What Adam Curry is reading

33 thousand foreign nationals evacuate from Central African Republic
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: 33 World News
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:37
  Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
  Name *
  Email *
  Website
  Comment
  You may use these HTML tags and attributes:
  Current monthye@rday*
  Leave this field empty*
LA Times - New state fault maps show higher earthquake risks in Hollywood
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:16
  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.
LA Times - Jerry Brown: Earthquakes 'just around the corner,' fault maps needed
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:15
  LA Times Loading...
  The page cannot be loaded because you are currently offline. Please check your internet connection and try again, or go back to the previous page.
  The page you requested was not found.
Cybercrime Review: CFAA amendments, new criminal statute proposed in Senator Leahy's bill
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:12
  On Wednesday, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) introduced the Personal Data Privacy and Security Act of 2014. Senator Leahy's bill, first introduced back in 2005, intends to "better protect[] Americans from the growing threats of data breaches and identity theft,'' according to a press release issued by the Senator.Included within the bill are amendments to the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (18 U.S.C. § 1030). Senator Leahy stated that the bill ''includes the Obama administration's proposal [full text] to update the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, so that attempted computer hacking and conspiracy to commit computer hacking offenses are subject to the same criminal penalties, as the underlying offenses.'' The bulk of Senator Leahy's amendments to the CFAA occur in Title I: Enhancing Punishment for Identity Theft and Other Violations of Data Privacy and Security (Sections 101 through 110). These changes would include adding the CFAA under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act (Section 101), maximizing penalties under the CFAA (Section 103), and clarifying that both "conspiracy" and "attempt" to commit a computer hacking offense are subject to the same penalties as completed, substantive offenses (Section 105), just to name a few.
  Also added within the bill would be a new criminal statute: 18 U.S.C. § 1041 Concealment of security breaches involving sensitive personally identifiable information. According to Senator Leahy, the new statute would provide "tough criminal penalties for anyone who would intentionally and willfully conceal the fact that a data breach has occurred when the breach causes economic damage to consumers.'' According to the section-by-section summary, the new statute would
  makes it a crime for a person who knows of a security breach which requires notice to individuals under Title II of this Act, and who is under obligation to provide such notice, to intentionally and willfully conceal the fact of, or information related to, that security breach.So in addition to adding a strict security breach notification law (Section 211 - 221), Senator Leahy's bill would create criminal penalties for intentionally and willfully concealing the security breach or "information realted to" that breach.Overall, the bill contains a number of amendments that would be of interest to anyone in the information privacy or security field. Senator Leahy has made a section-by-section outline of the bill available, as well as the bill's full text.
Sugar is 'the new tobacco': Health chiefs tell food giants to slash levels by a third | Mail Online
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:57
  Doctors and academics say levels must be reduced by up to 30 per centThey found that even zero-fat yoghurts can contain five teaspoons of sugarHeinz tomato soup has four while a Mars bar has eight teaspoons of sugarObesity and diabetes already cost the UK over £5billion a yearBy Sean Poulter
  PUBLISHED: 19:00 EST, 8 January 2014 | UPDATED: 04:42 EST, 9 January 2014
  9,259shares
  606
  Viewcomments
  Food giants are being told to cut the amount of sugar they use because it has become the 'new tobacco'.
  Doctors and academics say levels must be reduced by up to 30 per cent to halt a wave of disease and death.
  They found that even zero-fat yoghurts can contain five teaspoons of sugar, while a can of Heinz tomato soup has four.
  Doctors and academics say levels must be reduced by up to 30 per cent to halt a wave of disease and death
  The equivalent of 11 teaspoons are found in a small Starbucks caramel Frappuccino with whipped cream. A Mars bar has eight.
  'Sugar is the new tobacco,' said Simon Capewell, professor of clinical epidemiology at the University of Liverpool.
  'Everywhere, sugary drinks and junk foods are now pressed on unsuspecting parents and children by a cynical industry focused on profit not health.
  The obesity epidemic is generating a huge burden of disease and death.
  Obesity and diabetes already cost the UK over £5billion a year. Without regulation, these costs will exceed £50billion by 2050.'
  Doctors found that even zero-fat yoghurts can contain five teaspoons of sugar, while a can of Heinz tomato soup has four
  Professor Capewell is part of a new US-UK campaign group '' Action on Sugar '' that says asking firms to make voluntary changes has failed.
  The typical Briton consumes 12 teaspoons of sugar a day and some adults consume as many as 46.The maximum intake recommended by the World Health Organisation is ten, although this guideline is likely to be halved.
  The UN agency says there is 'overwhelming evidence coming out about sugar-sweetened beverages and other sugar consumption' being linked to obesity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease.
  A study by Action on Sugar found surprisingly high levels of sugar in many foods, including savoury products and healthy options.
  The Pret a Manger Very Berry Latte with milk has 26.9g of sugar '' the equivalent of seven teaspoons. Yeo Valley Family Farm 0% Fat Vanilla Yogurt has five.
  Sweet: A Mars bar has eight teaspoons of sugar while a tin of Heinz tomato soup has four
  Even Glaceau Vitamin Water, which is owned by Coca-Cola, has the equivalent of four teaspoons of sugar in a 500ml bottle.
  Action of Sugar said food firms should be able to reduce the amount of sugar they add to products by 20 to 30 per cent within three to five years, taking 100 calories a day out of the typical diet.
  This would be enough to halt or even reverse rising levels of obesity and associated ill-health, it claimed.
  Graham MacGregor, a professor at the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine in London and chairman of Action on Sugar, said: 'We must now tackle the obesity epidemic both in the UK and worldwide.
  'We must start a coherent and structured plan to slowly reduce the amount of calories people consume by slowly taking out added sugar from foods and soft drinks.
  'This is a simple plan which gives a level playing field to the food industry, and must be adopted by the Department of Health to reduce the completely unnecessary and very large amounts of sugar the food and soft drink industry is adding to our foods.'
  Dr Aseem , the group's science director, said: 'Added sugar has no nutritional value whatsoever, and causes no feeling of satiety.
  'Aside from being a major cause of obesity, there is increasing evidence that added sugar increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome and fatty liver.
  'We must particularly protect children from this public health hazard and the food industry needs to immediately reduce the amount of sugar that they are adding, particularly to children's foods, and stop targeting children with massive advertising for high calorie snacks and soft drinks.'
  But sugar manufacturers rejected the claims of the health experts saying they were not supported by the consensus of scientific evidence.
  Sugar Nutrition UK said the World Health Organisation published a review last year that found that any link between diabetes and body weight was due to overconsumption of calories and was not specific to sugar.
  It said: 'There have also been numerous studies, which have investigated potential links between sugar and diabetes, with experts from the British Dietetic Association, European Food Safety Authority, and Institute of Medicine being very clear that diabetes is not caused by eating sugar.
  Respected expert committees have reviewed the evidence over many years and all have concluded that the balance of available evidence does not implicate sugar in any of the so-called lifestyle diseases.'
  And Barbara Gallani, of the Food and Drink Federation, an industry group, also denied sugar was responsible for obesity.
  She said the industry already provided clear information on sugar levels to consumers, using figures and colour-coded labels.
  'Sugars, or any other nutrient for that matter, consumed as part of a varied and balanced diet are not a cause of obesity, to which there is no simple or single solution,' she added.
  Professor Shrinath Reddy, a cardiologist at the Harvard School of Public Health and member of the WHO panel of experts, disputed this conclusion.
  He said there was 'overwhelming evidence coming out about sugar-sweetened beverages and other sugar consumption links to obesity, diabetes and even cardiovascular disease'.
  Yoni Freedhoff, assistant professor of medicine at the University of Ottawa, said sugar needed again to become an occasional treat rather than a regular 'crutch'.
  He said that added sugar had found its way into virtually everything we eat.
  Share or comment on this article
BBC News - Campaigners vow to cut sugar in food
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:56
  9 January 2014Last updated at 05:30 ET Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
  A campaign group has been formed to reduce the amount of sugar added to food and soft drinks in an effort to tackle obesity and diabetes in the UK.
  Action on Sugar has been set up by the team behind Consensus Action on Salt and Health (Cash), which has pushed for cuts to salt intake since the 1990s.
  The new group aims to help people avoid "hidden sugars" and get manufacturers to reduce the ingredient over time.
  It believes a 20% to 30% reduction in three to five years is within reach.
  Like Cash, Action on Sugar will set targets for the food industry to add less sugar bit by bit so that consumers do not notice the difference in taste.
  Sugar in foodWell-known food and drink products and their sugar content:
  Starbucks caramel frappuccino with whipped cream with skimmed milk (tall): 273kcal; 11 teaspoons of sugar Coca Cola Original (330ml): 139kcal; 9 teaspoons of sugar Muller Crunch Corner Strawberry Shortcake Yogurt (135g): 212kcal; 6 teaspoons of sugar Yeo Valley Family Farm 0% Fat Vanilla Yogurt (150g): 120kcal; 5 teaspoons of sugar Kellogg's Frosties with semi-skimmed milk (30g): 4 teaspoons of sugar Glaceau Vitamin Water, Defence (500ml): 4 teaspoons of sugar Heinz Classic Tomato Soup (300g): 171kcals; 4 teaspoons of sugar Ragu Tomato & Basil Pasta Sauce (200g): 80kcals; 3 teaspoons of sugar Kellogg's Nutri-Grain Crunchy Oat Granola Cinnamon Bars (40g): 186kcal; 2 teaspoons of sugar Heinz Tomato Ketchup (15ml): 18kcal; 1 teaspoon of sugar Source: Action on Sugar
  Continue reading the main storyJames GallagherHealth and science reporter, BBC News
  Sugar is a widespread presence in our food and it's often found in unexpected places,
  It's probably no surprise that a can of cola contains nine teaspoons of sugar.
  But some tins of tomato soup and bottles of flavoured water have four teaspoons of sugar crammed inside. And seemingly healthy fat-free yoghurt often has a high sugar content.
  The NHS says most children and adults in the UK are consuming too much sugar.
  The primary concern is obesity - being high in sugar means being high in calories.
  Nearly two thirds of people in the UK are overweight or obese - leading to other health problems such as type 2 diabetes and heart disease.
  Some argue that the problems with sugar are even deeper than the calorie content, and that high doses of the sweet stuff can increase the risk of diseases such as a fatty liver.
  It says the reduction could reverse or halt the obesity epidemic and would have a significant impact in reducing chronic disease in a way that "is practical, will work and will cost very little".
  'Completely unnecessary'The group listed flavoured water, sports drinks, yoghurts, ketchup, ready meals and even bread as just a few everyday foods that contain large amounts of sugar.
  A favourite tactic of Cash has been to name and shame products with large quantities of salt.
  Action on Sugar chairman Graham MacGregor, who is professor of cardiovascular medicine at the Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine and set up Cash in 1996, said: "We must now tackle the obesity epidemic both in the UK and worldwide.
  "This is a simple plan which gives a level playing field to the food industry, and must be adopted by the Department of Health to reduce the completely unnecessary and very large amounts of sugar the food and soft drink industry is currently adding to our foods."
  Dr Aseem Malhotra, a cardiologist and science director of Action on Sugar, said: "Added sugar has no nutritional value whatsoever and causes no feeling of satiety.
  Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
  The size of some of the cups Coca-cola is sold in "need to come down" says president of Coca-cola Europe James Quincey
  "Aside from being a major cause of obesity, there is increasing evidence that added sugar increases the risk of developing type 2 diabetes, metabolic syndrome and fatty liver."
Velvet Glove, Iron Fist: Action on Sugar
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:54
  This week saw Consensus Action on Salt and Health (CASH) morph into Action on Sugar. Perhaps this was a recognition that the panic over salt "has little basis in science" and the real money now lies in the anti-sugar crusade. In a few years they will be called Action on Cheese.CASH's abrupt change of direction has meant that we have been able to watch campaigners switch between bandwagons in real time. The screenshot below shows the CASH website at that awkward halfway house between the salt shaker and the sugar bowl
  Fortunately for Action on Sugar, their new enemy is also a white crystal so they can keep most of their images. All they need is a web designer to delete the word 'salt' and replace it with 'sugar'.
  As I mentioned on Wednesday, Action on Sugar got proceedings underway with a frenzied media blitz that revolved around their claim that "sugar is the new tobacco". Within 24 hours, scientists were lining up to criticise this absurd hyperbole'--calling it "nuts", "inaccurate" and "quite crazy"'--but the damage had been done and Aseem Malhotra (for it is he) had got his smug little face on television countless times.
  Malhotra is Action on Sugar's Science Director. Says it all, really. As Slipp Digby notes in a must-read post that fisks the group's erroneous claims, "appointing him as Science Director when he has no experience in the field and has published no research is a really bad idea."
  It has been less than three years since Malhotra burst onto the scene. I had him down as a know-nothing wannabe celebrity on the make from his very first Observer articles. He made incredible schoolboy errors on very basic facts from the outset, although it is interesting to note that his early articles about Big Food did not mention sugar and his ideas appeared to have evolved by reading sensationalist anti-sugar books and becoming a disciple of Robert Lustig.
  Lustig's theories focus on High Fructose Corn Syrup, which he thinks is the primary cause of obesity in the USA. This has no relevance to the UK because there is hardly any High Fructose Corn Syrup in the EU (as usual, Malhotra seems to be unaware of this fact). Lustig might have a point or he might not, but at least he is a scientist who has put forward a testable hypothesis. Malhotra is not a scientist, he is a medic, and whilst that is enough for him to play the 'trust me, I'm a doctor' card, he is a prime example of why trusting medics on issues that are outside their immediate field of competence ends in tears.
  If you don't believe me, take a look at this interview with him on Sky News this week.
  Let's leave aside his usual claim that sugar has "no nutritional value whatsoever". People don't drink Coca-Cola because they think it's nutritious, they drink it because they like it. Let's also leave aside his claim that "poor diet is responsible for more disease than smoking, alcohol and physical inactivity combined" because I've written about that little fib before.
  Instead, let's look at this nugget:
  "Even if you are of normal weight and you have excess sugar in your diet, and you exercise, you are still increasing your risk potentially of getting Type 2 diabetes".
  What Malhotra has done here is mangle the results from a controversial and tentative study by Robert Lustig (there's a good discussion about it here) that found that sugar availability correlates with diabetes. That is not terribly surprising, perhaps, and it is even less surprising that obesity correlates with diabetes.The obvious explanation for both these findings is that excessive sugar consumption can lead to obesity and obesity can lead to diabetes. However, Lustig suggests that sugar consumption may have an effect on diabetes that is independent of its effect on obesity. In other words, he hypothesises that sugar consumption adds to diabetes risk of being obese. Whilst that is not impossible, the evidence he has presented so far is far from compelling. That's only my opinion, but it also happens to be the opinion of Diabetes UK, who put out a statement in response to Action on Sugar's media blitz.
  ''... it is important to be clear that we want to reduce sugar consumption because having too much can easily lead to weight gain, as is true with foods high in fat. So reducing the amount of sugar in our diets is not all that we need to do to reduce our risk of Type 2 diabetes.
  "The evidence that sugar has a specific further role in causing Type 2 diabetes, other than by increasing our weight, is not clear. We look forward to the conclusions of the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition, which is due to report this year.''
  Malhotra presents Lustig's theory as if it were proven fact and then further embellishes it by asserting that slim, physically active people are at greater risk of developing diabetes if they consume sugar. This goes beyond even Lustig's theory and enters the realm of outright quackery.
  And then there is this gob-smacking comment...
  "Intrinsic sugars within food like fruit and vegetables: not a problem, that's glucose. But what added sugar has is fructose and that is completely unnecessary in your diet."
  Malhotra has fallen for the naturalistic fallacy, implying that "intrinsic sugars" are healthy because they are "natural" whereas added sugars are not. In fact, there is no reason to think that 200 calories from a smoothie are any less fattening than 200 calories from a Coke.More incredibly, Malhotra thinks that glucose is the main sugar in fruit. Of course it isn't. Fructose is the main "intrinsic" sugar in most fruit (and some vegetables), hence the word fructose.
  This howler of Malhotra's is equivalent to a temperance campaigner thinking that beer is stronger than whisky. It is like an anti-smoking campaigner not knowing the difference between a pipe and a cigarette. It does not bode well for Action on Sugar that their Science Director doesn't have even a GCSE-level understanding of the subject about which he claims to be an expert.I foresee entertaining times ahead.
Chicago Tribune - Colorado airports tighten rules on marijuana possession
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:34
  Chicago Tribune Loading...
  Unable to find an internet connection. Please try again.
  Unable to find an internet connection. Please try again.
  Unable to find an internet connection. Please try again.
Thousands protest corruption in Turkey
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WT Newsfeed
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 04:11
  At least 20,000 demonstrators have taken to the streets of Turkey's capital Ankara in protest against Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government, which has been rocked by a vast corruption probe.
  The government also signalled it may back down on a contentious bid to curb the judges' powers as fierce scuffles erupted in a parliament commission ahead of a second round of debate over the draft bill.
  As Erdogan arrived home on Saturday after a week-long tour to Asia, the protesters gathered at Ankara's major Sihhiye Square, chanting "revolution will clean this filth" and "they are thieves".
  Some protesters were also handing out fake dollars with Erdogan's photo on them.
  The corruption scandal implicating close allies of Erdogan has rattled his government to its core, and poses the biggest challenge to his 11-year rule.
  It erupted on December 17, when several public figures, including high-profile businessmen and the sons of three ministers, were detained over allegations of bribery for construction projects as well as illicit money transfers to sanctions-hit Iran.
  Forced into a major cabinet reshuffle after the three ministers resigned, the prime minister has responded angrily to the probe, calling it a "dirty plot" to discredit his government.
  He repositioned hundreds of police chiefs in a major purge and has moved to curb the powers of the judiciary.
  Cleric blamed
  Erdogan's government, in power since 2002, has accused loyalists of US-exiled cleric Fethullah Gulen, whose movement wields influence in the police and judiciary, of instigating the corruption probe.
  Lami Ozgen, one of the protest leaders, said the scandal shed light on the true face of both the government and the Gulen movement.
  We are no way trusting the obsessive behaviour of the judiciary
  Pro-government daily Sabah
  "The crisis has made it known to the public how those who abuse religion and faith, are fond of wealth, luxury and splendour, how they worship money and how they see bribery as their direction to Mecca," Ozgen said.
  Gulen was a major supporter of Erdogan's ruling AKP party when it first came to power in 2002.
  But the two have parted ways after the government moved to shut down a network of private schools run by the movement.
  Turkey's justice minister said the government may abandon a reform package which would give it more powers over the appointment of judges and prosecutors.
  "If political party groups come together and reach a consensus, the proposal could be halted," local media quoted Bekir Bozdag as saying.
  Escalating tensions
  The AKP moved to tighten its grip over the Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors, which was slapped down by the top judicial body itself as unconstitutional and sparked criticism from the United States and the European Union.
  Scuffles broke out ahead of a second round of debate on the proposals in parliament's justice commission on Saturday, with local media reporting that politicians threw punches, water bottles and an iPad.
  Opposition parties demand that the AKP abandon the bill but Bozdag earlier said the proposed reforms would not be withdrawn.
  Erdogan has lashed out at a "judicial coup", accusing prosecutors running the case of plotting to undermine him and his government.
  "Why is the judiciary doing this? They have no reason other than treason," pro-government Sabah daily quoted him saying.
  "We are no way trusting the obsessive behaviour of the judiciary".
  The escalating tensions have also revealed the rivalry between Erdogan and his former ally President Abdullah Gul ahead of presidential elections in August.
  Gul, who is expected either to be re-elected or be the next prime minister should Erdogan become president, has so far adopted a conciliatory approach toward the crisis and commentators say he will be in a dilemma if the controversial bill comes his way.
  639
Civilan Coup-Turkey-AK Party interference in judiciary 'tantamount to civilian coup' - Today's Zaman, your gateway to Turkish daily news
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 04:06
  A debate about a civilian coup flared last week when Professor Mehmet Altan, an academic and writer, claimed that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan had staged a civilian coup to cover up claims of corruption and bribery. According to the professor, the prime minister staged a coup by ignoring the principle of the separation of powers and preventing public prosecutors from carrying out the corruption investigation -- in other words, putting the judiciary under the control of the executive.
  The sons of two former ministers are among 24 high-profile names, including some government officials and businesspeople, who were arrested in mid-December on corruption and bribery charges as part of the investigation.
  When the corruption investigation erupted, the prime minister sought to discredit the investigation by calling it a ''foreign plot'' and ''an attempt to damage the government made by a parallel state nested within the state.'' He immediately ordered the removal of hundreds of police officers who contributed to the probe. The Supreme Board of Judges and Prosecutors (HSYK) initiated an investigation into four prosecutors involved in the corruption probe and two of the prosecutors were removed from the case. In addition, the government issued a proposal to restructure the HSYK. If adopted, the bill will give the government a tighter grip on the judiciary, according to legal experts.
  Furthermore, in another incident in late December, a number of police officers who pursued and stopped a truck in the southern province of Hatay in early January on the suspicion that it was an arms shipment were removed from their duties. A prosecutor who wanted to search the truck was prevented from doing so and he subsequently handed the case over to another prosecutor in protest of the intervention in his investigation.
  According to Altan, all those developments have precluded the judiciary and the police force from functioning independently. ''Turkey is being governed by a coup government that has openly been defying the Constitution since Dec. 17 [when the corruption investigation became public],'' he noted. He also said that members of the government will be tried some day for ''staging a coup in order to prevent the judiciary from functioning.''
  Claims of a civilian coup also emerged in late December after the government made an overnight change in regulations governing ''judicial police'' -- law enforcement officers operating under the supervision of the judiciary. According to the amendment, police officers were required to report their activities to their superior officers within the police department and to other government officials in addition to the prosecutors that supervise them in criminal investigations. The amendment was harshly criticized by opposition parties and legal experts as it would prevent prosecutors and the police from conducting independent investigations. The Council of State overturned the amendment on Dec. 27.
  A retired public prosecutor who served on the Supreme Court of Appeals, Ahmet G¼ndel, said that the government's plans to restructure the HSYK are part of a ''very important process'' that will lead to the country being controlled by a single power, namely the government. The prosecutor noted that unauthorized and unchecked control of the government over the country will bring with it ''major danger and risk,'' including the abolition of the principle of the separation of powers. ''If the executive seizes control of the judiciary and the legislative, this means that the greatest disaster has occurred,'' he added. The prosecutor was implying a government shift from a democratic system toward oligarchy.
  G¼ndel also said he does not think that the opposition parties and civil society will remain silent in the face of the AK Party's plans to restructure the HSYK and allow the justice minister to dominate the board. ''But the [AK] party seems determined to pass the bill in Parliament despite protests. However, even if the bill is passed, this does not mean that everything is over,'' he said, and added that he expects the opposition parties to take the law to the Constitutional Court for annulment. ''I believe the Constitutional Court will show the necessary sensitivity when discussing whether or not to annul this law aimed at ending judicial independence,'' added the prosecutor.
  The legislation forwarded to the parliament speaker's office by the AK Party last week allows the undersecretary of the justice minister to be elected as chairman of the HSYK. The bill also mandates that the board will no longer have the authority to pass decrees and circulars. Instead, the justice minister will be entitled to pass decrees and circulars on behalf of the HSYK. Furthermore, the board will be stripped of its authority to decide to launch investigations of HSYK members. This authority is again passed to the justice minister.
  The bill has drawn the ire of legal experts and jurists amid mounting concerns over the gradual disappearance of the separation of judicial and executive powers and the ruling AK Party's firm position seeking to make the judiciary subservient to the government.
  Engin Altay, parliamentary deputy chairman of the Republican People's Party (CHP), said the prime minister is acting with a mindset of ''establishing his own dictatorship'' and becoming the ''single most powerful man'' in the country. According to Altay, the separation of powers stands on three separate legs and the planned changes to the HSYK structure are aimed at damaging one of these legs -- the judiciary. ''If one of these legs is damaged, the separation of powers will no longer work. And this will lead to the establishment of a new regime. This regime is called an oligarchy,'' he said, and added that the prime minister wants to govern Turkey on his own like an emperor.
  Hasan Cemal, a prominent journalist, believes Prime Minister ErdoÄŸan established a ''civilian tutelage'' since the corruption investigation was revealed and he said that the government acts like a court of law and sought to discredit the investigation as an ''ugly plot'' against the AK Party. In a column he wrote on Dec. 27, Cemal said the prime minister wants people to close their eyes to his ''coup-like activities'' and focus instead on the activities of the Hizmet movement, inspired by Turkish Islamic scholar Fethullah G¼len.
  ErdoÄŸan may believe that the corruption investigation was orchestrated by a ''parallel state'' and a ''gang within the state,'' a veiled reference to the Hizmet movement. But according to Cemal, ErdoÄŸan's claims that the corruption investigation was orchestrated by the Hizmet movement insult the public's intelligence. ''[Prime minister], do not insult our intelligence any longer,'' he said.
VIDEO- Turkish politicians fighting in the parliament of turkey 2014 - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 04:02
Rewards for Justice-benghazi - english
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:55
  On September 11-12, 2012, four Americans '-- U.S. Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, and Protective Security Specialists Glen Anthony Doherty and Tyrone Snowden Woods'-- were killed in a terrorist attack against the U.S. Special Mission Compound and Annex in Benghazi, Libya. A series of attacks involving arson, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), and mortars was waged on two U.S. facilities in Benghazi, as well as U.S. personnel en route between the two facilities. In addition, the attacks severely wounded two U.S. personnel, injured three Libyan contract guards, and resulted in the destruction and abandonment of both facilities.
  Ambassador John Christopher Stevens, 52, was born in northern California and began his career in the Foreign Service in 1991. Ambassador Stevens served many overseas assignments and was the Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya from 2007 to 2009. From March 2011 to November 2011, Ambassador Stevens served as Special Representative to the Libyan Transitional National Council, and arrived in Tripoli in May 2012 as the U.S. Ambassador to Libya. Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Ambassador Stevens was an international trade lawyer in Washington, DC, and previously taught English as a Peace Corps volunteer in Morocco from 1983 to 1985. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton recognized Ambassador Stevens as a ''brave and good man, consummate diplomat, and an American hero.''
  Sean Smith, 34, was born in San Diego, California, and enlisted in the Air Force in 1995, serving as a ground radio maintenance specialist and Staff Sergeant. Smith joined the Foreign Service in 2002 as an Information Management Officer, serving in various overseas assignments, including Baghdad, Pretoria, Montreal, and The Hague. Smith traveled to Benghazi, Libya, in September 2012 to provide communications and management support to the U.S. Special Mission.
  Glen Anthony Doherty, 42, was born in Winchester, Massachusetts, and enlisted as a Navy SEAL in 1995, serving in both Iraq and Afghanistan during his career. Prior to joining the Navy, Doherty also worked as a professional ski instructor, attended flight school, and was an experienced paramedic and flight trainer. In 2005, Doherty began working for a private firm providing security for American officials overseas. Doherty traveled to Benghazi, Libya, in September 2012 to provide security to the U.S. Special Mission.
  Tyrone Snowden Woods, 41, was born in Portland, Oregon, and served twenty years as a Navy SEAL, serving multiple tours in Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. Woods was also a registered nurse and a certified paramedic. In 2010, Woods began providing security for American officials overseas through a private security contractor. Woods traveled to Benghazi, Libya, in September 2012 to provide security to the U.S. Special Mission.
State Dept. Offers $10 Million Reward to Find Benghazi Terrorists | The Weekly Standard
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:54
  11:03 AM, Jan 10, 2014 ' By DANIEL HALPERThe State Department today publicly announced a $10 million reward "for information leading to the arrest or conviction of any individual responsible for the September 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks." The announcement for the reward is posted on rewardsforjustice.net.
  Seeking Information Against International TerrorismWanted Information leading to the arrest or conviction of any individual responsible for terrorist attack against the U.S. Special Mission Compound and Annex in Benghazi, Libya Up to $10 Million Reward
  "On September 11-12, 2012, four Americans '-- U.S. Ambassador to Libya John Christopher Stevens, Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith, and Protective Security Specialists Glen Anthony Doherty and Tyrone Snowden Woods'-- were killed in a terrorist attack against the U.S. Special Mission Compound and Annex in Benghazi, Libya. A series of attacks involving arson, machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), and mortars was waged on two U.S. facilities in Benghazi, as well as U.S. personnel en route between the two facilities. In addition, the attacks severely wounded two U.S. personnel, injured three Libyan contract guards, and resulted in the destruction and abandonment of both facilities," reads the announcement.
  The summary of rewardsforjustice.net lists the four Americans killed in that terrorist attack:
  Ambassador John Christopher Stevens, 52, was born in northern California and began his career in the Foreign Service in 1991. Ambassador Stevens served many overseas assignments and was the Deputy Chief of Mission in Libya from 2007 to 2009. From March 2011 to November 2011, Ambassador Stevens served as Special Representative to the Libyan Transitional National Council, and arrived in Tripoli in May 2012 as the U.S. Ambassador to Libya. Prior to joining the Foreign Service, Ambassador Stevens was an international trade lawyer in Washington, DC, and previously taught English as a Peace Corps volunteer in Morocco from 1983 to 1985. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton recognized Ambassador Stevens as a ''brave and good man, consummate diplomat, and an American hero.''
  Sean Smith, 34, was born in San Diego, California, and enlisted in the Air Force in 1995, serving as a ground radio maintenance specialist and Staff Sergeant. Smith joined the Foreign Service in 2002 as an Information Management Officer, serving in various overseas assignments, including Baghdad, Pretoria, Montreal, and The Hague. Smith traveled to Benghazi, Libya, in September 2012 to provide communications and management support to the U.S. Special Mission.
  Glen Anthony Doherty, 42, was born in Winchester, Massachusetts, and enlisted as a Navy SEAL in 1995, serving in both Iraq and Afghanistan during his career. Prior to joining the Navy, Doherty also worked as a professional ski instructor, attended flight school, and was an experienced paramedic and flight trainer. In 2005, Doherty began working for a private firm providing security for American officials overseas. Doherty traveled to Benghazi, Libya, in September 2012 to provide security to the U.S. Special Mission.
  Tyrone Snowden Woods, 41, was born in Portland, Oregon, and served twenty years as a Navy SEAL, serving multiple tours in Somalia, Iraq and Afghanistan. Woods was also a registered nurse and a certified paramedic. In 2010, Woods began providing security for American officials overseas through a private security contractor. Woods traveled to Benghazi, Libya, in September 2012 to provide security to the U.S. Special Mission.
  Because of "security issues" the offer of the $10 million reward had not been officially announced until today.
  Obama: 'We Join With the Israeli People in Honoring' Ariel Sharon
  Va. Gov: Bush Family Should Be Thrown in Jail
  Bernie Madoff Is Jamie Dimon's Latest Headache
  De Blasio Spends $35,250 on Teleprompter for Inauguration
  Browse 15 Years of the Weekly Standard
TSA expands reach with new anti-terror regs | TheHill
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:52
  The Transportation Security Administration on Friday unveiled long awaited regulations designed to protect against terrorist strikes involving aircraft repair stations near airports.
  Part of the government's response to the 9/11 attacks of 2001, the regulations extend TSA's security enforcement authority over the Federal Aviation Administration-certified stations, where commercial planes undergo maintenance.
  ADVERTISEMENT
  The regulations, which take effect next month, reflect the government's view that the stations ''continue to be a prime target of terrorist threats,'' according to a notice to be published in Monday's Federal Register.In particular, the rule aims to keep terrorists from commandeering unattended aircraft that are capable of flight and crashing them into populated areas.
  ''Enhancement of security at repair stations that have access to runways will mitigate the potential threat that a large aircraft could be used as a weapon,'' the agency contends.
  The regulations allow unannounced inspections at the facilities. Based on inspections, the TSA will have authority to order the repair stations to take corrective action.
  The new rule comes on top of regulations already put in place by the FAA, which has sought to fill safety gaps in the years since the Sept. 11 attacks.
  Still, a coalition of transportation unions panned the regulations as too weak, noting they would only apply to those repair stations on or adjacent to airports '' a carve-out not mentioned in the 2003 statute that guided the rule-making.
  ''The security challenges raised by the heavy use of contract maintenance are not limited to stations at airports and Congress clearly did not identify this distinction when it mandated security enhancements,'' Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO said in a statement issued Friday.
  Further, the group, comprised of 32 member unions, argues the rule fails to address concerns related to background checks of contract station employees.
  ''We understand that foreign governments and industry trade groups were pushing TSA to water down this security rule,'' the unions said. ''But we expected more from an agency that is supposed to be focused on transportation security.''
  The regulations are expected to cost roughly $23.22 million over 10 years, though the agency argues that a single terrorist attack could inflict enough damage to rival that total.
Hackers gain 'full control' of critical SCADA systems
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: WT Newsfeed
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:49
  Take part in discussions with comments on blogs, news and reviews; receive all the latest industry news directly to your inbox and tailor make your information specifically to your interests. Join now for free. 2) About You Country*
  * Country req'd
  State*
  * State req'd
  Job Function*
  * Job function required
  Company size*
  * Company required
  Industry*
  * Industry required
Exclusive: More well-known U.S. retailers victims of cyberattacks - sources | Reuters
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:42
  By Jim Finkle and Mark Hosenball
  BOSTON/WASHINGTONSat Jan 11, 2014 9:44pm EST
  TweetShare thisEmailPrint1 of 2. People shop at a Target store during Black Friday sales in the Brooklyn borough of New York, in this November 29, 2013, file photo.
  Credit: Reuters/Eric Thayer/Files
  BOSTON/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Target Corp and Neiman Marcus are not the only U.S. retailers whose networks were breached over the holiday shopping season late last year, according to sources familiar with attacks on other merchants that have yet to be publicly disclosed.
  Smaller breaches on at least three other well-known U.S. retailers took place and were conducted using similar techniques as the one on Target, according to the people familiar with the attacks. Those breaches have yet to come to light. Also, similar breaches may have occurred earlier last year.
  The sources said that they involved retailers with outlets in malls, but declined to elaborate. They also said that while they suspect the perpetrators may be the same as those who launched the Target attack, they cannot be sure because they are still trying to find the culprits behind all of the attacks.
  Law enforcement sources have said they suspect the ring leaders are from Eastern Europe, which is where most big cyber crime cases have been hatched over the past decade.
  Only one well-known retailer, Neiman Marcus, has said that they too have been victim of a cyber attack since Target's December 19 disclosure that some 40 million payment card numbers had been stolen in a cyber attack. On Friday, Target said an investigation found that hackers stole the personal information of at least 70 million customers, including names, mailing addresses, telephone numbers and email addresses.
  Neiman Marcus said it was not sure if the breach was related to the Target incident.
  Most states have laws that require companies to contact customers when certain types of personal information is compromised. In many cases the task of notification falls on the credit card issuer.
  Merchants are required to report breaches when certain types of personal information, including social security numbers are compromised. It was not immediately clear if that was the case with the retailers who were attacked around the same time as Target.
  The Secret Service and Department of Justice, which are investigating the Target breach, declined comment.
  (Reporting by Jim Finkle in Boston and Mark Hosenball in Washington; Editing by Grant McCool)
  Tweet thisLink thisShare thisDigg thisEmailPrintReprintsComments (1)
  Shoppers had been overspending. It was time to cut-back.
VIDEO-Al Roker Freaks Out Over People Claiming Polar Vortex is 'Some Left-Wing Media Conspiracy' | MRCTV
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:31
  More in the cross-post on the MRC's NewsBusters blog.
  On Wednesday's NBC Today, weatherman Al Roker became defensive over people criticizing media hype about the cold snap: "Well, a lot of folks have been saying there's no such thing as a polar vortex and that it's some left-wing media conspiracy. Let me tell you something. First of all, we've never used the phrase 'global warming' or 'climate change' in conjunction with this."
  Later on the show, Roker returned to the topic and ranted: "Some are saying that, A, we've created this phrase to hype it and to create hysteria and that we have made it a political issue by linking it to either climate change or global warming. I will give anybody who can prove that I have ever linked this with global warming or climate change, I will donate a thousand dollars to your charity. Alright?"
VIDEO-CNN on Lousy Employment Numbers: 'People Simply Gave Up' | MRCTV
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:28
  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: 1900 Campus Commons Drive, Reston, VA 20194. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.
  Copyright (C) 2014, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.
VIDEO- HEROIN USE SKYROCKETS IN U.S. SUBURBS! - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:20
VIDEO- Hundreds Lineup For Hours Waiting To Get Flu Shot In Canada - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:16
VIDEO- "A Message For Everybody Listening Right Now GET A FLU IMMUNISATION IF YOU HAVEN'T ALREADY!" - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 03:05
VIDEO- "The Threat Of Terrorism And The Very VERY Hostile Actions Russians Have Taken Towards Gay People" - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 02:29
VIDEO- "In My State Of The Union Address I Will Mobilize The Country" Obama Weekly Address - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 02:18
VIDEO- Cops Publicly Execute Another Person! BECAUSE THEY CAN! - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 02:14
Trash the TPP: Why It's Time to Revolt Against the Worst "Trade Agreement" in History | Occupy.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 02:05
  Odds are that you have not have heard of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. While the TPP has been under negotiation since 2008, talks have largely been done in secret and not covered by the mass media.
  The media black-out is quite impressive since this is the largest corporate trade agreement to be negotiated since the World Trade Organization got underway in 1995. Commonly called a global corporate coup, the TPP makes transnational corporations more powerful than governments. Others call it ''NAFTA on steroids'' because it will multiply the failures of NAFTA.
  If People Knew Its Contents, It Could Not Pass
  When it comes to trade, Obama has been the most secretive president. Past trade agreements were made public and discussed in the media. The Office of the US Trade Representative would publish the text on its website, even as the treaty was being negotiated.
  Not this time. The TPP is being kept secret from everyone except for the 600 corporate advisers who can read the text on their computers as it is being created, and help the US Trade Representative draft the language. These include the biggest transnational corporations like WalMart, Bank of America, JPMorgan, Pfizer and Monsanto or their trade associations. The TPP is being drafted of, by and for the transnational corporations.
  Members of Congress, however, have restricted access to the text and when they do see a summary of it, they must keep the contents secret even from their constituents. The media and public have only seen sections that have been leaked.
  Why are the corporations operating in secret? Former US Trade Representative Ron Kirk said that if the people knew what was in the agreement, it would raise such opposition that it could make the deal impossible to sign. Kirk led the negotiations on the TPP but left recently to join a lobbying firm that represents transnational corporations. If Kirk is right -- that if people knew what was in it, it would not pass -- then, should it pass?
  The Trans-Pacific Partnership Should Not Become Law
  The answer is no, the TPP should not become law. As people become aware of the TPP, more are working actively to stop it. The TPP is much more than a trade agreement. It will give transnational corporations greater control over our food, Internet access, medicines and health care, and degrade the environment, regulation of banks and wages.
  Indeed corporations will have absolute power over virtually every aspect of our lives. The agreement is being negotiated among a dozen Pacific Ocean countries but is open for other countries to join through a new "docking provision."
  One major advantage we have over past trade legislation battles is that we now have vast experience with trade agreements and the evidence is stark '' corporate trade agreements are bad for the economy, the environment and workers.
  Recently released government trade data for 2012 show these agreements kill jobs and increase trade deficits. In countries where the US has a trade agreement, the trade deficit has grown by more than 440 percent, while in countries where there is no agreement, the deficit has declined by 7 percent.
  The increased deficits from trade agreements resulted in the loss of nearly 1 million US jobs based on the administration's net exports-to-jobs ratio. This was evident with NAFTA, which cost the US 692,000 jobs. Wages in poor countries are much lower than for US workers. So it will not be surprising to see massive US job losses as well as falling wages as Americans compete with slave-wage jobs around the world.
  Some of the most heinous parts of the TPP are provisions to set up rigged trade tribunals. In these tribunals, corporations can sue governments for the loss of ''expected future profits.'' This means that if a country passes an environmental or a health law that will cost the corporation money, the corporation can sue for the expected profits it stands to lose. The suit will come before a trade tribunal where a three-judge panel, made up mostly of corporate lawyers on temporary leave from their corporate jobs, will decide the case.
  The takeaway from the tribunals is this: they will dissuade countries from putting in place public interest laws because those governments will be sued and forced to pay millions to corporations. We've already experienced something like this, though on a less sweeping scale. Global Trade Watch reports that under previous trade agreements, ''over $3 billion has been paid to foreign investors under US trade and investment pacts, while over $14 billion in claims are pending under such deals, primarily targeting environmental, energy, and public health policies.''
  By the end of 2011, corporations like Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Dow Chemical, and Cargill had launched 450 investor-state cases against 89 governments, including the US, to fight regulations that protect the environment. Among these cases were bans of toxic chemicals, hydrofracking, timber and mining regulations, and programs that incentivized green jobs and renewable energy programs.
  These are just a few examples among many. The TPP provides a backdoor for restrictions on Internet freedom, further deregulation of banks and elimination of ''Buy American'' provisions or other programs to encourage localism and environmental sustainability. On issue after issue, corporate profits come before what is best for the people and the planet.
  Strategic Action Plan to Stop the TPP
  Flush The TPP is a campaign bringing people together to stop the TPP. Since the 1999 protests against the World Trade Organization in Seattle, not only has the WTO been stalled but at least 14 trade agreements have also been stopped. The key to stopping these agreements were: (1) people knowing what was in the agreement; and (2) people taking action to oppose it. Together, we can make the TPP so unpopular that no legislator will want to go near it.
  The Obama administration knows this and is trying to take Congress out of the process. They are seeking ''Trade Promotion Authority,'' which is a euphemism for the now unpopular ''Fast Track'' legislation. Fast Track would allow the president to negotiate and sign the law before Congress takes any action, undermining the US Constitution in which the Commerce Clause gives Congress responsibility for setting the terms of trade.
  The President knows that if the TPP undergoes a democratic review process in Congress, it will surely fail.
  Therefore, the first two goals of the campaign to stop the TPP are (1) make the contents of the agreement public; and (2) stop ''Fast Track.'' Congress should fulfill its constitutional responsibility and serve as a check and balance to the president.
  The TPP offers an opportunity for solidarity between groups that are working on a broad variety of issues: food safety, health care, Internet freedom, worker rights, the environment and more. Coalitions of groups that support fair trade rather than free trade exist in the US and are expanding. We have a three-stage plan:
  Phase I: Throughout the summer, the goal is to educate and mobilize people. The TPP has been negotiated in secret for three years, and very few people know much about it. We start with #TPPTuesdays which are weekly actions to draw attention to the trade agreement. It will be up to people around the country to decide what works best for their local area or organization. And while there is power in acting on the same day every week, actions and educational events are certainly not limited to Tuesdays. The goal is to be visible and to educate. See the Actions and Tools pages for more information. You can begin by sharing the videos with this article and urging people to sign up at Flush the TPP.
  Phase II: In August during the Congressional recess, we switch focus to influencing members of Congress. We want elected officials to know that their constituents are watching, that we oppose the TPP, and that we demand Congress holds hearings and suggests amendments before the president is able to sign the agreement.
  Phase III: Defeat the TPP with major actions at the last round of negotiations and in Washington, DC as well as in home congressional districts. When a major action occurs, people will be encouraged to hold solidarity actions.
  In fact, this is not just something the people of the United States oppose, but is something people all over the world oppose. There have already been protests in other countries. Thousands of protesters have been taking to the streets in Japan. A cross-border coalition of advocacy groups from Canada, the US and Mexico co-wrote a tri-national statement of unity calling for public access to the text and a democratic process in Washington, DC. The cross-border group also works with advocates in other Pacific Rim countries in order to build solidarity.
  The TPP is a battleground for defining democracy in the 21st century and determining whether corporations will be our masters, or whether the people will rule. It is an epic conflict between people and transnational corporations, one the people can win, if we join together to stop the TPP.
  Kevin Zeese, JD, and Margaret Flowers, MD, are participants in PopularResistance.org; they co-direct It's Our Economy.
Obama Appoints Bank of Israel Governor to The Federal Reserve
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:55
  This week, President Obama named Stanley Fischer, former governor of the Bank of Israel, to serve as vice chairman Friday of the U.S. Federal Reserve board. The president named Lael Brainard, one of his top economic advisers, to serve as a governor of the fed and nominated Jerome Powell to a second term, According to UPI.
  "Stanley Fischer brings decades of leadership and expertise from various roles, including serving at the International Monetary Fund and the Bank of Israel," Obama said. "He is widely acknowledged as one of the world's leading and most experienced economic policy minds and I'm grateful he has agreed to take on this new role and I am confident that he and Janet Yellen will make a great team."
  Brainard served as treasury undersecretary for international affairs from 2010 to 2013. Powell, who was first named to the Fed board in 2012, was a treasury official in President George H.W. Bush's administration.
  Many people believe that the Federal Reserve is an organization that operates as a public service. There are not many out there who realize that this is a for profit business. Last year the federal reserve reportedly made 90 billion dollars.
  Marketplace.org reported that:
  ''While leaders in Washington stare down the fiscal cliff, let's not forget the fiscal fact that brought us to the edge: The annual U.S. government deficit of more than a trillion dollars. But through it all, one government-related entity has been hauling in record surpluses. New data capture the scope of profits at the U.S. Federal Reserve, estimated to be $90 billion this year.''
  ''The last five or six years their profits have roughly tripled,'' says Allan Sloan, senior editor-at-large at Fortune Magazine.
  @Bob_Tuskin
Accenture chosen as lead contractor on Obamacare website: government
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Reuters: Technology News
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:45
  WASHINGTONSat Jan 11, 2014 6:22pm EST
  Visitors look at devices at Accenture stand at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, February 26, 2013 file photo.
  Credit: Reuters/Albert Gea
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Accenture has been chosen to replace CGI Federal as the lead contractor for the Obamacare enrollment website, which failed to work when it launched in October for millions of Americans shopping for health insurance, the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said on Saturday.
  CGI Federal, a subsidiary of CGI Group, built the website, HealthCare.gov, which was plagued by error messages and slow speeds for weeks after the launch. The glitches created a political crisis for President Barack Obama, threatening the roll-out of his signature healthcare law and emboldening Republican foes to call for its repeal.
  "As CMS moves forward in our efforts to help consumers access quality, affordable health coverage, we have selected Accenture to become the lead contractor for the HealthCare.gov portal and to prepare for next year's open enrollment period," the agency said in a statement.
  CGI Federal said on Friday that its contract, which was originally awarded in 2011 and is scheduled to end February 28, would not be renewed.
  Accenture said the contract was worth $45 million for the initial phase of the project, and the Washington Post reported that the final value of the one-year contract would be about $90 million.
  "Accenture will bring deep healthcare industry insight as well as proven experience building large-scale, public-facing websites to continue improving HealthCare.gov," David Moskovitz, chief executive of Accenture Federal Services, said in a statement.
  Obama has said the fiasco with the website has made him want to overhaul the way the federal government buys technology services. Critics say the system favors large, established contractors such as CGI.
  Although the site is vastly improved, technical glitches continue to bedevil enrollment. The improvements allowed more than 1.1 million people to shop for and enroll in insurance on HealthCare.gov by the end of 2013, far short of original hopes.
  The deadline for signing up for 2014 health insurance under the Affordable Care Act is March 31, meaning Accenture will take over at a time when the government needs the site to handle what it hopes will be a surge of last-minute sign-ups.
  (Reporting by Roberta Rampton; Writing by Eric Beech; Editing by Dan Grebler and Steve Orlofsky)
  Link thisShare thisDigg thisEmailPrintReprints
Coalition defeated over 'annoyance' clampdown
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 01:01
  Peers have handed the government a big defeat in the Lords over plans to make injunctions against being 'annoying' legal.
  The upper chamber voted 306-178 against the proposed injunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyance (Ipnas), which would be easier to implement and be defined more broadly than antisocial behaviour orders (Asbos).
