to Boss Tweed.
  I honestly would trust Putin's Police in Russia as they at least kept Edward Snowden alive. What America has is the same malevolent minders of Pyongyang and Peking.
  This American Psycho Patrol gets off on it and they would not gravitate to it, unless they were psychos. That is what Chris Dorner was exposing in his manifesto as the LAPD was nothing but a lesbian minority psycho mob at odds with the white rulers and the Citizen was being beat down as the psychos worked out their problems armed.....and you know what they did to Chris Dorner now don't you.
  nuff said
  agtG
LA Times - Southwest jet's landing gear collapses on landing, injuring 10
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:27
  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.
General Alexander: NSA leaks causing sources to dry up - U.S. News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:14
  Doug Kasputin / Reuters file
  National Security Agency Director Gen. Keith Alexander speaks in Baltimore on June 27.
  By Pete Williams, Justice Correspondent, NBC News
  The U.S. Army general who runs the National Security Agency, in charge of the government surveillance programs revealed by Edward Snowden, say the disclosures and the resulting fallout have greatly distorted how they actually work and have caused some intelligence sources to dry up.
  "We have concrete proof that they have already, terrorists groups and others, are taking action, making changes, and it's going to make our job tougher," said Gen. Keith Alexander, in an interview at the Aspen Security Conference in Colorado.
  Alexander said it would be impossible to listen to every phone call and read every e-mail even if the government wanted to, which it does not. Consider, he said, the sheer volume '-- 114 billion e-mails, 24 billion text messages, and over 12 billion phone calls worldwide every day.
  "We're a foreign intelligence agency, we don't have the technical capabilities to do that. You'd have to have AT&T's and everybody else's networks, and we don't. We couldn't compel them to listen to those phone calls. That would require a warrant and a finding of probable cause."
  Alexander said the telephone and internet surveillance programs revealed in Snowden's leaks were court-approved but kept secret for a valid reason.
  "The purpose of these programs, and the reason we use secrecy, is not to hide from the American people, not to hide it from you, but to hide it from those who walk among you who are trying to kill you."
  Since the programs became public, the Obama administration faces growing pressure to reveal more about how the massive programs work. One gathers data on phone numbers dialed and length of calls made in the US, though not call content. The other allows the NSA to monitor overseas e-mails and Internet sites used by suspected terrorists.
  Some of the world's top computer and Internet companies are urged the administration to let them disclose the number and scope of the surveillance requests they get from the NSA, information that is classified.
  The federal government also faces new lawsuits brought by privacy advocates who seek to restrict the programs or to make more details about them public.
  At the Aspen conference, the head of the ACLU said Edward Snowden did America a service.
  "Up until Edward Snowden's revelations, the public debate was anemic. There was very little understanding about surveillance and the implications for ordinary Americans. Now it's much more robust," said Anthony Romero, the ACLU's executive director.
Statism is turning America into Detroit '' Ayn Rand's Starnesville come to life '' Telegraph Blogs
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:09
  You thought Atlas Shrugged was fiction?
  Look at this description of Detroit from today's Observer:
  What isn't dumped is stolen. Factories and homes have largely been stripped of anything of value, so thieves now target cars' catalytic converters. Illiteracy runs at around 47%; half the adults in some areas are unemployed. In many neighbourhoods, the only sign of activity is a slow trudge to the liquor store.
  Now have a look at the uncannily prophetic description of Starnesville, a Mid-Western town in Ayn Rand's dystopian novel, Atlas Shrugged. Starnesville had been home to the great Twentieth Century Motor Company, but declined as a result of socialism:
  A few houses still stood within the skeleton of what had once been an industrial town. Everything that could move, had moved away; but some human beings had remained. The empty structures were vertical rubble; they had been eaten, not by time, but by men: boards torn out at random, missing patches of roofs, holes left in gutted cellars. It looked as if blind hands had seized whatever fitted the need of the moment, with no concept of remaining in existence the next morning. The inhabited houses were scattered at random among the ruins; the smoke of their chimneys was the only movement visible in town. A shell of concrete, which had been a schoolhouse, stood on the outskirts; it looked like a skull, with the empty sockets of glassless windows, with a few strands of hair still clinging to it, in the shape of broken wires.
  Beyond the town, on a distant hill, stood the factory of the Twentieth Century Motor Company. Its walls, roof lines and smokestacks looked trim, impregnable like a fortress. It would have seemed intact but for a silver water tank: the water tank was tipped sidewise.
  They saw no trace of a road to the factory in the tangled miles of trees and hillsides. They drove to the door of the first house in sight that showed a feeble signal of rising smoke. The door was open. An old woman came shuffling out at the sound of the motor. She was bent and swollen, barefooted, dressed in a garment of flour sacking. She looked at the car without astonishment, without curiosity; it was the blank stare of a being who had lost the capacity to feel anything but exhaustion.
  ''Can you tell me the way to the factory?'' asked Rearden.
  The woman did not answer at once; she looked as if she would be unable to speak English. ''What factory?'' she asked.
  Rearden pointed. ''That one.''
  ''It's closed.''
  Now here's the really extraordinary thing. When Ayn Rand published those words in 1957, Detroit was, on most measures, the city with the highest per capita GDP in the United States.
  The real-life Starnesville, like the fictional one, decayed slowly, then collapsed quickly. I spent a couple of weeks in Detroit in 1991. The city was still functioning more or less normally, but the early signs of decomposition were visible. The man I was staying withn, a cousin of my British travelling companion, ran a bar and restaurant. He seemed to my teenage eyes to be the embodiment of the American dream: he had never been to college, but got on briskly and uncomplainingly with building a successful enterprise. Still, he was worried. He was, he told me, one of a shrinking number of taxpayers sustaining more and more dependents. Maybe now, he felt, was the time to sell up, while business was still good.
  He wasn't alone. The population of Motown has fallen from two million to 700,000, and once prosperous neighbourhoods have become derelict. Seventy six thousand homes have been abandoned; estate agents are unable to shift three-bedroom houses for a dollar.