  It followed a debate of over two hours in which peers from all sides of the House condemned the chilling effect the reform would be likely to have on all kinds of 'annoying' behaviour, from carol-singing and street preaching to bell-ringing and political protests.
  Whereas an Asbo can only be granted if a person or group is causing or threatening to cause "harassment, alarm or distress" to someone else, an Ipna could be approved merely if a judge believes the behaviour in question is "capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any person".
  Crossbencher Lord Dear, the former head of West Midlands police, turned down a last-minute government offer for more talks on the issue and pressed it to a vote rather than relying on "pious hopes" of a breakthrough.
  Opinion could have been swayed by a mistake from Lord Faulks, the Tory peer widely expected to shortly become a minister who was asked to give an example of the sort of behaviour which might be captured by the bill.
  He described a group of youths who repeatedly gathered at a specific location, smoking cannabis and playing loud music in a way representing "a day-by-day harassment of individuals".
  That triggered consternation in the chamber as peers challenged him over the word 'harassment' - a higher bar than the 'nuisance or annoyance' threshold he was arguing in favour of.
  "I find it difficult to accept a Conservative-led government is prepared to introduce this lower threshold in the bill," Tory backbencher Patrick Cormack said.
  "We are sinking to a lower threshold and in the process many people may have their civil liberties taken away from them."
  Lord Morris of Aberavon said the 'nuisance or annoyance' definition was so elastic that "if applied widely... would catch all sorts of people who really should not be before the courts".
  Peers repeatedly quoted Lord Justice Sedley's ruling in a 1997 high court case, when he declared: "Freedom to only speak inoffensively is not worth having."
  The government had made a minor concession over defining what could be defined as being annoying before today's vote.
  Instead of applying to any behaviour which is "capable of causing" nuisance or annoyance, injunctions would only be eligible to behaviour "that could reasonably be expected to cause" annoyance.
  The shift was dismissed as "a little bit of window-dressing" by civil liberties group Liberty, which concluded "nothing substantial has changed".
  Ministers made a second attempt to win over wavering peers by introducing a second concession this afternoon.
  Whereas a judge must be satisfied an Asbo is "necessary", the government had originally proposed an Ipna need only be granted if it is "just and convenient" to do so.
  Today ministers offered an amendment proposing that an Ipna only be granted if it targets conduct which could be "reasonably expected to cause nuisance or annoyance".
  Lord Dear had earlier told peers this concession was "vague and imprecise" and that "practitioners will leave it to the courts to decide, and this will introduce a chilling effect".
  His claim was backed up by Lord Blair, the former Metropolitan police commissioner, who insisted what mattered was "of how this is going to be interpreted on the streets". He added: "This is a piece of absolutely awful legislation."
  "The danger in this bill is that it potentially empowers state interference against annoying activities in the face of shockingly low safeguards," former director of public prosecutions Ken Macdonald, a Liberal Democrat peer, had said earlier.
  Campaign groups Liberty, Justice and a coalition of ethical groups '' from the Christian Institute to the National Secular Society '' had also spoken out against the injunctions.
  Parliament's joint committee on human rights has condemned the proposed changes, on the grounds that the 'just and convenient' test is lower than the 'necessity' test required under human rights law.
  The government responded to its report by arguing the meaning of 'nuisance and annoyance' is "well-known in the county court and is supported by 15 years of case law in our civil legal system".
  Officials rejected the claim that there is an issue of legal certainty over the definition '' and plan to publish guidance setting out examples of the prohibitions and positive requirements which could be included in an injunction.
  Following today's defeat the issue will return to the Commons - leaving ministers with the difficult dilemma of choosing whether to fight the battle over freedom of speech once again.
VIDEO-: John Miller: 'Almost no difference' between journalist, intelligence officer - POLITICO.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 00:29
  Congratulations, you've made it to the end of the week. Here's our look back. Produced by Michael Schwab and Bridget Mulcahy. 01/10/2014 4:30 PM EDT
  RSSEmailPlease see the Comments FAQ if you have any additional questions or email your thoughts to commentsfeedback@politico.com
  Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
  comments powered by Disqus
FSB-Federal Security Service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 00:24
  The Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation (FSB) (Russian: Ð¤ÐµÐ´ÐµÑÐ°Ð>>ÑŒÐ½Ð°Ñ ÑÐ>>ÑƒÐ¶Ð±Ð° Ð±ÐµÐ·Ð¾ÐÐ°ÑÐ½Ð¾ÑÑ‚Ð¸ Ð Ð¾ÑÑÐ¸Ð¹ÑÐºÐ¾Ð¹ Ð¤ÐµÐ´ÐµÑÐ°Ñ†Ð¸Ð¸ (Ð¤ÐÐ‘); Federal'naya sluzhba bezopasnosti Rossiyskoy Federatsii) is the principal security agency of the Russian Federation and the main successor agency to the USSR's Committee of State Security (KGB). Its main responsibilities are within the country and include counter-intelligence, internal and border security, counter-terrorism, and surveillance as well as investigating some other types of grave crimes. It is headquartered in Lubyanka Square, Moscow's centre, in the main building of the former KGB. The Director of the FSB since 2008 is army generalAleksandr Bortnikov.
  The immediate predecessor of the FSB was the Federal Counterintelligence Service (FSK) of Russia: on 12 April 1995, Russian president Boris Yeltsinsigned a law mandating a reorganization of the FSK, which resulted in the creation of the FSB. In 2003, the FSB's responsibilities were widened by incorporating the previously independent Border Guard Service and a major part of the abolished Federal Agency of Government Communication and Information (FAPSI). The two major structural components of the former KGB that remain administratively independent of the FSB are the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) and the State Guards (FSO).
  Under the federal law, the FSB is a military service just like the Armed Forces, the MVD, the FSO, the SVR, the FSKN and EMERCOM's civil defence, but its commissioned officers do not normally wear military uniform.
  Overview[edit]The FSB is mainly responsible for internal security of the Russian state, counterespionage, and the fight against organized crime, terrorism, and drug smuggling. Since 2003, when the Federal Border Guards Service was incorporated to the FSB, it has also been responsible for overseeing border security.[1] The FSB is engaged mostly in domestic affairs, while espionage duties are responsibility of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service. However, the FSB also includes the FAPSI agency, which conducts electronic surveillance abroad. All law enforcement and intelligence agencies in Russia work under the guidance of FSB, if needed.[1]
  The FSB combines functions and powers similar to those exercised by the United States FBI National Security Branch, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the Federal Protective Service, the National Security Agency (NSA), U.S. Customs and Border Protection, United States Coast Guard, and partly the Drug Enforcement Administration. The FSB employs about 66,200 uniformed staff, including about 4,000 special forces troops. It also employs about 160,000''200,000 border guards.[1]
  Under Article 32 of the Federal Constitutional Law On the Government of the Russian Federation,[2] the FSB head answers directly to the RF president and the FSB director is the RF president's appointment, though he is a member of the RF government which is headed by the Chairman of Government; he also, ex officio, is a permanent member of the Security Council of Russia presided over by the president and chairman of the National Anti-terrorism Committee of Russia.
  History[edit]Initial reorganization of the KGB[edit]The Federal Security Service is one of the successor organisations of the Soviet Committee of State Security (KGB). Following the attempted coup of 1991 '-- in which some KGB units as well as the KGB head Vladimir Kryuchkov played a major part '-- the KGB was dismantled and ceased to exist from November 1991.[3][4] In December 1991, two government agencies answerable to the Russian president were created by president Yeltsin's decrees on the basis of the relevant main directorates of the defunct KGB: Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR, the former First Main Directorate) and the Federal Agency of Government Communications and Information (FAPSI, merging the functions of the former 8th Main Directorate and 16th Main Directorate of the KGB). In January 1992, another new institution, the Ministry of Security took over domestic and border security responsibilities.[5] Following the 1993 coup attempt against President Boris Yeltsin, the Ministry of Security was reorganized on 21 December 1993 into the Federal Counter-Intelligence Service (FSK). The FSK was headed by Sergei Stepashin. Before the start of the main military activities of the First Chechen War the FSK was responsible for the covert operations against the separatists led by Dzhokhar Dudayev.[1]
  Creation of the FSB[edit]In 1995, the FSK was renamed and reorganized into the Federal Security Service (FSB) by the Federal Law of 3 April 1995, "On the Organs of the Federal Security Service in the Russian Federation".[6] The FSB reforms were rounded out by decree No. 633, signed by Boris Yeltsin on 23 June 1995. The decree made the tasks of the FSB more specific, giving the FSB substantial rights to conduct cryptographic work, and described the powers of the FSB director. The number of deputy directors was increased to 8: 2 first deputies, 5 deputies responsible for departments and directorates and 1 deputy director heading the Moscow City and Moscow regional directorate. Yeltsin appointed Colonel-General Mikhail Ivanovich Barsukov as the new director of the FSB. In 1998 Yeltsin appointed as director of the FSB Vladimir Putin, a KGB veteran who would later succeed Yeltsin as federal president.[7] Putin was reluctant to take over the directorship, but once appointed conducted a thorough reorganization, which included the dismissal of most of the FSB's top personnel.[1] Putin appointed Nikolai Patrushev as the head of FSB in 1999.[5]
  Role in the Second Chechen War[edit]After the main military offensive of the Second Chechen War ended and the separatists changed tactics to guerilla warfare, overall command of the federal forces in Chechnya was transferred from the military to the FSB in January 2001. While the army lacked technical means of tracking the guerrilla groups, the FSB suffered from insufficient human intelligence due its inability to build networks of agents and informants. In the autumn of 2002, the separatists launched a massive campaign of terrorism against the Russian civilians, including the Dubrovka theatre attack. The inability of the federal forces to conduct efficient counter-terrorist operations led to the government to transfer the responsibility of "maintaining order" in Chechnya from the FSB to the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MVD) in July 2003.[8]
  The Putin reforms[edit]After becoming President, Vladimir Putin launched a major reorganization of the FSB. First, the FSB was placed under direct control of the President by a decree issued on 17 May 2000.[5] Internal structure of the agency was reformed by a decree signed on 17 June 2000. In the resulting structure, the FSB was to have a director, a first deputy director and nine other deputy directors, including one state secretary and the chiefs of six departments: Economic Security Department, Counterintelligence Department, Organizational and Personnel Service, Department of activity provision, Department for Analysis, Forecasting and Strategic Planning, Department for Protection of the Constitutional System and the Fight against Terrorism. In 2003, the agency's responsibilities were considerably widened. The Border Guard Service of Russia, with its staff of 210,000, was integrated to the FSB via a decree was signed on 11 March 2003. The merger was completed by 1 July 2003. In addition, The Federal Agency of Government Communication and Information (FAPSI) was abolished and the FSB was granted a major part of its functions, while other parts went to the Ministry of Defense.[5] Among the reasons for this strengthening of the FSB were enhanced need for security of after increased terror attacks against Russian civilians starting from the Moscow theater hostage crisis; the need to end the permanent infighting between the FSB, FAPSI and the Border Guards due to their overlapping functions and the need for more efficient response to migration, drug trafficking and illegal arms trading. It has also been pointed out, that the FSB was the only power base of the new president, and the restructuring therefore strengthened Putin's position (see Political groups under Vladimir Putin's presidency).[5] On 28 June 2004 in a speech to high-ranking FSB officers, Putin emphasized three major tasks of the agency: neutralizing foreign espionage, safeguarding economic and financial security of the country and combating organized crime.[5] In September 2006, the FSB was shaken by a major reshuffle, which, combined with some earlier reassignments (most remarkably, those of FSB Deputy Directors Yury Zaostrovtsev and Vladimir Anisimov in 2004 and 2005, respectively), were widely believed to be linked to the Three Whales Corruption Scandal that had slowly unfolded since 2000. Some analysts considered it to be an attempt to undermine FSB Director Nikolay Patrushev's influence, as it was Patrushev's team from the Karelian KGB Directorate of the late 1980s '' early 1990s that had suffered most and he had been on vacations during the event.[9][10][11]
  By 2008, the agency had one Director, two First Deputy Directors and 5 Deputy Directors. It had the following 9 divisions:[5]
  Counter-EspionageService for Defense of Constitutional Order and Fight against TerrorismBorder ServiceEconomic Security ServiceCurrent Information and International LinksOrganizational and Personnel ServiceMonitoring DepartmentScientific and Technical ServiceOrganizational Security ServiceThe fight against terrorism[edit]Starting from the Moscow theater hostage crisis in 2002, Russia was faced with increased levels of Islamist terrorism. The FSB, being the main agency responsible for counter-terrorist operations, was in the front line in the fight against terror. During the Moscow theater siege and the Beslan school siege, FSB's Spetsnaz units Alpha Group and Vympel played a key role in the hostage release operations. However, their performance was criticised due to the high number of hostage casualties. In 2006, the FSB scored a major success in its counter-terrorist efforts when it successfully killed Shamil Basayev, the mastermind behind the Beslan tragedy and several other high-profile terrorist acts. According to the FSB, the operation was planned over six months and made possible due to the FSB's increased activities in foreign countries that were supplying arms to the terrorists. Basayev was tracked via the surveillance of this arms trafficking. Basayev and other militants were preparing to carry out a terrorist attack in Ingushetia when FSB agents destroyed their convoy; 12 militants were killed.[12][13] During the last years of the Vladimir Putin's second presidency (2006''2008), terrorist attacks in Russia dwindled, falling from 257 in 2005 to 48 in 2007. Military analyst Vitaly Shlykov praised the effectiveness of Russia's security agencies, saying that the experience learned in Chechnya and Dagestan had been key to the success. In 2008, the American Carnegie Endowment's Foreign Policy magazine named Russia as "the worst place to be a terrorist" and highlighted especially Russia's willingness to prioritize national security over civil rights.[14] By 2010, Russian forces, led by the FSB, had managed to eliminate out the top leadership of the Chechen insurgency, except for Dokka Umarov.[15]
  Increased terrorism and expansion of the FSB's powers[edit]Starting from 2009, the level of terrorism in Russia increased again. Particularly worrisome was the increase of suicide attacks. While between February 2005 and August 2008, no civilians were killed in such attacks, in 2008 at least 17 were killed and in 2009 the number rose to 45.[16] In March 2010, Islamist militants organised the 2010 Moscow Metro bombings, which killed 40 people. One of the two blasts took place at Lubyanka station, near the FSB headquarters. Militant leader Doku Umarov '-- dubbed "Russia's Osama Bin Laden" '-- took responsibility for the attacks. In July 2010, President Dmitry Medvedev expanded the FSB's powers in its fight against terrorism. FSB officers received the power to issue warnings to citizens on actions that could lead to committing crimes and arrest people for 15 days if they fail to comply with legitimate orders given by the officers. The bill was harshly criticized by human rights organizations.[17]
  Counterintelligence[edit]In 2011, the FSB exposed 199 foreign spies, including 41 professional spies and 158 agents employed by foreign intelligence services.[18] The number has risen in recent years: in 2006 the FSB reportedly caught about 27 foreign intelligence officers and 89 foreign agents.[19] Comparing the number of exposed spies historically, the then-FSB Director Nikolay Kovalyov said in 1996: "There has never been such a number of spies arrested by us since the time when German agents were sent in during the years of World War II." The 2011 figure is similar to what was reported in 1995-1996, when around 400 foreign intelligence agents were uncovered during the two-year period.[20] In a high-profile case of foreign espionage, the FSB said in February 2012 that an engineer working at the Plesetsk Cosmodrome, Russia's main space center for military launches, had been convicted to 13 years in prison on charges of state treason. A court judged that the engineer had sold information about testing of new Russian strategic missile systems to the American CIA.[21] An increasing number of scientists have been accused of espionage and illegal technology exports by the FSB during the last decade: researcher Igor Sutyagin,[22] physicist Valentin Danilov,[23] physical chemist Oleg Korobeinichev,[24] academician Oskar Kaibyshev,[25] and physicist Yury Ryzhov.[26] Ecologist and journalist Alexander Nikitin, who worked with the Bellona Foundation, was accused of espionage. He published material exposing hazards posed by the Russian Navy's nuclear fleet. He was acquitted in 1999 after spending several years in prison (his case was sent for re-investigation 13 times while he remained in prison). Other cases of prosecution are the cases of investigative journalist and ecologist Grigory Pasko,[27][28]Vladimir Petrenko who described danger posed by military chemical warfare stockpiles, and Nikolay Shchur, chairman of the Snezhinskiy Ecological Fund.[20] Other arrested people include Viktor Orekhov, a former KGB officer who assisted Soviet dissidents, Vladimir Kazantsev who disclosed illegal purchases of eavesdropping devices from foreign firms, and Vil Mirzayanov who had written that Russia was working on a nerve gas weapon.[20]
  Counter-terrorism[edit]In 2011, the FSB prevented 94 "crimes of a terrorist nature," including eight terrorist attacks. In particular, the agency foiled a planned suicide bombing in Moscow on New Year's Eve. However, the agency failed to prevent terrorists perpetrating the Domodedovo International Airport bombing.[18] Over the years, FSB and affiliated state security organizations have killed all presidents of the separatist Chechen Republic of Ichkeria including Dzhokhar Dudaev, Zelimkhan Yandarbiev, Aslan Maskhadov, and Abdul-Khalim Saidullaev. Just before his death, Saidullaev claimed that the Russian government "treacherously" killed Maskhadov, after inviting him to "talks" and promising his security "at the highest level."[29] During the Moscow theater hostage crisis and Beslan school hostage crisis, all hostage takers were killed on the spot by FSB spetsnaz forces. Only one of the suspects, Nur-Pashi Kulayev, survived and was convicted later by the court. It is reported that more than 100 leaders of terrorist groups have been killed during 119 operations on North Caucasus during 2006.[19] On 28 July 2006 the FSB presented a list of 17 terrorist organizations recognized by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, to Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper, which published the list that day. The list had been available previously, but only through individual request.[30][31] Commenting on the list, Yuri Sapunov, head of anti-terrorism at the FSB, named three main criteria necessary for organizations to be listed.[32] Federal Security Service
  Foreign intelligence[edit]According to some unofficial sources,[33][34][35] since 1999, the FSB has also been tasked with the intelligence-gathering on the territory of the CIS countries, wherein the SVR is legally forbidden from conducting espionage under the inter-government agreements. Such activity is in line with Article 8 of the Federal Law on the FSB.[36]
  Targeted killing[edit]In the summer of 2006, the FSB was given the legal power to engage in targeted killing, and hunt down and kill terrorism suspects overseas if ordered to do so by Russia's president.[37]
  Border protection[edit]The Federal Border Guard Service (FPS) has been part of the FSB since 2003. Russia has 61,000 kilometers (38,000 mi) of sea and land borders, 7,500 kilometers (4,700 mi) of which is with Kazakhstan, and 4,000 kilometers (2,500 mi) with China. One kilometer (1,100 yd) of border protection costs around 1 million rubles per year.[38]
  Export control[edit]The FSB is engaged in the development of Russia's export control strategy and examines drafts of international agreements related to the transfer of dual-use and military commodities and technologies. Its primary role in the nonproliferation sphere is to collect information to prevent the illegal export of controlled nuclear technology and materials.[39]
  Intimidation of foreign diplomats and journalists[edit]The FSB has been accused by The Guardian of using psychological techniques to intimidate western diplomatic staff and journalists, with the intention of making them curtail their work in Russia early.[40] The techniques allegedly involve entering targets' houses, moving household items around, replacing items with similar (but slightly different) items, and even sending sex toys to a male target's wife, all with the intention of confusing and scaring the target.[40] Guardian journalist, Luke Harding, claims to have been the subject of such techniques.[40]
  Organization[edit]Below the nationwide level, the FSB has regional offices in the federal subjects of Russia. It also has administrations in the armed forces and other military institutions. Sub-departments exist for areas such as aviation, special training centers, forensic expertise, military medicine, etc.[5]
  Structure of the Federal Office (incomplete):
  Counterintelligence Service (Department) '' chiefs: Oleg Syromolotov (since Aug 2000), Valery Pechyonkin (September 1997 '' August 2000)Directorate for the Counterintelligence Support of Strategic FacilitiesMilitary Counterintelligence Directorate '-- chiefs: Alexander Bezverkhny (at least since 2002), Vladimir Petrishchev (since January 1996)Service (Department) for Protection of the Constitutional System and the Fight against Terrorism '' chiefs: Alexey Sedov (since March 2006), Alexander Bragin (2004 '' March 2006), Alexander Zhdankov (2001''2004), German Ugryumov (2000''2001)Directorate for Terrorism and Political Extremism Control '' chiefs: Mikhail Belousov, before him Grafov, before the latter Boris Mylnikov (since 2000)Federal Protection Service of the Russian Federation '' Director: General of Army Yevgeniy Alekseevich Murov (from 8 May 2000)[41]President's regiment in the Service of the Commandant of the Moscow Kremlin of the Federal Security Service of Russia[42] (Russian: ÐŸÑÐµÐ·Ð¸Ð´ÐµÐ½Ñ‚ÑÐºÐ¸Ð¹ ÐÐ¾Ð>>Ðº ÐÐ>>ÑƒÐ¶Ð±Ñ‹ ÐºÐ¾Ð¼ÐµÐ½Ð´Ð°Ð½Ñ‚Ð° Ð'Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¾Ð²ÑÐºÐ¾Ð"Ð¾ ÐšÑÐµÐ¼Ð>>Ñ Ð¤ÐÐž Ð Ð¾ÑÑÐ¸Ð¸) stationed in Kremlin. Was created on 8 April 1936 as a special regiment (Spetsnaz) for the security of the Kremlin Garrison.Economic Security Service (Department) '' chiefs: Alexander Bortnikov (since 2 March 2004), Yury Zaostrovtsev (January 2000 '' March 2004), Viktor Ivanov (April 1999 '' January 2000), Nikolay Patrushev (1998 '' April 1999), Alexander Grigoryev (28 August '' 1 October 1998).Operational Information and International Relations Service (Analysis, Forecasting, and Strategic Planning Department) '' chiefs: Viktor Komogorov (since 1999), Sergei Ivanov (1998''1999)Organizational and Personnel Service (Department) '' chiefs: Yevgeny Lovyrev (since 2001), Yevgeny Solovyov (before Lovyrev)Department for Activity Provision '' chiefs: Mikhail Shekin (since September 2006), Sergey Shishin (before Shekin), Pyotr Pereverzev (as of 2004), Alexander Strelkov (before Pereverzev)Border Guard Service '' chiefs: Vladimir Pronichev (since 2003)Control Service '' chiefs: Alexander Zhdankov (since 2004)Science and Engineering Service (Department) '' chiefs: Nikolai KlimashinInvestigation Directorate '' chiefs: Nikolay Oleshko (since December 2004), Yury Anisimov (as of 2004), Viktor Milchenko (since 2002), Sergey Balashov (until 2002 since at least 2001), Vladimir Galkin (as of 1997 and 1998)Besides the services (departments) and directorates of the federal office, the territorial directorates of FSB in the federal subects are also subordinate to it. Of these, St. Petersburg and Leningrad Oblast Directorate of FSB and its predecessors (historically covering both Leningrad/Saint Petersburg and Leningrad Oblast) have played especially important roles in the history of this organization, as many of the officers of the Directorate, including Vladimir Putin and Nikolay Patrushev, later assumed important positions within the federal FSB office or other government bodies. After the last Chief of the Soviet time, Anatoly Kurkov, the St. Petersburg and Leningrad Oblast Directorate were led by Sergei Stepashin (29 November 1991 '' 1992), Viktor Cherkesov (1992 ''1998), Alexander Grigoryev (1 October 1998 '' 5 January 2001), Sergei Smirnov (5 January 2001 '' June 2003), Alexander Bortnikov (June 2003 '' March 2004) and Yury Ignashchenkov (since March 2004).
  Directors of the FSB[edit]On 20 June 1996, Boris Yeltsin fired FSB Director Mikhail Barsukov and appointed Nikolay Kovalyov as acting Director and later Director of the FSB. Aleksandr Bortnikov took over on 12 May 2008.
  Criticism[edit]Political role in Putin's Russia[edit]The FSB has been criticised for corruption and human rights violations. Some Kremlin critics such as Yulia Latynina and Alexander Litvinenko have claimed that the FSB is engaged in suppression of internal dissent; Litvinenko died in 2006 as a result of polonium poisoning.[43] A number of opposition lawmakers and investigative journalists were murdered in the 2000s while investigating corruption and other alleged crimes perpetrated by FSB officers: Sergei Yushenkov, Yuri Shchekochikhin, Galina Starovoitova, Anna Politkovskaya, Alexander Litvinenko, Paul Klebnikov (US), Nadezhda Chaikova, Nina Yefimova, and others.[44][45]
  The FSB has been further criticised by some for failure to bring Islamist terrorism in Russia under control.[46] In the mid-2000s, the pro-Kremlin Russian sociologist Olga Kryshtanovskaya claimed that FSB played a dominant role in the country's political, economic and even cultural life.[47][48][49]
  Former FSB officer Alexander Litvinenko, along with a series of other authors such as Yury Felshtinsky, David Satter, Boris Kagarlitsky, Vladimir Pribylovsky, claimed in the early 2000s that the 1999 apartment bombings in Moscow and other Russian cities were a false flag attack coordinated by the FSB in order to win public support for a new full-scale war in Chechnya and boost former FSB Director Vladimir Putin's, then the prime minister, popularity in the lead-up to parliamentary elections and presidential transfer of power in Russia later that year.[50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61]
  In his book Mafia State, Luke Harding, the Moscow correspondent for The Guardian from to 2007 to 2011 and a fierce critic of Russia, alleges that the FSB subjected him to continual psychological harassment, with the aim of either coercing him into practicing self-censorship in his reporting, or to leave the country entirely. He says that FSB used techniques known as Zersetzung (literally "corrosion" or "undermining") which were perfected by the East GermanStasi.[62]
  See also[edit]References[edit]^ abcdefSakwa, Richard. Russian Politics and Society (4th ed.). p. 98. ^Ð¤ÐµÐ´ÐµÑÐ°Ð>>ÑŒÐ½Ñ‹Ð¹ ÐºÐ¾Ð½ÑÑ‚Ð¸Ñ‚ÑƒÑ†Ð¸Ð¾Ð½Ð½Ñ‹Ð¹ Ð·Ð°ÐºÐ¾Ð½ Ðž ÐŸÑÐ°Ð²Ð¸Ñ‚ÐµÐ>>ÑŒÑÑ‚Ð²Ðµ Ð Ð¾ÑÑÐ¸Ð¹ÑÐºÐ¾Ð¹ Ð¤ÐµÐ´ÐµÑÐ°Ñ†Ð¸Ð¸>> 17 Dec 1997.^THE MILITARY AND THE AUGUST 1991 COUP McNair Paper 34, The Russian Military's Role in Politics, January 1995.^Gevorkian, Natalia (January 1993). 'The KGB: "They still need us"'. "Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists". pp. 36''39. ^ abcdefghSchneider, Eberhard. "The Russian Federal Security Service under President Putin". In Stephen White. Politics and the Ruling Group in Putin's Russia. ^On Organs of the Federal Security Service in the Russian Federation Russian Federation Federal Law No. 40-FZ. Adopted by the State Duma 22 February 1995. Signed by Russian Federation President B. Yeltsin and dated 3 April 1995.^Mark Tran. Who is Vladimir Putin? Profile: Russia's new prime minister. Guardian Unlimited 9 August 1999.^Baev, Pavel (2005). "Chechnya and the Russian Military". In Richard Sakwa. Chechnya: From Past to Future. Anthem Press. ^Ð¤ÑÐ± Ð—Ð°ÐºÑÑ‹Ñ‚Ð¾Ð"Ð¾ ÐÐ¸ÐÐ°^"Mass Dismissals at the FSB '' Kommersant Moscow". Kommersant.com. Retrieved 4 November 2010. ^Ð•Ð>>ÐµÐ½Ð° Ðª-ÐšÐ¸ÑÐµÐ>>ÐµÐ²Ð°, Ð'Ð¸ÐºÐ¾Ð>>Ð°Ð¹ Ðª-ÐÐµÑÐ"ÐµÐµÐ², Ð'Ð¸Ñ…Ð°Ð¸Ð>> Ðª-Ð¤Ð¸ÑÐ¼Ð°Ð½. "Ðª '' ÐšÐ¸Ñ‚ Ð¸ Ð¼ÐµÑ‡". Kommersant.ru. Retrieved 4 November 2010. ^"Russians claim killing of rebel Basayev, the Beslan butcher". The Independent. 11 July 2006. ^"Chechen rebel chief Basayev dies". BBC News. 10 June 2006. ^Biberman, Yelena (6 December 2008). "No Place to Be a Terrorist". Russia Profile. ^Saradzhyan, Simon (31 March 2010). "Eliminating Terrorists, Not Terror". International Relations and Security Network. ^Saradzhyan, Simon (23 December 2010). "Russia's North Caucasus, the Terrorism Revival". International Relations and Security Network. ^"Medvedev expands FSB powers". Russia Today. 27 August 2010. ^ ab"Russia Busted 200 Spies Last Year '' Medvedev". RIA Novosti. 7 February 2012. ^ abStory to the Day of Checkist^ abcCounterintelligence Cases- by GlobalSecurity.org^"Russia Convicts Military Officer of Spying For CIA". RIA Novosti. 10 February 2012. ^"Case study: Igor Sutiagin". Hrw.org. Retrieved 4 November 2010. ^"AAAS Human Rights Action Network". Shr.aaas.org. Retrieved 4 November 2010. ^Russian Scientist Charged With Disclosing State Secret^Oskar Kaibyshev convicted^Researchers Throw Up Their Arms^"Grigory Pasko site". Index.org.ru. Retrieved 4 November 2010. ^The Pasko case^Russia Used 'Deception' To Kill Maskhadov, 8 March 2006 (RFE/RL)^"17 particularly dangerous" (in Russian). Rossiyskaya Gazeta. 28 July 2006. Retrieved 13 August 2006. ^"'Terror' list out; Russia tags two Kuwaiti groups". Arab Times. 13 August 2006. Retrieved 13 August 2006. ^"Russia names 'terrorist' groups". BBC News. 28 July 2006. Retrieved 13 August 2006. ^Ð--ÐµÐÐ°ÑÑ‚Ð°Ð¼ÐµÐ½Ñ‚ Ð¾ÐÐµÑÐ°Ñ‚Ð¸Ð²Ð½Ð¾Ð¹ Ð¸Ð½ÑÐ¾ÑÐ¼Ð°Ñ†Ð¸Ð¸ (Ð--ÐžÐ) Ð¤ÐÐ‘^Ð'Ð°ÑÐ¸ ÑÐÐµÑ†ÑÐ>>ÑƒÐ¶Ð±Ñ‹ - Ð½Ð° Ñ‚ÐµÑÑÐ¸Ñ‚Ð¾ÑÐ¸Ð¸ Ð±Ñ‹Ð²ÑÐµÐ"Ð¾ ÐÐ¾ÑŽÐ·Ð°^Ð'ÐÐ¨Ð ÐÐŸÐ•Ð...ÐÐ›Ð£Ð–Ð‘Ð '-- Ð'Ð ÐÐ•Ð Ð ÐÐÐžÐ ÐÐ Ð‘ÐÐ'Ð¨Ð•Ð'Ðž ÐÐžÐ®Ð—Ð^Ð¤Ð•Ð--Ð•Ð ÐÐ›Ð¬Ð'ÐÐ Ð—ÐÐšÐžÐ' Ðž Ð¤Ð•Ð--Ð•Ð ÐÐ›Ð¬Ð'ÐžÐ ÐÐ›Ð£Ð–Ð‘Ð• Ð‘Ð•Ð—ÐžÐŸÐÐÐ'ÐžÐÐÐ^Finn, Peter (15 January 2007). "In Russia, A Secretive Force Widens". The Washington Post. Retrieved 20 May 2010. ^Putin Calls On FSB To Modernize Border Guards by Victor Yasmann for Radio Free Europe, December 2005.^"Status of the State Licensing System of Control over Exports of Nuclear Materials, Dual-use Commodities and Technologies in Russia: Manual for foreign associates in Russia," International Business Relations Corporation, Department of Nuclear Energy and Nuclear Fuel Cycle (Moscow, 2002).^ abcRussian spy agency targeting western diplomats, Guardian^"Murov biography (in Russian)". Fso.gov.ru. Retrieved 4 November 2010. ^"ÐŸÑÐµÐ·Ð¸Ð´ÐµÐ½Ñ‚ÑÐºÐ¸Ð¹ ÐÐ¾Ð>>Ðº". Ppolk.ru. Retrieved 4 November 2010. ^"The sadistic poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko" - by Don Murray;- CBC News, 2006^Amnesty International condemns the political murder of Russian human rights advocate Galina Starovoitova^Yushenkov: A Russian idealist^Russia After The Presidential Election by Mark A. Smith Conflict Studies Research Centre^In Russia, A Secretive Force Widens '' by P. Finn '-- Washington Post, 2006^"The making of a neo-KGB state". The Economist. 23 August 2007. Retrieved 18 July 2013. ^ÐŸÐžÐ'ÐžÐ'ÐžÐ'ÐžÐ–ÐÐÐÐ•^Blowing Up Russia: Terror from Within^Who was Alexander LitvinenkoBBC, 13 December 2012.^Boris Kagarlitsky, a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences Institute of Comparative Politics, writing in the weekly Novaya Gazeta, says that the bombings in Moscow and elsewhere were arranged by the GRU^"David Satter '' House committee on Foreign Affairs" (PDF). Retrieved 2012-01-29. ^Felshtinsky & Pribylovsky 2008, pp. 105''111^Video on YouTubeIn Memoriam Aleksander Litvinenko, Jos de Putter, Tegenlicht documentary VPRO 2007, Moscow, 2004 Interview with Anna Politkovskaya^Russian Federation: Amnesty International's concerns and recommendations in the case of Mikhail Trepashkin '' Amnesty International[dead link]^Bomb Blamed in Fatal Moscow Apartment Blast, Richard C. Paddock, Los Angeles Times, 10 September 1999^At least 90 dead in Moscow apartment blast, from staff and wire reports, CNN, 10 September 1999^Evangelista, Matthew (2002), The Chechen Wars: Will Russia Go the Way of the Soviet Union?, Brookings Institution Press, ISBN 978-0-8157-2499-5 , p. 81.^Did Putin's Agents Plant the Bombs?, Jamie Dettmer, Insight on the News, 17 April 2000.^''The consolidation of Dictatorship in Russia'' by Joel M. Ostrow, Georgil Satarov, Irina Khakamada p.96^Harding, Luke (2011). Mafia State. London: Guardian Books. ISBN (HB) 978-0852-65247-3 . External links[edit]Profiles[edit] Links to related articles
VIDEO-Nightly News: State Dept. Issues Russia Travel Alert
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sun, 12 Jan 2014 00:23
  >>>higher. tonight, the u.s. state department issued a warning any american planning to travel to the olympics in russia , this is about the potential danger following the terrorist threats and the opening ceremony is exactly four weeks from tonight. our chief foreign correspondent richard engel has more, what brought this about today, richard?
  >> reporter:good evening, brian, we understand there is no specific threat, but security is the overwhelming concern that russia has in the lead-up to these games. and russia is imposing some very severe security restrictions, already banning all liquids on flights, not just large amounts of liquids but any liquids of any kind. also about 40,000 police and soldiers are imposing a so-called ring of steel around the venues at sochi. the fsb, which is the new kgb is responsible for security overall. the main concern, obviously, is terrorists, specifically somebody coming from the north caucasuses. and earlier there were bombings that put the officials on alert. the u.s. is not concerned about the olympic venues themselves but concerned something could happen at a train station or a transport hub, a softer target that could be attacked during the game.
  >>richard engel in moscow, as we said the opening ceremony four weeks from tonight, thank
The United States Senate Committee on Finance: Newsroom - Chairman's News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 22:23
  Finance, Ways & Means Leaders Team Up to Craft Bill to Deliver Trade Deals that Boost U.S. Exports, Create Jobs
  WASHINGTON - Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT), Ranking Member Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) joined together today to introduce legislation that will establish strong rules for trade negotiations and Congressional approval of trade pacts, to deliver trade agreements that boost U.S. exports and create American jobs.
  The Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act of 2014 establishes 21st century Congressional negotiating objectives and rules for the Administration to follow when engaged in trade talks, including strict requirements for Congressional consultations and access to information. Provided the Administration follows the rules, special procedures apply when moving a negotiated deal that satisfies the objectives through the Senate and House of Representatives.
  ''The TPA legislation that we are introducing today will make sure that these trade deals get done, and get done right. This is our opportunity to tell the Administration '' and our trading partners '' what Congress' negotiating priorities are,'' Baucus said. ''TPA legislation is critical to a successful trade agenda. It is critical to boosting U.S. exports and creating jobs. And it's critical to fueling America's growing economy.''
  ''Every President since FDR has sought trade promotion authority from Congress because of the job-creating benefits of trade. Renewing TPA will help advance a robust trade agenda that will help American businesses, workers, farmers and ranchers by giving them greater access to overseas markets,'' said Hatch. ''This bipartisan legislation helps meet the challenges of today's competitive global economy and will play a key role in getting our nation out of years of economic stagnation by spurring economic growth and greater opportunity. From increasing protections for digital trade and data flows to enforcing strong U.S. intellectual property rights, this legislation will be instrumental to ensuring that our country's current trade negotiations in Asia and Europe are a success and that these agreements meet the high-standards necessary for congressional approval.''
  ''The Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act will give us the tools we need to move more job-creating trade agreements,'' Camp said. ''This legislation will ensure that the Administration is following the rules and negotiating objectives that Congress has set out. In order to achieve the economic growth and job benefits that trade agreements can bring to the U.S., we must first pass strong, bipartisan TPA legislation. I look forward to working with the Administration and with Republicans and Democrats in Congress to enact this bill.''
  The Bipartisan Congressional Trade Priorities Act of 2014 confronts many of the trade challenges facing the U.S. in the global marketplace, including: competition from state-owned enterprises; localization barriers to trade; and restrictions on cross-border data flows. TPA-2014 updates labor and environment provisions to reflect recent trade agreements, as well as market access priorities for goods and services. It strengthens oversight by Congress and the public by adding consultation and reporting requirements. TPA-2014 also provides for tougher, enforceable rules against barriers to U.S. agriculture. And for the first time, TPA-2014 sets out a clear directive on currency manipulation.
  TPA-2014 also provides greater transparency and gives Congress greater oversight of the Administration's trade negotiations.
  Senators Baucus and Hatch and Congressman Camp called TPA a ''vital tool'' as the U.S. continues Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations as well as free trade agreement talks with the European Union (EU). The two trade deals offer the U.S. landmark opportunities to boost exports. The TPP countries '' which represent many of the fastest-growing economies in the world '' accounted for 40 percent of total U.S. goods exports in 2012. And the EU purchased close to $460 billion in U.S. goods and services that same year, supporting 2.4 million American jobs.
  In addition, the U.S. is negotiating the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) with 50 countries, covering about 50 percent of global GDP and over 70 percent of global services trade. This agreement would create many opportunities for U.S. jobs in this critical sector.
  Renewing TPA, which expired in 2007, is necessary to successfully conclude these negotiations.
  The one page summary can be found here. The bill text can be found here.
  ###
U.S. cautions on travel to Sochi Olympics
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 21:31
  Michael Winter, USA TODAY5:54 p.m. EST January 10, 2014
  Security personnel walk in the Olympic Park in the Coastal Cluster on Jan. 9 in Adler, Russia.(Photo: Michael Heiman, Getty Images)
  SHARE301CONNECTEMAILMOREThe State Department issued a travelers' alert Friday for the Sochi Olympics, offering standard security tips while traveling and cautioning about medical facilities and Russia-related terrorism concerns in Georgia.
  Americans attending the Games "should remain alert regarding their personal security at all times" and "remain vigilant and exercise good judgment and discretion when using any form of public transportation," the advisory urged.
  Noting that the Olympics are the "first large-scale event to be held in Sochi," the U.S. government said, "Medical capacity and infrastructure in the region are untested for handling the volume of visitors expected for the Olympics," and medical care in many Russian localities "differs substantially from Western standards due to differing practices and approaches to primary care."
  Travelers were advised to consider "purchasing private medical evacuation and/or repatriation insurance."
  Noting recent terror attacks in the Russian Federation, the advisory pointed out that the Games "present an attractive target for terrorists."
  The Caucasus Emirate has indicated it may target the Olympics. The militant Sufi nationalist group, formed in 2007, has already attacked a ski resort, trains, an airport and a theater.
  The Federal Security Service of the Russian Federation has said 100,000 security personnel would be on duty at the Games and around Sochi.
  "Russian authorities have indicated that they are taking appropriate security measures in Sochi in light of this," the State Department said. "Acts of terrorism, including bombings and hostage takings, continue to occur in Russia, particularly in the North Caucasus region. There is no indication of a specific threat to U.S. institutions or citizens, but U.S. citizens should be aware of their personal surroundings and follow good security practices."
  Friday's advisory also reminded lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender travelers that Russia has banned "propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations" to minors and that the law applies to foreigners, even though the authorities have not clearly defined what constitutes "propaganda."
  But elsewhere the State Department writes that LGBT individuals "are protected by anti-discrimination laws in Georgia, and there are no legal impediments to the organization of LGBT events. However, traditional cultural attitudes result in LGBT individuals often facing de-facto discrimination and harassment by state and private actors."
  More information is available on the State Department's LGBT Travel Information site.
  Beyond Olympic- and Georgia-specific concerns, the State Department also reiterated basic tourist-awareness tips regarding theft, muggings, taxis, lodging, credit cards and documents. As is standard for much travel abroad, the State Department recommended signing up for its Smart Traveler Enrollment Program, in addition to sharing itineraries with family, friends and co-workers.
  The State Department offers more detailed information and recommendations on its Georgia site.
  All travelers to Georgia should "regularly monitor emergency messages on the U.S. Embassy's website for the latest information on the security situation throughout Georgia. In the case of a crisis and/or natural disaster, U.S. citizens in Tbilisi may tune in to FM radio stations for any updated U.S. Embassy emergency message for U.S. citizens."
  SHARE301CONNECTEMAILMORE
Board of Directors | Skoll Global Threats Fund
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 21:06
  Team Members:Jeff Skoll, Founder and Chairman
  Larry Brilliant, President, Skoll Global Threats Fund
  Sally Osberg, President and CEO, Skoll Foundation
  James DeMartini, Managing Partner, Seiler LLP
  As the first full-time employee and first President of eBay, Jeff developed the company's inaugural business plan and led its successful initial public offering. eBay has since become the world's largest on-line marketplace, connecting hundreds of millions of buyers and sellers. eBay's transformational trading platform democratized economic opportunity throughout the world, empowering individuals to become successful online entrepreneurs.
  Jeff founded the Skoll Foundation in 1999. It quickly became the world's largest foundation for social entrepreneurship, driving large-scale change by investing in, connecting, and celebrating social entrepreneurs and other innovators dedicated to solving the world's most pressing problems. Its flagship program, the Skoll Awards for Social Entrepreneurship, has supported 91 leading social entrepreneurs from 74 organizations whose extraordinary work serves the neediest populations all over the globe.
  The Skoll Foundation also co-produces the annual Skoll World Forum on Social Entrepreneurship with the Skoll Centre for Social Entrepreneurship at the Sa¯d Business School at the University of Oxford. The Skoll World Forum unites acclaimed social entrepreneurs with essential partners from the social, finance, private and public sectors. Each year, the Skoll World Forum attracts 800 distinguished delegates, including such renowned world figures as Archbishop Desmond Tutu, U.S. President Jimmy Carter, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, the Honorable Mary Robinson, Dr. Paul Farmer, and Nobel Laureates Al Gore, Muhammad Yunus, Jody Williams, and Dr. R.K. Pachauri.
  In 2009, Skoll founded the Skoll Global Threats Fund. Its initial focus is on five global issues that, if unchecked, could bring the world to its knees: climate change, water scarcity, pandemics, nuclear proliferation and Middle East conflict.
  Jeff founded Participant Media in 2004 with the belief that a story well told has the power to inspire and compel social change. Participant's films are accompanied by social action and advocacy campaigns to engage people on the issues addressed in the films. Jeff has served as Executive Producer on over 33 films to date, which have collectively received a total of 5 Academy Awards® and 22 nominations. Participant's films include, among others, Good Night, and Good Luck,North Country,Syriana,An Inconvenient Truth,The Kite Runner, Charlie Wilson's War,The Visitor,The Cove, Countdown to Zero,Waiting for' Superman',Food, Inc., The Help, and Contagion.
  In 2009, Participant launched its digital hub TakePart.com, an on-line Social Action Network' that engages people in the major issues which shape their lives. TakePart launched a digital magazine on MSN and a YouTube network in 2012.
  Jeff received a Bachelor's degree in Electrical Engineering from the University of Toronto and an MBA from the Stanford Graduate School of Business. He has been awarded an honorary Doctor of Laws degree from the University of Toronto and an honorary Doctor of Public Service from Santa Clara University. In 2012, Skoll was appointed an Officer of the Order of Canada. Jeff's other recent honors include the James C. Morgan Global Humanitarian Award (2011), Barron's 25 Best Givers (2010, 2009), Huffington Post's ''Ultimate Game Changer in Entertainment'' (2010), Environmental Media Awards Corporate Responsibility Award (2010), the Producers Guild of America's Visionary Award (2009), Global Green USA's Entertainment Industry Environmental Leadership Award (2009), Business Week's 50 Most Generous Philanthropists (2003-2007), Time Magazine's 100 Most Influential People (2006), and Wired Magazine's Rave Award (2006).
  Larry Brilliant is the President and CEO of the Skoll Global Threats Fund. He previously was Vice President of Google and Executive Director of Google.org.
  Larry is an MD and MPH, board-certified in preventive medicine. He lived and worked in India for ten years and was on the UN team that led the successful World Health Organization smallpox eradication program. He did his undergraduate in Philosophy at the U of M, his MD at Wayne Medical School and came back to do his MPH at the U of M. Later he joined the faculty from 1977 to 1986, first as assistant professor of health planning and international health and later, as associate professor of epidemiology at the U of M School of Public Health. He has authored two books and dozens of scientific articles on infectious diseases, blindness and international health policy.
  In 1985, while in Ann Arbor, Larry founded the Seva Foundation, an international NGO, whose projects have given back sight to nearly 3 million people worldwide through their work to eliminate preventable and curable blindness. Also in Ann Arbor, he co-founded The Well, a pioneering digital community that holds a special place in the history of online communities and he holds a telecom patent related to online transactions.
  He also worked for WHO and UNICEF in polio eradication and blindness and volunteered as a physician during several disasters, including the Asian Tsunami in Sri Lanka and Indonesia and the Bihar Floods. After the anthrax attacks in the U.S. in 2001, he volunteered as a first responder for CDC's bio-terrorism effort.
  Larry was founding chair of the National Bio-Surveillance Advisory Subcommittee, created by Presidential directive, and is a member of the World Economic Forum Global Advisory Council on Catastrophic Risks. He was elected to the Council on Foreign Relations in 2008. He is on the boards of the Skoll Foundation, Salesforce.com Foundation and is a frequent speaker and consultant on topics ranging from social action to large scale social change.
  Recent awards include the TED Prize in 2006, Time Magazine 100 Most Influential People and Top 20 Scientists and Thinkers (2008), UN Global Leadership Award (2008), Peacemaker Award (2005) and International Public Health Hero (2004) and two Honorary Doctorates. In 2009, the documentary about polio eradication, which Larry conceived and was funded by Google.org, The Final Inch, won an Oscar nomination and was bought and shown by HBO.
  Sally Osberg has led entrepreneurial organizations and been an agent for social change throughout her career. As President and CEO of the Skoll Foundation, she partners with Founder and Chairman Jeff Skoll and heads the organization's team in identifying and supporting innovators pioneering scalable solutions to global challenges. She is a well-known proponent of thought leadership, research, and alliances that advance the work of social entrepreneurs solving the world's most pressing problems.
  Currently, Sally serves on the boards of the Skoll Foundation, the Skoll Global Threats Fund, the Oracle Education Foundation and the Palestine-based Partners for Sustainable Development. She was founding Executive Director of Children's Discovery Museum of San Jose, guiding that institution to international recognition for its cutting edge work in the museum field, and formerly active as a director on the boards of the American Association of Museums, the American Leadership Forum, and Women and Philanthropy, among others. Sally has received the John Gardner Leadership Award from the American Leadership Forum, been inducted into the Junior Achievement Business Hall of Fame, and been named by the San Jose Mercury News as one of the ''Millennium 100'" for her role in shaping and leading Silicon Valley.
  Jim DeMartini is the Managing Partner of Seiler LLP, a large accounting firm with offices in Silicon Valley and San Francisco. The firm specializes in providing services to high-net-worth individuals and families, as well as closely held businesses. In his role as a trusted advisor, Mr. DeMartini counsels clients in matters including income, estate and gift tax planning, wealth management, all facets of real estate, and charitable gift planning.
  Currently, Mr.DeMartini is a member of the Board of Directors of the Stupski Foundation. Mr.DeMartini was Founder and Member of the Board of Directors of Sports Association for Youth, a non-competitive baseball league that currently benefits more than 1,000 Bay Area youths annually. Recently, Mr. DeMartini was Chair of the Santa Clara University Men's Golf Committee. Additional past community activities include Notre Dame de Namur University Trustee, Executive Committee Member, and Chairman of the Audit Committee; Sisters of Notre Dame de Namur of California Advisory Board; Santa Clara University English Advisory Board; Lucile Salter Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford Capital Campaign Committee; and, Stanford University Medical Center Friends of Orthopedics.
  From 1999-2004 Mr.DeMartini served on the Board of Directors of Mid-Peninsula Bank, a member of the Greater Bay Bancorp group. He attended the University of California at Los Angeles and holds a Bachelor of Science Degree in Accounting from Golden Gate University. Mr. DeMartini pursued graduate studies in taxation and speaks on a variety of related topics. Mr. DeMartini is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and California State Society of Certified Public Accountants.
Frequently Asked Questions - Flu Near You
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 21:06
  Flu Near You is a site administered by Healthmap of Boston Children's Hospital in partnership with the American Public Health Association and the Skoll Global Threats Fund.
  Flu Near You is open to anyone for browsing. Any individual living in the United States or Canada, 13 years of age or older, can register to complete brief, weekly surveys that help all of us learn more about the flu.
  This effort is supported with private funds to demonstrate its utility for multiple sectors who must work together for pandemic preparedness if data is openly shared. The information on the site will be available to public health officials, researchers, disaster planning organizations and anyone else who may find this information useful.
  Benefits See flu activity in your areaFind nearby locations offering flu vaccinesComplete quick surveys to advance our collective understanding of the fluVisualize flu trendsConnect with local public health organizationsCostFree!Privacy PolicyWe recognize the sensitive nature of Flu Near You questions, and take the security and confidentiality of your information seriously.As we describe below, your participation in this project will remain confidential. Submissions will be anonymized and posted in aggregate with other submissions. IP addresses are routinely recorded but will also remain confidential.
  Your contact information will not be shared with any third party except as required by law.
  We collect personal information such as, but not limited to, your email address, age, gender and Internet Protocol address. We reserve the right to use this information internally, including but not limited to research purposes, quality assurance purposes, and correspondence with you, but we will not sell, share, rent, or otherwise reveal this information to any third party except as required by law, or to address issues of noncompliance. We may share aggregate data with third parties in a manner that will not identify you.
  All data exchanged with this site is protected by SSL encryption, the same standard used to protect the transmission of credit card information and other sensitive data over the internet.
  Flu Near You uses cookies to improve the quality of our service, including (if you choose) remembering your login information so that it does not need to be re-entered.
  Terms of ParticipationBy sending a written contribution to Flu Near You, you grant a perpetual, royalty-free, unconditional license to Boston Children's Hospital, HeathMap and Flu Near You, and any successor organizations, to publish your contribution in aggregate with other submissions on the Flu Near You Web site and all affiliated sites, as well as disseminate it to other parties via RSS or other media, and to discuss or reference it in any publications related to or arising out of Flu Near You. You also agree that Flu Near You has the right, but not the obligation, to edit or remove any contribution in Flu Near You's sole discretion. You also agree to the HealthMap Terms of Use.
SEE IT: Footage reveals Hawaiian plane crash that killed health director who released President Obama's birth certificate (VIDEO) - NY Daily News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 20:50
  This is the horrifying moment a plane crashed into waters off Hawaii and killed its state director of health Loretta Fuddy - who was responsible for releasing Barack Obama's longform birth certificate.
  Terrifying footage taken by another passenger on board shows the aircraft losing power shortly after take-off and then later slamming hard into the water.
  The 2002 Cessna Grand Caravan's cabin starts to flood after impact - but everyone remains calm and eerily quiet as they leave the sinking craft.
  RELATED: SEE IT: DRIVER CRASHES THROUGH RITE AID ENTRANCE
  Fuddy, 65, managed to escape into the open water.
  Wearing a life-jacket, she reportedly held hands with her deputy director Keith Yamamoto as he tried to help her relax.
  But Yamamoto soon realized there was no response from her, and that she had died.
  RELATED: 2 DEAD, 1 MISSING AFTER U.S. NAVY HELICOPTER CRASH OFF VIRGINIA COAST
  The eight other people on board, including the pilot, were either rescued by helicopters and a search plane or swam for 90 minutes to shore, reports ABC News.
  Fuddy, on the Makani Kai Air flight from Molokai to Oahu last month after visiting a state-run leper colony, became famous in 2011 after she made Obama's birth certificate public.
  It was a bid to kill rumors that he wasn't born in the U.S.
  RELATED: AIR FORCE ID'S 4 KILLED IN HELICOPTER CRASH
  Tributes have been paid to Fuddy, with Gov. Neil Abercrombie saying she was "loved and respected."
  "Her knowledge was vast, her counsel and advice always given from her heart as much as from her storehouse of experience," he added.
  ON A MOBILE DEVICE? CLICK HERE TO WATCH THE VIDEO.
THE PERIMETER PRIMATE: The Gulen Movement in Azerbaijan & a quid pro quo?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 20:25
  It requires an ongoing effort to even minimally understand the Gulen movement, the secretive and controversial religious group which operates the largest charter school network in the United States. Details about this group's structure, recruitment and control of members, were recently presented by Fuad Aliyev in ''The Gulen Movement in Azerbaijan'' (12/27/2012). His article appeared in Current Trends in Islamist Ideology, a publication of the Hudson Institute's Center on Islam, Democracy and the Future of the Muslim World. Aliyev is a Fulbright Scholar at the Central Asia-Caucasus Institute at the School of Advanced International Studies at Johns Hopkins University.Azerbaijanis the largest country in the Caucasus, a geopolitical region at the border of Europe and Asia[see maps below]. It has enormous energy reserves, including one of the largest natural gas fields in the world, the Shah Deniz II. Only discovered in 1999, this field will be the origin point for the Nabucco gas pipeline, a project being planned that will bring the first gas ever from the Caspian Sea basin to Europe, via Turkey.Construction has not yet commenced, but if built, the Nabucco pipeline will be one of the largest engineering projects in the world. Some estimates say it will be operational by 2017. The Nabucco will join the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, an oil pipeline from Azerbaijan to a Turkish port on the Mediterranean, a project that was first proposed in 1992 and completed in 2005.The Gulen movementopened its first school inAzerbaijan in 1992. This was firstschool it opened outside of Turkey (see this article about its 20th anniversary from a Gulenist news source).The movement had expanded intoAzerbaijanimmediately after independence was attained in 1991 as a result of the dissolution of the Soviet Union. As Aliyev wrote, ''Since the arrival of the [Gulen movement] in Azerbaijan, it has made a targeted effort to recruit the children of the country's elite into their education institutions.'' It has beenreported that the offspring of many influential Azerbaijani officials are attending these schools.Given the timing and other indicators, something to ponder is if interests in these newish energy sources in which Turkey is an integral player might have some bearing on our government's unique relationship with Fethullah Gulen and his increasingly powerful group of intensely business-oriented followers. Is this somehow tied to thegenerous funding continually being provided to the Gulen movement for itscharter school expansion? Is it tied tothe strange silence fromUS Secretary of Education Arne Duncan and other members of our government about the fact that a secretive and controversial religious group from a foreign country is operating so many charter schools (none in 1998, two in 1999, and now 135)? Is our government enabling the Gulen charter school expansion as some sort of quid pro quo? There is an enormous amount of information which should be presented to the American public so that this large subject can be opened up for a much wider level of discussion.Excerpts from ''The Gulen Movement in Azerbaijan'' (12/27/2012).Of all the Sunni movements in Azerbaijan, the most influential is the Turkish Nurcular network that is now led by its dominant offshoot known widely as the ''G¼len'' or ''Hizmet'' movement. Named for its founder, the Turkish Muslim preacher Fethullah G¼len, the movement is a faith-based educational network that is enormously well-resourced and highly active internationally, especially in the Turkic world that stretches from Turkey into Central Asia...In Azerbaijan, the G¼len movement has succeeded in reaching out to a diverse population, but especially to urban elites. It is different from other Islamic movements in that it promotes its religious teachings not through outright proselytization, but discreetly through its network of secular educational institutions, social media and business associations...... According to various experts, what makes the G¼len movement different from other Nurcular movements is its clear hierarchical structure, its strict internal discipline, the secrecy of its laws, its openness to capitalism and avowedly pro-business stance, and its focus on working through media associations and businesses to develop the movement...In Turkey, the G¼len movement, as with some other Nurcu movements, is a well-structured, hierarchical organization... Students are recruited and controlled at a local level by Nurcu abis (brothers) and by ablas (sisters). According to former members of this network, the movement possesses its own security service that is tasked with rooting out moles and agents of national intelligence and law enforcement services. The movement keeps a database of all its members, and the training of each new recruit emphasizes the need to exercise discretion in revealing their involvement with the G¼len network. Students are additionally instructed to respect and obey the network's leadership...The secrecy surrounding the movement has aroused considerable suspicion about its activities and ultimate goals. According to Mikhail Davidov, the movement's underground network operates as a sort of intelligence service that collects information on political, economic, confessional and other dynamics in the Turkic-speaking regions and countries where the movement is seeking to spread its influence. Moreover, it has been claimed that the G¼len network works surreptitiously to infiltrate communities and the governments of Turkey and the [Commonwealth of Independent States] and promote its adherents to positions of power and influence. Because of these and connected fears, the movement has been banned in Russia and Uzbekistan by notoriously anti-Islamic authorities who see it as a subversive threat. Other Central Asian regimes have also been extremely wary of the Hizmet presence. Azerbaijan, by contrast, has always been more open to the movement, and it is in this post-Soviet country where the network has arguably had its greatest success and impact to date...It should be noted that the movement's media outlets are not explicitly religious. In fact, it is difficult to tell the difference between them and other secular media with an unaided eye...The network in any given country is usually divided into three tiers or groups. The first group includes people who are closest to G¼len and the immediate circle of his most trusted and loyal followers. The second group includes those who work directly for the movement to achieve its larger objectives. The third group includes mainly sympathizers of the movement and they largely consist of journalists, business people, public officials, alumni of Hizmet schools, and friends. While this third grouping is not always formally a part of the network, the network does often mobilize it to pursue various ends...Since the arrival of the group in Azerbaijan, it has made a targeted effort to recruit the children of the country's elite into their education institutions. It has also sought to involve young individuals who are likely to become the country's future technocratic, business and political elite; they reportedly have enjoyed many successes in doing this...The secularist Azerbaijani media has fiercely criticized the Nurcu network for brainwashing youth. From time to time, the media will feature the ''confessions'' of former G¼len members that expose what life is like within the movement. The programs show how young people are recruited, manipulated and then subjected to the strict control of abis or ablas. According to various reports, the movement has tried to bring youngsters studying in their schools into the ishik evi or yurd houses, which are large communal apartments capable of accommodating more than fifteen students and 3 to 4 abis or ablas. In these houses, the elder brothers and sisters teach lessons on the fundamentals of Islam and the works of Said Nursi and Fethullah G¼len. Distinguished students get promoted to the level of agabeys, or elder brothers, and they are then expected to recruit other young people. In exchange for their obedience and commitment to the movement, media reports indicate that the students have all their financial and career problems solved. The network pays for their education, provides them with housing, and helps to find them a job in G¼len-affiliated companies or in un-affiliated companies where network members are present...... In the public's view, the question of whether the movement seeks integration with Azeri society or to transform from within according to a Turkish-Islamist agenda remains largely unanswered. Given the movement's historical flexibility and its extensive organizational structure in Azerbaijan, it could at least in principle and for the time being seek both ends.
Palantir Apologizes For WikiLeaks Attack Proposal, Cuts Ties With HBGary - Forbes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 20:17
  Palantir chief executive Alex Karp in his 2009 appearance on the Charlie Rose show
  It's been a long week for security firm HBGary.
  First the loose hacker group Anonymous retaliated against one of the firm's employees investigating Anonymous by hacking into the corporation's servers and spilling 50,000 emails onto the Web. Then a string of those stolen emails revealed a proposal by the firm and two others to launch a campaign of illegal cyberattacks and calculated misinformation against WikiLeaks and its supporters.
  Now, just a few days later, one of those firms, Palo Alto-based Palantir, has publicly cut ties with HBGary and apologized for its role in the WikiLeaks response plan, essentially verifying the reality of that plan and isolating HBGary further.
  In a statement to the press, Palantir chief executive Alex Carp writes, ''I have directed the company to sever any and all contacts with HBGary.'' Karp adds that ''Palantir Technologies does not build software that is designed to allow private sector entities to obtain non-public information, engage in so-called 'cyber attacks' or take other offensive measures. I have made clear in no uncertain terms that Palantir Technologies will not be involved in such activities.''
  On Thursday, the Tech Herald reported that hacked emails from HBGary revealed a PDF document outlining a proposal to Bank of America to sabotage WikiLeaks on multiple fronts, a response plan to what some believe may be a release of Bank of America's internal documents by WikiLeaks in coming months. The PDF suggested launching cyberattacks on WikiLeaks servers, spreading misinformation about its insecurity, and even pressuring journalists who support the site, specifically focusing on Glenn Greenwald of Salon.com.
  Palantir's Karp also apologized for its role in that proposal. ''Personally and on behalf of the entire company, I want to publicly apologize to progressive organizations in general, and Mr. Greenwald in particular, for any involvement that we may have had in these matters.''
  The stolen PDF shows a Palantir logo on every slide, but also logos of HBGary and Berico Technologies. Neither of those firms responded to requests for comment Thursday. A Bank of America spokesperson denied ever engaging the services of HBGary.
  Here's Palantir's note in full:
  As the Co-Founder and CEO of Palantir Technologies, I have directed the company to sever any and all contacts with HB Gary.
  Palantir Technologies provides a software analytic platform for the analysis of data. We do not provide '' nor do we have any plans to develop '' offensive cyber capabilities. Palantir Technologies does not build software that is designed to allow private sector entities to obtain non-public information, engage in so-called ''cyber attacks'' or take other offensive measures. I have made clear in no uncertain terms that Palantir Technologies will not be involved in such activities. Moreover, we as a company, and I as an individual, always have been deeply involved in supporting progressive values and causes. We plan to continue these efforts in the future.
  The right to free speech and the right to privacy are critical to a flourishing democracy. From its inception, Palantir Technologies has supported these ideals and demonstrated a commitment to building software that protects privacy and civil liberties. Furthermore, personally and on behalf of the entire company, I want to publicly apologize to progressive organizations in general, and Mr. Greenwald in particular, for any involvement that we may have had in these matters.
Palantir Technologies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 20:15
  Palantir Technologies, Inc. is an American computer software and services company, specializing in US government customers, and since 2010, financial customers.
  History[edit]Palantir was founded in 2004 by Peter Thiel, Alex Karp,[2]Joe Lonsdale,[3]Stephen Cohen, and Nathan Gettings. Early investments were $2 million from the US Central Intelligence Agency venture arm In-Q-Tel, and $30 million from Thiel and his firm, Founders Fund.[4][5][6][7] Alex Karp is Palantir's CEO.[8] Palantir's name comes from the "seeing stones" in J. R. R. Tolkien's fantasy epic The Lord of the Rings. Headquartered in Palo Alto, California, the company has four international offices and four in the United States.[9]
  Palantir developed its technology by computer scientists and analysts from intelligence agencies over three years, through pilots facilitated by In-Q-Tel.[10] The software concept grew out of technology developed at PayPal to detect fraudulent activity, much of it conducted by Russian organized crime syndicates.[4] The company said computers alone using artificial intelligence could not defeat an adaptive adversary. Palantir proposed using human analysts to explore data from many sources, called intelligence augmentation.[11]
  In April 2010, Palantir announced a partnership with Thomson Reuters to sell the Palantir Metropolis product as QA Studio.[12] On June 18, 2010, Vice PresidentJoe Biden and Office of Management and Budget Director Peter Orszag held a press conference at the White House announcing the success of fighting fraud in the stimulus by the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board (RATB). Biden credited the success to the software, Palantir, being deployed by the federal government.[13] He announced that the capability will be deployed at other government agencies, starting with Medicare and Medicaid.[14][15][16][17] Estimates were $250 million in revenues in 2011.[18]
  In September 2013, Palantir disclosed over $196 million in funding according to a US Securities and Exchange Commission filing.[19][20] It was estimated that the company would likely close almost $1 billion in contracts in 2014.[21]
  Products[edit]Palantir Gotham[edit]Palantir Gotham (formerly known as Palantir Government) integrates structured and unstructured data, provides advanced search and discovery capabilities, enables knowledge management, and facilitates secure collaboration. The Palantir platform includes the privacy and civil liberties protections mandated by legal requirements such as those in the 9/11 Commission Implementation Act. Palantir's privacy controls keep investigations focused, as opposed to the expansive data mining techniques that have drawn criticism from privacy advocates concerned about civil liberties protection. Palantir maintains security tags at a granular level.[5][8]
  Palantir runs the site AnalyzeThe.US,[22] which allows Palantir customers and affiliates to use Palantir Gotham to perform analysis on publicly available data from data.gov, usaspending.gov, the Center for Responsive Politics' Open Secrets Database, and Community Health Data from HHS.gov.[23]
  Palantir Metropolis[edit]Palantir Metropolis (formerly known as Palantir Finance) is software for data integration, information management and quantitative analytics. The software connects to commercial, proprietary and public data sets and discovers trends, relationships and anomalies, including predictive analytics. A demonstration of QA Studio which combined Palantir Finance and content from Thomson Reuters requires only registration.[24]
  Customers[edit]Palantir Gotham is used by counter-terrorism analysts at offices in the United States Intelligence Community and United States Department of Defense, fraud investigators at the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board, and cyber analysts at Information Warfare Monitor (responsible for the GhostNet and the Shadow Network investigation). Palantir Metropolis is used by hedge funds, banks, and financial services firms.[4][5][25][26]
  U.S. military intelligence used the Palantir product to improve their ability to predict locations of improvised explosive devices in its war in Afghanistan. A small number of practitioners reported it to be more useful than the U.S. Army's program of record, the Distributed Common Ground System (DCGS-A). California Congressman Duncan D. Hunter complained of US DoD obstacles to its wider use in 2012.[27]
  Infowar Monitor[edit]Palantir partner Information Warfare Monitor used Palantir software to uncover both the Ghostnet and the Shadow Network. The Ghostnet was a China-based cyber espionage network targeting 1,295 computers in 103 countries, including the Dalai Lama's office, a NATO computer and embassies.[28] The Shadow Network was also a China-based espionage operation that hacked into the Indian security and defense apparatus. Cyber spies stole documents related to Indian security, embassies abroad, and NATO troop activity in Afghanistan.[26][29]
  Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board[edit]Palantir's software is used by the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board to detect and investigate fraud and abuse in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Specifically, the Recovery Operations Center (ROC) used Palantir to integrate transactional data with open-source and private data sets that describe the entities receiving Stimulus funds.[16]
  Palantir Night Live[edit]Palantir hosts Palantir Night Live at Palantir's McLean and Palo Alto offices. The event brings speakers from the intelligence community and technology space to discuss topics of common interest. Past speakers include Garry Kasparov, Nart Villeneuve from Information Warfare Monitor, Andrew McAfee, author of Enterprise 2.0, and Michael Chertoff.[30]
  WikiLeaks proposals[edit]In 2010 Hunton & Williams LLP allegedly asked Berico Technologies, Palantir, and HBGary Federal to draft a response plan to ''the WikiLeaks Threat.'' In early 2011 Anonymous publicly released HBGary-internal documents, including the plan. The plan proposed Palantir software would ''serve as the foundation for all the data collection, integration, analysis, and production efforts.''[31] The plan also included slides, allegedly authored by HBGary CEO Aaron Barr, which suggested ''[spreading] disinformation'' and ''disrupting'' Glenn Greenwald's support for WikiLeaks.[32]
  Palantir CEO Karp ended all ties to HBGary and issued a statement apologizing to ''progressive organizations'... and Greenwald '... for any involvement that we may have had in these matters." Palantir placed an employee on leave pending a review by a third-party law firm. The employee was later reinstated.[31]
  See also[edit]References[edit]^"Big Data, Big Bucks: Palantir Valued at $9 Billion". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 2013-12-05. ^"charlierose". Media.palantirtech.com. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^"Palantir Technologies | CrunchBase Profile". Crunchbase.com. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^ abcGorman, Siobhan (September 4, 2009). "How Team of Geeks Cracked Spy Trade". The Wall Street Journal. ^ abc"A Tech Fix For Illegal Government Snooping?". NPR. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^"Palantir Founders Fund". Foundersfund.com. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^Evelyn Rusli (2010-06-25). "Palantir: The Next Billion-Dollar Company Raises $90 Million". TechCrunch. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^ ab"Alexander Karp". Charlie Rose. 2009-08-11. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^"contact information". ^Jeff Widman (2009-06-05). "Palantir keeps it lean and mean on five-year journey from zero to 150 employees". VentureBeat. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^Ari Gesher (2010-03-08). "Palantir Technologies >> Blog Archive >> Friction in Human-Computer Symbiosis: Kasparov on Chess". Blog.palantirtech.com. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^"Press release: Thomson Reuters and Palantir Technologies enter exclusive agreement to create next-generation analytics platform for financial clients". Thomson Reuters. 2010-04-12. ^Tim Kauffman (2010-06-27). "The new high-tech weapons against fraud". Federal Times. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^Kiely, Kathy (2010-06-18). "Obama administration to create 'do not pay' list to bar shady contractors". USA Today. ^Peter Orszag, Director (2010-06-18). "Do Not Pay? Do Read This Post". Whitehouse.gov. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^ abEric Kuhn (June 1, 2010). "Companies capitalize on 'open government'". Political Ticker blog (CNN). Retrieved September 28, 2013. ^"Using Palantir with Open Source Data: Finding and Preventing Fraud in Stimulus Spending". Palantir Technologies. 2010-05-04. ^Ashlee Vance and Brad Stone (November 22, 2011). "Palantir, the War on Terror's Secret Weapon: A Silicon Valley startup that collates threats has quietly become indispensable to the U.S. intelligence community". Business Week Magazine. Retrieved September 28, 2013. ^"Notice of Exempt Offering of Securities". The United States Securities and Exchange Commission. September 27, 2013. Retrieved September 28, 2013. ^Cutler, Kim-Mai. "Palantir Is Raising $197M In Growth Capital, SEC Filing Shows". TechCrunch. ^Andy Greenberg, Ryan Mac (September 2, 2013). "How A 'Deviant' Philosopher Built Palantir, A CIA-Funded Data-Mining Juggernaut". Forbes. Retrieved September 28, 2013. ^"AnalyzeThe.US '-- Home". Web site. Palantir. Retrieved September 28, 2013. ^"Palantir Technologies to Showcase Analysis at the Community Health Data Initiative Forum: Harnessing the Power of Information to". FierceHealthcare. 2010-06-02. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^"Welcome - Plantir JoyRide". Retrieved September 28, 2013. ^"A Human Driven Data-centric Approach to Accountability: Analyzing Data to Prevent Fraud, Waste and Abuse in Stimulus Spending: Gov 2.0 Expo 2010 - Co-produced by UBM TechWeb & O'Reilly Conferences, May 25 - 27, 2010, Washington, DC". Gov2expo.com. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^ abChiang, Oliver (2010-04-30). "PayPal-Based Technology Helped Bust India's And The Dalai Lama's Cyberspies". Forbes. ^Scarborough, Rowan (July 16, 2012). "Military has to fight to purchase lauded IED buster". The Washington Times . Retrieved September 29, 2013. ^"CNN.com Video". CNN. ^Markoff, John (March 29, 2009). "Vast Spy System Loots Computers in 103 Countries". The New York Times. ^"Society 2.0: Tenet, Chertoff and Beer, Oh My! | Washington Life Magazine". Washingtonlife.com. 2010-04-09. Retrieved 2012-01-30. ^ abHarris, Shane (31 January 2012). "Killer App". Washingtonian. Retrieved 14 March 2012. ^James Wray and Ulf Stabe. "Data intelligence firms proposed a systematic attack against WikiLeaks". Thetechherald.com. Retrieved 2012-01-30. External links[edit]
AT&T: Sponsored Data Plan Doesn't Violate FCC Rules | TechnoBuffalo
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:46
  By Jacob Kleinman | January 10, 2014
  AT&T's plan to let individual companies sponsor your mobile data when accessing their services ran into trouble this week when the FCC said it might look into claims the that ''sponsored data'' could prove a threat to net neutrality. Today, the carrier issued an official statement defending its new plan.
  ''AT&T's sponsored data service is aimed solely at benefiting our customers,'' said Jim Cicconi, AT&T senior executive vice president of External and Legislative Affairs, adding that the carrier's goal is to help its subscribers save money. ''We see no reason why this is not a good thing. Also, we are completely confident this offering complies with the FCC's net neutrality rules, which our company supports.''
  The carrier's plan essentially lets a company like Facebook, Spotify or Netflix pay for the data you use to access their service from a mobile device, potentially lowering your monthly bill. But some have expressed concern the plan could threaten net neutrality. Not every company can afford to sponsor your data, meaning startups would have a hard time signing up new mobile customers if an established competitor already offered a similar service with sponsored data.
  Whether AT&T's sponsored data will become a reality is unclear. There's still no guarantee that the FCC will investigate the plan, though clearly the carrier is ready to defend itself if necessary.
  More Related Stories
Statement by the President on the Passing of Ariel Sharon
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:43
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  January 11, 2014
  On behalf of the American people, Michelle and I send our deepest condolences to the family of former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and to the people of Israel on the loss of a leader who dedicated his life to the State of Israel. We reaffirm our unshakable commitment to Israel's security and our appreciation for the enduring friendship between our two countries and our two peoples. We continue to strive for lasting peace and security for the people of Israel, including through our commitment to the goal of two states living side-by-side in peace and security. As Israel says goodbye to Prime Minister Sharon, we join with the Israeli people in honoring his commitment to his country.
Hackers Steal Card Data from Neiman Marcus
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Krebs on Security
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:42
  Responding to inquiries about a possible data breach involving customer credit and debit card information, upscale retailer Neiman Marcus acknowledged today that it is working with the U.S. Secret Service to investigate a hacker break-in that has exposed an unknown number of customer cards.
  Earlier this week, I began hearing from sources in the financial industry about an increasing number of fraudulent credit and debit card charges that were being traced to cards that had been very recently used at brick-and-mortar stores run by the Dallas, Texas based high-end retail chain. Sources said that while it appears the fraud on those stolen cards was perpetrated at a variety of other stores, the common point of purchase among the compromised cards was Neiman Marcus.
  Today, I reached out to Neiman Marcus and received confirmation that the company is in fact investigating a breach that was uncovered in mid-December.
  Neiman Marcus spokesperson Ginger Reeder said the company does not yet know the cause, size or duration of the breach, noting that these are details being sought by a third-party forensics firm which has yet to complete its investigation. But she said there is no evidence that shoppers who purchased from the company's online stores were affected by this breach.
  The entirety of the company's formal statement is as follows:
  ''Neiman Marcus was informed by our credit card processor in mid-December of potentially unauthorized payment card activity that occurred following customer purchases at our Neiman Marcus Group stores.
  We informed federal law enforcement agencies and are working actively with the U.S. Secret Service, the payment brands, our credit card processor, a leading investigations, intelligence and risk management firm, and a leading forensics firm to investigate the situation. On January 1st, the forensics firm discovered evidence that the company was the victim of a criminal cyber-security intrusion and that some customers' cards were possibly compromised as a result. We have begun to contain the intrusion and have taken significant steps to further enhance information security.
  The security of our customers' information is always a priority and we sincerely regret any inconvenience. We are taking steps, where possible, to notify customers whose cards we know were used fraudulently after making a purchase at our store.''
  The disclosure comes as many in the retail sector are seeking more information about the causes of the breach at nationwide retail giant Target, which extended from around Thanksgiving 2013 to Dec. 15, and affected some 40 million customer debit and credit cards.
  Target released additional details about the breach today, saying hackers also compromised the names, mailing addresses, phone number and email addresses for up to 70 million individuals. But Target has so far not publicly released information that would help other retailers determine whether their systems may have been hit by the same attackers.
  Neiman Marcus's Reeder said the company has no indication at this time that the breach at its stores is in any way related to the Target attack. Still, the timing of the discovery of the Neiman Marcus incident '-- mid-December '-- roughly corresponds to the discovery of the Target breach. I will have more on this developing story if additional details become available.
  Tags: Ginger Reeder, Neiman Marcus breach, target, U.S. Secret Service
  This entry was posted on Friday, January 10th, 2014 at 6:56 pm and is filed under A Little Sunshine, Latest Warnings. You can follow any comments to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a comment. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Target: Names, Emails, Phone Numbers on Up To 70 Million Customers Stolen.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Krebs on Security
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:40
  Nationwide retail giant Target today disclosed that a data breach discovered last month exposed the names, mailing addresses, phone number and email addresses for up to 70 million individuals.
  The disclosure comes roughly three weeks after the company acknowledged that hackers had broken in late last year and stolen approximately 40 million customer debit and credit card records.
  ''As part of Target's ongoing forensic investigation, it has been determined that certain guest information '-- separate from the payment card data previously disclosed '-- was taken during the data breach,'' the company said in a statement released Friday morning. ''This theft is not a new breach, but was uncovered as part of the ongoing investigation. At this time, the investigation has determined that the stolen information includes names, mailing addresses, phone numbers or email addresses for up to 70 million individuals.''
  Target said much of the data is partial in nature, but that in cases where Target has an email address, it will attempt to contact affected guests with informational tips to guard against consumer scams. The retail giant was quick to note that its email communications would not ask customers to provide any personal information as part of that communication.
  Target Chairman Gregg Steinhafel apologized for any inconvenience that the breach may have caused customers, and said he wanted customers to know that ''understanding and sharing the facts related to this incident is important to me and the entire Target team.''
  Nevertheless, the company still has not disclosed any details about how the attackers broke in. This lack of communication appears to have spooked many folks responsible for defending other retailers from such attacks, according to numerous interviews conducted by this reporter over the past few weeks.
  This latest disclosure also raises questions about what other types of information may have been jeopardized in this data breach. As part of its statement, Target said it would be offering a year's worth of free credit monitoring services to those affected. Target does collect Social Security numbers from customers who apply for Target Red Cards, which offer applicants 5 percent cash back if they agree to tie their debit accounts to the Red Card. So far, however, Target has not said anything about compromised Social Security numbers.
  Reading between the lines, one might wonder why Target is providing credit monitoring services to those hit by what is essentially a credit card breach. Many people conflate credit card fraud with identity theft, but these are two very different problems. The former is quite easy for the consumer to resolve, and he or she has very little (if any) liability for fraud. Identity theft, on the other hand, generally involves the creation of new or synthetic lines of credit in the consumer's name, which can take many years and cost thousands of dollars to resolve.
  The reason Target is offering ID theft protection as a result of this breach probably has more to do with the fact that this step has become part of the playbook for companies which suffer a data breach. Since most consumers confuse credit card fraud with ID theft, many will interpret that to mean that the breached entity is somehow addressing the problem, whereas experts tell me that this offer mainly serves as a kind of ''first response'' to help the breached entity weather initial public outrage over an intrusion.
  Update, 1:07 p.m. ET: Added additional perspective on this announcement.
  Tags: $40 million, 70 million, target, target data breach, Target hack
  This entry was posted on Friday, January 10th, 2014 at 9:28 am and is filed under Latest Warnings. You can follow any comments to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a comment. Pinging is currently not allowed.
Colorado Changes 420 Mile Markers to 419.99 to Thwart Stoner Sign Thieves
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Peace . Gold . LOVE
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:39
  DENVER - Thieves have been stealing the 420 mile marker sign so often, the state's transportation department has changed it to "419.99" in an effort to try and stop the problem.
  A photo of the 419.99 mile marker sign, which is about 148 miles on Interstate 70 east of Denver, began circulating on twitter through the @JournalistsLike twitter account on Friday.
  "So this is our way to test it out. So far it's working," said Amy Ford, a spokesperson with the Colorado Department of Transportation. "It's a traffic safety thing. It's a helpful thing to have these sings on the road. But people kept ripping them off."
  The number 420 is often used as a reference to smoking marijuana.
  The 419.99 sign has been put up within the last year Ford said.
  Ford also says they've had problems with thieves stealing the 69 mile marker sign in the past.
  Source: http://www.9news.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=372755
  ___
VIDEO-Krokodil Crock: How Rumors Of A 'Flesh-Eating Zombie Drug' Swept The Nation - Forbes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:38
  Log in with your social account:Or, you can log in or sign up using Forbes.New Posts+1 posts this hourMost PopularSnapchat's FutureListsThe 2014 30 Under 30Video30 Under 3012 Stocks to BUY for 2014Help|Connect
  |Sign up|Log in
Weekly Address: Ensuring 2014 is a Year of Action to Grow the Economy
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:36
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  January 11, 2014
  WASHINGTON, DC'-- In this week's address, President Obama called 2014 a year of action, which should start with Congress quickly passing emergency unemployment insurance for the 1.3 million Americans who lost this vital lifeline as they fight to find jobs and make ends meet.
  The audio of the address and video of the address will be available online at www.whitehouse.gov at 6:00 a.m. ET, Saturday, January 11, 2014.
  Remarks of President Barack ObamaAs Prepared for DeliveryThe White HouseJanuary 11, 2014
  Hi, everybody. Yesterday, we learned that in 2013, our businesses created 2.2 million new jobs '' including 87,000 last month. Our unemployment rate is the lowest it has been since October 2008. And across our broader economy, there are signs of progress. Our manufacturing and housing sectors are rebounding. Our energy, technology, and auto sectors are booming. Thanks in part to the reforms in the Affordable Care Act, health care costs now eat up less of our economy '' over the past four years, costs have grown at the slowest rate on record. And since I took office, we've cut our deficits by more than half.
  Thanks to the hard work and sacrifice of the American people, our economy is growing stronger. But we know we've got more work to do together. Our success as a country depends on more than the success of our broader economy '' it depends on the success of the American people. It depends on your ability to make ends meet, provide for your families, and, with a little hard work, feel like you can get ahead.
  So we've got to keep our economy growing, and make sure more Americans have the opportunity to share in that growth. We've got to keep creating jobs that offer new opportunity, and make sure those jobs offer the wages and benefits that let you rebuild some security. We've got more kids to educate, and families to get covered with health insurance, and an immigration system to fix. And we've got to make sure this recovery leaves no one behind.
  This will be a year of action. I'll keep doing everything I can to create new jobs and new opportunities for American families '' with Congress, on my own, and with everyone willing to play their part. And that action should begin by extending unemployment insurance for Americans who were laid off in the recession through no fault of their own. This vital economic lifeline helps people support their families while they look for a new job. And it demands responsibility in return by requiring that they prove they're actively looking for work. But Republicans in Congress just let that lifeline expire for 1.3 million Americans. And if this doesn't get fixed, it will actually hurt about 14 million Americans over the course of this year. Earlier this week, Democrats and Republicans in the Senate took the first steps toward making this right. But Congress needs to finish the job right away. More than one million Americans across the country will feel a little hope right away.
  Working folks are looking for the kind of stable, secure jobs that went overseas in the past couple decades. So next week, I'll join companies and colleges and take action to boost the high-tech manufacturing that attracts the kind of good new jobs a growing middle class requires.
  Business owners are ready to play their part and hire more workers. So next week, I'll be joined by college presidents as we lay out specific steps we can take to help more workers earn the skills they need for today's new jobs. Later this month I'll host CEOs at the White House to announce commitments we're making to put more of the long-term unemployed back to work.
  And at the end of the month, in my State of the Union Address, I will mobilize the country around the national mission of making sure our economy offers everyone who works hard a fair shot at opportunity and success. As Americans, that's what we should expect. And after everything you've done to recover and rebuild from crisis these past five years '' after all your hard work and sacrifice '' that's what you deserve.
  Thanks, and have a great weekend.
  ###
The Lindsay Oracle
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Lame Cherry
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 19:35
  As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.......
  In December of this past year, Pastor Lindsey Williams pronounced another of his oracles for the future. His sources are the third level conduits of the priests and the lords, in the moguls of industry who run the framework and are put into place to go along to get along.They are powerful men and women, but replaceable in a great deal like a 4th level egoist in Governor Chris Christy who thinks he is part of the power structure when all he is, is a pawn doing the dirty work of keeping the sheep from riot and revolution.
  The oracle now states that there will be a global economic reset of currency. These things have appeared here in much more detail around 6 months ago when I was working on the big secret of the day and the hour which I was shown. The Pastor hit upon many of the same topics, but as an apparent gold seller he was hawking for gold, while I quote the Bible in a time when gold will be cast into the streets.Look if a wormwood meteor is coming, a plague, Armageddon, 200 pounds of gold is not going to do you any good in buying life or safety, so of course you are going to cast it into the streets.
  Williams also stated that the rich are moving their assets into this new fiat currency already, which was stated here long ago would be the action in they would gain wealth, while you would be left holding the bill with you devalued dollars.My inquiries and Inspiration come from God, while Williams are these vacuous wealthy geezers whose outlook is they will make a billion dollars on this deal. The question is, what good is a billion dollars at geezer age, it is not like you need any more or it will secure any more power.
  The second level does fixate on power, but the first level is initiating all of this for the illuminated ones conjuring and return, meaning satan. This is about immortality, and Lindsey Williams sources have no inkling of the real prize in this as they are deluded as Judas Goats as their purpose is to keep moving the masses down the slaughter path, and all they will get is 30 pieces of silver for their rotting corpse.The rich of Williams sources do not comprehend they will be expendable once the immortality factor engages in the lords and the priests. The old verbiage was using a technicrat Asian subgroup, a Latino hard labor group, with the manager Ashkenaz as overlords for the elite of the mount, but realize that it is a process now that machines as in robotics which could rebuild themselves and administer all of this, pretty much negates the need for pesky humans who have a percentage of children of God with DNA who do not respond to control mechanisms.
  I have not inquired of Williams in his meter reader controls, but it does make sense in an array of these activated could indeed be a reception and broadcast antanae which would electronically dope the human mind or place thoughts into it.
  The reason for this post though is the falacies of Lindsey Williams in the Damascus gambit which failed. Williams mentioned that if Syria had been bombed by Obama it would have set into action the Prophecies of Ezekiel 38 and something in Isaiah. That is absolutely incorrect as Ezekiel 38 and 39 as this blog lectured Hal Lindsey on when he and others were pointing to them and silenced him, that 38 and 39 are after the 1000 year rule of Christ as Revelation proves in the time line.There was not intervention on the part of Syria, Divine or otherwise. It was as stated here that Snowden operation of MIC and Putin, working against the cartel. Putin believed and still believes that Obama Jinn is the anti Christ and MIC is attempting to derail this.Williams people are part of the Socio Conglomerates which this blog exclusively explained. MIC is a competing faction.
  Is Damascus still to be obliterated? Most definitely as the Scripture states it will, along with Ashod or the Philistine lands. There are things going on in this as I eluded to here and stated plainly in other points. It is not as Williams states in God is trying to get people to repent. That door has been closed and Elvis has left the building. This is more of satan realizing the time is almost complete and knowing imprisonment is coming is dragging it's feet.As stated here, there is no division in the house of satan or it would fall. There is Pater Pope doing stage theater exorcisms to give him his bonafides, as the darkness expands in complete control, as the Vatican grouses about wildcat priests on their own casting out demons who are on the increase, due to all of this manifesting.
  If Williams reads this, I have some advice. He is absolutely aggrevating in his presentation of continual meanderings of non information. It would assist his carnival barker show to open with secondary information which he could expound upon, do the big gun bit at the 30 minute point and expound upon that, and then third wave information, in going into generalities of how this will effect people.It would be more pleasing to listeners, and for filler, he could tell some stories about the dead geezer in things he liked as people always like gossip.He could also coordinate with his interviewer 4 questions which would assist in the movement of this and bring focus to the audience, by having key words spoken by Williams to alert the question.....that way the host could have a heads up and stop looking at porn with the mic off in silence.
  Where was I?
  Lindsey Williams has had some very good information fed. Some like the Indonesian oil manifested for a moment and then simply slipped away. It is the world of mice and men. Williams though does not have first level information. It is like a slave plantation. The masters live in the big house and you never see them. There are the overseers like the Rothschilds who manage things. Then there are the house niggers like the sources Williams have. Then there are the field niggers like Chris Christy who think because they shagged a house nigger, they are in the loop too.Then there are the pigs in the wallow which are all of you just waiting to be made into bacon, and thinking your mire makes you Animal Farm people to as you wear suits like the human folk do.
  The two reasons I note the above are the necessary correction concerning Scripture and it did startle me that the inquiry I made last year is in rough form being spoken of by the sources of Williams. It is like the insiders of Ulsterman spouting off things from here before his anus got raw from all the flow.
  As for the electronic mind meld, it is possible as it has been done. It though will not be one zombie nation, as I have stated in forensic behavior, God creates in DNA a certain percentage which are just "off" enough from the masses so extermination is not possible of a species by natural means.I happen as does TL to be in a group, like a number of you reading this who do not respond to the frequency waves. As stated, "they" turned up the juice twice on TL and I, which blew out veins in our eyes in being a bit over zealous in the mind warping, and it did not work.I told you that they will never kill all the rats. The black plague DNA group, those types like myself and other genetic factors create a core group which is going to be viable and operating through the mind fuzz the majority are chating Obama over.Bullets still are the end game, but it is this reality which is the problem of the percentages until the mosquito fleet is completed in the bite of death.
  If I could get a place with TL, I would not give a rip about any of this. I am though in jeopardy in the exposure in all of this in being a moving target as regrettably I appear to be the only conduit in this in this cycle and no one is going to touch on these things when the Two Witnesses appear.
  Oh that killer pig virus.......not an accident. That was a combined project in funds of CDC, military and USDA in three labs producing parts of the viral chain. It was introduced through hog vaccines deliberately.What is taking place is the Chicoms have a hybridized swine flu weapon, and by injecting the American hogs, the survivors are producing an antibody which will be gathered discreetly at slaughter and then incorporated into the next vaccines for humans.It is simply an express method in a national emergency which the cartel as well as the regime knows of, and hogicide is the solution to obtain the most expedited results. China is a pawn of the elite, but they still are independent and knowing of the upheaval would see benefit of a pandemic putting a pile of dead people in competitor nations to neutralize them.
  Think that is enough in the exclusives in explaining things behind the Mockingbird propaganda.
  So you rich people who think you are above all of this, just note that in exclusives in matter anti matter, this blog revealed lost nuclear bombs leaking on your expensive property, preplaced nukes by several nations ready to give you a nuclear glow, hogicide, and the reality that you are going to be plucked sooner than later in the feudal economics, just like the poor folks.All information which should explain what cotton pickers you all are. Perhaps you rich people should donate, because the controllers on top are not providing you the entire picture.
  It is really easy, just say your kid got stoned on hash oil, and when she thought she was ordering up goat sex porn, she instead hit the Lame Cherry donate button and dropped in a 350,000 dollar echeck, which you of course knew nothing about as you were busy watching the fags on Downtown Abbey.....yeah I know it is not Downtown......but as punishment you have stated that is her allowance for the next week.
  agtG 282Y
VIDEO-Federal Bureau of Investigation Mission - C-SPAN Video Library
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 16:34
  Follow Similar Programs0
  C-SPAN | Washington JournalFollow Sponsors
  Reynaldo Tariche, president of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Agents Association, talked about how the FBI adapts to national needs, and why fact sheets describing the FBI's mission showed the primary function .. Read MoreReynaldo Tariche, president of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Agents Association, talked about how the FBI adapts to national needs, and why fact sheets describing the FBI's mission showed the primary function to be law enforcement in 2012 and national security in 2013. He also spoke about the FBI's budget needs.
  45 minutes | 8 Views
  View Full Event (6 Programs)
Declaration of Interdependence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 09:08
  There have been a number of documents designated as the Declaration of Interdependence since at least the 1930s. US Secretary of AgricultureHenry A. Wallace used the term in relation to the Farm Act of 1933 in a radio address broadcast on May 13 of that year,[1] and apparently used the phrase again in 1936 in relation to "interdependence among nations and cultures." Later that year the phrase was quoted in Walter P. Taylor's essay "What is Ecology and What Good is it?" in the journal Ecology Vol. 17 (July 1936). This was the first use of the phrase in an ecological context.[2]
  On April 8, 1944 American philosopher and historian Will Durant was approached by two leaders of the Jewish and Christian faiths, Meyer David and Dr. Christian Richard about starting "a movement, to raise moral standards." He suggested instead that they start a movement against racial intolerance and outlined his ideas for a "Declaration of Interdependence". The movement for the declaration, Declaration of INTERdependence, Inc., was launched at a gala dinner at the Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel on March 22, 1945 attended by over 400 people including Thomas Mann and Bette Davis.[3] The Declaration was read into the Congressional Record on October 1, 1945 by Ellis E. Patterson.[4]
  In 1969 Cliff Humphrey, founder of Ecology Action, drafted an "Unanimous Declaration of Interdependence" and published it in Whole Earth Catalogue Supplement September 1969.[2]
  In 1976 two "Declarations of Interdependence" were presented to the public. One was the "Greenpeace Declaration of Interdependence" published by Greenpeace in the Greenpeace Chroncles (Winter 1976-77). This declaration was a condensation of a number of ecological manifestos Bob Hunter had written over the years. The ''Three basic Laws of Ecology,'' mentioned in the text were developed by Patrick Moore, with inspiration from the writings of Barry Commoner[5]
  Another Declaration of Interdependence was drafted by Henry Steele Commager and presented to the World Affairs Councils of Philadelphia on October 24, 1975. It was signed in a ceremonial signing on January 30, 1976 at Congress Hall, Independence National Historical Park, Philadelphia by several members of Congress.[6] It was also "endorsed" by a number of non-governmental organizations and United Nations specialized agencies.[7]
  A document entitled "Declaration of interdependence: a new global ethics" was adopted by the Board of Directors of the International Humanist and Ethical Union on 31 December 1988.[8]
  David Suzuki wrote a Declaration of Interdependence in 1992 for that years Earth Summit. It is currently being promoted by his foundation.[9]
  The PM Declaration of Interdependence, a statement of management principles for software, was published in 2005.[10]
Above the President: The Declaration of Interdependence
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 09:08
  The July Fourth Weekend is upon us again. For most Americans, that means time off from work, outdoor barbeques with friends and family, and fireworks celebrations. Yet for all Americans, this would also be a good time for thinking a little bit about our country, and about the course that we're headed down.