  The Observer, naturally, quotes a native complaining that 'capitalism has failed us,' but capitalism is the one thing the place desperately needs. Detroit has been under Leftist administrations for half a century. It has spent too much and borrowed too much, driving away business and becoming a tool of the government unions.
  Of Detroit's $11 billion debt, $9 billion is accounted for by public sector salaries and pensions. Under the mountain of accumulated obligations, the money going into, say, the emergency services is not providing services but pensions. Result? It takes the police an hour to respond to a 911 call and two thirds of ambulances can't be driven. This is a failure, not of the private sector, but of the state. And, even now, the state is fighting to look after its clients: a court struck down the bankruptcy application on grounds that 'will lessen the pension benefits of public employees'.
  Which brings us to the scariest thing of all. Detroit could all too easily be a forerunner for the rest of the United States. As Mark Steyn puts it in the National Review:
  Like Detroit, America has unfunded liabilities, to the tune of $220 trillion, according to the economist Laurence Kotlikoff. Like Detroit, it's cosseting the government class and expanding the dependency class, to the point where its bipartisan ''immigration reform'' actively recruits 50''60 million low-skilled chain migrants. Like Detroit, America's governing institutions are increasingly the corrupt enforcers of a one-party state '-- the IRS and Eric Holder's amusingly misnamed Department of Justice being only the most obvious examples. Like Detroit, America is bifurcating into the class of ''community organizers'' and the unfortunate denizens of the communities so organized.
  Oh dear. No wonder the president would rather talk about Trayvon Martin. If you want to see Obamanomics taken to its conclusion, look at Starnesville. And tremble.
GOP's Issa, US Postal Service Plan End to Home Delivery
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 17:00
  Mail delivery to the doorstep may be a thing of the past as lawmakers consider ways to cut costs to save the cash-strapped U.S. Postal Service, which lost $16 billion in 2012.According to CNN Money, the agency is working toward a more "centralized delivery" approach in which residents pick up their mail from a mailbox at the curb or at clusters of mailboxes within their neighborhoods.
  Editor's Note:Over 50? Check Out These Free Government Giveaways...
  The practice already is being adopted for new houses and developments, and some House Republicans want it rolled out universally.
  "A balanced approach to saving the Postal Service means allowing USPS to adapt to America's changing use of mail," said Rep. Darrell Issa, the California Republican leading the House effort to save the Postal Service.
  Doing away with doorstep delivery has become a central part of Issa's proposal to save money. Ending door-to-door deliveries would save $4.5 billion a year from the $30 billion the mail service currently spends on delivery.
  How? Right now, 35 million residences and businesses get mail delivered to their doorstep. CNN reports that it costs $353 per stop for a delivery in most American cities, taking into account such things as salaries and cost of transport.
  Curbside-mailbox delivery costs $224, and cluster boxes cost $160, according to a report from the Postal Service Office of Inspector General cited by CNN.
  In addition to the $16 billion lost by the agency last year, it twice defaulted on payments owed to the federal government to prefund retiree healthcare benefits totaling $11 billion. The agency also has exhausted a $15 billion line of credit from the U.S. Treasury.
  Nevertheless, the plan has received criticism from unions, which say it would be disruptive for the elderly and disabled, and from otehrs who claim it would be inconvenient and possibly unsafe.
  "It's madness," Jim Sauber, chief of staff for the National Association of Letter Carriers, told CNN. "The idea that somebody is going to walk down to their mailbox in Buffalo, N.Y., in the winter snow to get their mail is just crazy."
  Others, such as industry groups, support the idea as an alternative to the proposal of cutting Saturday service, which the service floated earlier this year before reversing the decision.
  Editor's Note:Should ObamaCare Be Repealed? Vote in Urgent National Poll
  The Postal Service also continues to struggle with mail volume, especially drops in first-class mail, its big revenue driver, as more Americans move to electronic bill-pay and e-mail. To many critics, the service has become little more than a junk-mail delivery service.
  (C) 2013 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
Falling TVs injure 17,000 kids a year | Harvard Health Blog
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 16:38
  Posted July 22, 2013, 4:39 pmTelevision can be hazardous to a child's health. Not just from the inactivity and mental mush that come with watching too much TV, but from the set itself. More than 17,000 American youths end up in emergency departments each year with injuries from a falling television set. Two-thirds of them are under age 5, according to a report published online today in the journal Pediatrics.
  Dr. Gary A. Smith and colleagues looked at injury data from 1996 to 2011. Over that period, nearly 400,000 children under 18 years old were treated in emergency departments for TV-related injuries. In 1996, most of the injuries occurred when kids ran into television sets. By 2011, injuries from falling TVs dominated.
  Curiously, the rate of televisions falling from TV stands and entertainment centers was stable over the years, while the rate of TVs falling from dressers, bureaus, chests of drawers, and armoires nearly quadrupled.
  What might be contributing to the increase? The researchers speculate that as Americans buy more TVs, some are relegated to less-safe locations, like bedroom dressers. The shift from older, bottom-heavy cathode ray tube televisions to lighter, less bulky flat-screen sets may also contribute to tippier TVs.
  Voluntary standards for some types of furniture, like chests, dressers, and bookcases, require that straps, anchors, or other anti-tip devices be provided. Television sets aren't covered by the standards. ''Extending this type of requirement to TVs as part of the Underwriters Laboratories standard that addresses TV stability would be an important step in decreasing the number of injuries resulting from falling TVs,'' the authors write.
  If you have children at home or grandchildren who visit, keeping TV sets off of furniture with drawers that can be opened'--which children sometimes use as steps to reach the set'--is one way to avoid injury. Bolting or strapping TVs to the surface is another.
  Check out other steps for making a home safer at the Harvard Health Publications/InteliHealth ''Childproofing your home'' tool.
Venture Funds Invest in Electronic Spying Startups
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 13:37
  ' Invalid email address.
  ' You can't enter more than 20 emails.
  ' Seperate multiple addresses with Commas.
  ' Must enter an email address.
  ' You must enter the verification code below to send.
  ' Invalid entry: Please type the verification code again.
TSA opening up PreCheck program to let more fliers speed through lines - NBC News.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Tue, 23 Jul 2013 08:52
  AirlinesThe Associated Press
  20 hours ago
  Joe Raedle / Getty Images
  A TSA agent waits for passengers to use the TSA PreCheck lane being implemented by the Transportation Security Administration at Miami International Airport on October 4, 2011 in Miami, Florida.
  The government is expanding the ways airline passengers can enroll in an expedited screening program that allows travelers to leave on their shoes, light outerwear and belts and keep laptop computers in cases at security checkpoints.
  Under the Transportation Security Administration's Precheck program, only travelers who were members of the frequent flyer programs of some air carriers were eligible for expedited screening. On Friday, TSA Administrator John Pistole said beginning later this year U.S. citizens will be able to enroll online or visit an enrollment site to provide identification, fingerprints and an $85 enrollment fee.
  About 12 million people are currently enrolled in the program. Pistole said he expects about another 3 million people to enroll before the end of the year.
  (C) 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
'Key Partners': The Secret Link Between Germany and the NSA - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 22 Jul 2013 22:37
  It was a busy two days for the surveillance specialists of the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND), Germany's foreign intelligence agency. At the end of April, a team of 12 senior BND officials flew to the United States, where they visited the heart of the global American surveillance empire: the National Security Agency (NSA). The purpose of their mission can be read in a "top secret" NSA document which SPIEGEL has seen -- one of the trove of files in the possession of whistleblower Edward Snowden.
  According to the document, BND President Gerhard Schindler repeatedly expressed an "eagerness" to cooperate more closely with the NSA. The Germans, the document reads, were looking for "guidance and advice."
  Their wish was fulfilled. Senior employees with the NSA's Foreign Affairs Directorate were assigned to look after the German delegation. The Americans organized a "strategic planning conference" to bring their German partners up to speed. In the afternoon, following several presentations on current methods of data acquisition, senior members of a division known as Special Source Operations, or SSO, spoke to their German guests. The SSO, one of the most secretive groups within the intelligence community, is the division that forms alliances with US companies, especially in the IT sector, for data mining purposes. Snowden describes this elite unit as the NSA's "crown jewels".
  The journey to Washington wasn't the first educational trip by German intelligence officials across the Atlantic this spring -- nor was it the last. Documents from Snowden that SPIEGEL has seen show that cooperation between Berlin and Washington in the area of digital surveillance and defense has intensified considerably during the tenure of Chancellor Angela Merkel. According to one document, the Germans are determined to "strengthen and expand bilateral cooperation."
  Completely Unaware?
  This is awkward news for Merkel, who is running for re-election as the head of the center-right Christian Democrats. The German campaign had been relatively uneventful until recently, but now a new issue seems to have emerged: the Americans' lust for data. Opposition politicians have intensified their attacks in recent days. First Peer Steinbr¼ck, the Social Democratic candidate for the Chancellery, accused Merkel of having violated her oath of office for failing to protect the basic rights of Germans. Not long later, SPD Chairman Sigmar Gabriel referred to Merkel as a "spin doctor who is trying to placate the population." According to Gabriel, it has since been proven that the German government knew about the NSA's activities.
  But the attacks from the SPD are not the chancellor's biggest worry; the real threat comes from within. At a very early juncture, Merkel insisted that her government had been completely unaware of the NSA's activities. It is a position she reiterated before starting her summer vacation last Friday.
  She will now be judged on the basis of those statements. Internally, Merkel's advisors argue that she had no choice but to take such a clear position. After all, both the head of the BND and the president of the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), Germany's domestic intelligence agency, had said that they had had no detailed knowledge of the Prism surveillance program and the extent of American data collection. On what basis could Merkel have contradicted them?
  But with each day, fears are growing at the Chancellery that a paper could eventually turn up that clearly shows the government's knowledge of the NSA activities.
  But does that really matter? What is worse? To be governed by a cabinet that conceals its connivance from citizens? Or to have a chancellor and ministers whose intelligence agencies exist in a parallel world, beyond the supervision of the government and parliament? Internal NSA documents show that the Americans and German intelligence agencies are cooperating more closely than previously known. The repeated assertions by the government and intelligence agencies in recent weeks that they were not fully aware of what US surveillance specialists were doing appear disingenuous in the extreme in light of the documents SPIEGEL has seen from the collection secured by Snowden.
  'Key Partners'
  According to those documents, the BND, the BfV and the Bonn-based Federal Office for Information Security (BSI) all play a central role in the exchange of information among intelligence agencies. The NSA refers to them as "key partners."
  The Americans provided the BfV with one of their most productive spying tools, a system called "XKeyscore." It's the same surveillance program that the NSA uses to capture a large share of the up to 500 million data sets from Germany, to which it has access each month, according to internal documents seen and reported on by SPIEGEL on the first of this month.
  The documents also reveal the lengths to which the German agencies and German politicians were willing to go to develop an even closer relationship with the Americans. This is especially applicable to the G-10 law, which establishes the conditions under which surveillance of German citizens is permissible. In one classified document -- under a section titled "Success Stories" -- it reads: "The German government modifies its interpretation of the G-10 privacy law '... to afford the BND more flexibility in sharing protected information with foreign partners."
  The claim that German intelligence agencies knew nothing was already hard to believe given that they have been cooperating with American agencies for decades. According to an NSA document from this January, cooperation between the offensive divisions of the NSA and the BND's "Technical Reconnaissance" unit began long ago in 1962.
  The Americans are extremely satisfied with the Germans. For decades, Washington poked fun at the conscientious German spies, who always had a legal decree on hand to justify why they were regrettably unable to participate in an especially delicate operation. This was a source of annoyance to the Americans, but ultimately they had no choice but to accept it.
  More recently, however, that has changed, as the Snowden documents indicate: The German bureaucrats have become real spies.
  During the course of 2012, in particular, the Germans showed great "eagerness and desire" to improve their surveillance capacities and even "to take risks and to pursue new opportunities for cooperation with the US," according to the NSA documents to which SPIEGEL was given access.