  On January 30, 1976, as the United States was approaching the bicentential of its Declaration of Independence from Great Britain, 124 Congressmen (32 Senators and 92 Representatives) gathered in Washington D.C. on behalf of the World Affairs Council to sign a so-called "Declaration of Interdependence." Some memorable quotes from the document include:
  "Two centuries ago our forefathers brought forth a new nation; now we must join with others to bring forth a New World Order.""We affirm that a world without law is a world without order, and we call upon all nations to strengthen and to sustain the United Nations and its specialized agencies, and other institutions of world order, and to broaden the jurisdiction of the World Court, that these may preside over a reign of law that will not only end wars but end as well that mindless violence which terrorizes our society even in times of peace."There's plenty more socialist drivel where that came from, but this should be enough to give you a taste of what the criminals who signed the document are aiming at. The document can be read in its entirety here (just scroll down almost till the bottom, it's the document authored by the "World Affairs Council of Philadelphia, 1975"):To accompany and promote this declaration, the Aspen Institute published The Third Try at World Order: U.S. Policy for an Interdependent World, written by Harlan Cleveland (Council on Foreign Relations). In that book, Cleveland whined about how the first try at a New World Order collapsed when the U.S. Senate refused to join the League of Nations after WWI, and about how the second try resulted in a world body (the United Nations) that was not vested with sufficient authority or power to enact and enforce world law.According to Cleveland, the "third try" at world government -- now underway -- is an attempt to arrive at world governance using a piecemeal approach, by strengthening the United Nations to deal with various global crises, which might involve (for instance) the planet's environment, food reserves (and famines), energy supplies, population and overcrowding, military stalements and conflict in a world of proliferating weapons.
  Nelson Rockefeller, Establishment MadmanIn fact, the publication of the "Declaration of Interdependence" was not an isolated incident. Like most Establishment-sponsored treason, it was part of a calculated, premediated assault upon American civil liberties and the U.S. Constitution that helps protects them. On March 14, 1976, the Philadelphia Inquirer announced plans for a "national critical appraisal of the American Constitution," to be held April 5-8 of that year. The conference would be attended by "leading" Congressmen, judges, laywers, historians, sociologists and professors, and was organized by none other than Nelson Rockefeller himself.Delegates to the conference had hoped for grandiose Fourth of July Constitutional Convention to be held in Philadelphia that year (1976), in which the existing Constitution of the United States would have been scrapped, and a new, pre-fabricated "Constitution for the New States of America" would have been introduced. Public backlash over obvious collusion between conference attendees, specific U.S. government officials and various world government organizations derailed their plans, and the proposed Con-Con was never held.
  In 1976, this nation came within a hair's breath of losing its most cherished treasure at the hands of Rockefeller mobsters. This Fourth of July, bethink yourselves, to ensure we never come so close to utter annihilation as a nation again.
37 Regrets That You Should Always Avoid
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 08:15
  Everyone goes through life experiencing enough mistakes and resulting damage that, by the time they are old enough, they have regrets. They say hindsight is 20/20 and when you look back at your life you will know what moments you should have changed. However, we want to help you out. Forget hindsight. We've compiled a list of the 37 things you must not do or else you will definitely regret them at the end of your life. Just read through these and trust us. It'll be worth it.
  1.) Not traveling when you had the chance. Traveling gets harder as you get older, as more people depend on your presence, day-to-day and it ends up becoming more expensive to bring more people with you.2.) Not learning another language. You probably took years of another language in high school. You should put it to good use.3.) Staying in a bad relationship. It may feel hard to get out of a bad relationship, but it's not worse than staying in it and wasting everyone's time.4.) Forgoing sunscreen. It may not seem like much, but sun damage adds up over the years, causing wrinkles and discoloration.5.) Missing the chance to see your favorite musicians. You never truly know when your favorite band might break up, so seize the day.6.) Being afraid to do things. Fear can paralyze us, but we can't let it.7.) Failing to make physical fitness a priority. As you get older you'll realize how important it is to take care of your body.8.) Letting yourself be defined by gender roles. Define yourself, don't let society do it.9.) Not quitting a terrible job. You may need to pay rent or provide for a family, but you can't force yourself to be miserable every day.10.) Not trying harder in school. Grades are important, but what's more important is learning how to apply yourself and be dedicated.11.) Not realizing how beautiful you are. There are many definitions of beauty and you shouldn't think you're unworthy of someone's attention.12.) Being afraid to say ''I love you.'' Loving another person is a precious gift, even if that same love wasn't returned.13.) Not listening to your parents' advice. They have a lot more experience than you'll want to give them credit for.14.) Spending your youth being self-absorbed. There is more to the world than just you and eventually you'll realize that.15.) Caring too much about what other people think. When you're older, you'll realize that the opinions of others don't factor into your true happiness.16.) Supporting the dreams of others over your own. Being nice is one thing, but sacrificing your happiness isn't worth it.17.) Not moving fast enough. Don't hesitate to make decisions, you'll end up regretting wasting time.18.) Holding grudges, especially against those you love. Choose to let go of your pain, instead of dwelling on it.19.) Not standing up for yourself. Just because others may disagree with you, it doesn't mean you have to abandon your principals.20.) Not volunteering enough. There are countless reasons to help other people, especially when they are needy.21.) Neglecting your teeth. Flossing and brushing may seem annoying, but it's much better to take care of your teeth while you're young instead of losing them later.22.) Missing the chance to talk to your grandparents before they die. They hold a lot of knowledge and they will only be around for a little while.23.) Working too much. You're going to miss the good parts of life, or be too stressed to enjoy them, if you do.24.) Not learning how to cook one good meal. It'll add to your family and friend get togethers more than you can ever imagine.25.) Not stopping to appreciate the moment. Quit texting or taking pictures and realize what you are doing when you are doing it.26.) Failing to finish what you start. Every day is an opportunity that shouldn't be squandered.27.) Never mastering one awesome party trick. This seems silly, but just think of how many amazing memories you can create.28.) Letting yourself be defined by cultural expectations. If your family or country thinks you should do something for a career, you're not forced to. Never.29.) Refusing to let friendships run their course. Sometimes people drift apart. Forcing that connection could do more damage than good.30.) Not playing with your children enough. Kids are joyful and innocent. You should be choosing to fill your life with this joy, not avoiding it.31.) Never taking a big risk (especially in love). Taking a bigger risk can pay off more than taking a smaller one.32.) Not taking the time to develop contacts and network. It may seem like schmoozing, but it'll help your career in the long run.33.) Worrying too much. Worrying, especially about things that haven't happened yet, is useless.34.) Getting caught up in needless drama. Drama can be addictive, but there is no point. Don't get off on how bad your day is.35.) Not spending enough time with loved ones. We are all on this earth for a limited amount of time, don't take that for granted.36.) Never performing in front of others. This may not be your true calling, but trying it at least once is an important life experience.37.) Not being grateful sooner. Learn to say thanks and learn to mean it. So many parts of your life will improve if you do.It's never too late to change your life, so start by avoiding these things.
  You won't regret it. (See what I did there?) Share this article with your friends so they can have the same advice.
  18384
Infographic: Scientists Who Doubt Human-Caused Climate Change | Popular Science
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 08:01
  The next time you hear someone dispute that human activity is destabilizing our climate, remember this pie chart.
  It represents geochemist James Lawrence Powell's review of 2,258 peer-reviewed scientific articles about climate change, written by 9,136 authors, published between Nov. 12, 2012 and December 31, 2013. Of all those hundreds of papers and thousands of researchers, Powellfound one article, authored by a single scientist, that attributed climate change to something other than human actions: "The Role of Solar Activity in Global Warming," by S.V. Avakyan, appearingin theHerald of the Russian Academy of Science,Vol. 83, No. 3.
  Powell, a past president of Oberlin, Franklin and Marshall, and Reed colleges, invites anyone to reproduce his survey of the science:
  Anyone can repeat as much of the new study as they wish--all of it if they like. Download an Excel database of the 2,258 articles here. It includes the title, document number, and Web of Science accession number. Scan the titles to identify articles that might reject man-made global warming. Then use the DOI or WoS accession number to find and read the abstracts of those articles, and where necessary, the entire article. If you find any candidates that I missed, please email me here.
  Powell's earlier surveyof peer-reviewed studies published between 1991 and Nov. 12, 2013, resulted in this pie chart:
  * See: Donald Trump or Rush Limbaugh
GitHub · Build software better, together.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 07:48
  Simple chat program using near ultrasonic frequencies. Works without Wifi or Bluetooth and won't show up in a pcap.
  Note: If you can clearly hear the send script working then your speakers may not be high quality enough to produce sounds in the near ultrasonic range.
  Usagerun python send.py in one terminal window and python listen.py in another. Text you input into the send.py window should appear (after a delay) in the listen.py window.
  Warning: May annoy some animals.
  InstallationQuietnet is dependant on pyaudio and Numpy.
$70,000 in Newtown donations missing
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Sat, 11 Jan 2014 07:42
  Pat Eaton-Robb, Associated Press11:46 p.m. EST January 10, 2014
  A makeshift memorial with crosses for the victims of the Sandy Hook massacre stands outside a home in Newtown, Conn., on Dec. 14.(Photo: Robert F. Bukaty, AP)
  Story HighlightsA charity formed after the Sandy Hook massacre is unable to account for the moneyThe more than $70,000 was raised through marathon runningThe organization's co-founder was in charge of the financesSHARE89CONNECTEMAILMOREHARTFORD, Conn. (AP) '-- A charity formed after the shooting massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School has been unable to account for more than $70,000 it raised through marathon running, one of its co-founders said Friday.
  Ryan Graney, of Nashville, Tenn., said only $30,000 of the $103,000 taken in by the 26.4.26 Foundation was used for the organization's purpose. That money was presented last January by co-founder Robbie Bruce to the nonprofit NYA, a youth sports center in Newtown, where the December 2012 shooting occurred.
  Graney said Bruce was in charge of the organization's finances but has cut off contact with her.
  Bruce didn't return repeated telephone messages from the Associated Press, including one left with his sister. Public records list Bruce's address as an apartment in a gated complex on the southern outskirts of Nashville. No one answered the door there Friday afternoon.
  An online biography lists Bruce, an endurance athlete, as co-founder of Nashville-based X3 Endurance, a fitness training company, which had a link to the foundation on its website. But Eddie Ferrell, another co-founder of that company, said it ended its relationship with Bruce almost a year ago and his whereabouts are unknown.
  The idea behind the 26.4.26 Foundation was for runners to participate in marathons, raising money for each of the 26 miles they ran and dedicating each mile to one of the 26 victims of the school shooting '-- 20 children and six educators. The fundraising effort was featured in Runner's World magazine and was the subject of several local news stories.
  The group held its first marathon in Nashville a week after the shooting, with more than 1,000 participants. Another was held in New Hampshire last April. More than 1,400 runners raised about $22,000 for the foundation, organizers said. The charity also received donations from runners in other events, Graney said.
  Graney said she noticed something was amiss last spring, when she discovered suspicious charges to the foundation's PayPal account.
  "I saw there was $1,200 billed for paddle boards," she said. "I went on (Bruce's) Instagram page, and he had posted a picture of a paddle board in the back of his truck."
  Graney said she confronted Bruce and he promised to meet her and go over the organization's finances. She said he never showed up and then cut off contact with her in September.
  She said she filed complaints with the FBI and the Tennessee attorney general's office, which said they don't comment on ongoing investigations.
  Graney said the foundation, registered as a nonprofit corporation in Tennessee, had virtually no overhead or other expenses that would justify not giving the vast majority of the proceeds to the people of Newtown.
  "I am in tears, sick about this," Graney said by telephone Friday.
  The attorney general's office in Connecticut, which has been keeping track of charities that sprang up after the shooting, said it had no knowledge of the foundation.
  The NYA's executive director, Dorrie Carolan, said her organization "graciously accepted a check in the amount of $30,000, which cleared shortly after it was received."
  Leigh Melia, who lives in Lebanon, 70 miles east of Newtown, ran 3 miles of the New Hampshire race as part of a relay team with a group of teachers and her then-7-year-old daughter. She said each mile was dedicated to a different Sandy Hook victim and she explained to her daughter who they were as they ran.
  "When I ran, I thought the money was going to those victims and their families," she said, adding she feels someone should be held accountable now that the money has gone missing.
  Graney said her hope is publicizing the problem will help get the money to where it belongs.
  SHARE89CONNECTEMAILMORECopyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
AFRICOM has deployed military advisers to Somalia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 23:00
  The U.S. military has deployed a small number of uniformed trainers and advisers to the failed state of Somalia for the first time since 1993, when two helicopters were shot down and 18 Americans were killed in the failed ''Black Hawk Down'' operation.
  A cell of U.S. military personnel has been stationed in the Somali capital of Mogadishu since last fall to advise and coordinate operations with African troops fighting to wrest control of the country from the al-Shabab militia, an Islamist group whose leaders have professed loyalty to al-Qaeda, according to three U.S. military officials.
  The previously undisclosed deployment '-- of fewer than two-dozen troops '-- reverses two decades of U.S. policy that effectively prohibited military ''boots on the ground'' in Somalia. Even as Somali pirates and terrorists emerged as the top security threat in the region, successive presidential administrations and the Pentagon shied away from sending troops there for fear of a repeat of the Black Hawk Down debacle.
  In recent years, the Obama administration has slowly and cautiously become more directly involved in Somalia.
  Drones from a U.S. base in Djibouti '-- a neighboring Horn of Africa country '-- conduct surveillance missions and occasional airstrikes from Somalia's skies. Elite Special Operations forces have also set foot on Somali territory on rare occasions to carry out counter-terrorism raids andhostage rescues, but only in the shadows and for no more than a few hours at a time.
  >>Read More...
Google apologizes for "Hitler" name on maps
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Phys.org - latest science and technology news stories
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 22:18
  Google apologizes for "Hitler" name on maps4 hours agoGoogle apologized Friday after a Berlin intersection briefly regained its Nazi-era name, Adolf-Hitler-Platz, on the Google Maps service.
  Google spokeswoman Lena Wagner said the company quickly took down the name after the error was discovered. The intersection was relabeled with its proper name, Theodor-Heuss-Platz, after West Germany's first post-World War II president.
  In a statement, Google said edits submitted by users of its Map Maker function "are reviewed either by the community of mapping volunteers or Google moderators."
  "In this particular case, the change in the street name was mistakenly approved, and we fixed it as soon as we were made aware," it added. "We apologize for any offense caused."
  The erroneous name was visible only for a few hours late Thursday.
  Scores of streets and squares were named after Hitler during his 1933-1945 dictatorship.
  The intersection in question, in western Berlin, sits on what the Nazis envisioned as the capital's main east-west axis for a redesign of the city that was never completed.
  Explore further:Google says sorry to Germany over 'Adolf Hitler Square'
  (C) 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
  More from Physics Forums - Computers
  Related Stories
  Google says sorry to Germany over 'Adolf Hitler Square' 1 hour ago
  Google apologised Friday after a major square in Berlin regained its Nazi-era name "Adolf Hitler" on its popular online Maps page for a few hours.
  Google to remove image of slain teen from online map Nov 19, 2013
  Google said Tuesday it will update its online mapping imagery to remove a satellite picture of the body of a teenager shot dead in the US state of California. ...
  Google to provide hotel guests more photos, maps Jan 08, 2014
  Google is expanding its hotel business, offering several new ways for travelers to learn about accommodations.
  Google brings All Access music subscription service to iPhone Nov 20, 2013
  Half a year after launching for Android, Google Play Music All Access is now available to iPhone users.
  Google's citizen cartographers map out the world Mar 31, 2011
  Google on Thursday revealed that an army of citizen cartographers is behind its widely used mapping service, helping the Internet search giant chart the world, including often inaccessible places.
  Google Talk knocked offline more than four hours (Update) Jul 26, 2012
  Google Talk, the US tech giant's messaging and telephony service, was knocked offline Thursday for unknown reasons, but was restored after more than four hours, the company said.
  Recommended for youTarget says data breach hit 70 mn customers (Update) 7 hours ago
  Giant US retailer Target said Friday that its recent data breach affected many more consumers and types of customer information than originally thought, and that the debacle hit December sales.
  Banking group sees limited future for Bitcoin 23 hours ago
  The online currency Bitcoin has shown unexpected success but its future as a broadly accepted exchange medium is limited, according to a report by a global banking group Thursday.
  Snapchat rolls out update after breach, apologizes Jan 09, 2014
  Snapchat has released an update to its disappearing-photo app following a security breach last week that exposed the phone numbers of millions of users.
  Israeli govt websites briefly downed by power outage Jan 09, 2014
  Israeli government websites were briefly downed on Thursday by a power cut at a server facility, a finance ministry official told AFP.
  Turkey seeks to curb Internet freedom Jan 09, 2014
  The Turkish government has moved to impose strict controls on the Internet by monitoring the activities of online users and blocking certain keywords, a parliamentary source said on Thursday.
  Grand Theft Troll? Anonymity encourages bad behaviour in online computer games, but group discipline wins the day Jan 09, 2014
  Flaming. Trolling. Griefing. Cheating. Most players of massive multi-player online games, such as GTA Online, have been victims of activities like these. New research from the journal Behaviour & Information Technology invest ...
  User comments : 0More news stories
  Technology uses micro-windmills to recharge cell phonesA UT Arlington research associate and electrical engineering professor have designed a micro-windmill that generates wind energy and may become an innovative solution to cell phone batteries constantly in ...
  Smartphone apps multiply, but so do germsIt may be your best friend, but your smartphone is also probably teeming with germs.
  Tech gets in your head, literally, to ease stressYes, technology can get into your head, says the maker of a new brain-sensing headband that promises to reduced stress.
  Planes, trains and automobiles: Traveling by car uses most energy(Phys.org) '--Fuel economy must improve 57 percent in order for light-duty vehicles to match the current energy efficiency of commercial airline flights, says a University of Michigan researcher.
  Malware on Yahoo ads turned user PCs into bitcoin miners(Phys.org) '--Yahoo, has acknowledged that its service sites were used by hackers to enslave massive numbers of ordinary PCs who did so to generate bitcoins, and by extension, real earnings. Ads were placed ...
  Autophagy predicts which cancer cells live and die when faced with anti-cancer drugs(Medical Xpress)'--When a tumor is treated with an anti-cancer drug, some cells die and, unfortunately, some cells tend to live. A University of Colorado Cancer Center study published in the journal Nature Ce ...
  Social media helps users embrace differences and provide support to one another, study findsAccording to recent statistics, more than 175 million tweets are sent daily, and 11 accounts are created every second on Twitter. One celebrity who boasts the highest amount of global subscribers is singer Lady Gaga who enjoys ...
  'Superlens' extends range of wireless power transfer(Phys.org) '--Inventor Nikola Tesla imagined the technology to transmit energy through thin air almost a century ago, but experimental attempts at the feat have so far resulted in cumbersome devices that ...
  Scientists cook up new electronic material(Phys.org) '--Scientists from SLAC, Stanford and Berkeley Lab grew sheets of an exotic material in a single atomic layer and measured its electronic structure for the first time. They discovered it's a natural ...
  How the brain makes myelination activity-dependent(Medical Xpress)'--A major question regarding how axons acquire a coat of myelin, is the role of spiking activity. It is known that in culture systems oligodendroctyes will at least try to wrap anything ...
  Javascript is currently disabled in your web browser. For full site functionality, it is necessary to enable Javascript. In order to enable it, please see these instructions.(C) Phys.org' 2003-2013, Science X network
  Google apologizes for "Hitler" name on maps4 hours agoGoogle apologized Friday after a Berlin intersection briefly regained its Nazi-era name, Adolf-Hitler-Platz, on the Google Maps service.
  Google spokeswoman Lena Wagner said the company quickly took down the name after the error was discovered. The intersection was relabeled with its proper name, Theodor-Heuss-Platz, after West Germany's first post-World War II president.
  In a statement, Google said edits submitted by users of its Map Maker function "are reviewed either by the community of mapping volunteers or Google moderators."
  "In this particular case, the change in the street name was mistakenly approved, and we fixed it as soon as we were made aware," it added. "We apologize for any offense caused."
  The erroneous name was visible only for a few hours late Thursday.
  Scores of streets and squares were named after Hitler during his 1933-1945 dictatorship.
  The intersection in question, in western Berlin, sits on what the Nazis envisioned as the capital's main east-west axis for a redesign of the city that was never completed.
  Explore further:Google says sorry to Germany over 'Adolf Hitler Square'
  (C) 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
  More from Physics Forums - Computers
  Related Stories
  Google says sorry to Germany over 'Adolf Hitler Square' 1 hour ago
  Google apologised Friday after a major square in Berlin regained its Nazi-era name "Adolf Hitler" on its popular online Maps page for a few hours.
  Google to remove image of slain teen from online map Nov 19, 2013
  Google said Tuesday it will update its online mapping imagery to remove a satellite picture of the body of a teenager shot dead in the US state of California. ...
  Google to provide hotel guests more photos, maps Jan 08, 2014
  Google is expanding its hotel business, offering several new ways for travelers to learn about accommodations.
  Google brings All Access music subscription service to iPhone Nov 20, 2013
  Half a year after launching for Android, Google Play Music All Access is now available to iPhone users.
  Google's citizen cartographers map out the world Mar 31, 2011
  Google on Thursday revealed that an army of citizen cartographers is behind its widely used mapping service, helping the Internet search giant chart the world, including often inaccessible places.
  Google Talk knocked offline more than four hours (Update) Jul 26, 2012
  Google Talk, the US tech giant's messaging and telephony service, was knocked offline Thursday for unknown reasons, but was restored after more than four hours, the company said.
  Recommended for youTarget says data breach hit 70 mn customers (Update) 7 hours ago
  Giant US retailer Target said Friday that its recent data breach affected many more consumers and types of customer information than originally thought, and that the debacle hit December sales.
  Banking group sees limited future for Bitcoin 23 hours ago
  The online currency Bitcoin has shown unexpected success but its future as a broadly accepted exchange medium is limited, according to a report by a global banking group Thursday.
  Snapchat rolls out update after breach, apologizes Jan 09, 2014
  Snapchat has released an update to its disappearing-photo app following a security breach last week that exposed the phone numbers of millions of users.
  Israeli govt websites briefly downed by power outage Jan 09, 2014
  Israeli government websites were briefly downed on Thursday by a power cut at a server facility, a finance ministry official told AFP.
  Turkey seeks to curb Internet freedom Jan 09, 2014
  The Turkish government has moved to impose strict controls on the Internet by monitoring the activities of online users and blocking certain keywords, a parliamentary source said on Thursday.
  Grand Theft Troll? Anonymity encourages bad behaviour in online computer games, but group discipline wins the day Jan 09, 2014
  Flaming. Trolling. Griefing. Cheating. Most players of massive multi-player online games, such as GTA Online, have been victims of activities like these. New research from the journal Behaviour & Information Technology invest ...
  User comments : 0More news stories
  Technology uses micro-windmills to recharge cell phonesA UT Arlington research associate and electrical engineering professor have designed a micro-windmill that generates wind energy and may become an innovative solution to cell phone batteries constantly in ...
  Smartphone apps multiply, but so do germsIt may be your best friend, but your smartphone is also probably teeming with germs.
  Tech gets in your head, literally, to ease stressYes, technology can get into your head, says the maker of a new brain-sensing headband that promises to reduced stress.
  Planes, trains and automobiles: Traveling by car uses most energy(Phys.org) '--Fuel economy must improve 57 percent in order for light-duty vehicles to match the current energy efficiency of commercial airline flights, says a University of Michigan researcher.
  Malware on Yahoo ads turned user PCs into bitcoin miners(Phys.org) '--Yahoo, has acknowledged that its service sites were used by hackers to enslave massive numbers of ordinary PCs who did so to generate bitcoins, and by extension, real earnings. Ads were placed ...
  Autophagy predicts which cancer cells live and die when faced with anti-cancer drugs(Medical Xpress)'--When a tumor is treated with an anti-cancer drug, some cells die and, unfortunately, some cells tend to live. A University of Colorado Cancer Center study published in the journal Nature Ce ...
  Social media helps users embrace differences and provide support to one another, study findsAccording to recent statistics, more than 175 million tweets are sent daily, and 11 accounts are created every second on Twitter. One celebrity who boasts the highest amount of global subscribers is singer Lady Gaga who enjoys ...
  'Superlens' extends range of wireless power transfer(Phys.org) '--Inventor Nikola Tesla imagined the technology to transmit energy through thin air almost a century ago, but experimental attempts at the feat have so far resulted in cumbersome devices that ...
  Scientists cook up new electronic material(Phys.org) '--Scientists from SLAC, Stanford and Berkeley Lab grew sheets of an exotic material in a single atomic layer and measured its electronic structure for the first time. They discovered it's a natural ...
  How the brain makes myelination activity-dependent(Medical Xpress)'--A major question regarding how axons acquire a coat of myelin, is the role of spiking activity. It is known that in culture systems oligodendroctyes will at least try to wrap anything ...
  Javascript is currently disabled in your web browser. For full site functionality, it is necessary to enable Javascript. In order to enable it, please see these instructions.(C) Phys.org' 2003-2013, Science X network
Ukraine Secures $6Bln Loan Option to Develop Atomic Energy.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: bertb news feed
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 22:11
  MOSCOW, January 10 (RIA Novosti) '' Ukraine said Friday that it has secured an option to borrow $6 billion from Russian banks to help develop its atomic energy industry.
  The agreement between the two countries was reached last December during an inter-governmental commission, according to a Ukrainian Economy Ministry statement.
  Russia agreed a large financial aid package for Ukraine last month after Kiev backed off from an association agreement with the European Union, a move that sparked large street demonstrations across the former Soviet country.
  ''Ukraine will use Russian technology because of its good technical features,'' said Valery Muntiyana, the Ukrainian official responsible for cooperation with Russia, according to the statement. ''It is fourth-generation technology, with a very high security threshold.''
  The statement did not specify which Russian commercial banks would provide the loans.
  Russian President Vladimir Putin said in November that Ukrainian companies already owe Russian lenders about $28 billion.
  Mass demonstrations in Ukraine erupted in November after the government declined to pursue long-planned trade agreements with the EU. Protesters seeking closer ties with the EU and a weakening of Ukraine's political and economic dependence on the Kremlin remain camped out in the center of the capital, Kiev.
  In December, Yanukovych and Putin inked deals that slashed the price of gas Russia sells to Ukraine and committed the Kremlin to buying $15 billion of Ukrainian bonds.
NASA warns of 'potentially hazardous' asteroid
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: RT - USA
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:27
  Published time: January 10, 2014 17:55This artist's concept shows the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, or WISE spacecraft, in its orbit around Earth. In September of 2013, engineers will attempt to bring the mission out of hibernation to hunt for more asteroids and comets in a project called NEOWISE. (NASA/JPL-Caltech)
  A new, ''potentially hazardous'' asteroid has been discovered by one of NASA's recently reactivated spacecraft '' and it's headed in Earth's direction.
  The new asteroid, called 2013 YP139, was spotted by NASA's Near-Earth Object Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (NEOWISE), and marks the spacecraft's first discovery since being resurrected last year.
  According to the Telegraph, the asteroid is still 27 million miles (43 million km) away from Earth, but with a diameter of nearly half a mile (0.4 miles, to be precise), an impact with our planet would cause significant damage. NASA estimates any asteroid with a diameter greater than 0.5 miles could create worldwide consequences upon impact.
  The 2013 YP139 doesn't quite raise concern to that level, but its trajectory has attracted the attention of NASA.
  Fortunately, the space agency added that the asteroid will miss the Earth this time around, though it will fly by our planet at a distance of 300,000 miles, or about as close as the moon. It's not expected to get any closer for the next century.
  Before going into ''hibernation,'' the NEOWISE had discovered more than 34,000 asteroids in 2010 and 2011, with potentially hundreds of discoveries ahead. The spacecraft scans what's typically a static space background, looking for disruptions it can follow and analyze.
  "We are delighted to get back to finding and characterising asteroids and comets, especially those that come into Earth's neighborhood," said Amy Mainzer of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, who is leading the mission, according to the Huffington Post."With our infrared sensors that detect heat, we can learn about their sizes and reflectiveness."
  While this NASA spacecraft detects potentially dangerous objects, however, one of the agency's telescopes just captured a remarkable image of space that's been termed the ''Hand of God.''
  Although scientists aren't sure if the shape in the image is an optical illusion, the result of a dying star 17,000 light years away has been the formation of an image that resembles a hand under an X-Ray.
  According to scientists from the Nuclear Spectroscopic Telescope Array (NuSTAR) Mission '' which investigates black holes, dying stars and more '' the star's particles are interacting with neighboring magnetic fields, causing a glowing reaction. The star is approximately 12 miles in diameter and spins about seven times every second.
U.S. to end CGI contract for Obamacare website: report
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Reuters: Technology News
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 22:08
  By Caroline Humer
  Fri Jan 10, 2014 4:08pm EST
  A man looks over the Affordable Care Act (commonly known as Obamacare) signup page on the HealthCare.gov website in New York in this October 2, 2013 photo illustration.
  Credit: Reuters/Mike Segar
  (Reuters) - The U.S. government will part ways next month with contractor CGI Federal over the troubled Obamacare enrollment website, HealthCare.gov, which struggled with technical problems when it launched in October, the company said on Friday.
  U.S.-listed shares of CGI Group, the parent of CGI Federal, were down 2.9 percent at $31.57 in late trading on the New York Stock Exchange, after the Washington Post reported the news earlier in the day.
  "CGI and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services have mutually agreed to complete work on CGI's contract for the Federally-Facilitated Marketplace, in line with the previously scheduled February 2014 contract end date," CGI spokeswoman Linda Odorisio said in an e-mailed statement.
  CGI's contract is scheduled to end Feb 28, according to documents dating from when the website contract was awarded in 2011.
  The Post reported that the U.S. government will instead sign a new contract with Accenture. In an e-mailed statement, an Accenture spokesman said, "We are in discussions with clients and prospective clients all the time - but it is not appropriate to discuss new business opportunities we may or may not be pursuing."
  HealthCare.gov's technology failures in the weeks after its October 1 launch created a political crisis for President Barack Obama, threatening the roll-out of his signature healthcare law to consumers and emboldening its foes among Republican lawmakers to call for its delay.
  CGI has been immersed in the effort to repair the site, which began working more smoothly for hundreds of thousands of consumers only in December, allowing them to enroll in new health insurance plans offered under Obama's Affordable Care Act.
  But the government's dissatisfaction over the website's early crashes, as well as aspects of the site that still do not work, are behind plans to sign a one-year contract with Accenture instead, the Post report said, quoting a person familiar with the matter.
  The new agreement with Accenture is valued at about $90 million, the Post said.
  The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the government agency overseeing the Obamacare roll-out, would not confirm or deny that it planned to end its contract with CGI.
  "We are working with our contract partners to make a mutually agreed upon transition to ensure that HealthCare.gov continues to operate smoothly for consumers," a CMS spokeswoman said in an e-mailed statement.
  This is at least the second contract for work on HealthCare.gov that the Obama administration chose not to renew.
  In November, CMS said it would not renew its contract with Verizon's Terremark unit for computer servers hosting the troubled website and instead award a contract for that work to Hewlett-Packard Co.
  Terremark's contract ends on March 30, the day before the deadline for Americans to sign up for health insurance for 2014 under the healthcare law. The Terremark servers suffered at least one hours-long outage last fall, making the website inaccessible.
  The end of the HealthCare.Gov contract was "negligible" for CGI's financials, according to one analyst, who declined to be quoted by name.
  "We're not talking about a contract being taken away; we're talking about the renewal opportunity going to someone else," the analyst said. "You could say what they're losing in effect is this $90 million, 12-month contract, which in the context of a $10 billion revenue company is nothing."
  More than 1 million people in 36 states have enrolled in health plans through HealthCare.gov, most of them in December. Another 1 million people enrolled through websites run by individual exchanges in the other 14 U.S. states.
  (Reporting by Sandra Maler in Washington, Caroline Humer, Lewis Krauskopf and Sharon Begley in New York, and Leah Schnurr in Toronto; Editing by Karey Van Hall, Michele Gershberg, Nick Zieminski and Dan Grebler)
  Link thisShare thisDigg thisEmailPrintReprints
Ford exec apologizes for 'We know everyone who breaks the law' remark
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 22:06
  Source: RTOn Thursday, Ford's Jim Farley told Business Insider that he didn't accurately portray the company's operations with regards to recording and logging user data with new smart car technology when he told a crowd at the CES electronics show in Vegas over the weekend, ''We know everyone who breaks the law, [and[ we know when you're doing it''
  ''We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing,'' Farley said on Sunday.Now as reports based off his remarks have attracted unwanted attention for the major motor company, Farley is racing into reverse in order to make certain Ford customers know that they aren't being spied on by any sort of sinister, under-the-hood surveillance system."I absolutely left the wrong impression about how Ford operates. We do not track our customers in their cars without their approval or their consent," Farley now tells Business Insider's Jim Edwards. "The statement I made in my eyes was hypothetical and I want to clear this up."After RT reported on Farley's remarks earlier this week, a representative for Ford tweeted in response:@RT_America Ford is committed to protecting privacy. We don't track customers. No data transmitted from vehicle w/o customer's consent 1st'-- Ford Motor Company (@Ford) January 9, 2014
  Ford spokesperson Wes Sherwood also explained to The Detroit News on Thursday that the car company is ''absolutely committed to protecting our customers' privacy'' and insisted that ''No data is transmitted from the vehicle without the customer's express consent.'' According to the paper, however, customers provide the company with that consent by agreeing to use those features, including on-board navigation systems.However, a report released earlier this week by the Government Accountability Office found that the biggest auto manufacturers in the world lack efficient retention policies with regards to that data. Across the board, the GAO said, if companies retain data then ''they did not allow consumers to request that their data be deleted, which is a recommended practice.''Both the GAO and Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) have since urged manufacturers to adopt new retention policies, and the lawmaker said he plans to introduce legislation that would mandate new policies before the end of 2014.The blowback after the remarks made in Vegas has been so significant, though, that Farley himself has taken the helm with regards of clearing up his comments.''We don't monitor, aggregate data on how people drive. I've given people the wrong impression, I regret that,'' he pleaded during an appearance on CNBC that aired Thursday.As RT reported previously, as many as 96 percent of the cars mass-produced for retail in 2013 were manufactured to include event data recorders.Farley said during the CES conference and in the days following his remarks that Ford does not supply any of that information to third-parties. In Vegas, though, he suggested that someday that intelligence could be crucial for helping solve traffic problems and other issues but monitoring up-to-the-minute automobile activity.''The data that today can be routinely collected by cars includes some of the most sensitive data that can be collected about a person, including information about their precise location and driving habits,'' Bob Darbelnet, the president and CEO of AAA, said in a statement earlier in the week.According to Business Insider, a spokesperson for Ford added that, in general, the global positioning units installed in the company's automobiles do not consistently send out information about the location of equipped cars. Though some of Ford's features collect user data, the spokesperson said, that information is provided in an opt-in basis and is not shared with outside parties.
Don't Look, Beyonce! Jay Z Caught In Graphic Oral Sex Video With TWO Women
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Radar Online Radar Online
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 22:02
  Just days after Beyonce and Jay Z enjoyed family time with Blue Ivy in Miami, the couple has been hit with a shocking bombshell: A newly unearthed video has captured the rapper and new dad caught next to an oral sex session with two women!
  The video, first re-discovered by hip hop blog Consequence of Sound and posted in full by Gawker, shows Jay Z looking on in delight as two half-naked women engage in enthusiastic oral sex while he discusses the wild tour life that inspired his album, In My Lifetime, Vol. 1.
  PHOTOS: Power Couples
  ''That comes from cats on tour running around, might have a little wifey back home but you know, ain't finished doing they thing '...'' Jay Z told interviewer Luther Campbell as the lingerie-clad women continued their sex session pressed up against him.
  ''They probably send us about 30, 60 chicks,'' Jay Z continued.
  PHOTOS: Beyonce, Jay-z and Blue Ivy Carter Spend Quality Time In Canada
  The video was reportedly filmed in 1997, five years before Jay and Beyonce met. But the blog points out, ''[it] will probably lead to Jay sleeping on the couch if Beyonce ever gets wind of it!''
Plane crashes, woman dies, survivor films and takes selfie
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: CNET News
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:58
  A month after a small plane crash in Hawaii, a surviving passenger shows GoPro footage and even a selfie taken during the ordeal.
  Ferdinand Puentes' image of himself in the water.
  (Credit: KHON-TV Screenshot by Chris Matyszczyk/CNET)Would you have done the same?
  Ferdinand Puentes was one of nine passengers in a 2002 Cessna Grand Caravan which suddenly suffered engine failure off Kalaupapa, Molokai in Hawaii last month.
  As he heard the engine fail and saw the plane heading for the water, one of his first instincts was to turn on his GoPro camera and film what might have been his own demise.
  As KHON-TV reports, Puentes knew the danger he was in, yet the decision to film as much as possible might perplex a few.
  He managed to get out of the plane alive and survived the crash. However, while he was floating on a seat cushion and wearing his life raft, he took a selfie.
  More Technically IncorrectWas the impulse to record just a natural reaction? After all, any bystander or news organization would have likely done the same thing. And these days everyone is using their phones to film just about everything they see.
  But wouldn't one's first instinct be to try to contact family and friends to say goodbye? Perhaps that did happen.
  The footage reflects a quite stunning lack of panic. The passengers behave in an orderly manner. There is no screaming or pushing. No one seems frantic at all.
  Loretta Fuddy, Hawaii's 65-year-old state director of health, died in the crash, despite managing to leave the plane.
  In watching Puentes talk to KHON-TV, though, it's evident that the footage brings back painful memories.
  Would everyone want to have such ready access to a reminder? Or would some prefer to forget?
  "You could have died," Puentes told KHON-TV. "There's so much variations that could have happened for the worse."
"X" Marks The Spot Of The Generational Divide
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Zero Hedge
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:51
  Well, still they are the future and it's us who fucked them up so we'll have to find a sollution.
  I'm working with some of those young kids and it's not the lack of work ethics but a lack of goals because we as a society destroyed the role models.
  What role models do those young kids have right now? Material products are evil... a steady relationship is so pass(C)... woman are hookers... guys are dumbasses... I mean what do we show those kids?As a working parent, we also get the wrong models. We are shown that we need to do whatever we want to do and put ourselfs first, not our kids.
  Yesterday I was eating with my best friend at his home. This guy has it all, his own company, a shitload of money, a fleet of collector cars, a second house in france, a third in Italy, 2 lovely kids.... he has it all.All besides one thing. His parents don't complement him about what he build and it's actually destroying everything he has because his frustration is killing him. Our society doens't show what makes you happy. What is happy? What's the goal?
  I got my goals, it's my family. they're number one to ten on my list. And I'm a happy guy. We've got more than enough to go arround and we get to do whatever we want. That was and is my goal.
  So as long as we don't get non material goals back at centerstage, we'll never restore our society.
Ford ''Know[s] Everyone Who Breaks the Law'' Using Cars They Made '-- Why Aren't They Doing Something About It?
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Volokh Conspiracy
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:49
  Business Insider reports that Ford executive Jim Farley stated, in a panel discussion:
  We know everyone who breaks the law, we know when you're doing it. We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing. By the way, we don't supply that data to anyone.
  He later retracted that, saying Ford doesn't routinely collect GPS data about its drivers, but that he was just ''imagin[ing] a day when the data might be used anonymously and in aggregate to help other marketers with traffic related problems.'' I'm happy to accept that clarification.
  Yet the point remains that Ford could technically gather this information, and could use it to prevent injuries. For instance, if GPS data shows that someone is speeding '-- or the car's internal data shows that the driver is speeding, or driving in a way suggestive of drunk driving or extreme sleepiness, and the data can then be communicated to some central location '-- then Ford could notify the police, so the dangerous driver can be stopped. And the possibility of such reports could deter the dangerous driving in the first place.
  Ford, then, is putting extremely dangerous devices on the road. It's clearly foreseeable that those devices will be misused (since they often are misused). Car accidents cause tens of thousands of deaths and many more injuries each year. And Ford has a means of making those dangerous devices that it distributes less dangerous; yet it's not using them.
  Sounds like a lawsuit, no? Manufacturer liability for designs that unreasonably facilitate foreseeable misuse is well-established. And the fact that the misuse may stem from negligence (or even intentional wrongdoing) on the user's part doesn't necessarily block liability, so long as the user misconduct is foreseeable. [UPDATE: I should note that I'm not wild about these aspects of our tort law system, and think they should likely be trimmed back in various ways; but there is certainly ample legal doctrine out there -- whether one likes it or not -- potentially supporting liability in such a situation.]
  Similar lawsuits were, after all, brought against gun manufacturers. They were mostly rejected by courts, largely because gun manufacturers couldn't reasonably tell when their products were being misused '-- but here, Ford could determine this (either now or in the very near future), and deter or stop actual misuses without stopping proper use of the car by law-abiding drivers. And while these sorts of gun manufacturer lawsuits were also preempted by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act, that's a gun-specific statute, which doesn't prevent lawsuits against manufacturers of other products.
  Of course, the problem is that such car manufacturer liability would interfere with what many people see as their privacy (or, perhaps more precisely, freedom from surveillance). We don't expect that our own devices will constantly report our actions '-- even likely illegal actions '-- to the police. And while one can imagine regulations or statutes that require such reporting, we'd expect a political debate about this, with potential political accountability for government officials that vote for such mandates. We don't expect, I think, that courts will impose such obligations on device manufacturers as a matter of the common law of torts, in the absence of this sort of political debate.
  Yet tort law precedents say surprisingly little about such tensions between product liability law (or negligence law more broadly) and privacy. Courts could say that some proposed precaution '-- such as some proposed product feature '-- isn't required by the ''reasonable care'' standard, because that precaution would excessively intrude on privacy; and sometimes they do say so. But sometimes they ignore privacy issues altogether, and they generally don't discuss them in any methodical way.
  Attentive readers might realize that this is all a pitch for my forthcoming Tort Law vs. Privacy article, which will be published this year in the Columbia Law Review. Here is the Introduction the article:
  Through the privacy torts, tort law aims to protect privacy. But tort law, and especially negligence law, can also reduce privacy.
  Tort law can pressure property owners, employers, and consumer product manufacturers into engaging in more surveillance. Tort law can pressure colleges, employers, and others into more investigation of students', employees', or customers' lives. Tort law can pressure landlords, employers, and others into more dissemination of potentially embarrassing information about people. Tort law can require people to reveal potentially embarrassing information about themselves. And technological change is likely to magnify this pressure still further. Yet this tendency has gone largely undiscussed.
  Modern negligence law (including the law of product design defects) obligates all of us to take reasonable precautions to prevent harm caused even in part by our actions, by our products, by our employees, or by others who are using our property. We also have duties to affirmatively protect some people '-- customers, tenants, other business visitors, and likely social guests '-- even against threats that we didn't help create. All these duties may require us to take reasonable precautions against criminal acts by others. [''The conduct of a defendant can lack reasonable care insofar as it foreseeably ... permits the improper conduct of ... a third party.'' ''The improper action or misconduct in question can take a variety of forms. It can be negligent, reckless, or intentional in its harm-causing quality. It can be either tortious or criminal, or both.''] And some of those required precautions may involve disclosing information about ourselves, or gathering and disclosing information about others.
  Under the Learned Hand formula for determining negligence, the requirement of ''reasonable precautions'' is often understood as requiring cost-effective precautions. Liability for failure to take a precaution is proper if B
  Gathering or disclosing information about people's backgrounds, tendencies, and actions is increasingly inexpensive, and increasingly effective at helping avoid, interrupt, or deter harm. The B (burden) of such precautions thus gets lower. The P (probability) that they will prevent harm gets higher.
  Failure to take those precautions thus becomes negligent. When comprehensive nationwide background checks were expensive and ineffective, they weren't required by the duty to exercise reasonable care. Now they are cheap, quick, and more comprehensive, so failing to do a background check is often seen as negligent. And employers do indeed report the desire to avoid legal liability as a major reason for investigating the backgrounds of job applicants. [Footnote: See Society for Human Resource Mgmt., Background Checking: Conducting Criminal Background Checks, at 3''4 (Jan. 22, 2010) (reporting that 73% of the 347 respondents, though in a self-selected sample, conducted criminal background checks on all job candidates, with 19% more conducting them only on candidates for particularly sensitive classes of positions); id. at 7 (reporting that 55% of 310 respondents gave ''[t]o reduce liability for negligent hiring'' as one of ''the primary reasons that [their] organization conducts criminal background checks on job candidates'').]
  Likewise, as video surveillance cameras became cheap enough to be cost-effective, courts began to hold that defendants may be negligent for failing to install surveillance cameras. [Footnote: See, e.g., Rodriguez-Quinones v. Jimenez & Ruiz, S.E., 402 F.3d 251, 256 (1st Cir. 2005) (noting low cost of a camera as part of the reason that a property owner might have a duty to install it).] Failure to provide camera surveillance is now a common claim in negligence cases. ''Take reasonable care'' translates into a steady and growing pressure: investigate, surveil, disclose.
  Still more comprehensive surveillance is likely to become technically feasible soon. Image recognition software will likely make it easier for one guard to monitor many more video cameras, by alerting the guard to which screen is showing a potentially dangerous confrontations. Facial recognition software will make it easier to keep track of who is present where and when, and to instantly look up visitors in criminal records databases. Again, under modern negligence law, as these precautions against crime become feasible, they may become legally mandated (on pain of liability should a crime take place in the absence of such precautions).
  Likewise, product manufacturers can increasingly monitor misuse of their products by customers. Car manufacturers can design cars that e-mail the police or call 911 whenever the car goes over 80 miles per hour. They can likely design cars that monitor the driver for signs strongly associated with drunk driving, and call 911 when those signs are present. They can design cars with breathalyzer ignition interlocks that check their drivers' breath alcohol level and report to the police attempts to drive drunk. As such technologies get cheap enough '-- cellular communication already has, and breathalyzer ignition overrides likely will, too '-- it becomes much more plausible to claim that a manufacturer is negligent for designing a deadly machine that fails to inexpensively monitor its operator for signs of dangerous driving.
  These tendencies also bear on the likely future scope of government surveillance, and not just private surveillance, as Part III.F will discuss. First, duties imposed on private property owners and employers are generally applicable to the government as property owner and employer. Surveillance data collected by the government in those capacities can easily be shared with law enforcement agencies.
  Second, as the NSA PRISM story vividly illustrates, surveillance data collected by private entities can easily be subpoenaed or otherwise obtained by law enforcement agencies, without a warrant or probable cause. What the private sector gathers, the government can easily demand.
  Third, the increasing prevalence of private surveillance may subtly make people more willing to accept government surveillance. If private entities are, for instance, required to maintain surveillance cameras with face recognition software on private property, it will be much harder to argue that police departments should be prohibited from doing the same on government-owned streets.
  Negligence law, then, can pressure potential defendants into taking what I call ''privacy-implicating precautions'': disclosing information about employees, customers, tenants, students, and the like, gathering information about them, and surveilling them. This pressure can sometimes have immediate and striking effects. An employer who must, for instance, warn customers about the threat posed by an employee '-- either because the employee has committed crimes, or because the employee is being stalked by a criminal who might injure bystanders in a future attack '-- will likely dismiss the employee, or not hire him in the first place. The same may be so for a landlord who must disclose this information about a tenant. And the pressure can also have long-term effects that are even more pervasive, as people's understanding of the privacy they should demand is molded by the limits on the privacy that they have grown used to.
  What then, should the tort system demand privacy-implicating disclosure, information gathering, or surveillance? This is a question that people who care about privacy, whether academics, advocates, citizens, judges, or legislators, should confront. If I am right, then tort law could affect privacy in largely unseen but substantial ways. Those who are interested in privacy should consider how they can participate in controlling and perhaps limiting these effects, whether through legislation, amicus briefs, or scholarly analysis.
  This Article will not try to offer a general answer to the question. Perhaps there is no single answer, but rather different answers for different contexts. When it comes to affirmative protection for privacy, the legal system has developed many different privacy rules to deal with different kinds of intrusions. Maybe there should likewise be several different privacy doctrines constraining the scope of negligence law. Moreover, people who value privacy differently, and for different reasons, will likely come to different answers. I don't want to commit myself to substantive proposals that rely on a theory of privacy that many readers and many judges may not share.
  Instead, this article will try to explore not what the answer ought to be, but which actor in the tort system should provide it. Should these privacy-vs.-safety decisions generally be made by jurors, applying the ''reasonable care'' standard? Should judges decide as a matter of law that certain precautions need not be taken because of the burden they impose on privacy? Or should the decisions be left to legislators or administrative agencies, with judges generally rejecting demands for privacy-implicating precautions unless a legislative or administrative body has mandated such precautions?
  Part I of the article will briefly define what I mean by privacy here '-- essentially ''control over the processing '-- i.e., the acquisition, disclosure, and use '-- of personal information,'' which includes limitations on surveillance. Part II will then catalog some of the specific ways that negligence law and product design defect law may require behavior that undermines privacy, or mandates surveillance.
  Parts III, IV, and V will discuss which institutions could take the lead in evaluating such privacy-implicating proposed restrictions to juries; the parts will outline the arguments for jury decisionmaking (Part III), judicial decisionmaking via ''no duty rules'' (Part IV), and judges' leaving the matter to legislative and administrative agency decisionmaking (Part V). In the process, the discussion will point to the relatively few court cases that have discussed these questions, almost all of them discussing them very briefly. My tentative view is that this is an area where courts should avoid allowing liability in the absence of legislative or administrative agency guidance; but I hope that the analysis offered throughout the article will be useful even to those who come to a different bottom line.
  [Footnotes: I use the term ''privacy'' for convenience here to include freedom from surveillance, even in public places.
  I focus here on how substantive liability rules may require gathering and revealing information. I do not discuss the important but already well-discussed debate about how discovery in civil cases may diminish the privacy of litigants, litigants' employees, and others.
  Product design defect law in practice largely applies negligence principles, since it imposes liability for ''unreasonable'' product designs -- designs that could have, reasonably and cost-effectively, been made safer. See, e.g., Restatement (Third) of Torts (Prod. Liab.) § 2 cmt. d, reporter's note cmt. a. (In some respects, product design defect law departs from negligence principles, for instance in holding distributors liable for manufacturers' negligent design choices, even if the distributor was not itself negligent, id. § 2(b); but those differences are largely irrelevant for our purposes.) For purposes of this article, I will use ''negligence law'' to refer both to standard negligence law and product design defect law.
  I deliberately don't label [various privacy-implicating precautions] ''privacy-violating precautions,'' because it may well be that some of these precautions should be required (whether by juries, judges, or legislatures), despite their privacy costs. In such a situation, the precautions may not be seen as violating the legitimate scope of the right to privacy, just as the law may restrict speech without violating free speech. But all the precautions do implicate privacy, in the sense that they impose privacy costs that ought to be considered in analyzing whether the precautions ought to be required.]
  Categories
  Archives
AUDIO-IC ON THE RECORD ' Outgoing NSA Deputy Director John Inglis...
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:49
  Outgoing NSA Deputy Director John Inglis Interviewed on National Public Radio
  January 10, 2013
  National Security Agency Deputy Director John C. ''Chris'' Inglis has spent most of his time recently defending the NSA from revelations by former contractor Edward Snowden. Snowden disclosed that the agency was gathering phone records of millions of Americans.
  Inglis retires Friday. Before stepping down, he talked to Morning Edition co-host Steve Inskeep about running a spy agency in a democracy. Below is a transcript of the unedited audio of their conversation.
  Listen to the interview via NPR's Morning Edition.
  DAVID GREENE, HOST:This is MORNING EDITION, from NPR News. I'm David Greene.
  STEVE INSKEEP, HOST:And I'm Steve Inskeep. We walked, this week, into a vast building covered in reflective glass, the headquarters of the National Security Agency. We met there with John C. ''Chris'' Inglis. He's the agency's No. 2, its top civilian beneath the general who runs it, Keith Alexander. Inglis was in his final week at the NSA.
  STEVE INSKEEP (HOST): OK, is it disappointing to have your final year at the NSA look like this past year has?
  CHRIS INGLIS (NSA): Yes and no. Certainly yes, in terms of the shock and dismay that's been induced in the American public, and some of the people who stand in the shoes of the American public, the Congress, about NSA. The accusations of misbehavior, which have not been borne out. That's certainly disappointing. But given all that I have gotten from NSA, it's been a year when I can pay back. It's been a year when I can help reinforce the workforce.
  It's a year when I can step up and be held accountable for describing what the workforce does, describing what the mission is. And so, to that extent, I've been pleased that I stayed an extra year. Most deputy directors at NSA, on average, serve about three and a half years. And I'm sitting now at about seven and a half years. And so by rights, I would have left three years ago.
  But we stayed, Gen. Alexander and I both stayed for a combination of reasons year by year. In the beginning of this year, we knew that we were going to head into some financial difficulties. The nation is trying to figure its way through sequestration. There were some furloughs that were on the table for the Department of Defense. And so we decided that we would stay through this year, and I'm very glad I did.
  INSKEEP: How damaging have the Snowden revelations been to this agency, in terms of its operations, its moral, anything else?
  INGLIS: Well, I think you've hit it. They're damaging on several counts. First and foremost, we've revealed quite a bit through these unauthorized disclosures to our adversaries about how we express our interest in them, the means by which we might then divine some intelligence information about them. Such that those who are keenly paying attention to that might then avoid our interest. And so we can say with great confidence that terrorists and rogue nations have been paying attention and have begun to take the necessary steps to invalidate the means and methods by which we would get intelligence on them. But it also has harmed relationships between the executive branch and other components of the government.
  As accusations have been made, again, in my view, most of which have been shown to be false, of activities within the executive branch that weren't fully understood or authorized by either the legislative branch or authorized by the judicial branch. And we've had to work hard to essentially understand what was true and what we have done and how we've exercised those authorities. The American public is certainly in a state of shock and dismay about what have been alleged abuses by NSA. The presidential review group recently concluded that there have been no illegalities or abuses by NSA. There are matters of policy before us, in terms of how you employ modern intelligence capabilities like we have at NSA. But I think that, you know, that's something that has to be repaired. We have to actually kind of be more transparent going forward, so the American public understands what we do, why we do it, how we do it.
  And then, two, there have been some difficulties between ourselves and this nation and other nations with whom were aligned, with whom we have common interests. And we're going to have to work on repairing and restoring that. And then, finally, the private sector, which essentially is the engine of commerce driving the Internet forward. There have been many accusations hurled in their direction about what they have or haven't done. And I think, again, when it's all sorted out we'll find that they've acted very responsible. And we're going to have to work hard to repair that, their reputation not just with the American public, but their reputation with those consumers of their products and services around the world.
  INSKEEP: You referred to terrorists or others taking actions to invalidate your ability to surveil them. I'd like to know what that means in practice. Because when I think about the way that people have been known to respond to revelations like this, they actually end up having to deny themselves the use of the entire global telecommunications network. I think of Osama bin Laden, who ends up hiding in a house and can only work with messengers. That's actually a significant disadvantage. Does it really damage them that much to know that someone is out there attempting to monitor them? Does it really damage you that much to know that someone's out there?
  INGLIS: Well, at the base of your question I think you're right. They must know that we would have an interest in their activities, and that they communicate about those activities. We must then, you know, use that as an opportunity to better understand them. But they don't know the precise means and methods that we might employ. It might be surprising to someone that a communication that makes its way from, say, some ungoverned space in the north of southwest Asia to a place like Yemen sometimes transits through the United States of America. It might be then be available for review by a foreign intelligence organization like the National Security Agency. We have reminded people of that time and time again across the summer. And within the Internet there are enormous number of choices that you might avail yourself of. If you don't want to use Service A, you can use Service B or Service C.
  And then there are security services that you can overlay with that. Whether it's encryption or obfuscation and anonymity services, you can make use of all that to essentially hide your trail. And we've seen all of that play out, in the wake of the Snowden unauthorized disclosures.
  INSKEEP: You have specific instances in which you'...
  INGLIS: We do.
  INSKEEP: '...believe that trails that you were following disappeared.
  INGLIS: We do, we do. Now it's too soon to say that some of that isn't serendipity. It's the kind of natural roil that takes place in terms of the turnover of technology. Something that we were able to do might be lost because it was simply a technology transformation. And they naturally move to something else, or something that we had as a capability has slipped away from us based upon the natural roil that is technology and operational practice. But they're adding up in ways that are too numerous and too, I think, related to the disclosures to be accidental. And so, therefore, we've got a hard job ahead of us to sustain the kind of access that we have against those bona fide foreign intelligent targets that the nation must know something about.
  INSKEEP: So you feel there was significant damage that you can measure from the various disclosures of programs like the metadata gathering program, of the monitoring of foreign leaders. There's been political damage to the United States, there's damage to this agency. Given the damage that has been done by the revelation of programs the NSA did in fact conduct, were those programs worth it?
  INGLIS: Nations like the United States, I think all nations, essentially conduct their affairs in the larger world have to know something about the threats to their people in the territory. They would like to know something about the success or not of their foreign policies. And therefore, it continues to be worth it to invest in foreign intelligence. So it's necessary'...
  INSKEEP: But we're talking about specific programs. Was the metadata program, for example, has it been worth it, given that part of the cost of it is that it got disclosed eventually?
  INGLIS: I think so. Well, that's a great question that we've been debating as a nation for the better part of six months. You're probably quite familiar with the testimony that I, General Alexander and others have made before Congress about the number of plots that have been thwarted by the totality of signet capabilities, intelligence capabilities that NSA brings to bear in various venues. We've described that as 54 total plots. That's, of course, not the totality of terrorist activity that we might have uncovered and exposed. But we were able to disclose in an unclassified domain, there are about 54 plots. Thirteen of those essentially had a U.S. nexus, the other 41 essentially had a nexus overseas. The vast majority of those were uncovered using what's called the 702 Authority, what has been sometimes referred to as Prism. We might for purposes in kind of a plain English way say that that's simply a lawful incept capability.
  Most nations have that. That an organization like myself would be able to, upon presentation through some legitimate court authorization, presentation to a telecommunications vendor, say I'm interested in Person X, can you give me something responsive to that? So most of those are attributable to that. The 215 Authority, the metadata authority, that's a harder thing to pin down, quite frankly. I've been asked on a number of occasions, do you have a but-for case? Can you say that was the silver bullet, right, that but-for the existence of the metadata you would not have uncovered a plot? There's a candidate for that, which is the plot that was exposed in San Diego. I think we were able to essentially tell the FBI that an individual was materially involved in terrorism that they had, three years prior, investigated based on a tip and kind of laid that case to rest.
  And but for the 215 Program, which we essentially tied that individual to some foreign terrorist activity overseas, the FBI would have let that case lain fallow for quite sometime. Now I cannot tell you that that wouldn't have turned up some other way. There wouldn't have been some other tool in the tool kit. And so here's the thing about the 215 or the telephone metadata program. It was precisely defined to cover a seam exposed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks that was described at length by the terrorist review committee. That said that, between NSA and the domestic law enforcement activities that there was a gap, there was a seam, that NSA knew things prior to 9/11 about the nature of terrorist conspiracies overseas that had not been tied to the U.S. component of that, Al Mitar is the case that comes to mind.
  That we could see the other end of that communication at a safe house overseas but did not know and did not have the means by which to say that the further end of that was actually in the United States of America. So the 215 metadata program was designed to cover that seam. And very narrowly constrained to only that case. And so it's, in a mosaic, useful to essentially inform other tools. But it's not a silver bullet in and of itself
  INSKEEP: But this is what I want to go through. You initially said, the agency said, and your boss General Alexander said, 54 plots were disrupted. What you've just affirmed for me is that the vast majority of those involved Prism, a different program.
  INGLIS: That's correct.
  INSKEEP: And there may only be one case that you can point to where you feel that the metadata program was significant. And in fact, the president's commission which looked into the NSA's operations, of course, didn't even endorse the one. They said it was hard to find any cases. And yet, there's been this tremendous political cost from its disclosure. That's why I ask again if it was worth it? If the reward from this program has been worth the financial cost, the cost in manpower, the cost in time and the political damage of it ultimately being disclosed, as many things ultimately are disclosed.
  INGLIS: I do think so. Because I don't know that I'd want to go back in time and say that I would run the risk of not uncovering the one plot that I did or to not have that tool that's an insurance policy to try to find something that crosses the seam from a foreign terrorist plot to something that might then be inserted into the United States as an activity here. I think we as a nation have to ask ourselves the policy question of what risks do we want to cover? Do we want to cover 100 percent of the risk? Or do we want to perhaps take a risk that from time to time something will get through? 9/11 was the single execution, it was the execution of a single plot with multiple threats. And about 3,000 people lost their lives that day. That's one terrorist plot coming to fruition.
  If that is an acceptable cost, if we can say, we can take the risk that we'll miss something, then we don't need to have all of the tools that cover these various seams. We don't need to have the belts and suspenders and Velcro that essentially will overlap in an interlocking way. The 215 is designed to essentially cover a seam that we don't know any other way to cover. There are other implementations of the 215 program. The government doesn't need to hold the data, it could be held by a third party. You could compel others to essentially do the kind of search that today NSA is authorized and charged to undertake. But the question remains as to whether you're going to have a capability to find something that is the connection of a foreign plot to a domestic extension of that plot. I have an insurance policy on my house. I'm happy to say that I've not collected on that insurance policy, at least for purposes of fire or significant damage in the 25 years I've lived in that house.
  But I'm not going to give that insurance policy up, because it's a necessary component to cover a seam that I can't otherwise cover.
  INSKEEP: You just mentioned other ways to do this program. Are you now as an agency considering those other ways? Just leaving the information with the phone company, for example, and picking it up through a, through a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court when you need it?
  INGLIS: Certainly. We are open to other limitations. I think'...
  INSKEEP: So you are considering that?
  INGLIS: We are considering that. But I think that we're not the policy agent that would decide whether or not we would then embrace one of those other choices. We would be a component of executing that choice. What would we offer, having some subject matter expertise in this is that two things. One, you have to first determine for what purpose would you want to have this program? This program is narrowly focused on trying to determine whether there's a connection between a foreign terrorist organization and a domestic plot. So against the 54 plots that were disrupted, since 41 of those had no U.S. connection, it would have been impossible for this program to make a meaningful contribution to those. It could have only made a contribution to the remaining 13. We essentially used this for 12 of the remaining 13. It returned information in 8 of those that we turned over to the FBI.
  But in the other four, where it didn't return information, it actually returned useful information to the FBI. It gave them confidence that there wasn't a domestic plot. They could focus their time and attention elsewhere. But you have to first determine, do you have a purpose like that for which you would collect this data? Then you have to determine what are the criteria of any implementation, regardless of where the data is stored, or who stores it, or who searches it. I think those criterion are four in number. First and foremost, if you're going to collect this data, you have to provide for the privacy of the civil liberty protections in that data. You have to ensure that there are controls imposed on that data. I think that was the great disservice that was initially done in the unauthorized disclosures, which is that what was released in the public domain was the order that said, NSA is authorized to collect the information, period.
  But it was the secondary order. There's actually a primary order that says here are all the controls, the imposition of constraints that goes with that. Those are really important because if you don't have those then you do not have a properly balanced program. The second criterion that you'd have to have is does the data that you collected have sufficient depth. Meaning, does it go back far enough in time, that if you made a search of it, you came away saying there's nothing there, that you'd have confidence that there really wasn't anything there. Telecommunications companies today who collect this metadata for business purposes do so with varying lengths of time. And they do so in varying formats. Some of them might have it for 6 months, some of them might have it for years.
  You'd want to have confidence that if you wanted to look back two years, three years, today, we look back five years, that the data was there. The third criterion would be does it have sufficient breadth. You want to know that you've essentially got the whole pile. If you're looking for a needle in the haystack you need the haystack. So you wouldn't want to check a database that only has one third of the data, and say there's a one third chance that I know about a terrorist plot, there's a two thirds chance I missed it because I don't have that data. And then the fourth and final criteria is that the program would have to have sufficient agility. And if you had a plot that was unfolding at the speed that a human or perhaps individuals coordinating across time and space were effecting, you'd have to have some confidence you could move at that speed.
  And so if the program provides that you can get an answer back in 5 days, but the plot that you're trying to determine is going to unfold in the next day-and-a-half, that's not going to work. If you can meet those four criterion, I think that you can implement this in any number of ways. And we are wide open to that. NSA does not determine the policy in this regard. NSA would have to faithfully execute the policy that was likely recommended by the executive branch. But with the coordination, cooperation and participation of the judicial and legislative branches as well.
  INSKEEP: You mentioned your feeling that Edward Snowden's disclosures revealed the metadata program in an unfair way. It revealed the part that looked bad, it didn't reveal the protections that you tried to bring along with it. In retrospect, knowing that, do you wish that some years ago this agency had made some effort to disclose this program in a way that the public could debate it, in a way that it could be looked at fairly from your point of view?
  INGLIS: In hindsight, yes. In hindsight, yes. But if you'd asked me on June 4th, say, just before all of this broke, if you'd said, are you concerned, Chris Inglis about the 215 metadata program? I would have said, not particularly because I would have said in my own mind, and I would have said to anybody who asked me, that is a properly constrained program. I would have emphasized the controls that are imposed on it. I would have described, right, not simply the noble purpose but the operational purpose that was behind it. And I would have described the participation of three branches of government in it. And I would have thought, I think naively at this point in time, that it was sufficient that those three branches of government had stood in the shoes of the American public and made that determination, and that it was executed under, right, that broad Rubrik of what we would call the whole of government.
  I think that what we found in the summer of 2013 is that it was insufficient. And that what we're going to have to do as a nation, and particularly as an agency, is to rebalance, right, the balance that we have struck between security, secrecy and transparency. I think that we have struck a good balance between security and the defense of civil liberties. And when we take an oath to the Constitution here, like anywhere else in the government, it's to the whole of it. And so I think we would, we have always worried about, right, the defense of civil liberties and privacy, consistent with what the Constitution and the articulation of the laws that come under that. The committee itself or the presidential review group itself that recently kind of talked at length about NSA, said that, as opposed to pre-FISA, pre-1978, there's a stark contrast today.
  There's no illegalities, no abuse of authority of power at NSA. However, there's been a strong policy discussion taking place. We think that's appropriate. And that policy discussion would have been better if it had been done in the thoughtful deliberative way that I think we're now approaching, as opposed to the salacious sensational way that these initial releases hit the street.
  INSKEEP: If in hindsight it would have been better to disclose the metadata program and have a public debate about it, are there other parts of NSA's operations today, other programs that are not known to the public that you think it would be wise for the public to have a reasoned debate about?
  INGLIS: Two answers to your question. I think, first and foremost, to some degree the American public must have confidence that what NSA does is appropriate, authorized and effective. And so the question remains as to whether 315 million Americans need to see it for themselves, or whether somebody can stand in their shoes? Because the second question that comes up is to what degree do you disclose this only to the 315 million, you know, Americans and beyond that you hold it at arm's length from those who would then do damage to us with that knowledge? Rogue nations, terrorists, right, proliferators, folks who are out there keenly trying to understand how NSA or other foreign intelligence organizations in the United States do their business. We cannot run the risk of giving away all of our capabilities, right, in the spirit of trying to make ourselves completely transparent.
  And so we're trying to strike that right balance. The balance today I think has a policy component of whether it's broadly permissible, useful, effective to give the kinds of authorities to NSA that we do. And that I think should have a fuller public discussion. But when you get down to the very discreet, right, somewhere between strategic and tactical choices about how you then implement that, I think that we need to then have a closed in discussion between three branches of government, those who stand in the shoes of the American public, so that we can have a fully informed decision that then results from that fully informed dialogue. But I am not at this point saying that I would bring all of NSA's capabilities out into the open. Not because I'm in any way, shape or form thinking that the American public would be shocked or outraged by those but because I really don't think we can afford to give those capabilities away to our adversaries.
  INSKEEP: You must have done a risk assessment though. Is there a program within the NSA, a discreet program in the way that the metadata gathering was a discreet program. Is there a program within the NSA that you think if it were disclosed that there would be a significant public debate about its correctness?
  INGLIS: No, I don't think so. I think that in the early days of the summer of 2013, we thought our way through is there some broader framework, right, that we could describe that would help people understand the next release, the next unauthorized disclosure. And so we actually published a paper. And it said, that you could think about NSA this way. NSA is of course a foreign intelligence organization that therefore must be motivated in whatever authorities it's allocated to focus on that. We think of ourselves as not so much being enabled and therefore given the opportunity to do what we will, but having to be explicitly authorized. And so before NSA undertakes an action you must in fact understand, as an NSA official, me, you must understand what's my explicit authority. It can't be generic. It can't be inferred.
  It has to be explicit. What is the articulation of that? Is it through a court order? Is it through an executive order out of the executive branch? And then beyond that, what's the priority given to the various issues that I would then go work on? I have essentially at the NSA have about 36,000 pages of requirements that I'm working on behalf of the executive branch. But those all can be traced back explicitly to an explicit authority, either from a court or from some executive branch authority that says, here's your authority to go get that.
  INSKEEP: When you say requirement, you mean please gather intelligence on this particular subject.
  INGLIS: That's right. A question that might be, can you tell me what the intention is of this rogue nation? Can you tell me what this terrorist group is doing? Right. And there's then when you expand those into all of the particular questions that then descend from that. Today are about 1,800 requirements at a coarse approximation. And when you then expand that, come to about 36,000 pages. And so the truth of the matter is beyond matters of law, which we are absolutely, you know, essentially going to obey, but beyond matters of law it would simply be inefficient for us to then go on a wild goose chase with those things we simply find interesting.
  INSKEEP: Are you effectively abandoning the metadata program? If you're thinking about just leaving it with the phone companies, leaving the information with the phone companies, querying it when you have a specific need and you can get a judge, wouldn't that just be, basically be giving up the program?
  INGLIS: I don't think so. I think a different implementation could meet the same four criterion that I told you about. That last one of which is that it's agile enough to essentially give domestic intelligence organizations, FBI, information at the speed that they need it to uncover and follow a plot. You can do that by implementing it at NSA. You can do that by implementing it at the vendors. You can do that by implementing it at a third party. But given the first three requirements, they're going to probably have to be some statutory and very likely some court involvement in order to setup the legal framework to achieve that. But that's not abandoning the program. That's implementing it a different way. I think most Americans would be surprised, this is out there but it's not been discussed at length, they'd be surprised at how infrequently we actually look at that data.
  In all of 2012 there were less than 300 occasions where we said what we had was reasonable articulable suspicion, that's the legal standard that's applied here, to query that database. Less than 300 times. So while most people might think in the worst case that we're looking at that data pot everyday and trying to find interesting connections inside of it, we do not. We have to wait until we had some predicate, some stimulating event that gives us that reasonable articulable suspicion to look in the pot. Until that point in time it's a locked box.
  INSKEEP: Although it is interesting though the president's commission wanted to investigate this issue and wrote about it said, that yes, 288 times I think in 2012 you went to the metadata for a particular phone number. But then you're allowed to look at phone numbers that we're called from that number'...
  INGLIS: That's true.
  INSKEEP: '...and then numbers that were called from those numbers. And they outlined a scenario where one data request might cause you to look at a million phone numbers.
  INGLIS: It could. But in all of 2012, we actually looked at 6,000.
  INSKEEP: 6,000?
  INGLIS: That's right. And that's not a change in the answer I just gave you. What happens is that, again, as a matter of record, is that we're authorized to essentially under reasonable articulable suspicion look at the first number. So we kind of, 288 times go in. That then returns some number of numbers that have been called. There's no names, there's no content. There's no locational data associated with it, it's just numbers that come back. We can then, we're authorized by the court, look further. We can take those numbers and do a second hop, or even a third hop. But we need to be judicious about that. Both for legal reasons is that we're trying to reduce constrain, right, the intrusion into this data set, right, that would otherwise occur. And it would be grossly inefficient to give the FBI a million numbers associated with one plot.
  INGLIS: And so the constraints that we have applied, based upon our analytic judgments have essentially touched 6,000 numbers in that data set, in all of 2012. Not a million. A million is theoretically possible. But when you then consider what the actual implementation of that is, it's a much different answer.
  INSKEEP: 6,000 numbers is the number in 2012?
  INGLIS: 6,000 numbers is what we actually then touched, all based upon the seeds that started with less than 300.
  INSKEEP: There was a similar program - was there not? - to gather metadata on electronic communications, emails and so forth.
  INGLIS: Emails, there was.
  INSKEEP: And it was abandoned because it was too hard to comply with the safeguards and because it was judged not to be practical, it wasn't worth the cost.
  INGLIS: It was abandoned principally for the latter reason, which is it was just too hard to make operationally workable. In theory, and especially given that people move more and more to emails, right, that kind of communication, in theory it would be even more valuable to try to detect a plot that moves from a foreign domain to a domestic domain using email metadata. The challenge is, is that the business model within the private sector doesn't support that. You and I grew up in an America where there were local calls, long distance calls, and the telephone company made their money by charging you for the number of local calls or the number of long distance calls for some duration. And for that reason they tracked that information. You could go to the telephone company and say, how many calls and what number called what number.
  And they would actually track that with great precision. Email didn't get its start that way. The first email account I had from a company with three letters said, for $6.95 a month you can write a million emails or one email, we don't care. We're going to send you, sell you a bandwidth. And so there was no material business interest on their part to track the metadata. They just wanted to sell you access to the pipe. Given that that information it doesn't exist, it's hard to recreate it. It became operationally very difficult to do that. It is theoretically possible, but very expensive. And we've decided in late 2011 that while we thought we could meet the requirements of the court, we were quite confident that we could, the only way we could proceed was in so doing, that it was operationally too difficult to do that because the business model was so different.
  INSKEEP: And yet you argued for some time that it was an important counter-terrorism tool.
  INGLIS: I would say it still would be an important counter-terrorism tool. If we could figure out how to do it with reasonable cost, dollar cost and time cost. But at this point in time is something that in a world of limited resources you have to make choices.
  INSKEEP: So I wondered if there was a contradiction between abandoning the email program, and keeping the phone record program. But you're basically saying the phone record program is just more practical, it can be done.
  INGLIS: It's much more practical. It can be done. People still use telephones.
  INSKEEP: Once in a while.
  INGLIS: Once in a while.
  INSKEEP: I want to ask about mistakes, errors, violations of privacy. You gave a fascinating talk late last year at the University of Pennsylvania in which you referred to a document that had been disclosed that referred to something like 2,700 errors by the NSA. You argued that about 2,000 of those were not really relevant, set them aside. And then acknowledged there were 711 actual errors where you violated someone's privacy in a way that was not authorized. What happened on those 711 times in one year?
  INGLIS: Yeah, so if I could clarify that. The report, first and foremost, was written in the early part of 2012. We wrote it ourselves. And we generate these reports essentially to take a hard look at how all the various things that we do to collect a communication of interest, store the communication of interest, query the communication of interest, we want to make sure we do that exactly right. And we determined in that report that on an annualized basis, we extrapolated the numbers, that we had essentially had about 2,776 situations that didn't go exactly according to plan. That was immediately interpreted by some press outlets when that was released - again, it was another unauthorized release - but when it was released, some number of press outlets immediately equated that to 2,776 privacy violations and went so far as to say that they were either willful or kind of attributable to the gross lack of conscientious actions on the side of NSA.
  Which is why I went then to some pains to explain what that really was. It turned out in 2,065 of those cases, so about 75 percent of those cases, the situation was that the individual, the organization that we were authorized to understand something about, whose communications we were trying to collect, had moved, right. Either they had physically moved or their services had moved and they were in a different location. Our authorities essentially asked the question up front of where is the party of interest? You know, where is the communication of interest? And where is the collection taking place? And if any of those change, we're probably using the wrong authority. And so, 2,065 we notified ourselves that that had changed. They don't consult with us before they change their location.
  And so the system actually worked exactly as it should, which is that it figured that out, stopped the collection, purged back to the point where we last knew with precision where they were and then went after the right authority to essentially begin that again. In my view, that would be a feature, right, a positive feature. That leaves then 711. They weren't privacy violations, per se. What they were was that an analyst somewhere across NSA entered the wrong telephone number, the wrong email address when they were attempting to target A, but instead they could have potentially targeted A-prime. In most of those cases the number that they entered because they fingered it, they got a 2 in there instead of a 3, or something of that sort. The number didn't exist and so it returned.
  But in all those cases it was caught because we essentially had checks inside the system, almost always a second check to make sure that what we have done is exactly what we intended to do. And we caught all of those things. And essentially took the right action. Whether it was how we formed the selector or whether it was how we queried a database, whether it was how we disseminated a piece of information. And those 711 occurrences have to be considered against all the activities we took that year. And it turns out that the average analyst, if you attributed those errors to an analyst, none of which were willful, all of which were simply accidents, the average analyst at NSA would make a mistake about every 10 years. The accuracy rate at NSA is 99.99984 percent, which is a pretty good record. But that said, we worry enough about making any mistakes that the 711 are a peculiar interest to us.
  We're going to fix those. And so we have driven those down quarter by quarter, year by year.
  INSKEEP: I was fascinated by that math, that 711 errors in a year means that 99.99984 percent of the time you're right. And so I started doing the math and reversed it, tried to figure out, well, how many communications are they monitoring then? And when I did the math I concluded that that means that you're monitoring, I wrote down 44,437,500 communications in a year. You're nodding, that's about the scale of your activities?
  INGLIS: That's what that math would lead you to but actually, it's not that simple. So let's say I'm interested in a particular terrorist, that individual might have dozens, might have across a given year hundreds of selectors. I'd kind of pick up and drop telephones on, you know, like it's fast food. They might form, discard email addresses at a rapid rate. Why? Because we told them that they're of interest to us. We've been telling them that for years through these unauthorized disclosures. So one individual might have attributable to them hundreds of these things. At the same time, we don't query one time a year. We might try to find out every few hours. We might try to find out every once in a while, you know, where this thing is. It might be that geo-location is of interest to us. And so all of that then constitutes a broad number of inquiries.
  And then when that data comes back to NSA, we query that data various and sundry ways to ensure that we fully understand what the nature of these kind of insights are into these foreign activities. And so that then constitutes a multiplicative factor in terms of how you get to large numbers. So you can get quickly to your 44 million number but that equates to a much, much smaller number of actual persons or organizations that we're interested in with some degree of frequency because they themselves are essentially running fast across this territory. And we, ourselves, are trying to actually figure out how to understand this with a currency that's measured in minutes as opposed to months or years.
  INSKEEP: One reason that number was of interest to me is because I'm sure after 9/11 the question was being asked are you casting the net widely enough? Is the question now whether you've been casting the net too widely?
  INGLIS: Well, that is a question that we've been asked. And so I think it's a fair question. So what we have to be able to do is to at once discover. Right. So we have to understand that there are incipient threats. There might be terror plots out there that we know nothing about. And so we have to be able to try to figure out how would we sense that, how we'd see that coming our way. And so you need to cast the net a little bit wider than perhaps what you currently know. But at the same time, you need to make sure that for purposes of efficiency and proportionality, right, we need to use these tools with some degree of discretion, that you're not casting it too widely. And so the balance for us typically comes into the difference what we call metadata, right, and content oriented searches. So metadata, which might be attributable to something like what you see on the outside of an envelope, right? There's an address there, a return address.
  INSKEEP: Sure, the phone number - who did they call? Where did they call?
  INGLIS: That's right. And in cases of snail mail there might be even a time stamp up there over the kind of stamp itself. You can tell a lot about who's communicating with who looking at that. And you can tell a lot about perhaps where the innocents are. You should leave that alone. Don't touch that. And perhaps where the parties of true interest are, right. What's the center of a terrorist network? Who perhaps is kind of conspiring to do what they might do, and who might be a level out from that, and two levels out from that. The metadata, if you cast that net widely enough, gives you a sense as to what the territory looks like, so that you then might traverse that territory and then go after the content with greater discretion and surgical precision. For purposes of efficiency you have to do your business that way. But for purposes of the law, and executing proportionality under the law, we also have to do our business that way.
  INSKEEP: So are you casting the net too widely right now?
  INGLIS: I don't think so. I think that there's a policy question to be asked about whether we should continue to collect the telephone metadata we know as the 215 Program. If we, as a nation, decide that we're willing to sustain the risk of not knowing, you know, those occasions when somebody crosses the seam, the purpose for which that program was defined, then we will have in fact said that the net was cast too widely and that we're going to essentially stop doing that to essentially reduce the possible incursion on the privacy of U.S. person communications. So that's a choice to be made. But we haven't yet made that choice.
  INSKEEP: Well, let's go a little beyond the metadata program to the NSA's broader operations or even other disclosures that have been made, such as the monitoring foreign leaders. In that context, has the net been cast too widely?
  INGLIS: I would say that NSA, as I indicated earlier in the conversation, has to not only understand that it has the authority, right, to target something of interest. But it must also know that there's a priority, right. We only operate against explicit priorities. And so we as a nation can make choices about how much we must know, need to know, about threats or activities in the world. I would tell you that there's an active consideration, the president has asked that question, about whether or not we should favor, right, some greater degree of outreach between intelligence organizations, between allies, in much the same way that we have for 70 years between the English speaking nations known as what I call the Five Eyes(ph). Great Britain, United Kingdom now, Australia and New Zealand, Canada, the United States. Should we extend, right, that same kind of degree of greater collaboration to others?
  That's a fair question. Right. And I think that's a question we're actually walking our way through.
  INSKEEP: Well, that's a policy question. I guess that might be a presidential question. But you can address that on a practicality level. When we think about some of these programs have proven to be controversial, have they been worth it? I get back to that question again. Did you get anything out of spying on Angela Merkel, or whatever? I mean was there anything that came out of that kind of monitoring that'...
  INGLIS: Yeah. Well, I won't talk about particular intelligence priorities. I will tell you that the vast majority, if not the entirety of the material that we have produced, which always cites the intelligence priority behind it, has been very useful and responsive to the requirements that essentially generated the activity in the first place.
  INSKEEP: In other words, someone asked you and you gave them what they asked for.
  INGLIS: Every report that NSA writes, and this would be true of any foreign intelligence organization within the United States the way we've essentially built the system, will cite, right, expressly what authority and what priority is being addressed by that.
  INSKEEP: I want to ask about monitoring Americans. And before I do, I want to ask you a question that I'm sure you've been compelled to answer a 100,000 times, but it would be useful just to hear your definition of it and for people to hear that. Under what circumstances can this agency monitor the communications of Americans? U.S. persons, U.S. citizens, people living here.
  INGLIS: That's a great question. It's an important question. So let me answer it this way in a slightly more comprehensive way than you might have intended because it's a complicated answer. I would say in order for this agency to target the content of an American's communications I need a court warrant. I need a court order. In order to target it, you know, as if I'm going after the American, the U.S. person communications. But it turns out that any communication in the world has at least two parties to it, right. There's kind of the sender, the receiver, there's the speaker, the listener, and vice versa. And so if I am legitimately going after, you mentioned earlier, Zawahiri, if he was kind of to create an email account and make use it, and if I was able to determine what that email address was, you could imagine that I might hypothetically at least, be interested in that.
  And I might then try to find that communication in the world. And if on the other end of that communication there was a U.S. person, it turns out both parties own that communication. And so at the same time I'm doing something that everybody would say is quite legitimate. I got Zawahiri's email. I've at the same time collected the email of the U.S. person because they both own that communication. And we would call that in my business, an incidental collect of an U.S. person communication. That's what an incidental collection is. It's not that somehow we were fishing for tuna and we got dolphins, right. We actually got a communication owned by two parties, and one of them is a U.S. person. And I then have rules, right, that are imposed on me both by the court and by the executive branch, depending upon which authorities I'm bringing to bear that talk expressly, explicitly about how I am then to handle the U.S. party, the U.S. person in that communication.
  And so the kind of long answer to your good and short question is that there are circumstances where I might incidentally get U.S. person communications. I've just explained one to you. But they are actually considered in advance as being not simply possible but probable in a world that increasingly is converged, right. All of these pathways are shared by adversaries, hostile parties and friends alike. And we therefore have to consider the possibility we will encounter U.S. persons and know precisely what we will do and always faithfully do it.
  INSKEEP: Are you - so in those incidental, in those cases of incidental collection, you what, disregard the U.S. person unless there is a court order involved?
  INGLIS: In broad terms, you do disregard the U.S. person. So what you have to do is what we would describe as the activity of minimize, right. And so unless the identity of the U.S. person, right, is important to the foreign intelligence value of that communication, we must then kind of screen that out, filter that out. We would say, let's say, that Zawahiri kind of disclosed his intent to attack something of interest to us in an email, and he shared that kind of with some number of persons, one of whom was a U.S. person. We would have to identify in the report that we would write at the classified level, that there was a U.S. person involved in this. That he was a recipient of this, or she was a recipient of this. And we would go no further than that unless, and until such time as it became clear that that party was materially involved in this plot.
  And if in that point and time we wanted to focus our time and attention on that U.S. person, I would then have to go get a warrant. No matter where they are on the planet earth, I'd have to get a warrant if I'm not going to focus on them as the target of interest, as opposed to them being incidentally involved in this communication.
  INSKEEP: You're telling me that you always and have always in every case sought a FISA, a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court approval before focusing on a U.S. person?
  INGLIS: Well, until I think it was 2008, if a U.S. person was overseas and they became of interest to me in the way that I just described, until 2008 the law provided that I could get an Attorney General authorization to target the U.S. person. Again, in my case it would only do that if it was a foreign intelligence purpose and if I had made the case to the Attorney General. The FISA Amendments Act that came in in 2008 essentially made it clear that no matter where you are on the planet earth, if you're a U.S. person, if you have U.S. person status, if NSA or any other foreign intelligence organization within the U.S. is going to target them, they must first get a probable cause statement from the court, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. So since 2008 the answer to your question is yes.
  INSKEEP: Yes, you always do that.
  INGLIS: Yes.
  INSKEEP: I want to follow up on an aspect of that. Because we should note the NSA has said, you know, maybe we're gathering metadata on Americans, but we're not listening to your calls, we're not reading your emails except in these very limited cases where there was a court order. But, of course, you are gathering and vast amounts of communications from around the world. And some of those will be between a foreigner and an American. And so American communications are being gathered in some fashion. Since 2011 haven't you had the authority to monitor the communications of Americans in that giant pile of communication without getting a specific warrant?
  INGLIS: Oh, so what you're talking about is the authority that we have. So let me go through an example. And if this is the one, then I'll talk at whatever length you'd like about it.
  INSKEEP: Please.
  INGLIS: So let's say that I'm going after my hypothetical, you know, favorite party, right, the head of Al-Qaeda worldwide. I mean I collect some of his communications. And I have confidence that I in fact have his communications, and they're now in a pile that I expect an analyst to then understand. You know, what is he doing? What is he saying? You know, what conspiracy might be afoot? That analyst now has not simply the authority but the obligation to understand that pile because they're all responsive to the intelligence query that I made. Every one of those has been now selected out of that sea of information, those trillions of communications worldwide. They've been selected out as being materially responsive to my query of interest. What's he doing? And inside of that then, there are all sorts of questions you might ask, right.
  Is this a plot against, right, so some financial institution within the United States. It turns out that's a U.S. person query. But if I wanted to know if this is a plot against one of those financial institutions I'd have to query that very limited constrained data set to see whether or not that institution is named. Analysts had the authority to do that, right. Those authorities are granted by the court, right, that gives us the authority to collect the information in the first place as part of the rule set that says, how might you then treat that pile? I think that's the question that's been asked of us some number of times. Are we in fact then using this as some back door to target the communications of Americans? We are not. We are using this essentially as a way to understand the pile of communications that were responsive to these foreign intelligence queries in the first place.
  INSKEEP: At least in this limited circumstance, have there then been instances where you've monitored the communications of U.S. persons without a specific warrant to do so?
  INGLIS: No. If monitor is that we're trying to find '' we're trying to have continuity on a U.S. person essentially by essentially asking queries of this pile, no, because we would not have essentially focused the collection activities on those U.S. persons. The only way the U.S. persons could've gotten into that pile is that they are, in fact, on the other side of the communication of somebody we're legitimately interested in.
  And the 702 provision goes so far as to say that we cannot use, right, our authorities under what's the so-called Prism program to reverse-target Americans, right? That's expressly prohibited by the law.
  INSKEEP: So if someone said '' in fact, I'll just say '' so if the question is have you targeted Americans using that authority in any case, the answer is no.
  INGLIS: Not in the context'...
  INSKEEP: It's happened zero times.
  INGLIS: '...that you intend. Not in the context that you mean. So let's say some clever person says, you know, I'm not authorized to target Chris Inglis overtly, unless I go get a warrant and he's not done anything to show himself as being a threat to the nation. But I know that he's always in contact with somebody that I am legitimately authorized to go after or I could make some plausible case for that.
  So why I don't go after Party B because I know that Chris is always in contact with him and I'll just collect enough communications that gives me insight into Chris Inglis? That is expressly prohibited by the law. It's written in that you cannot use that as a back door, as a 702 back door, the authority being 702, to target Chris Inglis. It's called reverse targeting.
  INSKEEP: Let me ask you about another issue, if I might, having to do with U.S. persons. You go to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court; you seek a warrant in the cases where your monitoring might call for you to look at a U.S. person. There have been calls, numerous calls, for some kind of public advocate to be in that court to essentially stand in for the person you're surveilling because, of course, they don't have a lawyer there.
  If that were to be done, would it interfere with your work in any way?
  INGLIS: We'd welcome it. So I would only put the caveat on there that it needs to be operationally efficient. So let's say that I'm authorized to target the head of Al Qaida worldwide and I'm actively doing that. I'm trying to figure out, you know, what communications services, selectors, that person's using. If at every moment in time somebody had to authorize me to put the next selector, right, on cover like, you know, he just changed his email address, can I put that on?
  If that's where the advocate stands in that's operationally not terribly efficient. But if there's going to be some novel interpretation of the law, if there's some authority that's going to be applied as an extension of the law that others might say I've got a different view, we welcome that, right. I think that that would be quiet appropriate.
  And I would go so far as to say that also with the court it might be helpful to have somebody who would assist them with matters of interpreting technology. How does the technology really work? And because that's not that straightforward, right, the technology is constantly roiling, right? It's changing over moment by moment and the way people employ that technology is changing over moment by moment.
  And so that might be another assist to the court, which I will tell you works very hard and faithfully to do all that themselves but any assistance that might be provided or any amicus that might be provided in terms of giving them an alternative view of the risks that are undertaken would be helpful.
  INSKEEP: Just so I understand what you're telling me, you're saying that if this public advocate, hypothetically, got a say on all 44 million communications you're looking at in a year, that'd be a serious problem.
  INGLIS: Yes. First, I'm not looking at 44 million communications in the context that you describe.
  INSKEEP: OK. OK, go on.
  INGLIS: But let's say it's a large number. If that kind of public advocate had to personally vouchsafe for every one of those collection activities then that would be operationally very inefficient and it would slow the system down. We would not in any way, shape, or form object to having some accountability exercise that says but I want to know how you've applied these authorities.
  That, in fact, happens today. The National Security Division at the Department of Justice, the executive branch, has some number of activities both across the DOD, the Department of Defense, and the director of National Intelligence that actually, in arrears, look at all of our collection choices to make sure that we've made the right choices.
  INSKEEP: What if you had this advocate each time you're seeking a warrant, which is a finite number of warrants that you do seek in a year. Is that operationally possible?
  INGLIS: Yes. So I'd let the lawyers rule on that but I would say from an operational perspective I would welcome that advocacy in the room. The question is how operationally efficient can you make it.
  INSKEEP: A few other questions. And I don't even know what time it is, by the way.
  UNIDENTIFIED WOMAN: I think it's 1:35.
  INSKEEP: Oh, it's 1:35. OK. So I want'...
  UNIDENTIFIED MAN: It's been 50 minutes.
  INSKEEP: OK, great. Great. We may even finish a little bit early. We will see '' we will see how things go here. I want to understand a couple of other things, however. One of them having to do with the state of technology. You've been described in the past year as '' in fact, in the past many years, as an immensely powerful agency with immense resources. And they certainly have been increased since 9/11.
  Given the challenge that you face, do you feel like you're running an immensely powerful agency?
  INGLIS: I do. I would say that we feel that we've been entrusted with a tremendously important responsibility and that cuts both ways. The pressure I feel on some days is have I, in fact, determined the threats to the nation such that I can inform the policymakers, decision-makers, people who stand in harm's way in uniform with sufficient insight and clarity that they'll help interdict those threats. That's a pressure.
  Right, so that's a great burden. It's a great responsibility. But I think you mean it the other way, which is do I have the authority to do things that, if taken to excess, we should be concerned about, right, that those things can be abused. We do have authorities that could theoretically be abused but we have applied extraordinary constraint and controls to that.
  INSKEEP: I actually mean it in a slightly different way. We were talking earlier about the email program that you abandoned because it would be nice to have but it just didn't make any sense.
  INGLIS: Right.
  INSKEEP: You're dealing with, you know, billions of communications around the world.
  INGLIS: Right.
  INSKEEP: Do you actually feel that you have the technical capability to monitor all the communications that you need to monitor? Or a sufficient number of them?
  INGLIS: If the answer at the end of the day has to be a hundred percent confidence that we know all threats to all things at all times, of course not. We don't have that sort of god's eye view. We don't have that omniscient capability. And so there's a reasonable balance. The Europeans actually have a nice turn of phrase for this. Our European counterparts say that when you try to achieve the right balance between security and privacy, you need to think in terms of necessity and proportionality. Right?
  Do you have some necessity to essentially incur upon, right, the otherwise private affairs of individuals of interest to you? And if you do, have you done that with certain '' have you done that with the aspect of proportionality such that only in proportion to the nature of that threat? And that's really the nature of how we apply instruments of national power like intelligence.
  You need to make sure that you have, at the end of the day, achieved some balance in that regard. We are neither omniscient nor unknowing. Right? We try to find that sweet spot in between. And I would say that I think that given the investments that the nation has made, not simply in the capabilities that people most often think about in terms of technology, but in the brain trust that is NSA, we're quite capable of helping the nation understand threats to its people and its territory and to its relationships, so that we can with confidence say we can make a meaningful contribution.
  INGLIS: And we are at the same time well constrained, controlled, you know, hobbled from making the sort of excessive application of those capabilities that you might worry about.
  INSKEEP: Here's what I'm thinking about. You're in a competitive environment and a changing environment. You're not just competing with enemies of the United States whom you might want to track; there are also technology companies who are constantly changing their methods, would like to protect the privacy of their customers, would like to persuade overseas clients that their privacy is being protected.
  INSKEEP: And so, I assume there is a push and pull of technology and innovation.
  INGLIS: Yes. There is.
  INSKEEP:
  Are you winning or losing? Are you gaining or falling behind?
  INGLIS: We're holding our own, I would say. So here's the great secret of NSA. I'll come lay this on the table. Most people when they kind of say I want a picture of NSA what they'll do is they'll take a picture of a device, a computer, technology, maybe the building that we're sitting in which has these black leaning panels on the outside.