  A Close Link
  The shift to a more offensive German security policy began in 2007, when Merkel's conservatives were in power in a coalition with the SPD, the so-called "Grand Coalition." Based on information the NSA had passed on to the BfV, German authorities discovered a group of Islamists led by convert Fritz Gelowicz, known as the Sauerland cell. Gelowicz and several of his friends had planned to detonate bombs in Germany. To this day, the German government is grateful to the Americans for the tip.
  According to the NSA document, the successful operation created "a significant level of trust" between the NSA and the BfV. Since then, the document reads, there have been "regular US-German analytic exchanges and closer cooperation in tracking both German and non-German extremist targets." The documents show that the NSA also provided several training sessions for BfV agents. The aim was "to improve the BfV's ability to exploit, filter and process domestic data." The hope was to create interfaces so that data could be exchanged on a larger scale -- a cooperation "that could benefit both Germany and the US," the paper reads.
  The pact also intensified on German soil. An NSA analyst accredited as a diplomat at the US Embassy in Berlin uses an office at the BfV once a week. According to the document, the analyst's job is to "nurture" the thriving relationship with the BfV. The agent also "facilitates US requirements." In addition, the Germans set up a "communications link" to the NSA to improve ties between agencies.
  Personal relationships also intensified. In May alone, just a few weeks before the Snowden revelations began, BfV President Hans-Georg Maassen, Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich and the 12-member BND delegation paid a visit to NSA headquarters. In the same month, NSA Director General Keith Alexander traveled to Berlin, where he made a stop at the Chancellery, which supervises the BND.
  The cooperation went beyond high level visits. According to the papers from the Snowden files which SPIEGEL has seen, the NSA provided the BfV with XKeyscore, and BND officials were also very familiar with the tool, given that their job was to instruct their counterparts with German domestic intelligence on how to use the spy program. The main reason the BfV was to be provided with XKeyscore was to "expand their ability to support NSA as we jointly prosecute CT (counter-terrorism) targets."
  A "top secret" presentation dated Feb. 25, 2008, which almost reads like an advertising brochure (the American spies are apparently very proud of the system), reveals all the things XKeyscore was capable of doing already five years ago.
Rep or Dem
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 22 Jul 2013 04:52
  %PDF-1.4 %½½½½ 51 0 obj > endobj xref 51 9 0000000016 00000 n 0000000526 00000 n 0000000829 00000 n 0000000983 00000 n 0000001092 00000 n 0000001229 00000 n 0000316453 00000 n 0000000631 00000 n 0000000809 00000 n trailer > startxref 0 %%EOF 52 0 obj > endobj 58 0 obj > stream H½b```e``*g`b`½X½ Ì06½½sNF'²®G½½½^3½Fa½½`½½4½u½½½½n½ HH½½~i½fbo½w½M endstream endobj 59 0 obj 87 endobj 53 0 obj > endobj 54 0 obj /ExtGState > >> endobj 55 0 obj > stream H½½w6RH/½*½235Ô" 4½½Ð"020R½52P0½34½½PH½½½½½5Tp½½ ½0Tu½ endstream endobj 56 0 obj > stream ½½½½Adobed½½½C ½½ ½,½½½ s!1AQa"q½2½½½B#½R½½3b½$r½½%C4S½½½cs½5D'½½½6Tdt½½½&½ ½½EF½½V½U(½½½½½½½eu½½½½½½½½fv½½½½½½½½7GWgw½½½½½½½½8HXhx½½½½½½½½)9IYiy½½½½½½½½*:JZjz½½½½½½½½½½?½q½VÓ• `½½k:}½H½RÎ›½f½)½*½lqP½c½½o½½(½YVLH½C½5)½(½z½KP½½P½|½Vë—¶XÛ...e'3Tcz½r½|½½½½Å>^½z½½,½+L½½|½A5#)½z½ c½½½Ë ½2½½½)½½(½½35s½½;½e½½@9F½,½(½8½(w½½/~½f½½½5½, ½Ë(C)½½½}½½(½½|½Qjm½½½½3>½U?N01$½½@6_3]½6R½½(½*z½ÛšLI½A½½ m½(½½|½½½.½½i½½+½_S½åŠƒ½½A½½½=OLi e½P=½½3p-Þ‡-P½½e½½½½½u\½o½½½J½½Wq½½ ½ë(C)½\½i½\p½½$S5*vë¶½c½v–¤Ö‡je½½)½½f½7½>½½@A½½½i½½1U½½½½½½{c7½½½4\½½Ò­]½B;e½N½c½ç®½~½½Î>>b ½½½V½½ ½1½ ½2½½½Ezí›‘é›‰½Z½:½½Bz½½½5;½½í¥2½S½8½½í...½Ì--½Ç‰q½½R½ÇšV½½W½]½2½V½Æ­N½½lw^½Ë½vÍ¹?½½½½+½½Õ§½5w½P½04½eT½Q|½½½W.½½e)½ ½j½½N["½U=e½í:uÆ½/½ln½½Ï...QN'm½½1½ë›Ž;|½½N½ÓŽix½rw3½6½C½Qj½Rs+½Uw½,\sm½½w½Pv#-½ ½p½½)½r½|X½½2½Û¾8rDT½.½lÙ‰|8½S½½_½\½h1½½1½ ½½½½l½uÌ½½+½|½½5=2½!½e'6½g#.½½½½l½ 9|+½Q ½1½]GÓsQZfV#q½½H½½S]½½5|r½ w½P½l½=½½½}8½'½1½½Ik½Û®b½½Æ--½j½½8½q½3$P½½'½_"½vÆ½½½#½1½½c½a]½&@c½½zw½ra½3½l½½s V½.½½½=¾Y!½Xm½VP½L½½½½½½zb½½Ó¶_½+M½½½½½½i½I½½@4a½ e½½Z½½aI½½½½½½u½½.½½½2½½3½e8½½i½½½½½½½ÇW(½tÊ(C)]½%|w5½½s½½7½½½1½Ò£½½7½½½ ½b 6;f½½;t½Ê>>½S½c½½c½+½*4)=r½jf ½uÌ® ½½v½½½z½½½½X½½^½O½½6½½[½Æ ½7Q½m½Ó¶5b;½½½½r½}½½#(½½0Rv#0½½½S½½A½½ ½PNC½½{v½Wl½j:e½:½u½I½½0nr½½½ Û¯½8½9Tt½[½0c½½½"½½½U½½k½0ß®Xn½er½l½½½79½c½½N½½½ë›'6½P½k½½m½q½aQ½½½½½M{½=½½3½½yU½Ê½r½½½eP0½9R½14½½½½r½½n@u½KSÞ½½)½/½eN½½½½nq½Gm½|½ ½½½½½OaL½½N;½½r½½½R½½|qc^½½2½#]½½Z½½lq½t½L½Ç®8 ½½T½*½lX½a½-½½½;}½½½Ò§(½½lr½4½½Tu½½½½½Q;{½}8½o½QM½½Ol½)½*OLwv½T½½9½½r½½XZ½½[½_0s:f"½lp$½½½NÙ~½½ M½½O}½½)½'±Zw½$½½;½gc½½½½½½XaZS|½½l½½½\½½; ½½½½½½½ ½½PW½1½½½e½½½&½Æ¾½½½\k½XB½½r½5½½N½½½½½_½1½|^½½i½fB|1½AÐŒ½½v½^gc½u5Ì>>½mh3V½½½J¨ÆŸu|7Æ']½L½m½]2½½,½½a5½½X½½½)½ N`µ½½Ù½½½5+½6½.½e)½9Z½v½*½+½+½ ½7;e½O|½Æ½2½A½½½½½Z½½f=½`Ç®nE½½½½½Æ½6Æ‘M½;a½-h:e½½½6½m½)½½½j½z½½½W½5½X e½so½0½½+zPf½Wl½½½a½W)½½½½Ë­s/]½½½;e½½N½kÄ‚\½C½3½`F½½GAL½q½)hw9½½½3V½½^X½½½G½uÜ'Î£½r½S/½½;½l½)½(QN½,x½~Q9b½½½l½½½½4½\½Ó(C)½TxeT ½\l½XoJ½E½1&½q½½#½b:½Ol½GJf ½½T½ f½~Yt W½0#½½½½½½zS|½½=F:½½M½4vÇŸ½*½½3#lwC½YÛ...4V½½½q½½eÔ'½½SZ½½½U½½½½Ò½½Ò›e½$½½½f½½½;½½sNQQJS2½v`v8½×¾X½S½½> fF½½e½½Å--½+@s½q½GC½k½Ì'½½u½H&½½6½l½~8½½9URh½A½z½|½t½0Ðž½(T½½½s½3½f½FQ½½Ç>9\½r½½½½fS½l½½½q½Ê¸½Q½|½½Ê›n½_ s½½5½Te½+½½0½½f½½½½|½[½½(;½#|r½½f5½QS½½P½|q½W½7½½_Ê...½½½½K½½Xe½*½½½½^½l½½,63q½jz½½^B½U½Í›½½,½l:f½Y\½½_1½½ 3½½-½^½½½r½½½V½d};e2½½1 ½bf½½y½i½[tÊ§½½Y½c½S3 ½]½½½½Äž½½½½|½Z½L½½@qÛƒ½½½*½½½s-½|K½AS½½bw½Z½½j½½o½R\½T½½Tlk½]@½C1 ½Æ--½½½6½½Ex½-½7½^½DÓ®b½½;f½o\h"½½½W½j½½½]½½½Rk½r½s½½ ½\a'½½½r½½,zuŸ½½½+½Nes½5O\Ü;f½MI½ L½½½cEA½½UO½½-½cT½2½N½-½½Q½]½½+½½½lzf$½½)qÄš½9D½c½I½½½q½LmI½;½áŠ½½]½8½u½½½Ý–½A½,7-½L½+½Rz½q½Ë(C)½3½½Ì½F½ÚuXðª‡½ZÓ...;½>½½½½}:`IW½4½lq½i½0m½½Zñ†­O8½kL½k½½fQ^½½HÚ>>e½5½½½]z½K½½1Bk-½n½½ Wl½½½½½]½½‘½(GM½frR½½½½q½+½r½S½U6½2½MNb½-Z½½feh6Æ´{P½½½½I½e6½½Ê½½½l½½½½Æ¹B3J½½½½½½$ÆF$X­2½cA.½½½½½j½q½M½f½t½e^½u½Q½½½½U{f&½xæ¨®½)½½½2½zt½½|½½½7L½½½j½=1QS½Æ•½½8/|½)½Ê>>f½Ç¾9V½½q½^½½½½Xz½½tË(C)½\k½½p=½#)Jn½å½½(½]NPSJ½½SM½½½#½e2t+½ZS½½f=½½½½`Gje½½½½A½4½S½e½½½j½½½'½½e v½½Zw½,u½½5)½Íµ1F½(½+½½n½½~vb½½fA½e½½i½½c/1'½7½½½½½½½½ Ù‚½½Mv½½r½½q½6½O½n½DW½8)=½-2½½½)T½½é›že½|x\½½½½v½:3\½½+½½½(½t½½½7½%½Xb^Ý†½|k½q½Þ‡,½9½NW79½½+½½o½ e½½\½Q½½ÜŽUÆ¨½½A½jW0Pq½6½½s½í›"½j½z½p½½h1Û'x&½`Êž5½½P½b½½áŒ­q½½^½½@=½k_½½u½M6½Z1½q½ã¾f`N½NI½:½@½*7½fPEzj½½½.½½Zev½\s ½½c½/½½½½*:½(^½½x½\|=sßµC½()½3½;u',%:½½v½½½/½½)F`NÙ½½-2½½Am½½Sc½( 3½½½A½{½n[½@_½[Pn2½>½½½;uÆ½\½½½D½b½½w½A½ZåŒ...]½3½½1$½;½½½1N½½j½t½4½eW5XJw½½zeFSFH½t'3lF½d½½:½½qs]½½½=½P½½u½l'[vÊ­vr½½½|½W½&½=3AL½½½½P½½#m½R½½c½½bnhze½Sq½½½2½½Òƒ-½½Æ­GO½Gr2½ ½9½½:½½½M½½½½½½½]½r½f9k½q@;½Y½Ê...½íš½a½½½fk½X5½/s½=:½+3½½½½ÓŽ!{½½P½½ë–>> c½½½|}O\jT½½n½T½½c½$½P½½½]½e½:½)½½R½½½~½½$½½½½)h~x½t½Q½/½b½]½½½½á›#-½q½½½½½½(½;½q½½(s|C½2Ù½½v½"½w½½ÞƒÉ¶½Gm½4½½esÞ•½$½½$cX½2½½l1½½½½½$½½W|Ç...½½4›—ÓŒrr½½½S^½½ß¾Q½½½(½|pa½½c½qá°9½½½½=½½3½½½½½>½½6½½y9@½½[½ly½cw½r½N½`½iC½½½½=k½V½½c½c)M½;½q½Ñ–½+OuW½½ m½½H,v' zcy}½×...½½;W|½;½3o½½½(7½?8½c½V½½FXL½½jë–ŠFn½½7½½^½a½O,½'½½½\½½(q½½q=2½+½½½½5½ ½ ½;½½f½eV½½QX½½^½½½0u?uZ½;½\½`g½Jbf>½l½½;½e½½½½)½\kx½JA½%6,½z½eã v½#½2½:e½½U½}½½½Ò¹B½½F½9G½7½L½½A,}+½½$½½z½iS½(½{e½½½3T½½½r½½$½=Z½q½C½9½½PsT½½`½½,u½|½j½½½Èšfm½Q$½N½½1½l½½½,r#|½½½½½×Ž½(6½l½ ½_o|½J½½W½;jTcU½5ë–¬3CLÔ¯½f½½L½'½,½q½z½½s^½c½½Ö¹A½4½$½½½½½ni\½½~½½½,.½½½Ê ½Å‡½4N½eGLo"E½Xu½>½`½e½Gl½½1>N7u½9uc½3S0½J½M½cÖ--½2½7½½Ê½½5½ ½ A½Êž½{½yW/½ëŠt½1½v½½½._½½½½½q½Ö§(T½½½\½½½V½m½½z½-wÚe½½æ¯¶9A½½(½½½o½½fzu½½X½½5½wÄžN½Tcy½íº½jvÄ6U)½½]½Ü¨:½nÙ…½0½½ [½N½7m½ã–£½` ½Pu½.½7½m½Y½\½A½½d|½N½|@ß¾8½½0½Q½I½½9|½½½s½*|½
  %PDF-1.4 %½½½½ 51 0 obj > endobj xref 51 9 0000000016 00000 n 0000000526 00000 n 0000000829 00000 n 0000000983 00000 n 0000001092 00000 n 0000001229 00000 n 0000316453 00000 n 0000000631 00000 n 0000000809 00000 n trailer > startxref 0 %%EOF 52 0 obj > endobj 58 0 obj > stream H½b```e``*g`b`½X½ Ì06½½sNF'²®G½½½^3½Fa½½`½½4½u½½½½n½ HH½½~i½fbo½w½M endstream endobj 59 0 obj 87 endobj 53 0 obj > endobj 54 0 obj /ExtGState > >> endobj 55 0 obj > stream H½½w6RH/½*½235Ô" 4½½Ð"020R½52P0½34½½PH½½½½½5Tp½½ ½0Tu½ endstream endobj 56 0 obj > stream ½½½½Adobed½½½C ½½ ½,½½½ s!1AQa"q½2½½½B#½R½½3b½$r½½%C4S½½½cs½5D'½½½6Tdt½½½&½ ½½EF½½V½U(½½½½½½½eu½½½½½½½½fv½½½½½½½½7GWgw½½½½½½½½8HXhx½½½½½½½½)9IYiy½½½½½½½½*:JZjz½½½½½½½½½½?½q½VÓ• `½½k:}½H½RÎ›½f½)½*½lqP½c½½o½½(½YVLH½C½5)½(½z½KP½½P½|½Vë—¶XÛ...e'3Tcz½r½|½½½½Å>^½z½½,½+L½½|½A5#)½z½ c½½½Ë ½2½½½)½½(½½35s½½;½e½½@9F½,½(½8½(w½½/~½f½½½5½, ½Ë(C)½½½}½½(½½|½Qjm½½½½3>½U?N01$½½@6_3]½6R½½(½*z½ÛšLI½A½½ m½(½½|½½½.½½i½½+½_S½åŠƒ½½A½½½=OLi e½P=½½3p-Þ‡-P½½e½½½½½u\½o½½½J½½Wq½½ ½ë(C)½\½i½\p½½$S5*vë¶½c½v–¤Ö‡je½½)½½f½7½>½½@A½½½i½½1U½½½½½½{c7½½½4\½½Ò­]½B;e½N½c½ç®½~½½Î>>b ½½½V½½ ½1½ ½2½½½Ezí›‘é›‰½Z½:½½Bz½½½5;½½í¥2½S½8½½í...½Ì--½Ç‰q½½R½ÇšV½½W½]½2½V½Æ­N½½lw^½Ë½vÍ¹?½½½½+½½Õ§½5w½P½04½eT½Q|½½½W.½½e)½ ½j½½N["½U=e½í:uÆ½/½ln½½Ï...QN'm½½1½ë›Ž;|½½N½ÓŽix½rw3½6½C½Qj½Rs+½Uw½,\sm½½w½Pv#-½ ½p½½)½r½|X½½2½Û¾8rDT½.½lÙ‰|8½S½½_½\½h1½½1½ ½½½½l½uÌ½½+½|½½5=2½!½e'6½g#.½½½½l½ 9|+½Q ½1½]GÓsQZfV#q½½H½½S]½½5|r½ w½P½l½=½½½}8½'½1½½Ik½Û®b½½Æ--½j½½8½q½3$P½½'½_"½vÆ½½½#½1½½c½a]½&@c½½zw½ra½3½l½½s V½.½½½=¾Y!½Xm½VP½L½½½½½½zb½½Ó¶_½+M½½½½½½i½I½½@4a½ e½½Z½½aI½½½½½½u½½.½½½2½½3½e8½½i½½½½½½½ÇW(½tÊ(C)]½%|w5½½s½½7½½½1½Ò£½½7½½½ ½b 6;f½½;t½Ê>>½S½c½½c½+½*4)=r½jf ½uÌ® ½½v½½½z½½½½X½½^½O½½6½½[½Æ ½7Q½m½Ó¶5b;½½½½r½}½½#(½½0Rv#0½½½S½½A½½ ½PNC½½{v½Wl½j:e½:½u½I½½0nr½½½ Û¯½8½9Tt½[½0c½½½"½½½U½½k½0ß®Xn½er½l½½½79½c½½N½½½ë›'6½P½k½½m½q½aQ½½½½½M{½=½½3½½yU½Ê½r½½½eP0½9R½14½½½½r½½n@u½KSÞ½½)½/½eN½½½½nq½Gm½|½ ½½½½½OaL½½N;½½r½½½R½½|qc^½½2½#]½½Z½½lq½t½L½Ç®8 ½½T½*½lX½a½-½½½;}½½½Ò§(½½lr½4½½Tu½½½½½Q;{½}8½o½QM½½Ol½)½*OLwv½T½½9½½r½½XZ½½[½_0s:f"½lp$½½½NÙ~½½ M½½O}½½)½'±Zw½$½½;½gc½½½½½½XaZS|½½l½½½\½½; ½½½½½½½ ½½PW½1½½½e½½½&½Æ¾½½½\k½XB½½r½5½½N½½½½½_½1½|^½½i½fB|1½AÐŒ½½v½^gc½u5Ì>>½mh3V½½½J¨ÆŸu|7Æ']½L½m½]2½½,½½a5½½X½½½)½ N`µ½½Ù½½½5+½6½.½e)½9Z½v½*½+½+½ ½7;e½O|½Æ½2½A½½½½½Z½½f=½`Ç®nE½½½½½Æ½6Æ‘M½;a½-h:e½½½6½m½)½½½j½z½½½W½5½X e½so½0½½+zPf½Wl½½½a½W)½½½½Ë­s/]½½½;e½½N½kÄ‚\½C½3½`F½½GAL½q½)hw9½½½3V½½^X½½½G½uÜ'Î£½r½S/½½;½l½)½(QN½,x½~Q9b½½½l½½½½4½\½Ó(C)½TxeT ½\l½XoJ½E½1&½q½½#½b:½Ol½GJf ½½T½ f½~Yt W½0#½½½½½½zS|½½=F:½½M½4vÇŸ½*½½3#lwC½YÛ...4V½½½q½½eÔ'½½SZ½½½U½½½½Ò½½Ò›e½$½½½f½½½;½½sNQQJS2½v`v8½×¾X½S½½> fF½½e½½Å--½+@s½q½GC½k½Ì'½½u½H&½½6½l½~8½½9URh½A½z½|½t½0Ðž½(T½½½s½3½f½FQ½½Ç>9\½r½½½½fS½l½½½q½Ê¸½Q½|½½Ê›n½_ s½½5½Te½+½½0½½f½½½½|½[½½(;½#|r½½f5½QS½½P½|q½W½7½½_Ê...½½½½K½½Xe½*½½½½^½l½½,63q½jz½½^B½U½Í›½½,½l:f½Y\½½_1½½ 3½½-½^½½½r½½½V½d};e2½½1 ½bf½½y½i½[tÊ§½½Y½c½S3 ½]½½½½Äž½½½½|½Z½L½½@qÛƒ½½½*½½½s-½|K½AS½½bw½Z½½j½½o½R\½T½½Tlk½]@½C1 ½Æ--½½½6½½Ex½-½7½^½DÓ®b½½;f½o\h"½½½W½j½½½]½½½Rk½r½s½½ ½\a'½½½r½½,zuŸ½½½+½Nes½5O\Ü;f½MI½ L½½½cEA½½UO½½-½cT½2½N½-½½Q½]½½+½½½lzf$½½)qÄš½9D½c½I½½½q½LmI½;½áŠ½½]½8½u½½½Ý–½A½,7-½L½+½Rz½q½Ë(C)½3½½Ì½F½ÚuXðª‡½ZÓ...;½>½½½½}:`IW½4½lq½i½0m½½Zñ†­O8½kL½k½½fQ^½½HÚ>>e½5½½½]z½K½½1Bk-½n½½ Wl½½½½½]½½‘½(GM½frR½½½½q½+½r½S½U6½2½MNb½-Z½½feh6Æ´{P½½½½I½e6½½Ê½½½l½½½½Æ¹B3J½½½½½½$ÆF$X­2½cA.½½½½½j½q½M½f½t½e^½u½Q½½½½U{f&½xæ¨®½)½½½2½zt½½|½½½7L½½½j½=1QS½Æ•½½8/|½)½Ê>>f½Ç¾9V½½q½^½½½½Xz½½tË(C)½\k½½p=½#)Jn½å½½(½]NPSJ½½SM½½½#½e2t+½ZS½½f=½½½½`Gje½½½½A½4½S½e½½½j½½½'½½e v½½Zw½,u½½5)½Íµ1F½(½+½½n½½~vb½½fA½e½½i½½c/1'½7½½½½½½½½ Ù‚½½Mv½½r½½q½6½O½n½DW½8)=½-2½½½)T½½é›že½|x\½½½½v½:3\½½+½½½(½t½½½7½%½Xb^Ý†½|k½q½Þ‡,½9½NW79½½+½½o½ e½½\½Q½½ÜŽUÆ¨½½A½jW0Pq½6½½s½í›"½j½z½p½½h1Û'x&½`Êž5½½P½b½½áŒ­q½½^½½@=½k_½½u½M6½Z1½q½ã¾f`N½NI½:½@½*7½fPEzj½½½.½½Zev½\s ½½c½/½½½½*:½(^½½x½\|=sßµC½()½3½;u',%:½½v½½½/½½)F`NÙ½½-2½½Am½½Sc½( 3½½½A½{½n[½@_½[Pn2½>½½½;uÆ½\½½½D½b½½w½A½ZåŒ...]½3½½1$½;½½½1N½½j½t½4½eW5XJw½½zeFSFH½t'3lF½d½½:½½qs]½½½=½P½½u½l'[vÊ­vr½½½|½W½&½=3AL½½½½P½½#m½R½½c½½bnhze½Sq½½½2½½Òƒ-½½Æ­GO½Gr2½ ½9½½:½½½M½½½½½½½]½r½f9k½q@;½Y½Ê...½íš½a½½½fk½X5½/s½=:½+3½½½½ÓŽ!{½½P½½ë–>> c½½½|}O\jT½½n½T½½c½$½P½½½]½e½:½)½½R½½½~½½$½½½½)h~x½t½Q½/½b½]½½½½á›#-½q½½½½½½(½;½q½½(s|C½2Ù½½v½"½w½½ÞƒÉ¶½Gm½4½½esÞ•½$½½$cX½2½½l1½½½½½$½½W|Ç...½½4›—ÓŒrr½½½S^½½ß¾Q½½½(½|pa½½c½qá°9½½½½=½½3½½½½½>½½6½½y9@½½[½ly½cw½r½N½`½iC½½½½=k½V½½c½c)M½;½q½Ñ–½+OuW½½ m½½H,v' zcy}½×...½½;W|½;½3o½½½(7½?8½c½V½½FXL½½jë–ŠFn½½7½½^½a½O,½'½½½\½½(q½½q=2½+½½½½5½ ½ ½;½½f½eV½½QX½½^½½½0u?uZ½;½\½`g½Jbf>½l½½;½e½½½½)½\kx½JA½%6,½z½eã v½#½2½:e½½U½}½½½Ò¹B½½F½9G½7½L½½A,}+½½$½½z½iS½(½{e½½½3T½½½r½½$½=Z½q½C½9½½PsT½½`½½,u½|½j½½½Èšfm½Q$½N½½1½l½½½,r#|½½½½½×Ž½(6½l½ ½_o|½J½½W½;jTcU½5ë–¬3CLÔ¯½f½½L½'½,½q½z½½s^½c½½Ö¹A½4½$½½½½½ni\½½~½½½,.½½½Ê ½Å‡½4N½eGLo"E½Xu½>½`½e½Gl½½1>N7u½9uc½3S0½J½M½cÖ--½2½7½½Ê½½5½ ½ A½Êž½{½yW/½ëŠt½1½v½½½._½½½½½q½Ö§(T½½½\½½½V½m½½z½-wÚe½½æ¯¶9A½½(½½½o½½fzu½½X½½5½wÄžN½Tcy½íº½jvÄ6U)½½]½Ü¨:½nÙ…½0½½ [½N½7m½ã–£½` ½Pu½.½7½m½Y½\½A½½d|½N½|@ß¾8½½0½Q½I½½9|½½½s½*|½
Scientist: Global warming not causing extreme weather | The Daily Caller
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Mon, 22 Jul 2013 01:13
  In a Senate hearing Thursday, environmental scientist Roger Pielke of the University of Colorado said it's ''incorrect'' to claim that global warming is spurring more extreme weather disasters.
  ''It is misleading and just plain incorrect to claim that disasters associated with hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or droughts have increased on climate timescales either in the United States or globally,'' Pielke said in his testimony before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. ''It is further incorrect to associate the increasing costs of disasters with the emission of greenhouse gases.''
  ''Hurricanes have not increased in the U.S. in frequency, intensity or normalized damage since at least 1900,'' Pielke added. ''The same holds for tropical cyclones globally since at least 1970.''
  Senate Democrats pointed to the increase in extreme weather events like hurricanes and tornadoes as evidence of global warming. California Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer said that ''climate change is real'' and human activities were the cause, adding that people can ''look out the window'' to see evidence of it.
  ''Heat waves, droughts, wildfires and floods '-- all are now more frequent and intense,'' said President Barack Obama in his State of the Union address.
  Pielke, however, notes that U.S. floods have not increased in ''frequency or intensity'' since 1950 and economic losses from floods have dropped by 75 percent as a percentage of GDP since 1940. Tornado frequency, intensity, and normalized damages have also not increased since 1950, and Pielke even notes that there is some evidence that this has declined.
  Pielke noted in his testimony that droughts have been shorter, less frequent, and have covered a smaller portion of the U.S over the last century. Globally, there has been very little change in the last 60 years, he said.
  ''The absolute costs of disasters will increase significantly in coming years due to greater wealth and populations in locations exposed to extremes,'' Pielke added. ''Consequent, disasters will continue to be an important focus of policy, irrespective of the exact future course of climate change.''
  Senators sparred over predictions and claims made about man-made global warming. Democrats argued that the effects of global warming can be felt today and Republicans argued that evidence of human-induced warming is thin.
  ''I would note that it has not been titled 'Global Warming: It's Happening Now,''' said Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter. ''Maybe that would have been too ironic given the Earth's stagnant temperature for the past 15 years, a fact that is currently confounding climate scientists and modeling experts who predicted otherwise.''
  Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Inhofe, a longtime critic of global warming claims, pointed to a set of Obama administration talking points on the ''do's and don'ts'' when talking about global warming.
  The talking points suggested not leading with economic arguments, not talking about scientific consensus surrounding global warming, and instead focusing on extreme weather.
  Prior to the hearing, Republicans on the committee released a report that called into question many past global warming claims made by Democrats, as well as Obama administration policy proposals. (RELATED: Senate GOP criticizes past global warming claims ahead of hearing)
  This didn't deter Senate Democrats who continued to argue that global warming could be seen today. Rhode Island Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse and Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders, who caucuses with the Democrats, both pushed for taxing carbon emissions.
  Republicans criticized the lack of White House testimony at the hearing.
  ''It is unfortunate we don't have any witnesses here from the Obama administration,'' Vitter said. ''Just weeks ago, President Obama announced a sweeping climate action plan, which will undoubtedly tighten the federal government's grip on our economy.''
  ''If the president is going after greenhouse gases, he won't stop at coal,'' said Wyoming Republican Sen. John Barrasso.
  Boxer, who chairs the committee, said no one from the administration was invited because they would be called in for future hearings on global warming.
  Follow Michael on Twitter
  Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.