  That's actually not NSA. That's a component of NSA. But if you want to really know what the core of NSA is, it's its brain trust. It's its people. All right? We employ some, you know, number of people which includes 1,000 Ph.D.s, that includes a diverse array of disciplines that we bring to bear. I mean, it works more horizontally than it does vertically.
  What we try to do is to determine what our challenges are, what we need to figure out, the use of a particular technology to communicate some conspiracy that would harm the United States. But how is that done? What are the security protocols being employed by our adversaries? How might we actually kind of understand the weaknesses in those and how might we then find that moment in time when we can understand what's actually being communicated by whom to whom about what.
  That's actually an intellectual issue, not a technology issue. And so, for the 70 years that we've essentially been doing this business, all the way back to the days of World War II, the principal instrument of power that we bring to bear is the intellectual power that is constituted in the workforce. And I'm very confident that this workforce will be up to the challenge of continuing to try to figure that out.
  There's an anecdote that's quite dated but I think it's also possibly useful. In the middle of World War II, the Axis powers, who were in those days using something called the German Enigma Machine, a very capable device. The mathematics inside of it were very impressive, even in its day but today would be still impressive. They went from what were called three rotors to four rotors.
  Each rotor had some number of positions. At the beginning of the day you'd set these rotors to A or Z or something in between. When they added the fourth rotor, right, most folks in the business said that's it, game over. You know, we had a kind of a thumbnail grip on three rotors but we couldn't possibly do four.
  But they missed the point, which was it wasn't about the static advantage of how you exploit a three rotor machine; it was about the intellectual advantage of can we, even when they use a four rotor machine, try to determine the mistakes that they might make, try to determine the weaknesses in that system. Try to, in a system in motion, a communications system in motion, try to find that place where we might then outwit, outthink, outmaneuver an adversary in the space we now call cyberspace.
  But in those days it was simply the short wave radio space. We still have an advantage. The United States and its allies still has an extraordinary advantage. We've got an enormous brain trust. And that's not simply people who work at NSA but the people who support NSA. And it's all done under the rule of law to ensure that those capabilities are brought to bear in a way that is completely consistent with the Constitution and the interpretations of the laws, the policies, and the orders.
  That's why I was so distressed in June of 2013 when the only thing that was in the unauthorized leaks in the first week or two was the fact that NSA can collect large quantities of what we now know as telephone metadata. What was not released at the same time were the constraints and controls that are imposed on that and the ethos, the culture that is applied inside NSA to make sure that we're completely faithful to that.
  We welcome further insight in that. I thought it was interesting that around right the December timeframe when one individual on the planet was saying that I won, I don't think anybody in NSA would ever think in those terms. What somebody at NSA might say is have I done enough to defend the nation. The director of compliance at NSA said that his Christmas wish was that he could give 315 million Americans a security clearance, so that they could come in and actually see what we do and how we do it.
  We welcome that degree of transparency. I just don't want to bring in terrorists and rogue nations and those who are trying to do harm to this nation and give them the same insight.
  INSKEEP: This is a side point, but I notice you're not saying the name Edward Snowden. Is there a reason you don't say his name?
  INGLIS: No. I can say that name.
  (LAUGHTER)
  INSKEEP: But you're not going to just now.
  INGLIS: I think Mr. Snowden deserves, you know, his day in court. He has his position. He has his opinion. I'd like to see him get his opportunity to make his case.
  INSKEEP: As much as you disagree with what he did, has he helped you since he brought about a public debate that you now say that in hindsight you wish had happened before?
  INGLIS: In the same way that somebody who burned my house down has given me the opportunity to perhaps build it in a way that I would prefer. And so I think his methods were reckless and irresponsible and given his originally stated case, which was he had been, you know, the self-determined judge and jury determined that NSA had exceeded its boundaries with respect to domestic collection and domestic activities and therefore, attempted to expose that.
  In so doing, he also exposed enormous quantities of information about how we do the business of tracking terrorists and tracking rogue nations and the like. So, you know, given his expressed concern I think that he's greatly gone by that and I therefore find him reckless.
  INSKEEP: What have the disclosures done to your relationships with technology companies?
  INGLIS: Oh, it's strained them, to be sure. Those technology companies have only tried to do the right thing and to support this nation and other nations. There's no nation on the planet that doesn't do what we would call lawful intercept, that under legitimate authority try to understand a little bit about the threats to the nation that might be communicated in today's technologies.
  And as those companies have been described as perhaps being inappropriately in collusion with various governments, not least of which this government, they've taken some I think unfair hits. I think when you look into it, those companies are responsible. They are a source of power of this nation. They are a source of benefit to anyone who would avail themselves of the services. And they therefore deserve to have the record set straight.
  INSKEEP: Are they being less helpful than they were?
  INGLIS: I think that when we need them they're still being helpful. Right? And, again, that's all done under the rule of law. That's all done responsibly. So the various companies who participated in the 702 program continue to be responsive. That continues to be something that helps us understand threats to the nation, our people, and our territories and our partnerships.
  INSKEEP: Some people have noticed what you almost might think of as a partisan divide, not about political parties but about people in different jobs. That if you're in the national security field, the Snowden revelations do not shock you or outrage you very much but that if you are working for a tech firm, a lot of tech executives are very mad, are very unhappy about this. How would you explain that divide?
  INGLIS: I don't know that I can explain the divide. I see it. I would say that what I have to think about as an executive within the executive branch under our Constitution is do I have express explicit authority to do what I do? And therefore I can quickly reconcile that the application of the authorities that we've described in so many ways across the summer have not simply been explicitly authorized but they've been properly constrained which is the nature of our Constitution and the laws that derive from that.
  And so I've long since reconciled myself to the way that balance is achieved. I'm not sure that if you're not in the government you would think about that. Right, you might just think about the dynamic of I'm trying to sell services to a world population, not simply the United States. And I'd like that world population to imagine that these are safe from kind of any intrusions whatsoever. Right?
  And to the degree that that balance hasn't yet been struck to everyone's satisfaction, not just the United States, I think that you might then have a different lens through which you're looking at the same problem set.
  INSKEEP: But that's an interesting point that they are selling to the world. And that means that Silicon Valley firms, in some cases in the past year, have lost business or have reported losing business because foreign partners don't want to deal with them and run the risk of being surveilled by the National Security Agency. Are they responding to that by taking additional measures to make sure that they're not surveilled by the NSA?
  INGLIS: I think whatever measures they're taking to give their customers greater confidence that they can safely, securely communicate are very likely appropriate. Insomuch as NSA should not have access to communications that it should not have access to. All right? If kind of in the scheme of things, there are classes of persons, whether they're U.S. persons or innocent foreigners who should not essentially have their privacy incurred upon by NSA because there's no material reason, there's no authority that I could divine for that, they should have some confidence that they're protected.
  Of note '' you didn't ask me but I'll bring this up. You know, there is '' a discussion has taken place where there have, in fact, been some willful abuses of the signet capabilities that NSA brings to bear. There have been 12 cases over the last 10 or so years where individuals made misuse of the signet system. They essentially tried to collect a communication that they were not authorized to collect 12 times.
  The vast majority of those were, in fact, overseas. Right? They were NSAers operating in foreign locations trying to collect the communication of an acquaintance so that they could better understand what that acquaintance was doing, but those acquaintances were foreigners. And our capabilities must be applied in a way that essentially meets the requirements imposed on me such that we would protect the privacy of foreign persons as much as we would protect the privacy of U.S. persons.
  An inappropriate use of the signet system for any purpose is inappropriate. All right? And so if the companies are simply trying to give additional confidence, right, to the customers who have no reason to fear NSA, I should have no reason to fear that.
  INSKEEP: Have any windows closed to you because corporations are behaving differently in the last six, eight months?
  INGLIS: It's too soon to tell and those details I'm really not kind of in hand with. I would tell you that those companies are attempting to give some greater confidence to the people who make use of their services that they are not being inappropriately spied upon. And I don't have any qualms about that.
  I would say that if, at the end of the day, we make it possible for terrorists to make use of these services in a way that they have absolute confidence that they'll never be undone, that they get anonymity services, they get encryption services, right, they get resilient, robust communications at any time of the day, then we will have achieved the wrong balance. But we're not there yet.
  INSKEEP:
  Do they have exit interviews for people who are leaving the National Security Agency?
  INGLIS: They do.
  INSKEEP: Did you do yours already?
  INGLIS: I have not.
  INSKEEP: You will be doing one?
  INGLIS: I will. I'll have the opportunity to talk with my boss, right, as I leave. And there's also something here at NSA we call parting thoughts. Right, it's actually a wiki-like device where you can essentially make a statement to anybody that would care to read that on a volunteer basis. And so I'll do that too.
  INSKEEP: I would think in an exit interview somebody would ask you '' your boss might ask you '' what would you change about this place? What would you change about this place?
  INGLIS: First and foremost, I think I would focus on what I wouldn't change about this. I'll answer your question in a second. But I would say that the kind of intellect, the kind of principled audacity that we attract and we encourage and develop has been a source of great strength for the nation, right, the things that we've been able to do. It is not an accident that there's not been a foreign-induced terrorist attack on this nation's soil in the last 12 years.
  In the last three months alone there have been 5,000 deaths attributable to terrorist activities across the broad swath of southwest Asia, Africa, places that, you know, are in the news every day. There are activities that are trying to come onshore. It's not a mistake that that's actually been a failure for them all those years.
  So there's a lot that I would say we have to sustain and keep going, which is a focus on the people, a focus on the principles and the ethos that essentially ensure that those people exercise their authorities the way that the American public would have them do that. I think going forward what I would change is that we need to continue to move in the direction of having greater transparency about the nature of NSA, what its authorities are, how those authorities are brought to bear.
  There's going to be a limit, a natural limit to that. We're not going to be able to get into all of the explicit technical stuff that we do. You know, people should know that there's a presidential daily brief. That President Obama on a daily basis gets access to highly sensitive information. But, you know, we're not going to reveal what the contents of that are on a daily basis, however interesting and titillating that might be. So we've got to find that balance.
  I would say further that as NSA goes forward it's going to have to make sure that it continues to provide an honest perspective on how these capabilities can be employed, what the risks of these capabilities being modified might be in both directions. If they're modified in one direction it might be that that incurs a greater possibility of intrusion on privacy. NSA needs to speak to that if that were to occur.
  At the same time, we would speak to that this particular change that might be considered would possibly harm our ability to have insights into the threats to the nation. NSA needs to be an honest ombudsman in that regard. And in that regard, NSA should avoid becoming a policy organization and stay where it is, which is an execution organization.
  That we are supposed to be the subject matter experts for the nation's cryptologic'...
  INSKEEP: Were you becoming a policy organization in any way?
  INGLIS: No. But there was the temptation for that. As we become more and more public, and I've said for a very long time, we were 30 miles from D.C. in every way, shape, and form and no one would come up to NSA. We got more people from overseas visiting us than we got from Washington, D.C. for long stretches of time.
  And as we become more and more public, in the public's eye, we will be asked questions of what would you do about A or B. And we need to therefore make sure that we stay on the right side of the line with respect to the policy calls. We should faithfully execute those policies. We should faithfully provide subject matter expertise about the implications, the import of those policies.
  But I think that we're best served, right, if NSA stays smartly within the executive branch, as an organization that faithfully executes those policies.
  INSKEEP: One other thing and then I think I'm done. I talked with Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists, who you know and who has been an advocate of the NSA disclosing more, to say the least. He feels, as you feel in hindsight, that programs such as the metadata program could have been disclosed earlier, could have been publicly debated and that the NSA did not allow that shows a lack of confidence in the public and the political process. Is he right about that?
  INGLIS: No, I don't think so. I think that '' I mean, I think Steven Aftergood has quite a lot to his credit in terms of very thoughtful commentary and I would not therefore kind of dismiss that thought. But when I look back, I think that the choice made was more about the concern that if we disclose that program that our adversaries would pick up on it. And that they would then modify their behavior or take whatever actions they could, right, to make it less likely that if they reached across that seam that we're trying to find that they would be detected.
  Right, so if we said, for example, in April of 2013, we have a telephone metadata data program, collection program, and we therefore will look for, right, the connection between a foreign terrorist organization and the domestic U.S. But we do not have a telephone '' or, I'm sorry, an email equivalent to that. We don't collect email metadata.
  Then any smart, savvy terrorist worth his salt would say, got it. You know, we're going to send perhaps, you know, emails or the equivalent of emails in the digital world but never, ever, ever make a telephone call. I think that's what actually was motivating us to make the choice that we did, which is to maintain the secrecy of that for the length of time that we did.
  And now that we're kind of in this new world, right, post-June of 2013, it's a much easier choice about how then do you kind of reconcile this tension? How do you achieve that greater transparency? First and foremost, we need to be completely transparent, as we've always tried to be with those who stand in the shoes of the American public, right.
  Whether it's the Congress or the judiciary, we need to be completely transparent with them and give them every opportunity to understand the ins and outs of the policy choices that they would make and then confer upon us. And then second, beyond that, we have to figure out to what degree we're going to extend that conversation to the American public. And it's still early days. Even though we're six months into this it's still early days in terms of determining how and when that might take place.
  The very fact that I'm sitting here with you is a component of that, our outreach to try to figure out what's the right balance in that regard.
  INSKEEP: Of course, Congress is the public's representatives on this. And this is a question I would only ask you because you're leaving. Because if you were going to continue on and testify before Congress again you'd probably be compelled to say very little about them but how's Congress doing in overseeing this agency?
  INGLIS: I would say well. I would say with respect to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence '' so that's the House side of the intelligence oversight '' and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, there's a fairly vigorous and I would say rigorous, right, degree of inquiries, hearings, staff-level engagements where they understand what NSA does, what its capabilities are, how we employ those capabilities. Such that, right, in the early part of June when all this was exposed, they weren't very surprised.
  We know all about that. With respect to the broader Congress, well, they've got a lot on their plate, right, whether it's trying to figure the sequestration out, whether it's trying to kind of reconcile the nation's finances to its income. And then the various committees that have a depth of expertise on the things that they're charged to actually uphold, it's impossible for 535 members of Congress to be expert about all the issues that come before them.
  And so there's probably some further work to be done if these issues are of interest to the entirety of the House and Senate. There's some further work to be done to bring in more of them, to expose, right, these capabilities to them. If you'd asked them before June of 2013 how much more interest they had, they said I'm OK because the intelligence oversight committees look at that.
  But now this is necessarily of greater interest to all of them and perhaps to particular subgroups of them, the judiciary committees on some of them. We welcome that insight. Our doors are always open to not simply the congressmen and the senators but to the staffers who would come up here. They are, by definition, cleared for everything we do. And so we have no qualms about sharing that with them, not least of which reason is it makes for better informed decisions on their part when they do grant us the authorities that we get.
  INSKEEP: Have you felt in the last few months that you've in some cases been judged by people who don't understand what you do?
  INGLIS: I do. I do. I think that's by all sides. And I think that it's not always their fault. I think that in many cases people who have judged have judged us on what they thought was a whole telling of the story. So go back to the middle of June 2013 when all that was out there were the most salacious, sensational bits of what NSA's tool set might be but people didn't understand the nature of the controls that are imposed on the use of that tool set.
  Again, in the early days '' we used this analogy; I'll go back to it '' which is looking at the blueprint of something gives you some insight into what the possibilities are, what the art of the possible is, but it doesn't tell you anything about how you operated, how you would actually, you know, use the machine. Right, so I can study an airplane's blueprint all day long. It doesn't make me a pilot.
  That doesn't make me, you know, any more knowledgeable about whether the airline that's going to fly this airplane would do this in a safe, right, thoughtful manner. And it doesn't tell me anything about the possibility that 19 individuals might get up one morning and fly these airplanes as weapons of mass destruction into a tower somewhere or some number of buildings somewhere.
  And so it's '' you need to know more than what the blueprints tell you. You need to know something about the culture, the ethos, the controls, and I think we're now having that discussion. People who have come to some conclusions about NSA, before they understood the totality of that, I think have been disserved, right. That they didn't necessarily come to conclusions at a time when it was right and proper to come to them.
  INSKEEP: Did you, in your discussions about programs like the metadata program, weigh the possibility that at some point it was going to be disclosed? Secrets get out sooner or later. Did you factor that in, in deciding whether to go ahead or not?
  INGLIS: We did, actually. And I think I gave you earlier in the interview the sense that if somebody had asked me on June 4th, hey, we're going to talk all about in the public domain tomorrow this 215 metadata data program, what do you think? I would have told you, I think we're OK. Because, you know, three branches of government have participated in that.
  The controls are imposed, right, when they take the cover off that box and look at how we've used that in all 2012 you know the rest of that story. We would've said that we've actually got the balance struck, right, between the security and the defense of civil liberties.
  INSKEEP: And that's true with all of the disclosures of the past six months, the monitoring foreign leaders, Prism, other things, you would've said '' I mean, you calculated the risk of the disclosure of all these things and concluded that they were all'...
  INGLIS: Oh, that's a different question, right. So with respect to the totality of what NSA does, I think that not all of those have withstood the test of the optics, you know, or perhaps, you know, the above the fold right side of the newspaper test. All right. Some of these things, when people kind of say you are doing, you know, you're targeting who?
  You know, isn't that a dear friend of yours and isn't that something that perhaps would do you more damage than good in understanding perhaps the nature of their aspirations, expectations in the world? And so I think, in part, going forward there will be a greater time and attention given to not just whether something is authorized and whether we need to have that information in order to make our way in the world but if this is going to be a greater risk of being exposed, are we willing to kind of see that exposure take place?
  But if this is going to be a greater risk of being exposed, are we willing to kind of see that exposure take place?
  INSKEEP: Mr. Inglis, thanks very much.
  INGLIS: Thank you very much.
  Transcript via NPR.org.
The Forgotten Embrace '' Obama DOJ To Investigate Chris Christie
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: The Ulsterman Report
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:43
  It appears Governor Chris Christie's (overly) kind pre-2012 words regarding Barack Obama's response to Hurricane Sandy, praise that many feel benefitted Barack Obama greatly leading up to Election Day, are all but forgotten by the Obama White House, who has unleashed a DOJ investigation into allegation's the governor's office used the temporary closing of a bridge as a bit of political payback against a Democratic New Jersey mayor.
  Best Friends Forever no more'...
  _________________________________________
  (via WHD)
  New Jersey U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman will investigate the closing of lanes leading to the George Washington bridge, a traffic jam-inducing move that has embroiled New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie in a scandal over whether the closures were political payback.
  Would this in any kind of way, remotely be, '' How could I even think such a thing? '' but possibly could be, an attempt by the White House to sink the leading Republican contender for President Obama's job?
  '...The decision comes just one day after Christie's defeated opponent for governor, Barbara Buono, called in the Justice Department to investigate.
  Nothing suspicious there. Now move along, please.
  Christie, for his part, said, for the feds to bring it.
  ''I have absolutely nothing to hide. My instruction to everybody would be to cooperate and answer questions. We have nothing to hide and this administration has nothing to hide,'' he said during his news conference. LINK
  _____________________________________________
  Regardless what the Governor Christie operatives may or may not have done in the ''bridge-gate'' matter, if only the Obama administration had been so keen and quick to investigate matters such as Fast and Furious, Solyndra, Eric Holder perjury, Pigford, The New Black Panthers voter intimidation, Rosengate, Associate Press, Benghazi, IRS intimidation, etc'....
  And that is just a partial list of the many legitimate and far more serious scandals that this same Obama DOJ has ignored and stonewalled the last five years.
  ____________________________________________
  Mac Walker is a man of shadow and steel, blood and bone. He protects those he loves with a ferocity and purpose few can overcome. His life has taken him around the world and back again, to a home that is no longer his, in a country that would see him dead. He seeks truth both in himself and others, and purpose in a place where the traditions and values of old fight against the emerging tyranny of the now. LINK
  SAVE 50%!!!!
  NOTE: MAC WALKER'S PATRIOT OMNIBUS offers the full chronological order of the current Mac Walker series, with over a THOUSAND pages of reading!
  **MAC WALKER'S BULLET (short story)
  **MAC WALKER'S REGRET (short story)
  **MAC WALKER'S BENGHAZI
  **MAC WALKER'S BETRAYAL
  **MAC WALKER'S HUNTED (short story)
  **DOMINATUS
  **TUMULTUS
  SEVEN STORIES - AVAILABLE AS A SINGLE DOWNLOAD FOR ONE LOW PRICE! LINK
Remarks by the President on Promise Zones | The White House
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 21:42
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  January 09, 2014
  East Room
  2:24 P.M. EST
  THE PRESIDENT: Well, welcome to the White House, everybody. And that was one of the best introductions I've ever had. (Applause.) So we're so proud of Kiara for the introduction and for sharing your story, and you're just so poised. And I know Geoff Canada is just out there all excited -- (laughter) -- and proud, and I know your mom is proud. I know she is. She should be.
  Kiara and the rest of these young people grew up in a 97-square-block section of Harlem. It's a place where the odds used to be stacked against them every single day, even just graduating from high school was a challenge. But with the help of some very dedicated adults and a program called the Harlem Children's Zone, they're right on track to go to college. Together, students, teachers, administrators, parents, community, they're changing the odds in this neighborhood. And that's what we're here to talk about today -'' changing the odds for every American child so that no matter who they are, no matter where they are born, they have a chance to succeed in today's economy.
  Now, the good news is that, thanks to the hard work and sacrifice of the American people all across the country over the last five years, our economy has grown stronger. Our businesses have now created more than 8 million new jobs since the depths of the recession. Our manufacturing, our housing sectors are rebounding. Our energy and technology and auto industries are booming. We've got to keep our economy growing. We've got to make sure that everybody is sharing in that growth. We've got to keep creating jobs, and then we've got to make sure that wages and benefits are such that families can rebuild a little bit of security. We've got to make sure this recovery, which is real, leaves nobody behind. And that's going to be my focus throughout the year.
  This is going to be a year of action. That's what the American people expect, and they're ready and willing to pitch in and help. This is not just a job for government; this is a job for everybody.
  Working people are looking for the kind of stable, secure jobs that too often went overseas in the past couple of decades. So next week, I'll join companies and colleges and take action to boost high-tech manufacturing -- the kind that attracts good new jobs and helps grow a middle class. Business owners are ready to play their part to hire more workers. So this month, I'm going to host CEOs here at the White House not once, but twice: First to lay out specific steps we can take to help more workers earn the skills that they need for today's new jobs; second, they're going to announce commitments that we're making to put more of the long-term unemployed back to work.
  And on January 28th, in my State of the Union address -- which I want all the legislators here to know I'm going to try to keep a little shorter than usual -- (laughter) -- they're cheering silently -- (laughter) -- I will mobilize the country around the national mission of making sure our economy offers every American who works hard a fair shot at success. Anybody in this country who works hard should have a fair shot at success, period. It doesn't matter where they come from, what region of the country, what they look like, what their last name is -- they should be able to succeed.
  And obviously we're coming off of a rancorous political year, but I genuinely believe that this is not a partisan issue. Because when you talk to the American people, you know that there are people working in soup kitchens, and people who are mentoring, and people who are starting small businesses and hiring their neighbors, and very rarely are they checking are they Democrat or Republican. There's a sense of neighborliness that's inherent in the American people -- we just have to tap into that.
  And I've been very happy to see that there are Republicans like Rand Paul, who's here today, who are ready to engage in this debate. That's a good thing. We've got Democratic and Republican elected officials across the country who are ready to roll up their sleeves and get to work. And this should be a challenge that unites us all.
  I don't care whether the ideas are Democrat or Republican. I do care that they work. I do care that they are subject to evaluation, and we can see if we are using tax dollars in a certain way, if we're starting a certain program, I want to make sure that young people like Kiara are actually benefiting from them.
  Now, it's one thing to say we should help more Americans get ahead, but talk is cheap. We've got to actually make sure that we do it. And I will work with anybody who's willing to lay out some concrete ideas to create jobs, help more middle-class families find security in today's economy, and offer new ladders of opportunity for folks to climb into the middle class.
  And, personally, I hope we start by listening to the majority of the American people and restoring the unemployment insurance for Americans who need a little help supporting their families while they look for a new job. And I'm glad the Republicans and Democrats in the Senate are working together to extend that lifeline. I hope their colleagues in the House will join them to set this right.
  Today I want to talk about something very particular, a specific example of how we can make a difference. We are here with leaders who are determined to change the odds in their communities the way these kids and their parents and dedicated citizens have changed the odds in Harlem. It's now been 50 years since President Johnson declared an unconditional War on Poverty in America. And that groundbreaking effort created new avenues of opportunity for generations of Americans. It strengthened our safety net for working families and seniors, Americans with disabilities and the poor, so that when we fall -- and you never know what life brings you -- we can bounce back faster. It made us a better country and a stronger country.
  In a speech 50 years ago, President Johnson talked about communities ''on the outskirts of hope where opportunity was hard to come by.'' Well, today's economic challenges are different but they've still resulted in communities where in recent decades wrenching economic change has made opportunity harder and harder to come by. There are communities where for too many young people it feels like their future only extends to the next street corner or the outskirts of town, too many communities where no matter how hard you work, your destiny feels like it's already been determined for you before you took that first step.
  I'm not just talking about pockets of poverty in our inner cities. That's the stereotype. I'm talking about suburban neighborhoods that have been hammered by the housing crisis. I'm talking about manufacturing towns that still haven't recovered after the local plant shut down and jobs dried up. There are islands of rural America where jobs are scarce -- they were scarce even before the recession hit -- so that young people feel like if they want to actually succeed, they've got to leave town, they've got to leave their communities.
  And I've seen this personally even before I got into politics. In fact, this is what drove me into politics. I was just two years out of college when I first moved to the South Side of Chicago. I was hired by a group of churches to help organize a community that had been devastated when the local steel plants closed their doors. And I'd walk through neighborhoods filled up with boarded-up houses and crumbling schools, and single parents and dads who had nothing to do with their kids, and kids who were hanging out on the street corners without any hope or prospects for the future.
  But these churches came together. And then they started working with other non-profits and local businesses. And the government -- local, state and federal -- participated. And we started getting some things done that gave people hope. And that experience taught me that government does not have all the answers -- no amount of money can take the place of a loving parent in a child's life. But I did learn that when communities and governments and businesses and not-for-profits work together, we can make a difference. Kiara is proof -- all these young people are proof we can make a difference.
  For the last 17 years, the Harlem Children's Zone -- the brainchild of Geoffrey Canada, who's here today -- has proven we can make a difference. And it operated on a basic premise that each child will do better if all the children around them are doing better. So in Harlem, staff members go door to door and they recruit soon-to-be parents for ''Baby College,'' preparing them for those crucial first few months of life; making sure that they understand how to talk to their child and read to their child, and sometimes working with parents to teach them how to read so they can read to their child and give them the healthy start that they need.
  And then, early childhood education to get kids learning at four years old. And then a charter school that help students succeed all the way through high school. And medical care and healthy foods that are available close to home. And exercise. I was very pleased to hear that -- Michelle was very pleased to hear that -- (laughter) -- that they've got a strong Phys Ed program. And then students getting help finding internships and applying to college, and an outstanding, dedicated staff that tries to make sure that nobody slips through the cracks or falls behind.
  And this is an incredible achievement, and the results have been tremendous. Today, preschool students in the Harlem Children's Zone are better prepared for kindergarten. Last year, a study found that students who win a spot in one of the charter schools score higher on standardized tests than those who don't. In a neighborhood where higher education was once just something that other people did, you've got hundreds of kids who've now gone to college.
  And Harlem is not the only community that's found success taking on these challenges together. In Cincinnati, a focus on education has helped to make sure more kids are ready for kindergarten. In Nashville, they've redesigned high schools and boosted graduation rates by almost 20 percent over the past 12 years. In Milwaukee, they've cut teen pregnancy in half.
  Every community is different, with different needs and different approaches. But communities that are making the most progress on these issues have some things in common. They don't look for a single silver bullet; instead they bring together local government and nonprofits and businesses and teachers and parents around a shared goal. That's what Geoffrey did when he started the Harlem Children's Zone. Government was involved -- so don't be confused here, it has an important role to play. And already there are government resources going into these communities. But it's important that our faith institutions and our businesses and the parents and the communities themselves are involved in designing and thinking through how do we move forward.
  And the second thing is they're holding themselves accountable by delivering measurable results. We don't fund things, we don't start projects just for the sake of starting them. They've got to work. If they don't work we should try something else. And sometimes those of us who care deeply about advancing opportunity aren't willing to subject some of these programs to that test: Do they work?
  In my State of the Union address last year, I announced our commitment to identify more communities like these -- urban, rural, tribal -- where dedicated citizens are determined to make a difference and turn things around. And we challenged them. We said if you can demonstrate the ability and the will to launch an all-encompassing, all-hands-on-deck approach to reducing poverty and expanding opportunity, we'll help you get the resources to do it. We'll take resources from some of the programs that we're already doing and concentrate them. We'll make sure that our agencies are working together more effectively. We'll put in talent to help you plan. But we're also going to hold you accountable and measure your progress.
  And if you're doing real stuff that is making a difference in the lives of young people like Kiara, then we're going to be there. Your country will help you remake your community on behalf of your kids, family by family, block by block.
  We call these communities Promise Zones. They're neighborhoods where we will help local efforts to meet one national goal -- that a child's course in life should be determined not by the zip code she's born in, but by the strength of her work ethic and the scope of her dreams.
  So we're here today to announce the first five Promise Zones in America. And I could not be prouder to be joined by Mayor Eric Garcetti of Los Angeles; and Mayor Michael Nutter of Philadelphia; and Councilwoman Ivy Taylor from San Antonio; Chief Gregory Pyle, one of our tribal leaders, and Jerry Rickett from the Kentucky Highlands Investment Corporation -- some of the leaders from these neighborhoods who are helping to make it happen.
  In the East Side neighborhood of San Antonio, nearly four in 10 adults don't have a high school diploma. The violent crime rate is 50 percent higher than the rest of the city. So schools and community members are focused on getting more kids into pre-K, boosting math and science in high school, and they're putting more cops on foot patrol to make their neighborhoods safer. It's a project worth investing in.
  In a section of L.A. that stretches from Pico-Union to Hollywood, the population decreased by 13,000 people in just 10 years. So developers are working to build more affordable housing; technical schools and community colleges are helping more people get the training they need to get jobs. It's a project worth investing in.
  In Philly, nearly four out of every 10 kids lives below the poverty line ''- and a lot of them are on the West Side of the city. So a local university is helping connect middle and high school students with mentors to get them ready for college. You've got a supermarket that's being planned that will create jobs and provide healthy food where there's been too little of both. We're going to invest in that.
  In Senator Mitch McConnell's home state of Kentucky, there are communities that have been struggling for decades with shutdowns and layoffs. So they're taking steps, locally initiated, to attract new businesses and create new jobs in new industries. You've got a local college that's stepping up to expand technical training and help more kids get a higher education.
  And in the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, where up to half of the residents in some areas live in poverty, community leaders are determined to change things. And they're making financing available to help women start their own businesses; they're investing in new water and sewer systems that will make the area more attractive for companies looking to locate there; and they're helping farmers and ranchers create more jobs, and more families thereby get access to healthy foods.
  So these are America's first five Promise Zones. And over the next three years, we're going to help launch 20 in all. And each of these communities is designing from the bottom up, not the top down, what it is they think they need, and we're working with them to make that happen. And each of these communities is prepared to do what it takes to change the odds for their kids. We will help them succeed -- not with a handout, but as partners with them every step of the way. And we're going to make sure it works, and we're going to hold them accountable to make sure it is making a difference in the lives of kids.
  As a nation, we've got plenty of reasons to hope. And I just want to end with one story just to give you a sense of what we're talking about here. Roger Brown came here today from Harlem. Where is Roger? There he is right here. I used to have a haircut like that -- (laughter) -- and maybe after I'm done with the presidency, I'm going back to that. (Laughter.)
  Growing up -- I want you to listen to Roger's story, because it's unique and it's special, but it's also representative. Growing up, Roger spent some time in the foster care system before going to live with his mom, who was working two jobs to make ends meet. When Roger was in 6th grade, his mom entered his name in the Promise Academy Charter School lottery and prayed. And Roger won a spot.
  Now, the way I hear it, Roger, you were still having some problems sometimes. He was the class clown and acting out, and almost got himself expelled. But the teachers and the staff did not give up on him. They saw something in him. They kept pushing him. And then one summer when Roger was home visiting his foster family, he looked around the room and he realized nobody in that room had gone to college, and nobody in that room had a job. And at that moment, something clicked. And Roger decided he wanted something better for himself -- and for his mom and for his two sisters that looked up to him.
  So Roger buckled down. He went from failing his classes to passing his classes. He became a member of the first graduating class at the Promise Academy. (Applause.) And today Roger is a sophomore at Hunter College in New York, one of the best colleges in the country -- the first person in his family to get that far. And now he wants to go to medical school and become a neurologist. (Applause.)
  If you want to know why I care about this stuff so much, it's because I'm not that different from Roger. There was a period of time in my life where I was goofing off. I was raised by a single mom. I didn't know my dad. The only difference between me and Roger was my environment was more forgiving than his. That's the only difference. If I screwed up, the consequences weren't quite as great.
  So if Roger can make it, and if I can make it, if Kiara can make it, every kid in this country can make it. But we've got to believe in that. We can't just give lip service to it. And it can't just get caught up in a bunch of political arguments.
  There are legitimate questions about how the best way to do this is, how we can best make progress. And there are legitimate debates to be had about how big of a role is government in that process, how big of a role is the private sector. And there's no disagreement that there has to be individual initiative -- it's got to start inside. Roger had to have a change of attitude. I had to have a change of attitude. Kiara -- she probably didn't need a change in attitude. (Laughter.) She was focused the whole time.
  We don't dispute that, but we do know that sometimes we talk about this stuff as if we care and then we don't deliver. We don't follow through. We don't make the effort. It's not sustained. We lose interest. And then we say to ourselves, well, maybe nothing can be done, and we put up with it. And as a consequence, a lot of our kids get lost. And we can't allow that to happen. That's what the Promise Zones represent.
  I want more kids to have the chance that Roger got. I want more kids to have the chance this country gave me. We should all want every one of our kids and their families to have a shot at success. If you are willing to dream big and work hard, you should grow up with the same opportunities in life as any other child living in any other place.
  That's what we're fighting for. That's what America is about. So let's act. Let's make it happen this year, all right?
  Thank you. God bless you. God bless America. (Applause.)
  END2:49 P.M. EST
yep disclosures
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 20:59
  Anonymous Yelp Users Face Identity Disclosure
  (CN) - Yelp must identify seven anonymous reviewers who left negative reviews for a carpet-cleaning business, a Virginia appeals court ruled. With approximately 102 million unique visitors every month, the Yelp website allows users to post and read reviews of local businesses. Anyone who posts a review is required to have actually been a customer of the business in question, pursuant to Yelp's Terms of Service. To review a business on Yelp, a user must register and provide Yelp with a valid email address. While Yelp does not require users to register with their real name, it records the IP address of every user who posts. In July 2012, Yelp displayed 75 reviews of Hadeed Carpet Cleaning in Alexandria, Va., a number of which were negative. After finding no record that the reviewers were actual Hadeed customers from a review of its customer database, Hadeed claimed that the negative reviews were false and defamatory. The business sued the John Doe authors of seven critical reviews and subpoenaed Yelp to learn the identities of the anonymous reviewers. Yelp repeatedly refused to respond to it, however, leading the trial court to hold Yelp in contempt. On Tuesday, the Virginia Court of Appeals agreed, 2-1, that Yelp must identify the users accused of defamation. While "an internet user does not shed his free speech rights at the log-in screen," the right to speak with anonymity is not absolute, Judge William Petty said for the majority. The Virginia Legislature has developed a detailed six-step test, codified at Section 8.01-407.1, for anyone seeking to uncover the identify of an anonymous internet user. The court rejected calls to find the law unconstitutional, saying "we cannot identify a clear, palpable, and free from doubt infirmity." "Generally, a Yelp review is entitled to First Amendment protection because it is a person's opinion about a business that they patronized," Petty wrote. "But this general protection relies upon an underlying assumption of fact: that the reviewer was a customer of the specific company and he posted his review based on his personal experience with the business. If this underlying assumption of fact proves false, in that the reviewer was never a customer of the business, then the review is not an opinion; instead, the review is based on a false statement of fact - that the reviewer is writing his review based on personal experience. And 'there is no constitutional value in false statements of fact.'" Hadeed demonstrated that the reviewers' identity is crucial to its case, and it has good-faith basis for its belief that the reviews are defamatory. "Without the identity of the Doe defendants, Hadeed cannot move forward with its defamation lawsuit," the 27-page opinion states. "There is no other option. The identity of the Doe defendants is not only important, it is necessary." Judge James Haley dissented, writing, "A business subject to critical commentary, commentary here not even claimed to be false in substance, should not be permitted to force the disclosure of the identity of anonymous commentators simply by alleging that those commentators may not be customers because they cannot identify them in their database."
Cory Doctorow: We are Huxleying ourselves into the full Orwell.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 20:56
  We are Huxleying ourselves into the full Orwell.Try as I might, I can't shake the feeling that 2014 is the year we lose the Web. The W3C push for DRM in all browsers is going to ensure that all interfaces built in HTML5 (which will be pretty much everything) will be opaque to users, and it will be illegal to report on security flaws in them (because reporting a security flaw in DRM exposes you to risk of prosecution for making a circumvention device), so they will be riddled with holes that creeps, RATters, spooks, authoritarians and crooks will be able to use to take over your computer and fuck you in every possible way.
  As near as I can work out, there's no one poised to do anything about this. Google, Apple and Microsoft have all built proprietary DRM silos that backed the WC3 into accepting standardization work on DRM (and now the W3C have admitted the MPAA as a member - an organization that expressly believes that all technology should be designed for remote, covert control by someone other than its owner, and that it should be illegal to subvert this control).
  Once this is standardized at the W3C, all the alternative browsers (eg Firefox) will also have to ship closed, opaque, illegal-to-report-vulnerabilities-in software to support it.
  And it's basically all being driven by Netflix. Everyone in the browser world is convinced that not supporting Netflix will lead to total marginalization, and Netflix demands that computers be designed to keep secrets from, and disobey, their owners (so that you can't save streams to disk in the clear).
  We are Huxleying ourselves into the full Orwell.
  I'm not kidding about any of this. I can't sleep anymore. I think it may be game over.
VIDEO-VAGINAS-Tampons & Pads - Generation Know - U by Kotex
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:36
  Q: For past two to three months, I am having my periods eight or days days before my regular date of '...
  0|
  Q: My periods are so irregular The last few have been extreme - like 8 months apart for 2 days, 2 '...
  0|
  Q: I have been having cramps before my period for a while now I have them right now and still no '...
  0|
  57% of girls say most women their age are misinformed about vaginal health.
  Get the facts myths have been busted.
  Bust a myth conversations have been started
  Break the silence notes have been written
  Change the message girls are telling what they know.
  Spread the word
VIDEO-H5N1 bird flu death confirmed in Alberta, 1st in North America - Politics - CBC News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:23
  Alberta health officials have confirmed an isolated, fatal case of H5N1 or avian influenza, federal Health Minister Rona Ambrose said Wednesday.
  But officials repeatedly emphasized that there is no risk of transmission between humans.
  The infected woman, an Alberta resident who recently travelled to Beijing, China, died Jan. 3.
  The case was confirmed in a lab test last night. It's the first such case in North America.
  The woman first showed symptoms of the flu on a Dec. 27 flight from Beijing to Vancouver aboard Air Canada flight 030. She continued on to Edmonton on Air Canada flight 244, after spending a few hours in the Vancouver airport, and was admitted to hospital Jan. 1. The symptoms of fever, malaise and headache worsened and the she died two days later. The Public Health Agency of Canada was notified Jan. 5.
  There were no respiratory symptoms, said Dr. James Talbot, Alberta's chief medical officer of health.
  Dr. James Talbot, Alberta's chief medical officer of health, noted the patient did not leave Beijing, or visit any farms or markets. (CBC)
  The diagnosis at the time of death was an inflammation of the brain and the linings that cover the brain. "That is one of the ways that H5N1 patients die," Talbot said.
  It is not known how the woman contracted the disease. She did not leave Beijing, did not travel to farms and did not visit any markets.
  "Virtually every case has a pretty strong link to a close contact with birds," Talbot said, though he noted there are other settings in which a person might catch H5N1, such as a restaurant that kept live birds for slaughter.
  Rare in humansDr. Gregory Taylor, deputy chief public health officer, said the avian form of influenza has been found in birds, mainly poultry, in Asia, Europe, Africa and the Middle East.
  Colourized transmission electron micrograph of Avian influenza A H5N1 viruses (seen in gold) grown in MDCK cells (seen in green). (Ho/Cynthia Goldsmith, Jackie Katz, Sharif Zaki/CDC/Canadian Press)
  There have been fewer than than 650 human cases of bird flu in 15 countries over the last decade, primarily among people who have spent time around infected birds, he said.
  "The illness [H5N1] causes in humans is severe and kills about 60 per cent of those who are infected," Taylor said.
  "No other illnesses of this type have been identified in Canada since the traveller returned from China. This is an isolated case."
  The officials added that the woman was otherwise healthy and it's not yet clear how the person contracted H5N1.
  Speaking to Evan Solomon, host of CBC News Network's Power & Politics, Taylor said the patient was relatively young.
  "This was a relatively young '-- well, a young person compared to me, with no underlying health conditions," he said. Taylor is 58.
  Risk of getting H5N1 lowOfficials emphasized that this is not a disease transmitted between humans.
  There were two people travelling with the infected person, whom officials are following for 10 days to ensure they don't have any symptoms. They are also going to notify the other passengers from the flights between Beijing and Edmonton, and are following a group of the patient's "close contacts."
  Talbot said family members of the victim are being monitored and treated with medication, but noted that there's no sign they are sick.
  Officials created confusion by referring to the patient as "him" and "her" in order to avoid identifying anyone. Officials said that they would not identify the sex, age or occupation of the patient. They also refused to say whether the infected passenger was an Edmonton resident or whether the patient went to hospital in Edmonton, although the final leg of the flight ended there.
  Talbot said reports that the patient was from Edmonton are erroneous.
  Ambrose, who phoned into a news conference in Ottawa, said Canadian officials are working with Chinese authorities on the case, as well as the World Health Organization.
  "The risk of getting H5N1 is very low. This is not the regular seasonal flu. This is an isolated case," she said.
  An Air Canada spokeswoman said in a statement the airline is co-operating with officials, but referred any questions on the matter to the Public Health Agency of Canada.
  Source: World Health Organization
  Figures for all countries except Canada are current as of Dec. 10, 2013. Canada's one case was reported on Jan. 8, 2014.
VIDEO-AMERICAN WILL DIE-Obama expected to support new restrictions on NSA | Watch the video - Yahoo News
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:27
  HomeMailNewsSportsFinanceWeatherGamesGroupsAnswersScreenFlickrMobileMoreCelebrityShineMoviesMusicTVHealthShoppingTravelAutosHomesYahoo NewsSearch NewsSearch WebSign InMailHelpAccount InfoHelpSuggestionsYahoo
VIDEO- Watch Dramatic Footage From Inside Plane Plunging Into the Ocean in Hawaii - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:49
Arianna Huffington announces launch of World Post news website | Media | theguardian.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:44
  The 1% are about to get their own publication. The digital media titan Arianna Huffington and the billionaire investor Nicolas Berggruen on Wednesday announced the launch of World Post, a comment and news website that looks set to become a platform for some of the most powerful people on the planet.
  Inevitably, the World Post will be launched at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, this month. Many of its contributors including former British prime minister Tony Blair, Microsoft's Bill Gates and Google's Eric Schmidt are regulars at the annual jamboree for the world's most connected people. Many are also advisers to the Berggruen Institute, the billionaire investor's nonpartisan policy think tank.
  Berggruen, known as the ''homeless billionaire'' because he prefers living in hotels to owning houses, said the 50/50 venture with Huffington Post owner AOL would not just be a platform for the world's elite. ''You have to start somewhere,'' he said. ''A lot of these people are knowledgable. On the other hand you will see a lot of unknown voices, young voices and from places that are not that obvious.''
  Huffington said: ''You can have all those heads of state and major business people, etcetera etcetera, writing right next to an unemployed man from Spain, a student from Brazil. The great heart of HuffPo is no hierarchy.''
  The site will have its own stand-alone presence but will also replace the Huffington Post's current world section. The Huffington Post will run the advertising side of the business and will also organise conferences and sponsored sections. Neither side will comment on how much funding has been put into the business.
  Berggruen said World Post would be run for profit. ''I think that's healthy,'' he said. ''But if we were going to make an investment in the most exciting areas to make an investment, it probably wouldn't be this. If it doesn't make money, we will still support it,'' he said. ''We're not in it just to make money.
  "It has to be profitable to be sustainable,'' Huffington said.
  The Huffington Post is now in 10 countries and will use its locally based journalists as well as three new dedicated foreign correspondents in Beijing, Beirut and Cairo to supply content for World Post alongside its other contributors. More hires are expected. But Huffington said its main strength would be in its ability to collaborate with local new organisations as well as its top level contributors.
  ''Collaboration is the key, especially in the linked economy,'' said Huffington. ''Recognising that you are not going to do the only good coverage. If you can bring your reader what other good work is being done, you improve their experience. That's really what the heart of World Post is about.''
  The publication's initial editorial board has deep ties to media companies around the world. Alongside Huffington and Berggruen it includes Juan Luis Cebrian, founding editor of El Pais, Dileep Padgaonkar, consulting editor of the Times of India, Yoichi Funabashi, former editor-in-chief of Asahi Shimbun, and Pierre Omidyar, founder and chairman of eBay and backer of a new investigative reporting organisation, First Look Media, set up with former Guardian journalist Glenn Greenwald.
  Huffington said 42% of the Huffington Post's 94m unique visitors each month come from outside the US. ''Just over two years ago we didn't have an international edition anywhere,'' she said.
  ''We have an incredible opportunity to use the pieces we already have on the board to speak to our existing audience and grow that audience simply by embracing the fact that we are an international entity,'' said Peter Goodman, executive business and global news editor for the Huffington Post.
  The launch comes amid a wave of new money going into media ventures. Berggruen said it was clear that traditional news organisations were still struggling and that many more would fail. ''I think there will be a few media voices that really have weight and will survive but fewer and fewer,'' he said.
  Berggruen, an avid art collector, said World Post would also move beyond public policy and would address issues that interest people around the world including the environment, health and the arts. ''Culture is much bigger than politics. It will be about science, art. Anything that captures our imagination and our lives,'' he said.
  Another board member Nathan Gardels, a syndication expert, media fellow at the World Economic Forum and editor of New Perspectives Quarterly, said the news industry was regaining an international perspective unseen since the end of the cold war.
  ''Most of the world's media has fragmented then rationalized and then re-localized,'' he said. Thirty years ago the news was much more international, he said, ''despite the fact that we are more interdependent than ever.''
  ''There is definitely an audience now for an international perspective. There may not be enough people in Los Angeles who want that but globally I think there is.''
IOActive Labs Research: Personal banking apps leak info through phone
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:42
  For several years I have been reading about flaws in home banking apps, but I was skeptical. To be honest, when I started this research I was not expecting to find any significant results.The goal was to perform a black box and static analysis of worldwide mobile home banking apps. The research used iPhone/iPad devices to test a total of 40 home banking apps from the top 60 most influential banks in the world.In order to obtain a global view of the state of security, some of the more important banks from the following countries were included in the research:The research was performed in 40 hours (non-consecutive).This research does not show the vulnerabilities found and how to exploit them in order to protect the owner of the app and their customers.All tests were only performed on the application (client side); the research excluded any server-side testing.Some of the affected banks were contacted and the vulnerabilities reported.The following tests were performed for each application: Transport Security Plaintext Traffic Improper session handling Properly validate SSL certificates Compiler Protection Anti-jailbreak protection Compiled with PIE Compiled with stack cookies Automatic Reference Counting UIWebViews Data validation (input, output) Analyze UIWebView implementations Insecure data storage SQLlite database File caching Check property list files Check log files Logging Custom logs NSLog statements Crash reports files Binary analysis Disassemble the application Detect obfuscation of the assembly code protections Detect anti-tampering protections Detect anti-debugging protections Protocol handlers Client-side injection Third-party librariesAll of the applications could be installed on a jailbroken iOS device. This helped speed up the static and black box analysis.Black Box Analysis ResultsThe following tools were used for the black box analysis:otool (object file displaying tool)[1]Burp pro (proxy tool)[2]ssh (Secure Shell)40% of the audited apps did not validate the authenticity of SSL certificates presented. This makes them susceptible to Man in The Middle (MiTM) attacks.[3]A few apps (less than 20%) did not have Position Independent Executable (PIE) and Stack Smashing Protection enabled. This could help to mitigate the risk of memory corruption attacks. magic cputype cpusubtype caps filetype ncmds sizeofcmds flags MH_MAGIC ARM V6 0x00 EXECUTE 24 3288 NOUNDEFS DYLDLINK PREBOUND TWOLEVELMany of the apps (90%) contained several non-SSL links throughout the application. This allows an attacker to intercept the traffic and inject arbitrary JavaScript/HTML code in an attempt to create a fake login prompt or similar scam. Moreover, it was found that 50% of the apps are vulnerable to JavaScript injections via insecure UIWebView implementations. In some cases, the native iOS functionality was exposed, allowing actions such as sending SMS or emails from the victim's device.A new generation of phishing attacks has become very popular in which the victim is prompted to retype his username and password ''because the online banking password has expired''. The attacker steals the victim's credentials and gains full access to the customer's account.The following example shows a vulnerable UIWebView implementation from one of the home baking apps. It allows a false HTML form to be injected which an attacker can use to trick the user into entering their username and password and then send their credentials to a malicious site.Another concern brought to my attention while doing the research was that 70% of the apps did not have any alternative authentication solutions, such as multi-factor authentication, which could help to mitigate the risk of impersonation attacks.Most of the logs files generated by the apps, such as crash reports, exposed sensitive information. This information could be leaked and help attackers to find and develop 0day exploits with the intention of targeting users of the application. Most of the apps disclosed sensitive information through the Apple system log. The following example was extracted from the Console system using an iPhone Configuration Utility (IPCU) tool. The application dumps user credentials of the authentication process.CA_DEBUG_TRANSACTIONS=1 in environment to log backtraces.Jun 22 16:20:37 Test Bankapp[2390] : USER-IDXRSPASSWORDxxxxxxxxJun 22 16:20:37 Test Bankapp[2390] : ]]]]]]]]]]]]] wxxx.xxxxx.comJun 22 16:20:42 Test Bankapp[2390] : RETURNED:Jun 22 16:20:42 Test Bankapp [2390] : CoreAnimation: warning, deleted thread with uncommitted CATransaction; set CA_DEBUG_TRANSACTIONS=1 in environment to log backtraces.The following tools were used for the static analysis and decryption:IDA PRO (disassembler tool) [4]Clutch (cracking utility) [5]objc-helper-plugin-ida [6]ssh (Secure Shell)gdb (debugger tool)IPCU [7]The binary code of each app was decrypting using Clutch. A combination of decrypted code and code disassembled with IDA PRO was used to analyze the application.Hardcoded development credentials were found in the code. __text:00056350 ADD R0, PC ; selRef_sMobileBankingURLDBTestEnv____text:00056352 MOVT.W R2, #0x46__text:00056356 ADD R2, PC ; "https://mob_user:T3stepwd@db.internal/internal/db/start.do?login=mobileEvn"__text:00056358 LDR R1, [R0] ; "setMobileBankingURLDBTestEnv_iPad_mobil"...__text:0005635A MOV R0, R4__text:0005635C BLX _objc_msgSend__text:00056360 MOV R0, (selRef_setMobileBankingURLDBTestEnvWithValue_iPad_mobileT_ - 0x56370) ; selRef_setMobileBankingURLDBTestEnvWithValue_iPad_mobileT___text:00056368 MOVW R2, #0xFA8A__text:0005636C ADD R0, PC ; selRef_setMobileBankingURLDBTestEnvWithValue_i_mobileT___text:0005636E MOVT.W R2, #0x46__text:00056372 ADD R2, PC ; "https://mob_user:T3stepwd@db.internal/internal/db/start.do?login=mobileEvn&branch=%@&account=%@&subaccount=%@"__text:00056374 LDR R1, [R0] ; "setMobileBankingURLDBTestEnvWith_i"...__text:00056376 MOV R0, R4__text:00056378 BLX _objc_msgSendBy using hardcoded credentials, an attacker could gain access to the development infrastructure of the bank and infest the application with malware causing a massive infection for all of the application's users.Internal functionality exposed via plaintext connections (HTTP) could allow an attacker with access to the network traffic to intercept or tamper with data.__text:0000C980 ADD R2, PC ; "http://%@/news/?version=%u"__text:0000C982 MOVT.W R3, #9__text:0000C986 LDR R1, [R1] ; "stringWithFormat:"__text:0000C988 ADD R3, PC ; "Mecreditbank.com"__text:0000C98A STMEA.W SP, {R0,R5}__text:0000C98E MOV R0, R4__text:0000C990 BLX _objc_msgSend__text:0000C994 MOV R2, R0__text:0001AA70 LDR R4, [R2] ; _OBJC_CLASS_$_NSString__text:0001AA72 BLX _objc_msgSend__text:0001AA76 MOV R1, (selRef_stringWithFormat_ - 0x1AA8A) ; selRef_stringWithFormat___text:0001AA7E MOV R2, (cfstr_HttpAtmsOpList - 0x1AA8C) ; "http://%@/atms/?locale=%@&version=%u"__text:0001AA86 ADD R1, PC; selRef_stringWithFormat___text:0001AA88 ADD R2, PC; "http://%@/atms/version=%u"__text:0001AA8A loc_1AA8A ; CODE XREF: -[BranchesViewController processingVersion:]+146j__text:0001AA8A MOVW R3, #0x218C__text:0001AA8E LDR R1, [R1]__text:0001AA90 MOVT.W R3, #8__text:0001AA94 STMEA.W SP, {R0,R5}__text:0001AA98 ADD R3, PC ; "Mecreditbank.com"__text:0001AA9A MOV R0, R4__text:0001AA9C BLX _objc_msgSendMoreover, 20% of the apps sent activation codes for accounts though plainttext communication (HTTP). Even if this functionality is limited to initial account setup, the associated risk high. If an attacker intercepts the traffic he could hijack a session and steal the victim's account without any notification or evidence to detect the attack.After taking a close look at the file system of each app, some of them used an unencrypted Sqlite database and stored sensitive information, such as details of customer's banking account and transaction history. An attacker could use an exploit to access this data remotely, or if they have physical access to the device, could install jailbreak software in order to steal to the information from the file system of the victim's device.The following example shows an Sqlite database structure taken from the file system of an app where bank account details were stored without encryption.Other minor information leaks were found, including:__data:0008B590 _TakeMeToLocationURL DCD cfstr_Http10_1_4_133__data:0008B590 ; DATA XREF: -[NavigationView viewDidLoad]+80o__data:0008B590 ; __nl_symbol_ptr:_TakeMeToLocationURL_ptro__data:0008B590 ; "http://100.10.1.13:8080/WebTestProject/PingTest.jsp"Internal file system paths:__cstring:000CC724 aUsersXXXXPro DCB "/Users/Scott/projects/HM_iphone/src/HBMonthView.m",0Even though disclosing this information on its own doesn't have a significant impact, an attacker who collected a good number of these leaks could gain an understanding of the internal layout of the application and server-side infrastructure. This could enable an attacker to launch specific attacks targeting both the client- and server-side of the application.From a defensive perspective, the following recommendations could mitigate the most common flaws:Ensure that all connections are performed using secure transfer protocolsEnforce SSL certificate checks by the client applicationProtect sensitive data stored on the client-side by encrypting it using the iOS data protection APIImprove additional checks to detect jailbroken devicesObfuscate the assembly code and use anti-debugging tricks to slow the progress of attackers when they try to reverse engineer the binaryRemove all debugging statements and symbolsRemove all development information from the production applicationHome banking apps that have been adapted for mobile devices, such as smart phones and tablets, have created a significant security challenge for worldwide financial firms.As this research shows, financial industries should increase the security standards they use for their mobile home banking solutions.
Vsevolod Chaplin - OrthodoxWiki
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 16:28
  The Very Reverend Archpriest Vsevolod Chaplin is the chairman of the Synodal Department for the Cooperation of Church and Society of the Moscow Patriarchate, in addition to being a member of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation and rector of St. Nicholas on the Three Hills Church, Moscow.
  BiographyVsevolod Anatolyevich Chaplin was born on March 31, 1968, into the family of an agnostic professor. He went to school in Golyanovo, Moscow.
  After he graduated in 1985, he joined the staff of the Publishing Department of the Moscow Patriarchate. On recommendation of Metropolitan Pitirim, he entered the Moscow Theological Seminary, graduating in 1990.
  From October 1990 to March 2009, he was in the Department for External Church Relations (DECR) of the Moscow Patriarchate, beginning as an ordinary fellow (1990-1991) before moving into public affairs (1991-1997), then being secretary (1997-2001) and vice-president (2001-2009). At the same time as being in the DECR, he continued studies at the Moscow Theological Academy, defending his thesis and graduating in 1994.
  Vsevolod was ordained to the diaconate on April 21, 1991, and to the priesthood on January 7, 1992. He was elevated to archpriest in 1999.
  Fr Vsevolod has no children.
  CommitteesIn addition to his other work, Fr. Vsevolod was or is a member of:
  The Council for Cooperation with Religious Associations under the Russian President on March 4, 1996, May 14, 1997 and May 28, 2009The Central Committee of the World Council of ChurchesThe Conference of European ChurchesThe WCC Commission on International AffairsThe Expert Council under the Committee of the State Duma on affairs of public associations and religious organizationsthe expert group the OSCE on Freedom of Religion or Belief.March 31, 2009: Chairman of the Synodal Department for the newly formed relationship between the Church and society.January 3, 2010: Member of the Russian Organizing Committee "Victory".July 26, 2010: Member of the Patriarch's Council of Culture.Public StatementsFr Vsevolod's role as Chairman of the Department for the Cooperation of Church and Society means that he makes public statements on religion and ethics, including:
  Opposing the confusion of the terms 'religion' and 'denomination', claiming that confessions can be just Christian.Commenting on the positive side of Stalin and Ksenia Sobchak, but negatively on MadonnaAdvocating the establishment of 'Orthodox National Teams'Opposing euthanasiaOpposing the anonymity of the InternetCriticised Darwin's doctrine on the origin of manCriticised idea that faith is a private matterRefuses to pray with Christians of other denominationsConsiders that, to avoid rape, Russian girls need to be 'more serious in appearance'. Proposed that a 'nationwide dress code' could help.Supports the beautification of church buildings, iconostases, ornaments and vestments, as befits a religion at the centre of national life, giving the Church the opportunity to speak to rich and poor alike.AwardsState awardsThe Order of Friendship (January 21, 2009) - for outstanding contribution to the development of spiritual culture and strengthening friendship between peoples.Diploma of the Russian Federation President (July 20, 2011) - for services to the development of spiritual culture and strengthening friendship between peoplesChurch awardsThe Order of St. Prince Daniel of Moscow, second class (2010)The Order of St. Innocent, Metropolitan of Moscow (2005)The Order of St. Prince Daniel of Moscow, third class (1996)Other awardsThe medal "For peace and harmony between peoples" (International Federation for Peace and Harmony, 2007) - for their active participation in the peace, charity, peace and mutual understanding, cooperation among peoples and for strengthening relations and fruitful cooperation between the regional diocesan and secular non-governmental organizationsThe Order of the Russian Imperial House St. Anne's II degreeCommemorative Medal "The highest visit to Kiev - the mother of Russian cities. 1911-2011" (The Russian Imperial House, 2011)Commemorative Medal "The highest visit to the Crimea. 2011" (the Russian Imperial House, 2011)ReferencesExternal links
COC 'diep, diep teleurgesteld' door koning
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: VK: Home
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:33
  10/01/14, 15:00 '' bron: ANP
  (C) anp. Het COC organiseerde in april een demonstratie tegen de Russische president Vladimir Poetin in Amsterdam.
  Het COC reageert geschokt op het nieuws dat premier Mark Rutte en koning Willem-Alexander afreizen naar de Olympische Winterspelen in Sotsji. De belangenorganisatie voor homo's had gehoopt dat er een statement tegen Rusland gemaakt zou worden.
  Tanja Ineke, voorzitter COC Nederland: 'Ik ben verbijsterd en diep, diep teleurgesteld. Ten eerste omdat het kabinet de Russische lhtb's (lesbiennes, homo's, transgenders en biseksuelen) in de kou laat staan. Die hadden opgeroepen om een duidelijk signaal te geven en niet de hoogste vertegenwoordigers te sturen.'
  'Ten tweede omdat Nederland normaal altijd voorop loopt als het aankomt op homorechten en nu sluiten we niet eens achteraan achter Frankrijk, de VS en andere landen. We hopen dat de Tweede Kamer hier alsnog een stokje voor steekt.'
Native ads grow up
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Columbia Journalism Review
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:25
  The New York Times is now in the native-advertising game, and that's raised the hackles of folks like Andrew Sullivan, Michael Wolff, and Tom Foremski.
  But native ads aren't inherently worse than regular ads. It's all about the disclosure, and the Times has done that well here.
  All ads are potentially problematic for journalism. The conflicts of interest are built in. Shall we cover this General Motors story, say, and lose our biggest advertiser (as The Wall Street Journalcourageously did in the 1950s) or ignore it or at least soft-pedal it a bit? Shall we put our Homes reporters on this predatory-lending story or have them continue writing about quirky radiators and toilet-flushing confusion? Shall we bundle this lucrative newspaper insert put together by the Chinese government and made to look like a real paper?
  Trade-offs, you know.
  The particular problem with native advertising is its potential to trick readers into thinking it's not advertorial. It's an existential one, actually, as Audit Chief Dean Starkman wrote a year ago: Make the ad too native and it's deceptive. Make it too ad-like and nobody will want to read it.
  The Times's Dell ad, its first, is firmly in the latter. Here's what it looks like on my screen:
  It's hard to imagine anyone mistaking this page for an actual New York Times story (perhaps not least because Times copy editors would have whacked a couple of these ledes).
  First, the Times didn't place the story in the news area on its home page. It put it in an ad spot and put ''PAID POST'' in all caps. The NYT isn't serving the ad in Denmark, where I am, so here's Business Insider's screen capture:
  Now, readers can come in via links, obviously. But the giant blue border with Dell's logo and ''PAID FOR AND POSTED BY DELL'' around the actual posts is plenty of signal that this is not a Times story, as is the byline, which has the Dell before the writer's name, even.
  The font is different and smaller, and the actual NYT stories linked to are clearly labeled ''SELECTED BY (Dell logo).
  Critically, the Times isn't even letting search indexes spider these URLs. You can't find them in Google results even if you search for quotes or the URL. That means these ads won't get intermingled with NYT results in search results.
  So when Andrew Sullivan says this, he's arbitrarily demanding higher standards from digital'--where the ads bring about a tenth of the cash'--than from print:
  When we picked a pure subscription model over a year ago, I honestly wouldn't have believed that a year later, even the NYT was knee-deep in corporate propaganda with the NYT logo and other articles at the top of the page. Especially after their great pay-meter success, why sacrifice something so special as the integrity of the NYT for what cannot yet be big bucks?
  Look, I'm no fan of native advertising, but truth be told, I don't like advertising, period. It will always coexist uneasily with journalism because journalism is (or should be) about getting at the truth as best we can, while marketing is inherently about manipulating people to get us to buy stuff.
  Ads are a necessary evil, alas. And these NYT ads are no worse than the ''special advertising sections'' that magazines and papers, including the Times, have run for decades. I'd say these ads are better-demarcated than many of those sections, actually.
  Native ads aren't inherently worse than regular ads. It's all about the disclosure, and the Times has done that well here.
  The potential problems are down the road, and we and others will be watching closely. If nobody reads them, will the Times make the disclaimers less obvious?
  Let's hope not. Until and unless that happens, then, these are fine.
  Ryan Chittum , a former Wall Street Journal reporter, is deputy editor of The Audit, CJR's business section. If you see notable business journalism, give him a heads-up at rc2538@columbia.edu.
'Chip fault' in crash helicopter
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BBC News - Home
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:19
  10 January 2014Last updated at 07:13 ET A helicopter had already been cleared to fly when a computer system found 94 metallic chip detections in its gearbox eight days before it crashed, a fatal accident inquiry has heard.
  The Bond helicopter came down in April 2009, leaving all 16 men on board dead.
  Engineers discussed calling the helicopter back once the fault was found but a decision was taken not to do so.
  It was taken out of service once it returned on 25 March 2009.
  At the time there was no requirement for the Health and Usage Monitoring System (HUMS) - which detects mechanical faults - to be fully downloaded from the helicopter before a flight could take off.
  Giving evidence on the fifth day of the inquiry in Aberdeen, former Bond engineer Charles Verner Hill, said he was informed of the problem by a colleague.
  He said: "While having a tea break he came and got me and informed me there was an anomaly in Delta Lima's ground station."
  He said he discussed the anomaly with his line manager John Crowther and asked him whether the helicopter should be called back.
  He said: "I wasn't told to recall it."
  When the helicopter returned Mr Hill and colleague Lee McGill examined the gearbox and the fault detector.
  "Mr McGill didn't find anything and when I recovered the epicyclic and held it up to the light I didn't see any particles.
  "We took the card in again and downloaded the data from that flight and there was still an indication on it and I wasn't happy with that."
  The helicopter was taken out of service and the particles were discovered later in the day.
  An Air Accidents Investigation Branch report blamed a catastrophic gear box failure for the crash, which happened 12 miles off Peterhead.
  The two crew who died were Capt Paul Burnham, 31, of Methlick, Aberdeenshire, and co-pilot Richard Menzies, 24, of Droitwich Spa, who worked for Bond Offshore Helicopters.
  The KCA Deutag employees killed were Brian Barkley, 30, of Aberdeen; Vernon Elrick, 41, of Aberdeen; Leslie Taylor, 41, of Kintore, Aberdeenshire; Nairn Ferrier, 40, of Dundee; Gareth Hughes, 53, of Angus; David Rae, 63, of Dumfries; Raymond Doyle, 57, of Cumbernauld; James John Edwards, 33, of Liverpool; Nolan Goble, 34, of Norwich, and Mihails Zuravskis, 39, of Latvia.
  The other victims were James Costello, 24, of Aberdeen, who was contracted to Production Services Network (PSN); Alex Dallas, 62, of Aberdeen, who worked for Sparrows Offshore Services; Warren Mitchell, 38, of Oldmeldrum, Aberdeenshire, who worked for Weatherford UK; and Stuart Wood, 27, of Aberdeen, who worked for Expro North Sea Ltd.
After 20 Years of NAFTA Poverty, Lawmakers Move to Fast-Track TPP
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BlackListedNews.com
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:17
  'The Trans-Pacific Partnership would be an unmitigated disaster for everything from the environment to internet freedom and working families'
  On the heals of NAFTA's ''20 years of regret'' anniversary, U.S. lawmakers are aggressively pushing legislation to fast-track what has been called NAFTA on steroids: the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).
  Three powerful lawmakers '--House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI), Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) and Ranking Member Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) '-- announced legislation (pdf) Thursday that would allow the Obama administration to fast-track approval of this behemoth trade deal.
  Known as ''trade promotion authority,'' the legislation would allow the Obama administration to dodge deliberation and amendments from Congress.
  Public Citizen summarizes:
  Whether or not the president obtains the listed negotiating objectives, the bill would empower the president to sign a trade pact before Congress votes on it with a guarantee that the executive branch can write legislation to implement the pact and alter wide swaths of existing U.S. law and obtain both House and Senate votes within 90 days. That legislation is not subject to markup and amendment in committee, all amendments are forbidden during floor votes and a maximum of 20 hours of debate is permitted in the House and Senate.
  The legislation is being advanced despite broad opposition from within Capitol Hill as well as social justice, labor, and environmental organizations.
  ''For nearly four years, the U.S. Trade Representative and TPP negotiators have purposely restricted participation and information, keeping members of Congress and citizen groups, unions, environmental and consumer organizations in the dark,'' said Communications Workers of America President Larry Cohen. ''There has been no opportunity for public interest groups to meaningfully participate in the negotiations, and under fast track authority, there will be no opportunity for our elected representatives to amend the deal and make it better for Americans.''
  Said Charles Chamberlain, Executive Director, Democracy for America, ''The Trans-Pacific Partnership would be an unmitigated disaster for everything from the environment to internet freedom and working families.''
  He added, ''Let's be clear: A vote for fast track authority on the TPP is a vote for a deal that will hurt hardworking Americans and haunt every single member of Congress, Republican or Democrat, who votes for it.''
Israel plans new settlement homes
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: BBC News - Middle East
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:15
  10 January 2014Last updated at 08:09 ET Israel has announced plans to build 1,400 new homes in Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
  The move was expected after the release of 26 Palestinian prisoners last month, but was delayed until after a visit by US Secretary of State John Kerry.
  Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said it showed "Israel's clear commitment to the destruction of peace efforts".
  There has been little sign of progress from the direct negotiations mediated by Mr Kerry, which resumed in July.
  A dispute over settlement construction led to the collapse of the last talks.
  About 500,000 Jews live in more than 100 settlements built since Israel's 1967 occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The settlements are considered illegal under international law, though Israel disputes this.
  'Displaying true agenda'Continue reading the main storyThe announcement... is a test for the US administration's ability to hold Israel accountable''
  End QuoteSaeb ErekatChief Palestinian negotiatorOn Friday, Israel's housing ministry issued tenders for the construction of 801 housing units in West Bank settlements, including Efrat, Elkana and Emanuel, and 600 in Ramat Shlomo in East Jerusalem.
  The ministry also re-issued tenders for a further 532 homes in East Jerusalem that had previously failed to attract bids from contractors.
  The settlement watchdog, Peace Now, said that since the direct peace talks resumed, Israel had announced plans for 5,439 settlement homes.
  "These latest tenders could cause negotiations to break down and destroy Kerry's efforts," said Peace Now's general secretary, Yariv Oppenheimer.
  Mr Erekat, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) executive committee and its chief negotiator at the peace talks, said the Israeli government was "openly displaying its true agenda".
  "The announcement of yet more settlement units at this particular moment is a test for the US administration's ability to hold Israel accountable for actively sabotaging their efforts for peace," he added.
  At the beginning of the month, the US secretary of state held talks with Israeli and Palestinian representatives in an effort to secure a "framework" for a final Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement.
  He hoped to achieve consensus on core issues - including security, borders, Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees - so progress could be made towards signing a comprehensive treaty by April, US officials said.
  In a separate development on Friday, the Israeli foreign ministry summoned the ambassador of the Netherlands "for clarification" over the decision by the Dutch pension fund asset manager, PGGM, to divest from five Israeli banks involved in financing West Bank settlements.
  Raffi Schutz, the ministry's deputy director general for European affairs, told Caspar Veldkamp that the move was "unacceptable and relies on false pretence".
  He said Israel expected the government of the Netherlands "to take an unequivocal stance against such steps, which only wreak damage" to bilateral relations.
  Last month, the Dutch water supplier, Vitens, ended a partnership with the Israeli water company, Mekorot, which supplies settlements.
'‹Legislation would grant Obama 'fast-track authority' on global trade pacts like TPP
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: RT - USA
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:08
  Published time: January 10, 2014 01:00Edited time: January 10, 2014 01:49Demonstrators protesting against the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) are seen on Pennsylvania Avenue, near the White House, on September 24, 2013 in Washington, DC.(AFP Photo / Mandel Ngan)
  Congressional leaders on the US trade policy have introduced legislation that would grant President Barack Obama ''fast-track authority'' to enact three looming global trade accords, including the controversial Trans-Pacific Partnership.
  House Ways and Means Committee Chair Dave Camp (R) and top Senate Finance Committee members Max Baucus (D) and Orrin Hatch (R) on Thursday unveiled the Trade Priorities Act of 2014 that would require a simple up-or-down vote on major trade deals without the opportunity to offer amendments to pertinent bills.
  ''The [Trade Priorities Act] legislation we are introducing today will make sure that these trade deals get done, and get done right,'' Sen. Baucus said in a statement. ''This is our opportunity to tell the administration - and our trading partners - what Congress's negotiating priorities are.''
  The Obama administration is seeking the heightened authority in trade deals, allowing the Executive Branch to smooth congressional negotiations on accords. The two major deals, both long in the works, that are likely to be subject to such legislation are the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the 28-nation pact with the European Union, the Trans-Atlantic Free Trade Agreement (TAFTA). The deals would establish the world's largest so-called free-trade zones.
  The US is also working on a services-trade accord with a group of nations that would encompass half of the global economy.
  The TPP has come under much scrutiny for being negotiated among the US and 11 other nations along the Pacific Rim: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.
  Critics cite serious concerns over how provisions of the project could, for example, drive up the price of medications and other goods across the world. The White House's reluctance to provide details to leading lawmakers responsible for America's trade plans has caused a rift within the President's own political party, as his administration remains adamant about protecting the items being heard.
  According to leaked excerpts of the Pacific deal, the Obama administration has been considering TPP provisions that would allow foreign corporations operating within the United States to appeal regulations on the environment, labor and banking that would be enforced on American-owned businesses with no chance of reprieve.
  Under the provisions, while the US could be sanctioned for failing to impose regulations on American-run businesses, multinational corporations are given a direct path by the TPP to file such appeals. If one of the Pacific nations chooses to go down that route, their plea would be heard by an international tribunal that could overrule US law.
  One group opposing the TPP deal - Fight For The Future - says there is more to be concerned with besides secretive international court mandates. According to group the TPP will: ''restrict, police and censor the Internet, stifling free speech and innovation; radically decrease access to affordable medicine; circumvent protections for workers and the environment; expand economic inequality; prevent corporations from properly labeling genetically modified food.''
  Outside of elevating ''individual foreign firms to equal status with sovereign nations,'' government transparency advocate Public Citizen says TPP seems to be less about trade but rather mechanisms to enact corporate policy at the expense of the average American.
  ''Of TPP's 29 draft chapters, only five deal with traditional trade issues,'' Public Citizen reports on its website. ''One chapter would provide incentives to offshore jobs to low-wage countries. Many would impose limits on government policies that we rely on in our daily lives for safe food, a clean environment, and more. Our domestic federal, state and local policies would be required to comply with TPP rules.''
  In late July, Obama called for the new fast-track authority. US Trade Representative Michael Froman and US Commerce Department Secretary Penny Pritzker have both urged Congress to ultimately pass the measure.
  Supporters of the fast-track legislation include major players like the Business Roundtable, the US Chamber of Commerce, the American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Association of Manufacturers. Boeing, Pfizer, Walmart and numerous other major corporations have aggressively lobbied for the authority granted in the Trade Priorities Act.
  ''TPA is the Chamber's top trade priority before the Congress,'' Thomas Donohue, the organization's president and chief executive officer, said Thursday in a statement.
  White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said Thursday that while he had not seen details on the new proposed legislation, ''when there's progress on that front it's a good thing,'' according to BusinessWeek.
  Meanwhile, a competing bill to the Trade Priorities Act is in the pipeline, said Rep. Sander Levin, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee.
  ''You have to have a very substantial increase in Congress's involvement at all stages,'' Levin told reporters. The Trade Priorities Act ''falls far short'' of what would meet that standard, he said.
Statement by National Security Advisor Susan E. Rice on South Sudan
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:08
  The White House
  Office of the Press Secretary
  For Immediate Release
  January 09, 2014
  The United States strongly supports the efforts of the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) mediators, Ambassador Seyoum Mesfin and General Lazaro Sumbeiywo, to secure a cessation of hostilities and to resolve the conflict in South Sudan peacefully through talks being held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. This crisis must be ended swiftly through a negotiated settlement in order to prevent the escalation of a dangerous conflict that neither the people of South Sudan, the region or the international community can afford.
  The United States calls upon rebel-leader Riek Machar and President Salva Kiir to sign immediately the cessation of hostilities agreement tabled by IGAD. Mr. Machar, in particular, must commit to a cessation of hostilities without precondition. His continued insistence on the release of detainees as a pre-condition for a cessation of hostilities is unacceptable and runs counter to the express will of the detainees who informed the IGAD mediators yesterday that they support talks on an unconditional cessation of hostilities and stated clearly that their status as detainees should not be an impediment to reaching an agreement on a cessation of hostilities.
  At the same time, the United States is disappointed that the detainees being held by the Government of South Sudan have not yet been released. The United States reiterates its call upon President Salva Kiir to release the detainees immediately to the custody of IGAD so that they can participate in the political negotiations.
  It is the obligation of both President Kiir and Mr. Machar to ensure that the lives of their people and future of their young country are not further marred by continued violence and atrocities.
  ###
BOHICAGATE
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: Lame Cherry
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 14:04
  As another Lame Cherry exclusive in matter anti matter.......
  Did not this blog conclusively predict there was an operation engaged in to bring down Republican Governor Chris Christy in the first Mockingbird hit piece on him which revealed he was engaged in bringing down Mitt Romney in 2012 for his own run for the President in 2016.Everything from stopping Mormon Romney from raising funds in New Jersey like some mafioso to the Obama in his pants walk in the hurricane beachcombers revealed the treachery of Christy was as deep as Romney in destroying Conservative Fred Thompson in 2008 for Romney's own 2012 run.
  Governor Christy is a Rockefeller Republican thug and bully, just like Mormon Romney is. None of that is that interesting in the facts, but the interest is in the group of pariahs from the fagsexuals to the cultist Foster Freiss types who ruin Conservative candidates and then commit fratracide on each other for their chance to Cassius each other in never reaching Caesar status.
  When you have Mark Halperin show up in text, you have an intelligence asset of the left employed to bring down those on the right and to enhance the ability of those on the left in stealing the next election. That is what the first hit piece on Christy was about, and it came from Birther Hussein hisself's regime as Muchelle is foaming rabid to keep that Obama legacy alive and not under indictment.That is going to be conducted by Hillary Clinton as this blog has stated. I have warned all that Hillary is the liberal nominee and that Jeb Bush has already stolen the GOP nomination, and informed you of this before the ink was dry on the stolen Romney ballots by Obama.
  Hillary Clinton with the cartel has set this up to face Jeb Bush, and she is clearing the Republican field, with willing assistance from the Rovians, who have furious Mormon Romney wanting retaliation on Christy, as Jeb Bush in glee watches his one competitor who could damage him exposed as a crook in the Obama book about him and now exposed as a despot in shutting down the George Washington Bridge ramps.The Obama Attorney General is investigating this, so this is coming from the Obama re elect Hillary Campaign coordination, and no matter what Christy does in firing people, this is going to be the big harpoon into his blubber form and the lances are ready to follow.
  Are you not pleased now that whaling stories appeared here and will continue to appear here so you comprehend all of this? Oh you did not know God was Inspiring me to teach you of things in what blubber boy Christy will now experience for spouting off.
  "Arrrrr matey, thar she blows en she's a big un!!!!!"
  Just to help out the Tub Boy Governor, that "one email" was sent deliberately to be found in "time for some traffic problems at Fort Lee", from one of Christy's top aides. This was an intelligence operation and coordinated not of the Rovians, Obama, Bushites or Clintons. This is David Wildstein who was to head the New Jersey GOP got an email from staffer Bridget Ann Kelly in Christy's two time campaign manager knew of this operation.You might recall G. Gordon Liddy going off reservation with help in E. Howard Hunt, breaking laws and setting up Richard Nixon for Watergate.
  Liddy was cartel asset, just like those assets were employed to destroy John McCain and obliterate Sarah Palin in 2008 to put Obama into the White House illegally.
  They are all minders and if you are connected high up enough as the Bush family is, you get blackmailed and not prosecuted except for Scooter Libby, but if you are Birther Obama Chin, you get away literally with murder.Chris Christy had minders like all of these people do, and yes the leftists have minders too to control and blackmail them too. Christy was set up for this fall.Ronald Reagan had minders like Howard Baker trying to set him up as a geezer brain to install George H. W. Bush in a coup of that era.
  The reason the big harpoons have sunk into Christy's fat ass, is the first book slash did not stop Christy nor implode his polling nor finanicial numbers for donations. It was necessary then for the elect Hillary in 2016 campaign to take a more fall on your sword pitard to remove Christy.What is taking place now is those who were fired in being minders who set up this E. Howard Hunt operation have already the agreement that they will give evidence implicating Governor Christy...in more than this gate over the bridges in New Jersey.
  As this progresses, if Christy does not come to heel and help wipe out Jeb Bush when the time comes and a tandem beach stroll with Hillary at the appropriate time for her win, Chris Christy will be indicted and brought to complete ruin.
  Hillary Clinton was brought to heel on the same terms in her indictment for campaign fraud, and the charges just disappeared when she was put on the Obama leash and is performing tricks for the cartel completely in being taught who is really in charge.
  Chris Christy was an Ann Coulter minder fiction. He is finished as a political enterprise except what he can be made to perform for in the cartel. The cartel would not have expended several minders if this was not necessary to neutralize the Tub boy. That means he was a problem.
  Chris Christy is detested by Conservatives. He is loathed by the Romney breast feeders. He has no sympathy on the left as they only have heart for a Fang Jinn or Hillary. The billionaire fags did not appreciate Christy helping install Obama even if they made money off of it.That means the fat boy has two harpoons in him now, and they will bring out the lances.
  By Christy's actions and words, he apparently is too much the self deluded moron to comprehend his political life is over as an intelligence operation from on top is being engaged in against him. Morons like this are played as pawns and think themselves king and that is what brings them down.Sarah Palin played coy in she was promised the prize, but soon enough was like John Edwards in finding the carpet was yanked out from under her.
  The phones for Christy are still being answered, only to manipulate him and mind him. The best advice this blog gives this pompous buffoon is to make the call in selling his soul to save himself. He is going to be a political whore for Hillary Clinton if he stays viable and if the whim happens he will be the next Rod Blagojevich.
  That should be worth a few hundred thousand dollars in donations to this blog for all that insider reality. You now know what is really taking place instead of trying to find your ass with both hands as usual in Mockingbird.
  Enough of this for now as I am not being paid enough for Wifi internet nor to afford a life. It must be that the rich have some suicide wish to die in ignornance instead of offering up for the facts here.
  On and so it is a reality as I dislike Chris Christy, the reality is Christy knew nothing of this, no more than Nixon did, and he was played on the line and the hook set.Chirsty should know it is bad with Limbaugh putting the lance in and rubbing it in for Mockingbird. Levin will follow as those baron backed mic heads all spout the same talking points.
  Being ignorant is not going to save Christy as this is about Hillary Clinton 2016. If he makes the call and takes up the Chris Stevens, he will survive, but not as viable as Hillary did after her improprieties.If not, he has that vaseline jar six pack to comfort him in federal prison.
  That is how the game is played. You are either brought viagra suitcase to heel or click your pretty Palin heals together for FOX or you end up with your zipper down like John Edwards who was in the same position of being in the way as Christy is for the Hillary train.
  As stated too much nattering as not paid enough for this. Do not forget the exclusive here in someone left radioactive material in Mexico to be a story concerning the Persian Marxists in that projected attack in New Jersey which is on the books. The powers do require Christy to perform like that Obama walk on the beach of that event is initiated.This concerns more than 2016 and the Hillary Clinton stolen victory for the White House.
  Nuff said for the rich, as why should I save them with information when they do not care about my dire straights.
  agtG 299Y
  You probably did not note that this blog predicted all of this before the New York Times and CNN have now gone wall to wall with the end of Tuna Tub boy, so much so that lurching Rush Limbaugh is sending out a blow claiming that the NSA spies on him too (gasp) in emails (double gasp) and in homosexual laisons......(that was just add libbing) but even Rusto of the Goode Shippe LolleePop is engaged in saying this is about Hillary Clinton.Almost as if they were reading this as I typed it.....disconnected from all Wifi.....and suddenly Limbaugh changed gears from submarining Christy to going all BOHICA. BEND OVER HILLARY IT'S CHRISTY'S ASS.
  So as Limbaugh wondered what this gate was called, this blog has christyed it BOHICAGATE.
  .......and it was all broken here first months ago....before Alec Baldwin did not cry his way to another season of the Alec and the Beautiful.
  So donate for your sake as you rich people as it is working to save your lives. It is simply as chimps can peal bananas and you rich can click a donate button......both are enjoyable things to primates and it creates more dung to throw at those peering at you from behind your zoo bars.
  Gotta jet..........
What you should know about Turkey's AKP-Gulen conflict - Al-Monitor: the Pulse of the Middle East
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 13:34
  Protesters demonstrate against Turkey's ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) government and demand that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan resign because of the corruption investigation in Ankara, Dec. 18, 2013. (photo by REUTERS/Umit Bektas)
  Author: Mustafa Akyol Posted January 3, 2014
  The political tension, if not ''war,'' between the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) and the Islamic community led by Fethullah Gulen, is currently the hottest topic in Turkey. Most foreigners, however, have a hard time understanding the exact nature of this peculiar battle, which is even too confusing for Turks themselves. Here are some basic guidelines to understanding the conflict.
  Summary'Ž Print The recent AKP-Gulen split in Turkey has surprised many in the country and turned old allies into enemies.Are they not all conservative Sunni Muslims?
  Yes, they are. Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Islamic scholar Gulen and both their followers are pious Muslims who come from Turkey's mainstream Sunni (Hanafi) Islam. No wonder they used to be allies against Turkey's authoritarian secularists. No wonder they both use religious references these days in their arguments.
  There are some differences though. The core of the AKP comes from the ''National View'' (Milli Gorus) tradition, which can be best defined as Turkey's version of political Islam with anti-Western and pan-Islamic tones. Although the AKP explicitly abandoned this ideology during its founding more than a decade ago, most observers think Erdogan is gradually reverting back to the ''National View'' in the past few years.
  The Gulen movement, however, comes from the tradition of Islamic scholar Said Nursi (1878-1960), who focused on faith and morality rather than politics, and whose followers generally shied away from political Islam. Hence, Gulen's followers never voted for Gorus and opted for center-right parties. Some scholars have thus defined the Gulen movement as ''cultural Islam'' as opposed to political Islam.
  Why are they in conflict?
  Had the Gulen movement been limited only to cultural Islam, this current tension would be limited. Most observers agree that the movement in fact has its own version of a political effort: aiming for members to obtain jobs within the judiciary and the police. Apparently, this began back in the '70s as an effort to transform a hostile state '-- Turkey's draconian secular regime '-- by gradually joining its ranks. Since it has been a covert task, it has always been a matter of speculation and a source for conspiracy theories.
  When the AKP came to power in 2002 and soon found itself targeted by the old secular guard, the Gulen followers within the police and the judiciary emerged as a natural ally. Thus Erdogan, it is often said, empowered these fellow conservatives against their secularist rivals. However, once the old establishment was decisively defeated, sometime around 2010 to 2011, disagreements emerged between the AKP and the Gulen movement. The first breaking point was the so-called ''MIT (Turkish National Intelligence Organization) crisis.''
  In February 2012, MIT head Hakan Fidan, a confidant of Erdogan, was called by an Istanbul prosecutor to testify as part of an investigation into the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). This was, as The New York Times then reported, ''the latest round in a power struggle between the country's security forces and its intelligence agency.'' It was also widely interpreted as a power struggle between pro-Gulen police/judiciary and the AKP. Since then, Erdogan's supporters complain of a ''parallel state'' within the state, which allegedly acts according its own internal hierarchy and uses state power for its own purposes.
  Why did things escalate in the past two months?
  Since the ''MIT crisis'' of February 2012, the AKP-Gulen movement relations have been silently sour. But in mid-November 2013, all hell broke lose when Erdogan planned to close down ''prep schools,'' or weekend courses that prepare high school students for university exams. Since about a quarter of these schools are operated by the Gulen movement, and are a source of both finance and recruitment, the movement perceived this move as an attack. The pro-Gulen media opposed the government's ''attack on private enterprise.'' The government responded with harsh statements, and the war of words was soon declared an ''open war.''
  This battle between ''an increasingly authoritarian political leadership and its ever more nervous rival,'' as described by Al-Monitor columnist Yasemin Congar, took a new turn on Dec. 16, when Hakan Sukur, a football star turned parliamentarian, resigned from the AKP. Sukur, who heavily criticized the government upon resignation, is a proud follower of Gulen, and his entry into the parliament in 2011 was seen as a sign of a marriage between the movement and the party. His resignation signaled a divorce.
  The next morning, the real bomb went off: Zekeriya Oz, an Istanbul prosecutor who is widely believed to be a member of the Gulen movement, initiated an early morning raid on dozens of individuals, including the sons of three ministers, an AKP mayor, businessmen and bureaucrats. Millions of dollars stacked in shoeboxes were exposed to the press, underlining that this is the greatest corruption scandal in recent Turkish history. Over eight days, the four ministers who were accused resigned. One of them, Erdogan Bayraktar, shocked the country by saying Erdogan should resign too.
  Since the beginning of this corruption probe, two opposing narratives are competing. The pro-AKP camp openly blames the Gulen movement, or at least its ''parallel state,'' of trying to bring down the AKP government through the corruption probe. In their eyes, this is a ''coup effort'' by seemingly legal means. The pro-Gulen media and some others, in return, blame the government for trying to hide its widespread corruption by resorting to conspiracy theories and blocking the judiciary's right to investigate the government.
  How are Iran and Israel involved?
  At the heart of the corruption scandal is Turkey's gold-for-oil trade with Iran. According to the claims, Turkey made this deal in order to bypass US-EU sanctions on Iran, and Turkish state-owned Halkbank acted as the main agent of the money transfer, in a complex web explained well in Al-Monitor. No wonder one of the suspects in custody is Suleyman Aslan, CEO of Halkbank, in whose home millions of dollars were allegedly found in the now-famous shoeboxes. Another prominent suspect is Riza Sarraf, a wealthy Iranian businessman who deals with gold and was originally named Reza Zarrab. He is accused of having given bribes to prominent politicians.
  In response, the pro-AKP media imply that the covert trade with Iran was merely for Turkish national interests, and the money in personal homes would be used for charitable purposes such as building schools. Moreover, according to the same media, the real culprit behind this ''coup'' effort is Israel. The reasoning is that the biggest enemy of Iran, and Iranian-Turkish ties, is Israel and its US lobby, so these powers must be behind the corruption probe. The fact that the Gulen movement has carefully avoided joining the anti-Israeli sentiment within Turkey's Islamic circles (including Gulen's much discussed opposition to the Gaza Flotilla of 2010) is taken as evidence for the Israeli conspiracy. Pro-AKP media are full of articles these days that depict the Gulen movement as the fifth column or the Trojan Horse of ''Zionism.''
  Who do 'the liberals' support?
  Well, it depends. Many liberals had tired with the AKP long before, or at least during, the Gezi Park protests of last summer. So, most of these liberals support the corruption probe, and thus appear to be in a political alliance with the Gulen movement. There are other liberals, however, who still support the AKP based on the importance they attach to the peace process between the government and the PKK. This second group of liberals is also quite suspicious about the ''parallel state'' '-- a euphemism for the Gulen movement in the judiciary and police '-- and warns about its hawkish and ''anti-peace'' stance with regard to the PKK.
  Meanwhile, most other Islamic groups (none of them as big and prominent as the Gulen movement) are united behind Erdogan. Secularists are in shock and are weeping for what happened to the secular republic at the hands of two opposing Islamic cliques.
  Who will win?
  Only God knows. Plus, it is hard to tell what ''winning'' means. The Gulen movement is not a political party, and there is no other political party that it will be totally comfortable with. That is why some speculate that the movement is not anti-AKP but merely anti-Erdogan, and that it hopes for a post-Erdogan and less assertive AKP.
  Whoever wins, the victory can only be Pyrrhic. If Erdogan crushes the Gulen movement by any means, as some speculate these days, he will lose many votes and further diminish his democratic credentials. If the Gulen movement wins, it will only be proclaiming that it has a lot of power within the state, which will harm its reputation of being a moderate expression of ''cultural Islam.'' Meanwhile, Turkey's political and economic stability will suffer, not to mention its rule of law and societal peace.
  This is a war without any winners, in other words. But aren't those wars precisely the ones that are fought most passionately?
  Read More: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/01/akp-gulen-conflict-guide.html
A "Mein Kampf" Resurgence, Thanks to Amazon's Kindle
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 13:32
  You won't see Adolf Hitler peering back at you from the featured display tables at Barnes & Noble any time soon. But browse the most popular e-book stores these days and Der F¼hrer's mug is seemingly unavoidable. For a year now, his magnum manifesto has loomed large over current best-sellers on iTunes, where at the time of this writing two different digital versions of Mein Kampf rank 12th and 15th on the Politics & Current Events chart alongside books by modern conservative powerhouses like Sarah Palin, Charles Krauthammer and Glenn Beck.
  In fact, all seven of Beck's books trail Herr Hitler's nearly century-old tell-all, which consistently holds its own against new e-blockbusters like Game Change by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, This Town by Mark Leibovich, and Nate Silver's TheSignal and the Noise.
  NOW READ THIS
  Mein Kampf hasn't made The New York Times nonfiction chart since its U.S. release in 1939, the same year Germany invaded Poland, and its print sales have fallen steadily ever since. But with a flood of new e-book editions, Hitler's notorious memoir just clocked a banner digital year. One 2012 English-language version is currently the number one Propaganda & Political Psychology book on Amazon. Another digital selection is a player in the Globalization category.
  NOW READ THIS
  Or to put it another way: On Amazon, there are more than 100 versions of Mein Kampf for sale in every conceivable print and audio format, from antique hardbacks to brand-new paperbacks. Of those 100 iterations, just six are e-books'--yet all six of them rank among the 10 best-selling versions overall. And those are just the ones people are paying for.
  REICH 3.0: At press time, two separate versions of "Mein Kampf" ranked 12th and 15th in the Politics & Current Events chart on iTunes.
  So what exactly is going on here? Are people reading Hitler on their smartphones and Kindles? Is this what happens when Mein Kampf becomes available in the privacy of our own iPads? Could it be a cultural curiosity much like what's happened with sleazy romance novels, which surveys show are increasingly consumed in more clandestine e-form?
  NOW READ THIS
  The first Kindle edition of Mein Kampf surfaced in late 2008, selling for $1.60. Shortly after that, another version popped up for $1.58 and rocketed up Amazon's Legal Thrillers chart, then suddenly vanished in March 2009, along with a slightly pricier rival version, after a blogger at CNET acknowledged its burgeoning success. At the time, Amazon did not respond to CNET, which found it ''unclear who uploaded the Kindle Edition of Mein Kampf.'' Nevertheless, the e-book behemoth removed the virtual versions while continuing to offer a range of cloth and paperback printings, the overwhelming majority of which sold poorly if at all.
  [NOW READ THIS:]
  Houghton Mifflin, which holds the copyright of an English translation favored by scores of academics, hasn't published a softcover of Mein Kampf since 1998, and U.S. sales declined in the mid-1990s, when retailers moved an estimated 15,000 annual print copies. But as tablets gained popularity in the late-2000s, the e-book's presence grew and then soared. Besides the iTunes and Kindle-compatible versions, hundreds of txt and pdf files are available for download from thousands of online sources. More than a dozen free English-language versions of Mein Kampf have been downloaded in excess of 100,000 times from the nonprofit Internet Archive alone.
  KINDLENACHT: One of several Amazon charts dominated by Hitler
  Despite the vast availability of no-cost copies, paid editions of Mein Kampf have crept up on hot lists since companies like Barnes & Noble and most recently Apple launched aggressive e-reader campaigns. One of the purged electronic editions from 2008 has since returned to Kindle and regularly registers on the Communism & Socialism charts. Another pick, ''The Official 1939 Version,'' was listed by the U.K.-based Coda Books in September 2011 and is currently the 17th best-seller in Nationalism in any format. And an ''unexpurgated'' edition of Mein Kampf that showed up on Amazon two years ago continues to hold in the Philosophers rankings.
  NOW READ THIS
  Hitler's big comeback, though, came in 2013, when a 99 cent Kindle version released in January started charting among World War II books and Historical Biographies & Memoirs. Its publisher, a California company called Elite Minds Inc., uses the dollar e-book to promote more expensive original translations of Mein Kampf they retail in print and audio packages. In an email to Vocativ, Elite Minds President Michael Ford says, ''Sales are great,'' but notes that he faces ''a moral dilemma in promotion'' in that he fears advocating ''something that could be misused.'' He says, ''I have not heavily promoted the book and decided, for the most part, to let it spread among those who have a true historical and academic interest naturally.''
  NOW READ THIS:
  While the Amazon and iTunes algorithms are proprietary secrets'--and the best-selling e-publishers of Hitler's work declined to share figures with Vocativ'--current rankings suggest Mein Kampf could be following a similar trend to that of smut and romance novels. People might not have wanted to buy Mein Kampf at Borders or have it delivered to their home or displayed on their living room bookshelf, let alone get spotted reading it on a subway, but judging by hundreds of customer comments online, readers like that digital copies can be quietly perused then dropped into a folder or deleted. ''I think I waited 45 years to read Hitler's words,'' writes one reviewer. Another sums it up thusly: ''Curiosity killed me to get this book.''
  [NOW READ THIS]
  NOW READ THIS: APPLE KNOCKOFFS YOU WON'T SEE AT CES
  Similar comments have been made about the erotic smash hit 50 Shades of Grey, which in June 2012 became the first book to move 1 million units on Kindle. According to the Romance Writers of America, ''Romance buyers are buying e-books to a greater extent when compared with other major fiction subgenres,'' with e-book sales in the genre doubling annually. An October 2013 Book Industry Study Group report titled ''Consumer Attitudes Toward Book Reading'' yielded comparable results, finding that ''more than 50 percent [of subjects] surveyed say they prefer romance and erotic fiction in digital,'' while ''less than 10 percent preferred print.''
  Now Read This
  There are other rational explanations for Hitler's success in the digital realm, like the fact that tablets are much less cumbersome than, say, the hulking 694-page Houghton Mifflin hardcover. But Mein Kampf's electronic popularity is more likely a result of the 50 Shades phenomenon coupled with latent curiosity that's easily sated with a click. In a 2010 talk at Harvard, Rice University sociologist Elizabeth Long noted that stigmatized genres like ''mystery, science fiction and especially pornography'' have forever been ''sentenced to back corners, stuffed away out of sight,'' and predicted that taboo titles would migrate off physical bookshelves and into the cloud. Compared to Mein Kampf, books about chains and leather seem pretty soft core.
  This first-edition copy of "Mein Kampf," signed by Adolf Hitler, fetched approximately $48,000 at auction in 2005. It was likely removed from one of Hitler's offices at the end of World War II. (EPA)
  ***
  Translating in English to ''My Battle,'' Mein Kampf initially debuted to lackluster public interest. Hoping book profits could help cover mounting legal fees, Hitler began writing his memoir in prison in 1923, shortly after his then fledgling Nazi battalion was captured while trying to seize power in Munich. Annual sales of the first volume, a 400-plus-page screed printed in 1925, failed to exceed 10,000 copies. A 1927 volume with a key addition outlining Hitler's nascent extinction agenda sold 55,000 copies in 1930, and sales jumped exponentially after Hitler became chancellor in 1933. In a surefire marketing strategy, throughout the remainder of the decade the Third Reich bought and distributed 6 million copies of Mein Kampf to German citizens, including complimentary hardcovers for couples on their wedding day. By the time of his suicide in 1945, Hitler's book had earned him the modern equivalent of $152 million.
  EXPLAINER: The 'Mein Kampf' CopyrightA translation of Mein Kampf by Nazi sympathizer James Murphy was published in 1939 in the U.K., quickly becoming ''the big sensation.'' But it was soon swept up in a legal battle with two rival versions. Houghton Mifflin, which secured the U.S. copyright to Mein Kampf in 1939, published its own deluxe translation curated by 10 distinguished ''editorial sponsors,'' but the publishing giant wound up in court fighting yet another competing edition by Stackpole & Sons, a Pennsylvania imprint that claimed the work was in the public domain and not protected by copyright. The ensuing decision in the 1939 case, Houghton Mifflin Co. v. Stackpole Sons, Inc., set a precedent for Hitler and all other people of questionable statehood, whom the court ruled are ''entitled to the benefits of American copyright laws.''
  Even before Hitler offed himself in 1945, Houghton Mifflin was persuaded to direct profits from the book to Jewish refugees. From that point on, it became unofficial protocol to redistribute money made from Mein Kampf, and in 1979, the U.S. War Claims Fund paid out $139,000 in confiscated Hitler royalties to American ex-POWs. As noted, reparations and donations continued into the 2000s. After that, in addition to there being less confiscated Hitler royalties to go around, some charities began roundly rejecting proceeds from the book. Still, here and in various places abroad, booksellers'--sometimes skirting the law and sometimes adhering to copyright (as with U.S. sellers of public domain versions like the 1939 Murphy edition, or their own proprietary translations)'--have largely stayed under the radar. One possible exception is Amazon, which retails more than 100 versions and makes between 35 to 70 percent royalties on each copy.
  Several generations later, Mein Kampf remains a seismic and unnerving force. Nowhere has it caused more contention than in Germany, which banned new production of the book upon inheriting copyright ownership in 1945 and maintains national exclusivity until 2015. Lawmakers there had pledged to release an annotated version of Mein Kampf to coincide with the expiration of their rights. Last month, however, officials iced the plan out of concern that any acknowledgment of Hitler could project the wrong message, particularly at a time when German leaders are struggling to suppress an electorally active neo-Nazi faction from infecting the republic.
  ''At the very least, this episode illustrates the ongoing absurdity of the situation around the publication of Hitler's book in Germany,'' noted The Guardian's Berlin correspondent. The government, he wrote, ''can do nothing about the thousands of scans uploaded outside Germany that remain just a keystroke away for those within the country.''
  The first edition with signed photograph. (CARL DE SOUZA/AFP/Getty Images) AFP/Getty Images
  Trying to curb Hitler's sales has proven a futile exercise worldwide. Since showing up in Asia 15 years ago, Mein Kampf has sold in excess of 100,000 copies in India. In 2005, the debut of the first-ever Turkish translation sold 100,000 copies in the first two months. And now, with the e-book revolution in full swing, readers are downloading Hitler everywhere. But who exactly is pocketing the profits?
  NOW READ THIS
  In the past, sales have understandably drawn scrutiny from Holocaust survivor advocates and Jewish groups. Random House, which holds the U.K. copyright on the most popular English translation, has donated in excess of $1 million to the Holocaust Survivors' Memoirs Project. In 2000, members of the World Jewish Congress convinced Houghton Mifflin to share the wealth. Thirteen years later, the WJC has adjusted its strategy to the changing times. Rather than petitioning for philanthropic reparations, the international organization is now asking the world's largest online retailer, Amazon, to stop selling Mein Kampf and other hate books altogether.
  NOW READ THIS
  ''Amazon is a powerful and iconic company,'' says WJC CEO Robert Singer, who emphasizes theirs is not a call to ban the book, but rather a ''corporate responsibility campaign.''
  ''Amazon chooses not to sell many titles, such as pornography and books promoting incest, because some find that material offensive,'' says Singer. ''We're just asking the company to stop profiting from the sale of other offensive materials.''
  NOW READ THIS
  The WJC hasn't heard back from Amazon. A spokesperson for the company responded to initial inquiries from Vocativ, but ceased communicating after we specifically mentioned Mein Kampf. So too did Montecristo Publishing, an obscure Brazilian outfit that specializes in re-packaging public domain manuscripts, whose 99-cent version of the book currently ranks 15th in the iTunes Politics & Current Events category, where it's gaining on Palin and has already edged out Ann Coulter and Newt Gingrich. Like Amazon, Montecristo stopped emailing Vocativ after we asked how many copies they've sold and if they share profits with charities.
  NOW READ THIS
  Michael Ford, president of the other major e-publisher of Mein Kampf on iTunes, Elite Minds, explains that he prefers ''to use the earnings to develop other products that help people'' and has ''an issue with giving profits to one group or another.''
  ''This is a historical book,'' says Ford. ''To claim that some particular group, museum or activist cause should be entitled to money from it just because of its place in history is illogical to me.''
  Chris Faraone is the News and Features Editor of DigBoston. His most recent book, I Killed Breitbart, has been getting spanked by Mein Kampf on Kindle and iTunes for the past three months.
Schneiderman targets 'Insider Trading 2.0' | Capital New York
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 13:04
  Attorney General Eric Schneiderman today announced a settlement with BlackRock, the world's largest asset management firm, under which the company will halt its practice of receiving market-moving analysis before the public had access to it.
  Schneiderman, who once called the practice "Insider Trading 2.0," began his investigation into BlackRock in July 2012, following a report in the New York Times that outlined the firm's ''advance survey'' practice, which the attorney general said gave the company unfair access to market information unavailable to the public.
  BlackRock maintained that its survey program solicited information from financial analysts that was based on previously published reports. But the attorney general's office said it uncovered evidence that the survey program's design allowed it to capture analysts' views on companies that had not yet been made public.
  MORE ON CAPITALADVERTISEMENTBlackRock had been receiving research reports from financial analysts through the survey program for five years, although federal and state laws prohibit brokerage firms and analysts from selectively disclosing such information before the reports are disseminated to all customers entitled to them.
  As part of the settlement, BlackRock agreed to discontinue the practice, a move Schneiderman's office said could have far-reaching effects both because of BlackRock's size (it managed more than $4 trillion in assets) and the company's reach. BlackRock's analyst survey program was the world's largest, and the company has agreed to end the practice not only in the United States, but also worldwide.
  In an address Schneiderman gave to the Bloomberg Markets 50 Summit in September 2013, the attorney general said the practice, which he dubbed ''Insider Trading 2.0,'' was responsible for ''distort[ing] our markets far more than Albert Wiggin or Ivan Bosky or even Gordon Gekko could ever have imagined.''
  In addition to agreeing to discontinue the practice, BlackRock will pay $400,000 to offset the costs of the attorney general's investigation. BlackRock neither admitted nor denied the Attorney General's allegations.
  ''BlackRock deserves credit for recognizing the need for reform when it comes to the dissemination of information that can move markets,'' Schneiderman said in an emailed statement.
  ''BlackRock's agreement with my office to end its global analyst survey program and cooperate with my office's investigation into the early release of Wall Street analyst sentiment is a major step forward in restoring fairness in our financial markets and ensuring a level playing field for all investors. The concept that there should be one set of rules for everyone is critical to protecting the integrity of our markets, which is why my office will continue to take action against those who provide unfair advantages to elite traders at the expense of the rest of us.''
  Read the full settlement agreement here.
  MORE:Author: Laura Nahmiasfollow this reporter
  previousMORE IN ALBANYnextAROUND THE WEBMORE FROM CAPITALPlease enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
  comments powered by
De Blasio Transition Donors Include Many With Interests Before City | Politicker
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:57
  Bill de Blasio at his inauguration, which was funded by transition donors. (Photo: Stan Honda/Getty)
  Donors hoping to gain favor with newly-elected Mayor Bill de Blasio had one last chance to fill his coffers before his administration kicked into high gear. They took advantage of the opportunity.
  New and loyal backers pumped more than $2 million dollars into Mr. de Blasio's transition effort, new campaign finance filings show. And with Mr. de Blasio already elected, it perhaps isn't surprising that many of those offering last-minute backing have a financial stake in his administration.
  Among the notable names who maxed out on their giving''in addition to real estate titans like SL Green's Stephen Green, Alexander Durst from the The Durst organization, and the usual smattering of attorneys and finance types''were Hollywood director Steven Spielberg and his wife Kate Capshaw, as well as Dreamworks Animation CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg and his wife, Marilyn. Both of the couples contributed the max $9,000 to Mr. de Blasio's transition efforts. Neither had contributed to his campaign.
  Then there's the taxi industry, which according to Capital New York's tabulations gave more than $350,000 to Mr. de Blasio over the course of his campaign. They didn't stop giving. The industry''which battled former Mayor Michael Bloomberg over outer-borough green apple cabs, and efforts to standardize the industry''contributed another $45,000 to the mayor's inauguration and transition efforts, the records show. The sum includes maximum contributions from Jose Altamilano, the president of El Barrios Car Service, Neil Greenbaum and Eldar Guseynov, the manager and COO of All Taxi Management, as well as many smaller contributions from drivers and medallion owners.
  Transit advocates have long been puzzled by Mr. de Blasio's vague opposition to the outer-borough cabs''which appear to have proven popular in the communities they serve''prompting critics to speculate that the contributions could be the motivation. Mr. de Blasio has repeatedly denied this, however.
  Mr. de Blasio's press office did not immediately respond to questions about the implications of the contributions''or others in the filings.
  Among the transition's biggest bundlers were Charles Hocking ($30,350), election lawyer and lobbyist Stanley Schlein ($25,340) and Mercury Public Affairs' Jonathan Greenspun ($23,000). Also on the list: Harold Ickes, who raised $10,000 on Mr. de Blasio's behalf.
  Mr. Hocking, who also contributed $1,100 to Mr. de Blasio himself, is the president Hazen and Sawyer, an engineering firm that specializes in providing safe drinking water and controlling water pollution, according to its website. The firm has tens of millions of dollars of worth of contracts with the city's Department of Environmental Protection, according to city records. Employees at the firm''who live as far away as Georgia, Florida and North Carolina''also made a total of 43 contributions to the transition, totaling $16,200, the campaign records show. Mr. Hocking did not respond to an email seeking comment.
  According to city's campaign finance board, individuals doing business with the city are barred from contributing to transition efforts. But that doesn't stop them from bundling money from other donors.
  Mr. Schlein, a top election lawyer and registered lobbyist with the city, is identified in Mr. de Blasio's filings as working on behalf of Dominion Voting Systems Inc., which produces electronic voting systems for many districts across the state. The firm holds nearly $50 million in contracts with the city, records show, and provides absentee and affidavit ballots and other services to the city's Board of Elections, according to a spokeswoman for the board.
  Mr. Schlein also does business with the city as an employee of Crossroads Developer LLC, which is doing work with the city's Department of Housing Preservation and Development, city records show.
  Others with clear interests in the city also opened up their wallets. Mr. de Blasio received the maximum $4,500 from Chaim Reichman, a manager at Twin America, which runs the controversial double-decker sightseeing buses that have recently faced crackdowns by the City Council. He also got cash from John Curcio, the president of Empire State Bus Corp., which has nearly $100 millions in contracts with the Department of Education, records show.
  And perhaps hoping to receive the same top billing they enjoyed in the Bloomberg administration, a number of others involved in the film and television industry, including Douglas Steiner of Steiner Studios were also generous. Employees at Broadway Stages, who contributed more than $45,000 to Mr. de Blasio's campaign, added another $28,000 to his transition and inauguration efforts.
  The mayor also received $1,000 from another celeb, actress Susan Sarandon, who appeared at Mr. de Blasio's side often during the campaign.
Matthew Aid '-- Former CIA Deputy Director Michael Morell Named to Goodyear Board of Directors
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 12:51
  AKRON, Ohio, Jan. 9, 2014 /PRNewswire/ '-- Michael J. Morell, retired deputy director of the Central Intelligence Agency, has been elected to the board of directors of The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (NASDAQ: GT).
  "We are pleased to have Michael Morell join the Goodyear Board of Directors,'' said Goodyear Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Richard J. Kramer. ''He brings to our board outstanding leadership skills and a global perspective gained during the course of three decades of distinguished service to the United States. We look forward to adding his skills and expertise to our board.''
  Morell served as deputy director of the CIA from May 2010 to August 2013. A career officer, he held a variety of senior leadership positions with the agency, including serving as acting director twice, director of intelligence and executive director. He also served as a deputy director at the National Counterterrorism Center.
  He joined the CIA in 1980 as an analyst covering international energy issues. Morell later worked on East Asia for 14 years, holding a number of jobs in analysis and in management before his selection in 1999 as director of Asian Pacific and Latin American analysis.
  A native of Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, Morell earned a bachelor's degree in economics from the University of Akron and a master's degree in economics from Georgetown University.
  Morell, 55, served on President Barack Obama's Review Group on Intelligence and Telecommunications. He is a senior fellow at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, a counselor at Beacon Global Strategies, and a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
  Throughout his career, Morell received a number of awards, including the Presidential Rank Award for exceptional performance, the Distinguished Intelligence Medal for his role in the 2011 operation against Osama Bin Laden, the Distinguished Career Intelligence Medal, the National Intelligence Distinguished Service Medal, the Department of Defense Service Medal, and four CIA Director's Awards.
  The election of Morell brings the size of Goodyear's board to 13 members.
VIDEO-Swearing toddler in 'thug' video taken into protective custody - CNN.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 01:12
  STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  Authorities say there was no crime committed, but safety concerns existedVideo shows toddler bombarded with obscenities, coached to respond in kindOmaha police union says it illustrates "a cycle of violence and thuggery"ACLU and African-American leaders blast the posting of the video(CNN) -- A Nebraska toddler who repeated a slew of profanities in an online video has been taken into child protective custody, Omaha police said Wednesday.
  While authorities found nothing criminal in the video, officials from the Omaha police's Child Victim Unit and the Nebraska Child Protective Services took the infant and three other children into custody on Wednesday, the police department said on its Facebook page.
  The joint investigation found safety concerns, the statement said.
  CNN learned of development through Twitter.
  In the video, the diapered child is bombarded with obscenities and racial slurs by the adults around him.
  The African-American toddler knocks down a chair and gives nearly as good as he gets, responding to some of the comments with an upraised middle finger and telling one of the adults at one point, "Shut up, bitch." The adults laugh and prompt him to repeat other crudities.
  Just another day on the Internet -- until the police union in Omaha, Nebraska, posted the clip on its website to highlight what it called the "cycle of violence and thuggery" the community faces.
  Police union draws fire over swearing toddler 'thug' video
  The Omaha Police Officers Association came under fire from the city's police chief, the ACLU and at least one community leader. They say the move needlessly antagonizes the city's minority communities, who make up about a quarter of Omaha's 409,000 residents.
  Sgt. John Wells, the union's president, said the video was "disturbing" and "offensive."
  "The focus here isn't on any particular ethnic group. The focus here is on the troubling behavior towards this child," Wells said. "This behavior is going to potentially lead this child down a path that is completely unhealthy."
  On the website where the video is hosted, the union said the clip came from "a local thug's public Facebook page."
  "We here at OmahaPOA.com viewed the video and we knew that despite the fact that it is sickening, heartbreaking footage, we have an obligation to share it to continue to educate the law abiding public about the terrible cycle of violence and thuggery that some young innocent children find themselves helplessly trapped in," the police union wrote in a post accompanying the video.
  "Now while we didn't see anything in this video that is blatantly 'illegal,' we sure did see a lot that is flat out immoral and completely unhealthy for this little child from a healthy upbringing standpoint," it added.
  Wells said one of the adults mentions a local street gang in the video.
  "That is why when we talk about the culture, the criminal culture, that this is to try to break the cycle and deal with the culture of violence and the culture of gang activity," he said.
  But in a city where police officers' treatment of minorities led to lawsuits, criminal charges against two officers and the firings and reassignments of several others in the past year, critics say the video is poking at raw wounds. Willie Hamilton, president of the community activist group Black Men United, said the union "crossed a line by doing this."
  "For them to take a video out of context -- a 2-year-old who doesn't have the brain capacity to know what's going on -- and to say that this child, because two adults acted inappropriately, is going to end up in a life of crime is totally inappropriate," Hamilton said.
  And the American Civil Liberties Union of Nebraska, which filed an excessive-force suit against the Omaha Police Department on behalf of an African-American family on Monday, said the union's use of "racially charged language" was "very disconcerting."
  Police Chief Todd Schmaderer tried to distance his agency from the controversy in a statement issued Tuesday, saying that the union's website and Facebook page are separate from those of the Omaha Police Department and that he has little authority over the public statements of union members.
  "With that background and understanding, I want to make it explicit and clear that the views expressed on the OPOA Facebook page do not necessarily reflect the official stance of the Omaha Police Department," Schmaderer said. "I strongly disagree with any postings that may cause a divide in our community or an obstacle to police community relations."
  Wells said union members have turned the video over to the department's child victim unit, which will work with child-welfare agencies to investigate the circumstances. He said the organization "didn't think we'd get this big of a reaction."
  "Hopefully, the impact is, it gives law-abiding citizens what law enforcement deals with on a daily basis, and it sort of throws back the blinders that these type of problems are going on," he said. "And we can have a very frank and open discussion on how to tackle these issues and come up with solutions."
  CNN's Joseph Netto, Casey Wian and Jack Hannah contributed to this report.
9,135 out of 9,136 scientists believe climate change is happening - Salon.com
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Fri, 10 Jan 2014 01:02
  Contrary to what conservatives might suggest, there really isn't a debate in the scientific community over whether climate change is real. The commonly cited statistic is that 97 percent of scientists agree that global warming is happening, and that it's caused by human activity. Another way of looking at that consensus comes courtesy of James Lawrence Powell, who examined a year's worth of climate-related scientific studies and found that virtually all accept man-made global warming.
  Powell's analysis covers 2,258 articles published in peer-reviewed journals between November 2012 and December 2013, written by a total of 9,136 authors. He found but one holdout: S. V. Avakyan who, writing for the Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, concluded that ''contribution of the greenhouse effect of carbon-containing gases to global warming turns out to be insignificant.'' Powell discusses Avakyan's dissenting opinion at his personal blog:
  A clue to the author's motivation comes on the first page of the article, where he writes,''The switch of world powers first to decreasing the use of fossil fuel and then to carbon-free energy within the framework of the Kyoto Protocol may lead to economic collapse for Russia as a consequence of the reduction and, probably, even loss of the possibility to sell oil and natural gas on the world market.''
  Dr. Avakyan addresses the two main facts that any theory of global warming must explain: over the last 100 years or so, both CO2 levels and global temperatures have risen and by about the same relative amount. Mainstream science attributes this to cause and effect: namely, the greenhouse effect, in which atmospheric CO2 absorbs rising heat radiation and redirects some of it back down to raise the temperature at the Earth's surface. Dr. Avakyan's paper attributes the known temperature rise to the effect of solar geomagnetic activity on clouds, and the known rise of CO2 to the carbon not absorbed due to expanding deforestation, desertification, and urbanization, and the resulting lessening of photosynthesis. The paper is complicated and we will have to wait until the article has been out longer for the experts to weigh in. For now, one swallow does not a summer make.
VIDEO-L. Ron Hubbard's Great-Grandson Spills The Family Secrets On How Scientology Started. Eek.
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 09 Jan 2014 23:24
  Scientology has a history of silencing critics. If you want to know where that history comes from, look no further than the experiences of Jamie DeWolf, the great-grandson of L. Ron Hubbard, the founder of Scientology. Learn his family's story. Then share it.
  At 1:46, we learn about L. Ron's dream to con everyone. At 3:40, we hear about the horrifying threats. At 5:42, the church takes the family secrets. At 7:00, I laugh.
  If you want to see more of Jamie's awesome work, you could Like him on Facebook and share this. Totally up to you though.
  Credits:By L. Ron Hubbard's great-grandson, Jamie DeWolf for the good folks at Snap Judgement. You can download his latest album for free here. Learn about some of L. Ron's interesting fabricated history. And read about what it's like for a celebrity to try to leave the church.
  DISCLOSURE: I was a Scientologist briefly a while back. I took their personality test on a whim. They called me in for a consultation. I told my wife to fix me if I came back brain-washed. I went to the LA Scientology center. They showed me a movie of weird celebrities telling me that if it weren't for Scientology, they'd be dead. They told me they have an empty office in every center in case Hubbard comes back, and that he wrote a ton of really bad books. They then showed me my results and asked me if I wanted to pay for a class on how to be more organized. (You don't need a test to know I'm a organizational disaster.) I asked them how they could believe this stuff. Then I signed up for a free six-month membership on the off chance that I could use it in the future for a joke. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
  Tags:Want more stuff like this?We're on a mission to spread meaningful content far and wide.Try our daily email, The Upworthiest, and see for yourself!
  Thanks for signing up!Nice! Like us on Facebook to add daily goodness to your feed:
  Flash Video EmbedThis video is not supported by your device. Continue browsing to find other stuff you'll love!
VIDEO- Mom: Medical marijuana saved my ill son - YouTube
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 09 Jan 2014 23:11
Congressional Deal Reached on Obama Trade-Talks Authority - Bloomberg
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 09 Jan 2014 23:00
  Congressional leaders who oversee trade policy introduced legislation today that would give President Barack Obama the fast-track authority he is seeking to enact three of the world's largest accords.
  House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp of Michigan joined leaders of the Senate Finance Committee to offer legislation on so-called trade-promotion authority, which subjects trade deals to an up-or-down vote by Congress.
  ''The TPA legislation we are introducing today will make sure that these trade deals get done, and get done right,'' Democratic Senator Max Baucus of Montana, the Senate Finance Committee Chairman, said in a statement. ''This is our opportunity to tell the administration -- and our trading partners -- what Congress's negotiating priorities are.''
  The Obama administration is seeking trade-promotion authority to smooth congressional passage of trade deals, including one being negotiated with a group of 11 Pacific region nations and another with the 28-nation European Union. Those pacts, to create the world's largest free-trade zones, would link regions with about $44 trillion in annual economic output. The U.S. is also negotiating a services-trade agreement with a group of nations that would cover about half of the world's economy.
  Obama 'Priority'The fast-track authority is a priority for Obama and is critical as negotiations move forward on the EU and Pacific-rim pacts, White House press secretary Jay Carney said.
  While Carney said today he hasn't seen the specifics of the legislation, ''when there's progress on that front it's a good thing.''
  Related:
  Representative Sander Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Republican-led House panel, said he's working on a rival measure and will lead opposition to the Baucus-Camp bill.
  ''You have to have a very substantial increase in Congress's involvement at all stages,'' Levin told reporters today in his office in Washington. The measure introduced by his colleagues ''falls far short'' of what needs to be included, he said.
  Baucus's bill, co-sponsored by Republicans Camp and Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, updates labor and environmental protections, adds provisions to guard intellectual property from cyber theft and for the first time seeks to prevent currency manipulation by trading partners, according to a fact sheet.
  Business SupportIt also ensures that members of Congress have access to the negotiating texts and lets them participate in the talks.
  Industry groups including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the business community's largest lobby, and the National Association of Manufacturers immediately backed the legislation.
  ''TPA is the Chamber's top trade priority before the Congress,'' Thomas Donohue, the Washington-based organization's president and chief executive officer, said in a statement.
  Levin said his bill will include provisions to prevent currency-manipulation and to create a bipartisan congressional panel that will weigh in on trade deals on an ongoing basis. He said the bill will include goals on labor, the environment and access to medicines.
  U.S. automakers led by Ford Motor Co. (F) today separately proposed that negotiators working on the Pacific trade deal take steps to prevent currency manipulation by trading partners.
  'Currency Discipline'''We will not support a Trans-Pacific Partnership that does not include a strong and enforceable currency discipline,'' Matt Blunt, president of the American Automotive Policy Council and a former Republican governor of Missouri, said today on a call with reporters. The Washington-based group lobbies on behalf of Ford, General Motors Co. (GM) and Chrysler Group LLC.
  Speaking at a Bloomberg Government breakfast today, Representative Aaron Schock of Illinois, a Republican on the House panel, said Obama needs to do more to lobby for trade-promotion authority.
  ''We need the president to come out and say he wants this. We need leadership from him,'' Schock said, noting that the White House hasn't endorsed the lawmakers' plan.
  Obama in a July 30 speech called for the authority, and U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman and Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker, two of his top deputies, have each urged Congress to pass the measure.
  Bipartisan SupportHouse Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, said Obama provided ''scant attention'' on fast-track authority in seeking support from Democrats in Congress.
  ''I made clear to the president that this can't pass unless there's bipartisan support for it,'' Boehner told reporters today at the Capitol.
  The trade authority, which expired in 2007, lets Congress set parameters for considering trade deals, and allows lawmakers to pass the accords without making amendments. Opponents, including labor unions and environmental groups, say they want more say in the pacts, particularly with the Pacific agreement in its final stages of negotiation, before giving Obama fast-track authority.
  ''This legislation strips Congress of its defining democratic characteristic -- its check-and-balance structure,'' Michael Brune, executive director of the San Francisco-based Sierra Club, said today in a statement. He said lawmakers should be able to fully debate and amend trade deals.
  Supporters of fast-track authority including a coalition of about 160 groups, led by organizations including the Business Roundtable, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Association of Manufacturers. The coalition -- whose members include Boeing Co. (BA), MetLife Inc. (MET), Pfizer Inc. (PFE) and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT) -- has ramped up lobbying efforts in recent months.
  To contact the reporters on this story: Brian Wingfield in Washington at bwingfield3@bloomberg.net; Laura Litvan in Washington at llitvan@bloomberg.net; Michael C. Bender in Washington at mbender10@bloomberg.net
  To contact the editor responsible for this story: Jon Morgan at jmorgan97@bloomberg.net
JPMorgan Chase plans to exit prepaid card business | Reuters
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:40
  By David Henry
  NEW YORKThu Jan 9, 2014 12:32pm EST
  People walk inside JP Morgan headquarters in New York, October 25, 2013.
  Credit: Reuters/Eduardo Munoz
  NEW YORK (Reuters) - JPMorgan Chase & Co (JPM.N) plans to sell or exit over time its business of issuing prepaid cards for corporate payrolls and government tax refunds and benefits, the company said on Thursday.
  The cards, which had been offered with cash and treasury services to companies and governments, had become a headache of risks in operations and regulations, according to a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to speak publicly.
  Last month JPMorgan warned some 465,000 holders of the cards that their personal data may have been accessed by computer hackers who attacked its network in July.
  The company mailed incorrect replacement cards to some 4,000 people receiving payments from the state of Connecticut. The state treasurer blasted the bank for its "obvious lack of attention to detail.
  Government regulators are focusing on whether corporate payroll programs that use the cards have sufficient safeguards against burdening employees with fees.
  In July, New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sent letters to more than 20 companies asking for details on how they use payroll cards. [ID:nL2N0F916H] The probe was started after complaints from workers and advocacy groups about fees bank charge for using the cards.
  Employers have said that they offer the cards to employees as an option along with paper paychecks and direct deposits to bank accounts. Even with the fees, they can be cheaper than check-cashing services.
  But there have been complaints that direct deposit choices are hard to exercise and a lawsuit was filed against a McDonald's franchisee by an employee who claimed she was required to use a JPMorgan Chase payroll card.
  The bank was not sued in that case, but the complaint was bad for the Chase brand name.
  The U.S. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau in September issued a bulletin to reiterate that laws and rules on electronic funds transfers apply to payroll cards. The bulletin specifically noted that the CFPB has authority over banks providing payroll cards, which raised the possibility that banks might be expected to make sure corporate clients were following rules when paying employees with cards.
  JPMorgan became a target for law enforcers and regulators after the biggest bank in the United States by assets lost $6.2 billion in a derivatives bet in 2012 out of its London offices.
  On Tuesday, the company agreed to pay $2.6 billion to settle government and private claims against it for not reporting suspicions of fraud by convicted Ponzi-schemer Bernie Madoff, its long-time client. And, it agreed last year to pay $13 billion to settle government claims over mortgage-related instruments sold before the financial crisis.
  Since then, JPMorgan has been moving to simplify its operations after its risk controls and guards against money laundering were found deficient by regulators. Critics have also said the bank is too big to manage.
  JPMorgan decided last summer to exit its physical commodities business after concluding potential returns were not worth the regulatory hassle. It is also getting out of lending to students, as well as scaling back on international transactions that carry heightened risks of money laundering.
  According to JPMorgan's statement, the bank "will explore a full range of options for its prepaid card business, including a sale." In the meantime, it will continue to support current clients and cardholders, but will not take on new business. The decision does not affect Chase customers holding credit, debit or prepaid "Liquid" cards, the company said.
  The business contributes too little toward JPMorgan's nearly $100 billion in annual revenue to have to be disclosed in its income statement.
  (Editing by Phil Berlowitz and David Gregorio)
  Link thisShare thisDigg thisEmailPrintReprints
VIFRO-the tap: Lisbon Treaty legalises paedophilia
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:32
  From October 2009Lisbon Treaty Legalises PaedophiliaThis video explains how, in all previous EU Treaties,there was an Article, expressing that the Treaty must be interpreted without prejudice or discrimination to any sexual orientation. There was in every EU Treaty until now, always a protocol added to the 'sexual orientation' Article, whereby paedophilia was expressly excluded as a protected sexual orientation.
  The Lisbon Treaty, however, is different. Article 21 permits any sexual orientation, as per usual, but, for the first time, the protocol expressly excluding paedophilia is nowhere to be found.
  The video commentator thinks this exclusion has something to do with Moslems. I don't agree. There is already plenty of evidence that countries like Belgium and Germany already tolerate paedophilia, and the Lisbon Treaty is merely expressing the current beliefs of EU lawmakers that paedophilia is a normal human activity, which should not be criminalised.The implication is that by default, and without any discussion from any signatory to the Treaty, paedophilia is now to be legalised across Europe - or at least as soon as Vaclav Klaus' signature hits paper.
  Paedophilia could be expressly legalised at some future date by majority vote, or a judge could now already state that any discrimination against a paedophile was illegal. EU law, unlike British Common Law, is teleological. The judge does not need a direct statement of clarity. He is able to look at words and interpret them as to what he believes was intended by the original lawmaker, and the intention is clear enough.
  If people in Britain knew about this, would they be happy to be signing away their national existence to a new government, the EU, which, the evidence shows, believes paedophilia to be a normal sexual orientation? I doubt it.
  See my earlier post on the EU and paedophilia HERE
  Read briefly this extract, the words of Madeleine McCann's mother, Kate -
  Child sexual exploitation and child pornography in particular, is sadly and shockingly extensive worldwide. It is a multi-billion dollar industry aided by the use of the Internet with the 'thirst' for younger victims growing. Once again, my 'bubble' of a life burst as I began to discover the facts relating to this now global crisis.As we travelled through Europe in an attempt to raise awareness of Madeleine's abduction and appeal for help, we were repeatedly made aware of the unbelievable existence of such a horrifying activity and its vastness in our so called civilised and 'child-loving' society.
  How can such 'businesses' be condoned or tolerated by us all? What are the benefits for our children of being in a European Union where several member countries offer child pornography as a LEGAL past time?
  Lack of sex offender registers, lack of reliable tracking systems for known offenders and no CRB check requirements , not even for those working with children are other major areas of concern within many parts of Europe. posted by Kate HERE.
  http://the-tap.blogspot.co.uk/2009/10/lisbon-treaty-legalises-paedophilia.htmlThis video explains how, in all previous EU Treaties,there was an Article, expressing that the Treaty must be interpreted without prejudice or discrimination to any sexual orientation. There was in every EU Treaty until now, always a protocol added to the 'sexual orientation' Article, whereby paedophilia was expressly excluded as a protected sexual orientation.
  The Lisbon Treaty, however, is different. Article 21 permits any sexual orientation, as per usual, but, for the first time, the protocol expressly excluding paedophilia is nowhere to be found.
  The video commentator thinks this exclusion has something to do with Moslems. I don't agree. There is already plenty of evidence that countries like Belgium and Germany already tolerate paedophilia, and the Lisbon Treaty is merely expressing the current beliefs of EU lawmakers that paedophilia is a normal human activity, which should not be criminalised.The implication is that by default, and without any discussion from any signatory to the Treaty, paedophilia is now to be legalised across Europe - or at least as soon as Vaclav Klaus' signature hits paper.
  Paedophilia could be expressly legalised at some future date by majority vote, or a judge could now already state that any discrimination against a paedophile was illegal. EU law, unlike British Common Law, is teleological. The judge does not need a direct statement of clarity. He is able to look at words and interpret them as to what he believes was intended by the original lawmaker, and the intention is clear enough.
  If people in Britain knew about this, would they be happy to be signing away their national existence to a new government, the EU, which, the evidence shows, believes paedophilia to be a normal sexual orientation? I doubt it.
  See my earlier post on the EU and paedophilia HERE
  Read briefly this extract, the words of Madeleine McCann's mother, Kate -
  Child sexual exploitation and child pornography in particular, is sadly and shockingly extensive worldwide. It is a multi-billion dollar industry aided by the use of the Internet with the 'thirst' for younger victims growing. Once again, my 'bubble' of a life burst as I began to discover the facts relating to this now global crisis.As we travelled through Europe in an attempt to raise awareness of Madeleine's abduction and appeal for help, we were repeatedly made aware of the unbelievable existence of such a horrifying activity and its vastness in our so called civilised and 'child-loving' society.
  How can such 'businesses' be condoned or tolerated by us all? What are the benefits for our children of being in a European Union where several member countries offer child pornography as a LEGAL past time?
  Lack of sex offender registers, lack of reliable tracking systems for known offenders and no CRB check requirements , not even for those working with children are other major areas of concern within many parts of Europe. posted by Kate HERE.
India's electoral commission dumps Google over spying fears - Software - Technology - News - iTnews.com.au
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Thu, 09 Jan 2014 22:28
  Take part in discussions with comments on blogs, news and reviews; receive all the latest industry news directly to your inbox and tailor make your information specifically to your interests. Join now for free. 2) About You Country*
  * Country req'd
  State*
  * State req'd
  Job Function*
  * Job function required
  Company size*
  * Company required
  Industry*
  * Industry required
Ford VP: 'We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing'
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: RT - USA
  Thu, 09 Jan 2014 20:20
  Published time: January 09, 2014 18:24Ford Group Vice President Marketing and Communications Jim Farley.(Reuters / John Gress)
  Modern automobiles are logging tremendous amounts of information every single second they're being put to use, and a senior executive at the Ford Motor Company says car manufacturers have access to every last piece of it.
  At the CES electronic trade show in Las Vegas this week, the global vice president for Ford's marketing and sales division opened up about just exactly how much data is being collected by his company's latest line of smart cars.
  ''We know everyone who breaks the law, we know when you're doing it. We have GPS in your car, so we know what you're doing,'' Ford's Jim Farley told a Vegas crowd on Wednesday, according to Business Insider reporter Jim Edwards.
  ''By the way, we don't supply that data to anyone," Farley assured attendees.
  But just as how National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden revealed how the United States government compels telecommunication companies for metadata pertaining to the phone habits of millions of Americans on a regular basis, the sheer face alone that this automotive data is being collected and stored means it could someday be used by others.
  Edwards described Farley's remark as being ''both sinister and obvious.''
  ''Because of the GPS units installed in Ford vehicles, Ford knows when its drivers are speeding, and where they are while they're doing it,'' Edwards wrote. Should the company choose to share that information with law enforcement, though, then it could create an environment where surveillance extends off the computer and onto the road.
  As many as 96 percent of the cars mass-produced in 2013 included event data recorders, RT reported last year, similar to the black boxes that log information inside airplanes.
  ''These cars are equipped with computers that collect massive amounts of data,'' Khaliah Barnes of the Electronic Privacy Information Center told the New York Times then. ''Without protections, it can lead to all kinds of abuse,'' she said.
  According to Business Insider, Farley said this information is being recorded in cars by Ford so that data aggregators and analysts may someday later be able to use it in real time to help solve problems, such as traffic congestion.
  As RT reported earlier this week, however, automobile owners don't have a choice for now as to whether or not they want their activities being etched into the computers of car makers. The Government Accountability Office released a report days before Farley's remarks detailing the results of an investigation into data storage protocol among auto makers Ford, General Motors, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda and Nissan and said that, across the board, if companies retained data then ''they did not allow consumers to request that their data is deleted.''
  The GAO says it would be a ''recommended practice'' for auto makers to adopt a policy that lets drivers be sure their personal driving data is destroyed upon request.
  Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) initially asked for the report to be conducted, and upon its completion this week he issued a statement saying more needs to be done to safeguard privacy in the information age.
  ''Modern technology now allows drivers to get turn-by-turn directions in a matter of seconds, but our privacy laws haven't kept pace with these enormous advances,'' Franken said. ''Companies providing in-car location services are taking their customers' privacy seriously '' but this report shows that Minnesotans and people across the country need much more information about how data are being collected, what they're being used for, and how they're being shared with third parties.''
Millionaires' Club: For First Time, Most Lawmakers are Worth $1 Million-Plus
  Link to Article
  Archived Version
  Source: OpenSecrets Blog
  Thu, 09 Jan 2014 21:41
  For the first time in history, most members of Congress are millionaires, according to a new analysis of personal financial disclosure data by the Center for Responsive Politics.Of 534 current members of Congress, at least 268 had an average net worth of $1 million or more in 2012, according to disclosures filed last year by all members of Congress and candidates. The median net worth for the 530 current lawmakers who were in Congress as of the May filing deadline was $1,008,767 -- an increase from last year when it was $966,000. In addition, at least one of the members elected since then, Rep. Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), is a millionaire, according to forms she filed as a candidate. (There is currently one vacancy in Congress.)Last year only 257 members, or about 48 percent of lawmakers, had a median net worth of at least $1 million.
  Members of Congress have long been far wealthier than the typical American, but the fact that now a majority of members -- albeit just a hair over 50 percent -- are millionaires represents a watershed moment at a time when lawmakers are debating issues like unemployment benefits, food stamps and the minimum wage, which affect people with far fewer resources, as well as considering an overhaul of the tax code."Despite the fact that polls show how dissatisfied Americans are with Congress overall, there's been no change in our appetite to elect affluentpoliticians to represent our concerns in Washington, said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center. "Of course, it's undeniable that in our electoral system, candidates need access to wealth to run financially viable campaigns, andthe most successful fundraisers are politicians who swim in those circles to begin with."
  Breaking the numbers down further, congressional Democrats had a median net worth of $1.04 million, while congressional Republicans had a median net worth of almost exactly $1 million. In both cases, the figures are up from last year, when the numbers were $990,000 and $907,000, respectively.
  The median net worth for all House members was $896,000 -- that's up from $856,000 in 2011 -- with House Democrats (median net worth: $929,000) holding an edge over House Republicans (median net worth: $884,000). The median net worth for both House Republicans and Democrats was higher than in 2011.
  Similarly, the median net worth for all senators increased to $2.7 million from $2.5 million, but in that body it was the Republicans who were better-off. Senate Democrats reported a median net worth of $1.7 million (a decline from 2011's $2.4 million), compared to Senate Republicans, at $2.9 million (an increase from $2.5 million).
  Senate Democrats were the only group reporting a drop in their median net worth from the prior year -- a decline that is at least partly because of the loss of two extremely well-off Senate Democrats from the list: now-Secretary of State John Kerry, who had been the wealthiest senator with a 2011 average net worth of $248 million, and Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) who had an average net worth of $87.5 million before his death last year.The richest member of Congress was, once again, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) chairman of the House Oversight Committee. Issa, who made his fortune in the car alarm business, had an average net worth of $464 million in 2012. Issa had ruled the roost as the wealthiest lawmaker for several years but was bumped from that perch last year by Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas).In our analysis last year, we estimated that McCaul's 2011 average net worth was $500.6 million -- a dramatic increase for him from the year before. McCaul's affluence is primarily due to the holdings of his wife, Linda, the daughter of Clear Channel Communications Chairman Lowry Mays. McCaul took a dramatic tumble from the list's pinnacle, reporting an average net worth of $143.1 million in 2012.Shed no tears for McCaul, though: His drop wasn't due to any great financial misfortune, but reflects changes in reporting rules. Beginning with reports covering calendar year 2012, high-value assets, income and liabilities belonging to the spouses of House members may be reported as being worth simply "$1 million or more." Previously, the forms required somewhat more specific valuations. So, for example, on his 2011 disclosure McCaul reported that his wife owned a 10.1 percent interest in LLM Family Investments that was worth "more than $50 million." Now, he reports that his wife's share of the fund has increased to 12.2 percent, but he can list it as a "spousal asset over $1,000,000," though it's likely worth much more.
  This methodological change (to a system the Senate already uses) also appeared to affect Rep. Chellie Pingree (D-Maine). On her disclosure form covering 2010, she reported having an average net worth of $750,000. Then in 2011 she married hedge fund manager Donald Sussman, which increased her average net worth for that year to $85.8 million. Her report for 2012 shows a dramatic decline, to $42.4 million, because of the new reporting rules.The least wealthy member of Congress in 2012, at least on paper, was Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.) -- a slot he occupied the previous year as well. Valdao reported an average net worth of negative $12.1 million in 2012. That's actually a big improvement from 2011, when his average net worth was negative $19 million. According to Valdao's disclosure forms and our interviews with his staff last year, his debt is the result of loans for his family dairy farm. The second-poorest member of Congress continued to be Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-Fla.), who for decades has owed millions of dollars for legal bills incurred in the 1980s, when he was charged with accepting a bribe while sitting as a federal judge. As we noted last year, Hastings was acquitted, but later impeached and removed by the Senate before running for Congress in 1992. His level of debt has not changed since 2005.
  Although more members of Congress are millionaires than ever before, and the median net worth for all lawmakers is higher than ever, their total net worth -- the value of all their assets minus liabilities -- fell from $4.2 billion in 2011 to $3.9 billion in 2012. Again, that could be at least partly due to the change in the House reporting requirements for spousal assets and liabilities.Congressional holdings
  For several years recently, the stock market seemed to be out of fashion with members of Congress. That seems to have changed in 2012.
  Last year we noted that an analysis of the top 50 investments held by members of Congress showed most companies had fewer congressional investors in 2011 than in 2010, a trend that had been ongoing for several years. We noted last year that only 11 stocks in the top 50 had more investors in 2011 than in 2010.But of 41 stocks listed in the top 50 in both 2011 and 2012, 33 of them had more investors in 2012 than the year before.
  General Electric continued to be the most popular investment for current members of Congress. In 2011, there were 71 lawmakers who reported owning shares in the company; in 2012, there were 74. The second most popular holding was the bank Wells Fargo, in which 58 members owned shares (up from 40 in 2011). Financial firms were well-represented in the 10 most popular investments: Bank of America came in sixth (51 members) and JPMorgan Chase was seventh (49 members). Both companies had more congressional investors than in 2011 (11 more for Bank of America and 10 more for JPMorgan Chase.)Investing in instruments like mutual funds, managed portfolios and even hedge funds continues to be a popular strategy. Besides providing good returns, they also cushion lawmakers from accusations of having a conflict of interest when they take actions on the job that might impact specific stocks.Overall, though, real estate was the most popular investment for members of Congress. Their investments in real estate in 2012 were valued at between $442.2 million and $1.4 billion. The next most popular industry to invest in was securities and investment, with congressional investments being worth between $64.5 million and $229.6 million.Commercial banks, computers and oil and gas rounded out the top five most popular investments for lawmakers in 2012.Download the full list of all current members of Congress and the most popular congressional investments here: http://bit.ly/1gl3JyXImages: Rep. Darrell Issa, AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite;