Iranian presidential candidate Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf has stressed that he can fix the economy in two years if he wins the June 14th vote.

During a tour of Varamin and Eslamshahr in Tehran Province on Saturday, the Principlist candidate said mismanagement is behind the current problems facing the country, stressing that it is possible to fix the economy in two years.

The Tehran Mayor said that many less privileged areas are yet to develop, pledging that if he becomes president, he will put the development of those areas as a top priority on his agenda.

The Principlist candidate stressed that existing problems can be resolved if the potentialities of the country are properly used.

Qalibaf is competing against seven rivals, namely Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election. This yearâ„¢s election will be held on June 14.

Nearly 50.5 million Iranians are eligible to vote in the upcoming presidential election.

AR/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranian Presidential candidate Mohammad-Reza Aref has vowed to resolve the problem of unemployment and continue the subsidy reform program.

In a speech in the holy city of Mashhad on Saturday, Aref said he would resolve the countryâ„¢s problems by using all the capacities of Iranâ„¢s Constitution.

Vowing to tackle unemployment, Aref said he seeks all-out development in various political, cultural, economical and social fields.

Å“By implementing the subsidy reform plan I will put bread on the tables. I have come to eradicate inflation and create one million job opportunities every year,” the presidential candidate added.

The former Iranian vice president said he was a Reformist and reform means safeguarding the ideals of the Islamic Revolution, accountability and encouraging popular participation.

Aref is competing against seven rivals, namely lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, Secretary of Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, director of the Strategic Research Center of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, former Telecommunication Minister Mohammad Gharazi, and Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election. This yearâ„¢s election will be held on June 14.

Nearly 50.5 million Iranians are eligible to vote in the upcoming presidential election.

MYA/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranian Presidential candidate Mohammad-Reza Aref has vowed to resolve the problem of unemployment and continue the subsidy reform program.

In a speech in the holy city of Mashhad on Saturday, Aref said he would resolve the countryâ„¢s problems by using all the capacities of Iranâ„¢s Constitution.

Vowing to tackle unemployment, Aref said he seeks all-out development in various political, cultural, economical and social fields.

Å“By implementing the subsidy reform plan I will put bread on the tables. I have come to eradicate inflation and create one million job opportunities every year,” the presidential candidate added.

The former Iranian vice president said he was a Reformist and reform means safeguarding the ideals of the Islamic Revolution, accountability and encouraging popular participation.

Aref is competing against seven rivals, namely lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, Secretary of Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, director of the Strategic Research Center of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, former Telecommunication Minister Mohammad Gharazi, and Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election. This yearâ„¢s election will be held on June 14.

Nearly 50.5 million Iranians are eligible to vote in the upcoming presidential election.

MYA/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

“Nobody is listening to the content of people’s phone calls,” President Obama said June 7 as he sought to allay concern arising from news reports over the previous two days of massive data gathering of telephone records, e-mail messages, and other communications by the National Security Agency. Saying he didn’t want the day to “just be a bleeding press conference,” the president took two questions from reporters in San Jose, California, following his speech on the Affordable Care Act.

“Mr. President,” asked Jackie Calmes of the New York Times, “could you please react to the reports of secret government surveillance of phones and Internet? And can you also assure Americans that the government – your government – doesn’t have some massive secret database of all their personal online information and activities?”

The president began by citing congressional support for the surveillance programs, noting that “relevant intelligence committees have been briefed on these programs. These are programs that have been authorized by broad bipartisan majorities repeatedly since 2006.” He also insisted that the right of privacy is reasonably protected by procedural safeguards in the programs.

The programs “make a difference in our capacity to anticipate and prevent possible terrorist activity,” Obama said, adding that they are “under very strict supervision by all three branches of government and they do not involve listening to people’s phone calls, do not involve reading the e-mails of U.S. citizens and U.S. residents.”

“As was indicated, what the intelligence community is doing is looking at phone numbers and durations of calls,” Obama continued. “They are not looking at people’s names, and they’re not looking at content.” Before members of the “intelligence community” may listen to a phone call, he said, “they’ve got to go back to a federal judge, just like they would in a criminal investigation.”

But in the case of a warrant such as the April 25 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order, authorizing the collection of all of Verizon’s call logs every day for three months, the judge that the FBI or NSA goes back to is not an impartial magistrate. The court was created by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and is often referred to as the FISA court. It is located in the headquarters building of the Department of Justice, the prosecutorial arm of the federal government. It almost never turns down a request for a warrant and rarely modifies one. It is easy enough for intelligence analysts to find the name that goes with any phone number, making the president’s statement that intelligence analysts are looking only at numbers, not names, essentially meaningless. And it is easy enough to get a warrant when they want to listen to phone calls.

“This is a court that meets in secret, allows only the government to appear before it, and publishes almost none of its opinions,” Jameel Jaffer, deputy director of the American Civil Liberties Union, said to the Washington Post. “It has never been an effective check on government.”

Obama, who was an outspoken critic of surveillance activities by the George W. Bush administration, acknowledged that he took office with “a healthy skepticism about some of these programs,” but came to realize they were needed. “We’ve scrubbed them thoroughly,” he said, and expanded safeguard and oversight provisions. “And if there are members of Congress who feel differently, then they should speak up. And we’re happy to have that debate,” he stated.

But members of Congress who have been briefed on classified information are forbidden by law to divulge what they’ve learned. In letters to Attorney General Eric Holder on in 2011 and again last year, U.S. Senators Ron Wyden of Oregon and Mark Udall of Colorado, both Democrats, protested the secrecy surrounding interpretations by the FISA court of the government’s power under the business records section of the Patriot Act. Even the interpretations are classified, they wrote, making public debate about them all but impossible.

“We believe most Americans would be stunned to learn the details of how these secret court opinions have interpreted section 215 of the Patriot Act,” the senators said in their March 15, 2012 letter to Holder. “As we see it, there is now a significant gap between what most Americans think the law allows and what the government secretly claims the law allows.” (Emphasis in original.) 

The court orders themselves come with a gag rule forbidding those served with warrants from disclosing the orders to anyone other than an attorney for the purpose of helping them comply. Perhaps that’s why some of the Internet companies named in the Washington Post story on the PRISM program issued carefully worded and remarkably similar statements denying participation in a massive data-gathering program by the National Security Agency.  

“We have never heard of PRISM,” said Steve Dowling, a spokesman for Apple. “We do not provide any government agency with direct access to our servers, and any government agency requesting customer data must get a court order.”

“We do not provide any government organization with direct access to Facebook servers,” said Joe Sullivan, chief security officer for Facebook. “When Facebook is asked for data or information about specific individuals, we carefully scrutinize any such request for compliance with all applicable laws, and provide information only to the extent required by law.”

But that can be quite extensive, indeed, as is evident in the FISA court’s order to Verizon. Google issued a statement saying, “We have not joined any program that would give the U.S. government – or any other government – direct access to our servers. Indeed, the U.S. government does not have direct access or a “back door” to the information stored in our data centers. We had not heard of a program called PRISM until yesterday.”

Yahoo also released a statement saying it does not “provide the government with direct access” to its servers. And Microsoft said: “We provide customer data only when we receive a legally binding order or subpoena to do so, and never on a voluntary basis.” 

Well, there’s nothing voluntary about complying with a court order, especially one issued by a secret tribunal that a former NSA intelligence analyst called “a kangaroo court with a rubber stamp.” And the companies’ statements, so similar they appear to have been coordinated, all speak of the government having no “direct access” to their servers. Might there be “indirect” access, despite Google’s denial of any “back door” open to the government?

In their 2010 series in the Washington Post called “Top Secret America,” Dana Priest and William Arkin wrote: “Every day collections systems at the National Security Agency intercept and store 1.7 billion e-mails, phone calls and other types of communications.” That’s a whole lot of access, however obtained, through however many back, front, or side doors.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper late Thursday night called the leaks of classified documents about the NSA data gathering through the PRISM program “reprehensible” and said the disclosure of the court order authorizing the collection of the Verizon records will be damaging to national security.

“The unauthorized disclosure of a top secret U.S. court document threatens potentially long-lasting and irreversible harm to our ability to identify and respond to the many threats facing our nation,” Clapper said. Obama, in his remarks Friday morning, made the same point.

“If every step that we’re taking to try to prevent a terrorist act is on the front page of the newspapers or on television, then presumably the people who are trying to do us harm are going to be able to get around our preventive measures,” added the president. “That’s why these things are classified.”

It’s hard to believe, though, that the 560 million pages of classified documents the government produces each year all have to do with preventing terrorist acts or other matters related to national security. Often documents are classified because they would otherwise prove embarrassing to government officials – as in the WikiLeaks disclosure of Hillary Clinton’s private opinion of certain foreign dignitaries. What’s surprising is not that such things get leaked and published, but that they ever make their way into classified documents in the first place.

Perhaps our government officials are now embarrassed by what we’ve learned about the extent of their collection of data on us. In the statement they posted on their website, Google CEO Larry Page and chief legal officer David Drummond said they understand that governments “need to take action to protect their citizens’ safety – including sometimes by using surveillance. But the level of secrecy around the current legal procedures undermines the freedoms we all cherish.”

^{Photo of President Obama: AP Images}

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Iranâ„¢s Foreign Ministry Spokesman Abbas Araqchi has condemned recent remarks by a number of Canadian parliamentarians regarding the human rights situation of the Islamic Republic.

In a meeting titled “Iran Accountability Week” in late May, a group of Canadian legislators criticized human rights in Iran, alleging that the Islamic Republic violates the rights of Iranians, including women and ethnic minorities.

In reaction, Araqchi described the remarks as Å“ridiculous” and Å“politically motivated”, adding the comments came as the Canadian government was facing political illegitimacy due to the countryâ„¢s 2011 election fraud.

The Iranian diplomat said that the allegations against Iran came as the Canadian Federal Court has confirmed that the countryâ„¢s 2011 federal election was fraudulent. He also criticized Ottawa for failing to take necessary measures regarding the genocide of Canadaâ„¢s aboriginal people.

Å“While the Canadian Federal Court has confirmed fraud in the [2011] federal election of the country and certain other important issues such as the genocide of Canadaâ„¢s aborigines … have also been addressed yet, Canadian public opinion expect the countryâ„¢s Parliament to seriously and immediately deal with such issues,” Araqchi said.

In late May, the Canadian Federal Court confirmed that the countryâ„¢s 2011 federal election, which led to the victory of Stephen Harper’s government, was fraudulent. The court emphasized in a ruling that it has found in no uncertain terms that widespread election fraud took place during the vote.

Araqchi also expressed hope that Canadian lawmakers would address the plight of the aboriginals, in particular the issue of the hundreds of missing women and aboriginal girls.

Native Canadians remain among the poorest members of the Canadian society with most of them suffering poor educational, economic and social conditions.

AR/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranian presidential candidate Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel says the US and its allies are using Iranâ„¢s nuclear program as an excuse to mount pressure on the Islamic Republic.

Å“I believe that Iranâ„¢s nuclear issue is [being used as] a pretext to oppose the Islamic Republic of Iran…. The Americans and all of their allies know that Iranâ„¢s nuclear activities are peaceful and in line with international regulations so Iranâ„¢s nuclear issue is [used as] an excuse to pressure the Islamic Republic…,” Haddad-Adel said during a press conference on Saturday.

The lawmaker named resistance against economic pressure and sanctions as the only way of success in nuclear talks with the P5+1.

Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers – Russia, China, France, Britain, and the US plus Germany – have held several rounds of talks, mainly over the Iranian nuclear energy program.

Å“The way to success in the nuclear issue is for us to insure the country against economic pressure and sanctions… our representative diplomat can only be successful when the US sees no hope in achieving success through economic pressure,” Haddad-Adel added.

The Principlist candidate emphasized that any pressure caused from the sanctions can be minimized through better management in economy and by creating domestic stability and unity.

Å“Resolving our problems is firstly through disappointing our enemy [in achieving success] through exerting pressure on us and this can be done through economic management and creating solidarity and a peaceful environment at home ….,” he added.

Haddad-Adel is facing seven rivals in the upcoming election, including Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, Secretary of Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

On June 14, Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election. Expatriates will also be able to vote at 285 polling stations which will be set up in other countries.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election.

PG/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Vodafone — the world’s second-largest mobile phone company — paid no corporate tax in Britain in 2012 for the second year running, despite handing out £4.8 billion in cash dividends to shareholders in the last 12 months.

The London-based telecom giant said investment in the UK coupled
with interest payments eliminated its corporate tax liabilities
at home, although the firm paid around £3bn in tax abroad.

Vodafone raked in £45bn in revenues last year, with underlying
earnings of £13bn and a global profit exceeding £3bn. More than
£5bn in revenues were generated in the UK, though underlying
earnings — income minus one-off items — fell to £1.2bn from
£1.3bn.

The firm’s UK operating profits fell to £294 million from £402mn
a year prior amidst falling voice and service revenues.

Mobile networks such as Vodafone are able to reclaim money spent
developing their own networks, including the construction of
radio masts to support antennae and the laying of cables. The
company further received a return on part of the expenditures
paid to the government to buy the airwaves which carry mobile
traffic, as well as interest charges on cash borrowed in order to
make those payments.

A large portion of the firm’s infrastructure investment went
towards new base station equipment, which will allow Vodafone to
launch its 4G mobile broadband network over the summer.

The firm was also able to avoid taxes by sending profits to its
Luxembourg subsidiaries, where both its customer and employee
base is low, and tax rates dip below 1 percent. Vodafone
Luxembourg 5 Co Sarl, which funds money to other branches,
reported profits of $2.43 billion for the year to March 2012 and
paid a tax rate of less than 1 percent, Reuters reported.

A spokesperson for the firm claimed Vodafone did not funnel
profits out of the UK, insisting its Luxembourg operations had no
bearing on taxes paid at home. He further explained that unites
in the tiny European state are able to offset income against
write-offs in the value of assets held by those companies.

Vodafone stressed its commitment to “integrity in all tax
matters,” noting that it paid £882mn in other UK taxes and
contributions during the year.

However, with £4.8bn in dividend payouts, the tax revelation is
likely to spark further debate over domestic multinational tax
contributions, with Google, Starbucks and Amazon all being called
upon by parliament to justify their tax status.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Leader of Turkeyâ„¢s opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) Devlet Bahceli has called for early elections, as anti-government protests continue across the country for the ninth day.

On Saturday, Bahceli called for snap elections and for Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to reaffirm his mandate in order to overcome the current unrest.

“The prime minister’s stance and the tumult have deepened the crisis,” said the opposition leader, adding, Å“The prime minister’s time is up, we believe he has to renew his mandate.”

Thousands of anti-government protesters took to the streets in the Turkish city of Istanbul on Saturday.

This came as Erdogan convened his party leadership to discuss the recent wave of anti-government protests across the country.

Demonstrators have reportedly set up tents at Istanbulâ„¢s iconic Taksim Square for a weekend of protests.

Fresh rallies have been also planned in the Turkish capital, Ankara.

On Friday, Erdogan called for an immediate end to the demonstrations in the country and said the government was open to Å“democratic demands,” but adding that the demonstrations were Å“bordering on vandalism.”

The unrest began after police broke up a sit-in staged at Taksim Square on May 31 to protest against the demolition of Gezi Park.

The protesters say the park, which is a traditional gathering point for rallies and demonstrations as well as a popular tourist destination, is the city’s last public green space.

SZH/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party has rejected the opposition’s call for early elections as anti-government protests continue in the country.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Dr. Susan Berry
breitbart.com
June 8, 2013

As dissatisfaction with the U.S. public school system grows, apparently so has the appeal of homeschooling. Educational researchers, in fact, are expecting a surge in the number of students educated at home by their parents over the next ten years, as more parents reject public schools.

A recent report in Education News states that, since 1999, the number of children who are homeschooled has increased by 75%. Though homeschooled children represent only 4% of all school-age children nationwide, the number of children whose parents choose to educate them at home rather than a traditional academic setting is growing seven times faster than the number of children enrolling in grades K-12 every year.

As homeschooling has become increasingly popular, common myths that have long been associated with the practice of homeschooling have been debunked.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 11:37 am

Tags: big brother, domestic news, education, government corruption

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

A pro-Taliban Pakistani politician says newly-elected Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif will discuss prospects for peace with Taliban during his upcoming visit to Afghanistan.

Muhammad Asim Makhdoom, a senior member of a pro-Taliban party said on Saturday that Sharif will discuss with Afghan President Hamid Karzai crucial issues related to talks with Taliban in Kabul next week.

Å“We have learnt through reliable sources that Mr. Sharif is scheduled to visit Afghanistan next week where he will primarily discuss with Mr. Karzai the core issues relating to talks with Taliban,” Pakistanâ„¢s daily Dawn quoted Muhammad Asim Makhdoom, Central Information Secretary of Jamiat Ulema-i-Islam (Samiul Haq), as saying.

Sharif has called for peace talks between the militants and the government several times in the past.

Earlier, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) spokesman was quoted as saying that the militants might agree on a truce if Sharif’s government showed seriousness in holding the peace talks.

President Karzai has also formed a peace council to lead talks with the Taliban.

The council has been making efforts to initiate dialogue with discontented Afghans and militants who have engaged in warfare with the US-led forces and Kabul’s Western-backed government.

The US-led war in Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001. The offensive removed the Taliban from power, but insecurity continues to rise across the country, despite the presence of thousands of US-led troops.

JR/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranâ„¢s Majlis Speaker Ali Larijani has called on the Iraqi government to provide security for the Iranian pilgrims visiting this country.

Condemning the latest terrorist attack against Iranian pilgrims in Iraq on Saturday, Larijani urged Baghdad to take necessary measures to counter thugs and terrorist groups in the country.

Sixteen Iranian pilgrims were killed in a terrorist bomb attack in the Iraqi city of Muqdadiyah in Diyala Province, about 80 km northeast of the capital Baghdad, on Friday morning.

The blast, killing nearly 20 people overall, ripped through the bus taking pilgrims to the holy city of Najaf. At least 45 people, many of them thought to be Iranians, were also wounded in the bombing.

Larijani also expressed his sympathies over the death of Iranian pilgrims.

Earlier on Saturday, Iranâ„¢s Foreign Ministry spokesman Abbas Araqchi condemned the attack as indiscriminate, unjust, and counters to all human and Islamic principles.

No group has yet claimed responsibility for Fridayâ„¢s bloody attack.

In another terrorist attack on May 25, five Iranian pilgrims were killed and 20 others were injured after a booby-trapped car hit their bus near the city of Samarra, some 125 km north of Baghdad.

MYA/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Anti-austerity protesters stand outside the Greek parliament building in Athens. (File photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranian presidential candidate Mohammad Gharazi says the next administration must adopt a successful economic model to fix the existing problems of the country.

Å“Those who want to fix the economy need a model that has worked in at least ten countries. The next administration will get nowhere if it tries to invent a new model. Economic stability and prosperity come on the back of a successful model,” the former Telecommunications Minister said in a meeting with members of the Tehran Chamber of Commerce Saturday.

The independent candidate blamed Reformist and Principlist administrations of the past for price hikes, saying the country faces inflation when a one-party administration tries to eliminate others from economic activities.

Gharazi is competing against seven rivals, namely lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, Secretary of Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, director of the Strategic Research Center of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, Secretary of the Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref, and Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election. This yearâ„¢s election will be held on June 14.

Nearly 50.5 million Iranians are eligible to vote in the upcoming presidential election.

AR/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

A demonstrator reads a magazine amongst tents in Gazi Park next to Taksim Square in Istanbul on June 8, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Security officials and citizens inspecting the damage following a car bomb explosion in the central Syrian city of Homs on June 8, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Britain has desperately sought to blacklist Lebanonâ„¢s resistance movement Hezbollah.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Israeli forces have clashed with Palestinian demonstrators protesting against the expropriation of Palestinian lands by Israel in the occupied West Bank, Press TV reports.

On Saturday, Palestinians took to the streets in the village of Niâ„¢lin to express their outrage over confiscation of their lands by Tel Aviv regime and the expansion of settler units.

Israeli troops reportedly fired tear gas and rubber bullets to disperse the protesters. Dozens of protesters sustained injuries as a result.

Tension has been rising in the region lately as Israelis have stepped up seizing Palestinian land in order to build more settlements.

The presence and continued expansion of Israeli settlements in occupied Palestine has created a major obstacle for the efforts to establish peace in the Middle East.

More than half a million Israelis live in over 120 illegal settlements built since Israelâ„¢s occupation of the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and East al-Quds in 1967.

The UN and most countries regard the Israeli settlements as illegal because the territories were captured by Israel in a war in 1967 and are hence subject to the Geneva Conventions, which forbid construction on occupied lands.

MAM/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

Gerard Batten, a member of the European Parliament for London for the United Kingdom Independence Party, said earlier this week at Watford, outside of the Bilderberg confab, that the European Union was designed by Nazis.

“In 1942,” Mr. Batten told Alex Jones, “the German central bank under Doctor Walther Funk along with leading industrialists said how are we going to run the economies of Europe after we have won the war.” They proposed the “European Economic Community, that’s what they called it, and they had a common agricultural policy” and policies covering other aspects of trade and cultural affairs.

Batten said it is more than likely many of the Nazi economic architects responsible for drafting up plans for a common union found their way into the bureaucracy after the supranational institution began under the auspices of the European Economic Community in the early 1950s, at the same time the Bilderberg Group was established and began to hold annual meetings. The Maastricht Treaty officially established the current European Union in 1993.

Asked about the CIA’s role in forcing Britain into the union through a trade deal in the 1970s, Batten said the intelligence agency outspent and out maneuvered those opposed to integration. “I see this as an instrument of American foreign policy at the time,” Batten said, adding that the global elite were keenly interested in creating a centralized and autocratic dictatorship in Europe.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 10:55 am

Tags: big brother, economics, foreign affairs, police state

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

A man tries to run from a sandstorm in the Western Saharan city of Dakhla (Photo: Evgeni Zotov/ Flickr)Decades of drought in central Africa may have had a surprising cause, according to new research that challenges the notion that the severe dry weather was triggered mainly by bad agricultural practices and overgrazing.

The research, done at the University of Washington, shows that the drought was at least partially caused by pollution in the Northern Hemisphere.

The researchers said that sulfate-laden aerosols coming from coal-burning factories from the 1960s through the 1980s actually slowed warming in the Northern Hemisphere compared to the Southern Hemisphere. This shifted tropical rain bands south, away from the Sahel region, and led ultimately to the near drying up of Lake Chad, which is used to water crops in surrounding areas.

Africa’s Sahel regionAfrica’s Sahel region “We think people should know that these particles not only pollute air locally, but they also have these remote climate effects,” said the study’s lead author, Yen-Ting Hwang, a University of Washington doctoral student in atmospheric sciences.

Hwang’s co-author, Dargan Frierson, an associate professor of atmospheric sciences at the University of Washington, said “to some extent, science messed this one up the first time around.”

“People thought that a large part of that drought was due to bad farming practices and desertification,” he said. “But over the last 20 years or so we’ve realized that that was quite wrong, and that large-scale ocean and atmosphere patterns are significantly more powerful in terms of shaping where the rains fall.”

Researchers also studied rainfall in other places on the northern edge of the tropical rain band such as northern India and South America. These areas also experienced less rainfall during the 1970s and 1980s. Meanwhile, areas on the southern edge of the tropical rain band, such as northeast Brazil and the African Great Lakes, saw an increase in rainfall.

The researchers also looked at 26 climate models used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and found that nearly all the models showed some southward shift in rainfall and that slowed warming in the Northern Hemisphere was the “primary cause.”

“One of our research strategies is to zoom out,” said Hwang. “Instead of studying rainfall at a particular place, we try to look for the larger-scale patterns.”

There was a silver lining found in the research.

The study showed that steps taken in the United States and Europe in the 1960s and 1970s to reduce emissions and improve air quality began to improve the situation in the Sahel. While the area still suffers short-term droughts, “the long-term drought began to recover in the 1980s” as the rains began to move north again, according to the research.

“We were able to do something that was good for us, and it also benefited people elsewhere,” Frierson said.

It’s a trend that Hwang says is likely to continue.

As the atmosphere gathers higher levels of greenhouse gases, however, Hwang said the Northern Hemisphere will warm more rapidly than the Southern Hemisphere because there is more land.

“It’s not yet crystal clear what will happen,” she said. “There will be some shift in the tropical rains, and most models predict a northern shift.”

© 2013 Voice of America

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Rescuers wearing life jackets make their way in floodwaters to evacuate survivors in China’s northwestern province of Gansu. (File photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

An aerial view of the US National Security Agencyâ„¢s Utah Data Center in Bluffdale, Utah, June 6, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

Jeff Greenwald takes Senator Lindsey Graham to task for defending the destruction of the Fourth Amendment.

Unfortunately, Greenwald insists on using the false left-right paradigm to make his argument. He says the senator from South Carolina is “one of the most right-wing members of the United States Congress.”

Obama is often described as a left-winger and even a socialist. Despite this, his support for the surveillance and war state apparatus mirrors that of Graham, minus a few minor ideological flourishes. Right, left, socialist, conservative — these designations are about as relevant as the color tie worn by senators on a particular day.

Lindsey Graham is not a right-winger. He is an establishment neocon. Graham is one of the primary promoters of the contrived war on terror. It’s his job to push the idea that cartoonish Muslims in far away caves pose an ominous threat to the United States. He says due to this never-ending supposed threat we must surrender our constitutional rights and consent to the military industrial complex stealing trillions of our hard-earned dollars in order to wage illegal and criminal wars in places of interest to banksters and transnational corporations. Instead of protesting the loss of liberty, we are expected to celebrate its demise, as Graham does, and thank the state for its intrusion into the minutest personal details of our lives.

Graham does not oppose the “National Security Administration,” as he calls it (it’s an agency), listening in on his phone calls because he enthusiastically supports the implementation of a high-tech police and surveillance state supposedly in reaction to phantom terrorists who never seem to attack. He is a military dictatorship fetishist who adores war and the simplistic idea of foreign enemies that must be fought against with eternal vigilance.

Lindsey Graham is one of the most dangerous enemies of liberty. This is not especially surprising or unusual because many of the most dangerous enemies of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are in Congress.

Earlier this week, senators Dianne Feinstein and Saxby Chambliss used the phony war on invented terror to say basically the same thing Graham did following the latest revelations about the NSA.

Congress supports the NSA going through what amounts to your underwear drawer. If they opposed it, Congress would move to strip the NSA of its authority to surveil millions of Americans. A few mavericks like Rand Paul still exist in Congress, but they are vastly outnumbered by lickspittle servants of the shadow government and the military authoritarian agenda of the global elite.

Lindsey Graham, Dianne Feinstein, Saxby Chambliss and the rest have sold their souls to the Devil for power, money and fame. It does not bother them in the least that the NSA listens to their phone calls or reads their emails. They are bought and sold like chattel. It is their job to make sure you are unable to practice your God-given natural right to be free of government coercion and violence. It is their duty to make sure you become a slave and never realize your potential to be a free human being.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 9:53 am

Tags: big brother, constitution, domestic news, government corruption, police state, terrorism

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Thousands of protesters poured onto the streets of Frankfurt to decry harsh police methods used to break up an anti-capitalist ‘Blockupy’ demonstration in the city one week prior. Protest organizers say up to 20,000 turned out for the event.

Saturday’s march followed the same route where police surrounded
nearly 1,000 demonstrators last Saturday in the run-up to a
violent confrontation.

Many in attendance hoisted up a motley array of umbrellas in
defiance of law enforcers, who are against the use of parasols at
demonstrations. Others carried banners with photos from the
previous Blockupy protest depicting police violence.

Placards and banners showing the demonstrators’ solidarity with
Turkish protesters who were recently the victim of excessive
police force also featured prominently at the event.

The march, which again concluded at the European Central Bank —
the focal point of the previous Saturday’s clashes — was
organized in protest against the violation of fundamental rights
and freedoms, Blockupy activists said.

Members of the Social Democratic Party of Germany, the Greens,
and the Pirate Party also took part in the protest. Police
estimate some 7,500 turned out for Saturday’s march, while
organizers claim there were 20,000 attendees.

Last Saturday, Police incensed anti-austerity Blockupy marchers
by stopping them before they were able to approach the ECB
building in Frankfurt after protesters reportedly set off
firecrackers.

Blockupy accused police of intentionally attempting to escalate
tensions by sealing off a route which had previously been
approved “by several legal institutions.”

Police fell on demonstrators with pepper spray and truncheons
after saying they were repeatedly attacked by a small group of
protesters. Several demonstrators and police officers were
hurt in the melee.

An open letter condemning the violent June 1 police crackdown on
demonstrators was published in the New Germany daily. The letter,
signed by German political scientists, historians and social
scientists, said they were “extremely concerned about the
actions of the police,” who should have been protecting the
protesters, not hindering them.

This article originally appeared on: RT

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Leader of Turkey’s opposition Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) Devlet Bahceli has called for snap vote, as anti-government protests continue across the country for the ninth day.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Egyptâ„¢s ousted dictator Hosni Mubarak appears in a Cairo court on June, 8 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Would you buy a used car from this man? If the maker happens to be Constitution Motors, model “Rule of Law,” with accessories including habeas-corpus rights, right of counsel, speedy trial, then, after kicking the tires, you might want to apply the Guantanamo Test, in which case, you find the doctrine of indefinite detention, solitary confinement, and, while languishing, perhaps a might of torture, sleep deprivation, brain washing–all in all, that’s one car, given the wear and tear, the deceptive warranty, the recklessness of the owner, one would want to stay away from, and begin looking for a more honest value. On the same lot, a sleek beauty from Drone Motors, already armed as part of the original equipment, and handled with great care, the driver somehow sitting 8,000 miles away, a car having one, and only one, purpose–to kill, and therefore listed by Consumers Report as a good buy, if that were the new owner’s purpose. Our shopper, however, has a mild distaste for that sort of thing, having already been disappointed in the previous maker’s “Rule of Law,” concerned, no doubt, about the low resale value when, what is hoped for a vehicle, it contributes to a sense of well-being for the owner and his family. But now, on to the third, from Surveillance Motors, practically invisible, as though a mirage, a car, unlike any in automotive history, produced without advertising, all known test results classified by the management, and, in truth, so shoddy as to violate every law in the book (except those laws, such as FISA, designed to protect it and give it the air of legality) and therefore appealing solely to criminal types.

This last model, especially its twotone coupe, aptly named the Nondisclosure Provision, can be counted on to turn heads (or, metaphorically, of course, chop them off, leaving no untoward trace), and is all the rage among government procurement officers. It comes equipped with the latest in gadgetry to ensure an entertainment center designed to please the most discriminating taste, with universal access to every conceivable channel known to human communication. Tune in (only competitors dare call this “spying”) to private conversations, and, if lucky, pillow talk, globally, thereby enriching one’s sense of humanity at the same time knowing the FISA Court gives you full legal right to eavesdrop. The coupe improves on all earlier models, such as the McCarthyism, still a collector’s item, because it conjures up a threat called terrorism that is far more sinister, menacing, and widespread than Communism, only to lash it to pieces by the help of the new service centers, known as CIA and JSOC, and with the approval of the firm’s CEO, in not-so-extreme cases, an ongoing marketing campaign of paramilitary operations, including licensing assassination, while, with bigger fish to fry, a strategy of confrontation (e.g., the “pivot” or Pacific-first strategy to contain and isolate China) calling for the massive deployment of naval and air power into the new territory to be opened. Nondisclosure, at your dealers now, with a careful warranty that balances domestic thought-and-social control with the promise that the benign company has only its customers’ interests at heart, is currently the product of press revelations, ones hinting that this, along with the other models, beckons all to a glorious future in the National-Security (aka Surveillance) State.

Not surprisingly, these automotive offerings are designed to be sold, primarily, to the power hungry, who have only contempt for the law, as they speed from one intervention to another, attracted to the models’ rakish design, fusing militarism and domestic repression (as in the two-tonedness of the coupe), and its extravagant price tag, in this case, up to $100B for nuclear modernization, missile defense systems, and retrofitted aircraft to carry the weapons, and even larger amounts for wars, occupations, worldwide bases, mercenaries, and the usual accroutrements for national security. We should thrill to, and take pride in, the humongous sums, coming directly out of domestic needs (thus instilling in the citizenry–customers all—noble sentiments of austerity and self-sacrifice), approaching if not exceeding $1T (as in trillion). As used cars, they carry the pedigrees of previous use, as in Vietnam and research and development in regime change, tested from Cuba and Chile (notably successful, with Pinochet, the new executive on board to all three companies) to Iran and other testing grounds, should rival companies (aka alternative modes of development and/or challenges to US financial and business hegemony) try to spring up.

Fortunately, forces of authoritarianism, possessing majority ownership in all three, have found their joint supersalesman, who converts counterterrorism into counterrevolution and the clear makings of a domestic Police State, in short, a free market for their products–lawlessness, assassination, and spying on the customer base–proudly decked out in liberal/progressive dress, snake-oil charm (to some), and a record of networking which takes him into the inner circles of Wall Street, the CIA, and the “defense” industries. And why not, for he promises them global markets, political-military hegemony, and blood-letting sufficient to satisfy the most psychopathic drivers on the road. His name may be familiar, Obama, but his record has been skillfully falsified to cover up the very results these models were intended to achieve, and to which the customer base turns a blind eye: a consistent policy framework promotive of inequality, social deprivation, and massive wealth-accumulation to the stockholders. With scare-tactics abounding, such that wrecking the Constitution, reducing America’s “enemies” to blood spats or specks of dust, and mounting a campaign to dismantle safeguards to, and perhaps the idea of, privacy, all publicised and sold as essential to The Protection of the Homeland, one can look forward to the breaking of new sales records, equally shared, harbinging a new era, which is nicely put as: liberal humanitarian fascism.

I include below my four Comments to the New Yorks Times (June 5-8) in response to revelations about government programs of surveillance, each self-explanatory–and consecutively written— for those familiar with the paper’s themes and coverage on this significant issue. Their importance to me is as germinating soil for ideas which then find a place, as now, in the article. More than addenda, they contain a specificity of criticism from which further elaboration and the fleshing out of implications become possible. At this writing, Obama is meeting with the Chinese president to discuss cyberwarfare, as meanwhile he actively conducts cyberware against the American people. The fourth Comment in this series is fuller than NYT’s space limitations allow:

I

The Times finally stirs, after blindly supporting Obama these many years. Consider your heritage: A.O.S. [Arthur O. Sulzberger] and publication of The Pentagon Papers. Yet you still compartment the issues, making civil liberties merely one area, instead of seeing it as integrated with the whole of public policy.

Obama is a menace to freedom. Period. What you protest against here has its immediate parallels in the doctrine and practice of indefinite detention, denial of habeas corpus to detainees, the very gruesome act of targeted assassination (a self-evident war crime), and yet you fiddle while America burns, by upholding the fiction that because Republicans are so bad Obama must therefore be good.

Stand up for press freedom (as by and large you do), but also stand up for freedom that extends further: the right to have transparent government, rule of law punctiliously observed, effective regulation, a vital social safety net, and protection of the environment—NONE of which the Obama administration has done.

II

Expressions of outrage are simply not enough. We should have seen this coming, even from the early months of the First Term. Obama is a danger to civil liberties. He shows contempt for the Constitution from numerous angles, perhaps beginning with unctuous remarks about transparency, and then proceeding to throw a mantle of secrecy around government like not seen before in peacetime. Overclassification of documents is a deliberate attempt to cover up illegal and criminal activity which cannot stand the light of day. Indeed, Obama’s obsession with secrecy reveals an unstable, desperate personality, fearful not only of discovery of real and potential war crimes, but also of self-discovery, that beneath the “cool” exterior is one unduly attracted to power, to the point of being unscrupulous both in gathering and using it.

Hiding behind legislation is a shabby pretext for surveillance because Congress is itself complicit in constitutional violations. The very fact of refusing to make public the legal memos presumably validates the kinds of surveillance now uncovered, a refusal also about targeted assassination, which gives Obama no leg to stand on—and today’s denials should be taken for what they are: damage control, obfuscation, worse, deceit. How can America tolerate a POTUS whose preference lies in assassination? Liberals and progressives—the sad state of radicalism in America—enjoy being walked over, lied to, betrayed at every turn, and then come back for more.

III

Laws are not necessarily lawful. Using FISA and/or hiding behind nondisclosure and other secretive procedures mocks the rule of law itself. Obama has soiled the Constitution he was sworn to uphold. This is worse than McCarthyism because more sweeping in intent and possessing the technological means for conducting surveillance.

Civil liberties is a paramount issue of democracy—failure there makes one wary of failure on other fronts, including US interventions, massive military expenditures, regulatory lacunae, wide differentials in wealth and power, and yes, Guantanamo, Espionage Act prosecutions, etc., which although pertinent to civil liberties also strike a more disturbing note: the fascistic tendencies of the administration.

IV

This gets worse by the minute. “Domestic spying activity,” far worse than Watergate, and, given its scope the actors involved, NSA, DOJ, and yes, POTUS (all, despite careful attempts to squirm out of accountability), should send massive waves of indignation through society–yet has not. Why? In fact, the DOJ April court filing, on expanding the scope of these activities, and nailing down the no-disclosure provision, while conveniently leaving Obama and Holder unmentioned, should be a warning of the looming threat to American liberties. The recent IRS affair is a tempest in a teapot compared with what Obama-Holder-NSA-DOJ-FBI-CIA have shown to be overt neofascist actions, tendencies, and tactics.

Kudos to The Times for defending press freedoms. But you still do not confront, and probably never shall confront, Obama head-on, or, despite your justified concern, Congress itself, which willingly turns a blind eye to illegalities, even war crimes, as in targeted assassination, commissioned and/or committed by the Obama administration. For when you refer to “limit[ing] the collection of call records and the monitoring of Internet traffic to that of people suspected of terrorism,” you fall right back into the trap Obama-Holder has set for you: that of being stampeded by cries of national security and protecting the Homeland against terrorist attacks. Therefore, silence; just as Congress has also maintained silence–the only difference being Congress tacitly approves, by a bipartisan majority, the need for knuckling under to administration pressure and your editorial cautiously–too cautiously–does not. How long until the “people suspected of terrorism” includes Obama’s critics, or critics of assassination, or critics of B61-12, or critics of secrecy and nondisclosure rules?

Time is running out. As a principal defender of press freedom, The Times should take off the editorial gloves, stop its obeisance to the lesser-of-two evils mindset, and expose Obama, in every realm of public policy, for betraying the principles that got him elected.

Norman Pollack is the author of “The Populist Response to Industrial America” (Harvard) and “The Just Polity” (Illinois), Guggenheim Fellow, and professor of history emeritus, Michigan State University.

This article originally appeared on: Counterpunch

An Afghan woman and her daughter wail after a relative was killed in an air strike in Azizabad village in the Shindand district of Herat province, Afghanistan. (File photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]At least eight people, including three women and a teen, have been killed in a car bomb explosion in the Syrian province of Homs.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

One well-informed estimate suggests 100,000 people are employed at the National Security Agency. (Photograph: Terry Ashe/Time & Life Pictures/Getty Images)The very existence of National Security Agency (NSA) was not revealed for more than two decades after its establishment in 1952, and even now its structure and activities remain largely unknown. Hence its wry nickname: No Such Agency.

Of all the US intelligence services, it is has been the best hidden, and has prided itself on having the fewest leaks — at least until now. How many people does it employ? That is classified. Just how many people does it target? The NSA tells members of Congress that it does not have the tools to provide such figures.

When Harry Truman set up the NSA, it was exclusively aimed at monitoring communications abroad. The question that had exercised politicians and civil rights organisations since the Senate unveiled it in 1975 is to what extent its ferocious appetite for data has encompassed American citizens. General Lou Allen, the first NSA chief to appear in public, told Congress in the mid-1970s that the agency maintained lists of hundreds of names, including US citizens under surveillance for anti-war dissent or suspicious foreign connections.

As technology has evolved, so has the NSA’s capacity to intercept an astonishing variety and volume of communications. Satellites scoop up calls and emails in the ether and beam the information back to earthbound receiving stations. One estimate suggests that each of these bases hoovers up roughly one billion emails, phone calls and other forms of correspondence every day, and the agency has up to 20 bases.

“This is not science fiction. It is happening now,” a source with knowledge of the NSA said.

Domestic snooping exploded in scale after 9/11, when George W Bush authorised the agency to eavesdrop on Americans without the previous requirement for warrants. Within a few months of taking office in 2009, the Obama administration’s Justice Department conceded that the agency had been guilty of “over-collection” of domestic communications but claimed the excess had been accidental.

With every passing administration, the NSA has ballooned. One well-informed estimate of its staffing levels is 100,000, of whom about 30,000 are military and the rest private contractors. Its headquarters is a vast edifice of smoked glass in Fort Meade, in the leafy Washington suburbs, with sizeable complexes in Georgia and Texas and overseas bases in Japan, Germany and the UK.

While the NSA is by far the biggest surveillance agency in the world, it shares some of its work with four other allies: Britain, Australia, New Zealand and Canada. Collectively, they are known as the “five eyes”. Of the five, the biggest after the NSA is Britain’s General Communications Headquarters (GCHQ).

The predecessor to the NSA was the short-lived Armed Forces Security Agency, which was set up in 1949. It was a relatively modest body compared with the mammoth the NSA has since become.

The young agency suffered some early embarrassments. In 1960, two of its staff defected to the Soviet Union. Three years later, a former NSA employee published code-breaking secrets in the Soviet paper Izvestia; the same year, an NSA employee killed himself while being investigated for selling secrets to Moscow.

Since then, internal security has been tightened significantly, but as the agency’s secrecy deepened, its reach expanded relatively unchecked. It was a Democratic senator and lawyer, Frank Church, who in 1975 first raised the alarm at the agency’s sprawling tentacles. During a series of hearings into the work of the intelligence agencies, he warned that the NSA’s magnifying glass could be turned inwards on the American people.

“I don’t want to see this country ever go across the bridge,” he said. “I know the capacity that is there to make tyranny total in America, and we must see to it that this agency and all agencies that possess this technology operate within the law and under proper supervision, so that we never cross over that abyss. That is the abyss from which there is no return.”

The Church Senate hearings led to the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (Fisa), which required a warrant to conduct surveillance of communications within the US. A Fisa court, made up of a small group of judges appointed by the chief justice and located inside in the justice department, was given the job of deciding whether to grant warrants — it approves almost all requests.

In the years since 9/11, as the role of the NSA has snowballed, so has the debate over its operations. In 2005, the New York Times reported that the Bush administration had secretly authorised the NSA to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the US, to search for terrorist activity without the Fisa court warrants. The order had been signed in 2002, but the newspaper cited about a dozen serving or former officials who expressed concern about the legality. The Times delayed publication of the article for a year because of government concerns about its impact.

In the face of the subsequent uproar, the Bush administration said it had ceased the warrantless surveillance in January 2007 and resumed the practice of requiring NSA warrants. In 2008, Congress loosened some of those constraints in the Fisa Amendment Act.

The massive surveillance programme has continued under the Obama administration, at home as well as abroad. And the culture of intense secrecy persists. For years, Senators Ron Wyden and Mark Udall have been demanding to know just how many people inside the US have been spied on by the NSA. No answer has been forthcoming.

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

The sun sets on San Onofre. (Photo: dolanh/cc/flickr)In a victory for anti-nuclear activists, the trouble-stricken San Onofre nuclear plant is set to close permanently.

The plant’s operator, Southern California Edison, made the announcement on Friday.

The closing of San Onofre “is very good news for the people of Southern California,” said Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth (FOE).

As long-time anti-nuclear activist Harvey Wasserman has noted, the plant

sits in an earthquake/tsunami zone halfway between Los Angeles and San Diego. At least 8 million people live within a 50 mile radius, many millions more within 100. The reactors are a stone’s throw from both a major interstate and the high tide line, with a 14-foot flood wall a bare fraction of the height of the tsunami that overwhelmed at Fukushima.

“We have long said that these reactors are too dangerous to operate and now Edison has agreed,” added Pica. 

The San Onofre Safety website has pointed out that

San Onofre consistently has the highest number of safety and discrimination allegations (complaints) compared to all other U.S. nuclear power plants, according to Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) data.

The plant had been out of commission since January 2012 because of a leak detected in its steam generator, and in April a whistleblower warned a local news station of a “potentially catastrophic problem” at the plant and said that a faulty redesign of the plant’s steam generators put the system at risk of a “full or partial meltdown.”

With the plant now set to close, “the people of California now have the opportunity to move away from the failed promise of dirty and dangerous nuclear power and replace it with the safe and clean energy provided by the sun and the wind,” said FOE’s Picah.

______________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Protesters raise their hands as they shout slogans during a protest at Taksim Square in Istanbul, on Monday, June 3, 2013. (photo credit: AP Photo/Kostas Tsironis) As tensions continued to build in Turkey over the government’s heavy-handed police crackdown during almost two weeks of mass protests, Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan returned to the country, defiant and angry, to decry the demonstrations as “bordering on illegality” and called for an immediate end to the movement that has garnered international support.

“These protests that are bordering on illegality must come to an end as of now,” Erdogan said to a large crowd of supporters outside a terminal at Istanbul’s airport early Friday.

Erdogan also blamed the escalation of the widespread public protests on “terror groups” which he lumped in with leftist parties and members of his political opposition.

But, as the Guardian reports Thursday, numerous political analysts focusing on Turkey say the leader continues to “misinterpret the reasons behind the protests” that have now spread far beyond Gezi Park and Taksim Square in Istanbul to Ankara, the nation’s capital, and other cities.

Cengis Aktar, a professor of political science at Istanbul’s Bahcesehir University, told the Guardian:

[Erdogan] believes there is a plot to overthrow him with the complicity of external and international forces. Erdogan has returned from abroad as angry dad. This is bad. It means he is preparing for confrontation.

And Bahar Leventoglu, Assistant Professor of Political Science and Economics at Duke and a native of Turkey stated:

A lot of people now see ErdoÄŸan’s policies as a ‘cultural war’ against their lifestyles, and see the government’s so-called ‘Taksim project’ as an extension of this cultural war. […]

Erdogan also has no tolerance for criticism. He believes that he knows what is good and what is bad for citizens of Turkey, and so we have to obey him as if we are teenagers being disciplined by dad. I’m sure he was taken by surprise by the protests against the government, as Turkey does not have a long history of this. But times are changing, and Erdogan is behind the times in this one.

Meanwhile, as Erdogan spoke, supporters waved Turkish flags, chanting “We will die for you, Erdogan” and “Let’s go crush them all.”

Erdogan called on his ruling party, Justice and Development Party (AKP), and their supporters to refrain from the “lawless protests” of his opponents.

Erdogan once again promised go forward with plans to tear down Istanbul’s last green space to construct a shopping mall–the decision which sparked the protests last Tuesday, May 28.

“We said we are sorry for the tear gas used,” Erdogan has said of the clouds of tear gas that have enveloped Istanbul, Ankara, and other Turkish cities throughout the week along with the excessive presence of riot police that has lead to the death of at least two citizens and the injuries of more than 4,300, 47 of them seriously.

“We are angry. He doesn’t listen,” said 25-year-old biologist Senay Durmus in Taksim Square.

“This started with some trees. But I think it’s about freedom,” added Ali Ihsan Canimoglu, 32, goggles wrapped around his wrist to protect his eyes in case of a tear gas attack.

_______________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

“Reprehensible.” “Reckless.” “Illegal.”

The NSA’s PRISM program, which accesses the systems of internet giants like Facebook and Google to obtain user data, was revealed this week. These are the adjectives some officials in Washington are using to describe not the sweeping surveillance of Americans by the NSA revealed this week, but letting Americans know that such surveillance exists.

Speaking to CBS on Friday, WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange said, “Let’s ask ourselves whether the whistleblower who has revealed those, and there’s more to come, is going to be in exactly the same position as Bradley Manning is in today.”

Journalist and Guardian columnist Glenn Greenwald, part of the team that broke the stories, wrote on Friday of the courage of whistleblowers in the face of such intimidation:

Like puppets reading from a script, various Washington officials almost immediately began spouting all sorts of threats about “investigations” they intend to launch about these disclosures. This has been their playbook for several years now: they want to deter and intimidate anyone and everyone who might shed light on what they’re doing with their abusive, manipulative exploitation of the power of law to punish those who bring about transparency.

That isn’t going to work. It’s beginning completely to backfire on them. It’s precisely because such behavior reveals their true character, their propensity to abuse power, that more and more people are determined to bring about accountability and transparency for what they do.

They can threaten to investigate all they want. But as this week makes clear, and will continue to make clear, the ones who will actually be investigated are them.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said the revelations proved “we are a culture of leaks” and said there should be an investigation to find the source of the leak:

“The fact of the matter is, this was a routine three-month approval that was under seal that was leaked,” Feinstein told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell, who followed up by asking if the source of the leak should be investigated.

“I think so,” Feinstein said. “I think we’ve become a culture of leaks now.”

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper said the leak was “reprehensible” and could cause “irreversible harm:”

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper called the disclosure of an Internet surveillance program “reprehensible” and said it risks Americans’ security. He said a leak that revealed a program to collect phone records would affect how America’s enemies behave and make it harder to understand their intentions.

“The unauthorized disclosure of a top secret U.S. court document threatens potentially long-lasting and irreversible harm to our ability to identify and respond to the many threats facing our nation,” Clapper said in an unusual late-night statement.

An ABC News headline reads ominously: “On the Hunt for the NSA Wiretapping Leaker:”

“It’s completely reckless and illegal… It’s more than just unauthorized. He’s no hero,” one senior law enforcement source told ABC News of the unidentified leaker. The source speculated that a single person could be behind both recent leaks to the British newspaper The Guardian and to The Washington Post. […]

“This guy’s trying to be some kind of martyr,” the law enforcement source said. […]

If the leaker is in the government, former Deputy Director of the FBI Tim Muphy said he should be punished.

“You have an obligation when you have a clearance not to leak this kind of information,” Murphy said.

At an event in San Jose, California on Friday, President Obama offered this blunt statment:

“I don’t welcome leaks.”

______________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Amid the explosive back-to-back revelations made by the Guardian and Washington Post regarding a pair of National Security Agency surveillence programs this week, the hacktivist group Anonymous on Friday released what they claim are additional NSA documents that both deepen and expand on those earlier revelations.

In a statement that accompanied the release of the thirteen documents–and addressed to “the citizens of the world”–Anonymous said the information they contain proves “the NSA is spying on you, and not just Americans.”

The group claims that the global intelligence apparatus discussed within some of the documents shows that government agencies “are spying on the citizens of over 35 different countries” and that this is being “done in cooperation with private businesses, and intelligence partners” across the globe.

That statement seems like a specifc reference to what one of the documents details as the Department of Defense’s Global Information Grid (or GIG), designed to ” enable the secure, agile, robust, dependable, interoperable data sharing environment for the Department where warfighter, business, and intelligence users share knowledge on  a global network that facilitates information superiority, accelerates  decision-making, effective operations, and Net-Centric transformation.”

“Your privacy and freedoms are slowly being taken from you, in closed door meetings, in laws buried in bills, and by people who are supposed to be protecting you.” – Anonymous

“We bring this to you,” the Anonymous statement explained, “so that you know just how little rights you have. Your privacy and freedoms are slowly being taken from you, in closed door meetings, in laws buried in bills, and by people who are supposed to be protecting you.”

Though some of the documents contained in the dump appear to be from the public domain, it is unclear how all of them may have been obtained.

As U.S. News & World Report details, the documents “total thousands of pages, but among them include reports on the “Information Sharing Environment,” “Suspicious Activity Reporting,” a list of names from the Intelligence and National Security Alliance (an intelligence research group) spy list, reports on the Department of Defense’s “Information Enterprise” and a discussion about the government’s “Net Centric Environment.”

The thirteen documents were posted in a list and included as a digital index, reproduced below:

But, as Gizmodo writer Chris Mills warns:

Hit up the documents for further details; just be warned that although this might look like the plot of a B-list movie starring Aston Kutcher, the docs themselves are incredibly dry and full of more acronyms than whatever presentation you should be working on.

______________________________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

[unable to retrieve full-text content]

read more

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

As striking Walmart workers and supporters headed from around the country to protest the retail giant’s annual stockholder meeting in Fayetteville, Ark., the corporation issued a restraining order on several Walmart labor groups and banned protesters from going near the meeting.

Shareholders fill Bud Walton Arena on the University of Arkansas campus for the annual Wal-Mart shareholders’ meeting in Fayetteville, Ark. (April L. Brown / Associated Press) The Los Angeles Times reports:

Armed with a temporary restraining order against demonstrators and a $15-billion stock buyback program for investors, Walmart held its annual shareholder meeting Friday.

The company is facing renewed scrutiny over its labor practices at home and the working conditions of those who produce its cheap clothes abroad after the deaths of more than 1,100 workers in a Bangladesh building collapse.

To preempt protesters, Walmart sought, and was granted, a temporary restraining order against the United Food and Commercial Workers International Union, Organization United for Respect at Walmart and other unnamed defendants from a judge in Benton County, Arkansas.

According to the order, these organizers were prohibited from: “entering onto or inside Walmart’s private property in the State of Arkansas to engage in activities such as picketing, patrolling, parading, demonstrations, ‘flash mobs,’ handbilling, solicitation, and manager confrontations,” among other acts.

Some Walmart critics, however, did manage to get into the shareholder meeting on Friday, including Kalpona Akter, the executive director of the Bangladeshi Center for Worker Solidarity and former garment factory worker in Bangladesh.

Akter spoke in turn inside the meeting and urged Walmart to address worker safety conditions in their factories around the world such as the Rana Plaza in Bangladesh that collapsed last month killing more than 1,100 workers.

“If the world’s largest retailer refuses to address the state of workers’ rights and working conditions seriously, things will not change,” Akter, said in a statement emailed to The Los Angeles Times before she spoke at the meeting.

“The last six months have seen two of the worst disasters in the entire history of the garment industry,” said Kalpona Akter, a union activist in Bangladesh, referring to the Rana Plaza collapse and the Tazreen fire. “Both occurred in buildings where Walmart goods were produced.”

“Don’t you agree that the factories where Walmart products are made should be safe for the workers?” she said.

Walmart recently refused to sign an agreement between a number of Western brands to improve working conditions in their subcontracted factories there.

The legally binding agreement, signed by retailers including H&M, Primark, C&A, Tommy Hilfiger, Calvin Klein, Zara, Tesco and others, “aims to compel retailers to pay for rigorous and independent public inspections and blacklist any factories unwilling to comply,” the Guardian reported.

Additionally, Janet Sparks who works at a Walmart in Baker, La, and is a shareholder, also spoke out, urging the company to pay its employees livable wages and to fix its exploitative scheduling policies–both issues which have garnered widespread Walmart workers’ strikes throughout the year.

“Times are tough for many Walmart associates, too. We are stretching our paychecks to pay our bills and support our families,” said Ms. Sparks, a member of the union-affiliated employee group OUR Walmart.

Meanwhile, Walmart, oozing with profits, took the opportunity at the shareholder meeting amongst appearances by Hugh Jackman, Tom Cruise, Kelly Clarkson, Jennifer Hudson, dancers and a “giant puppet of a white elephant,” to announce to its shareholders a $15-billion buyback program.

“Our strong cash flow enabled the company to invest in growth and repurchase over $14 billion of our stock during the last two years,” Charles Holley, Walmart executive vice president said at the meeting, which Reuters described as filled with “glitz, songs and stock buyback.”

“We’re pleased to continue our share repurchase program with this new $15 billion authorization,” Holley said.

Walmart’s stock prices remain close to an all-time high.

The New York Times adds:

As expected, none of the shareholders’ proposals passed. The founding Walton family owns more than 50 percent of shares, making it impossible to pass any measures without their support. Likewise, despite opposition from some large pension funds and proxy-advisory firms, all 14 directors up for re-election were reinstated. Walmart said it would release a detailed breakdown of the votes on Monday, which would signal how dissatisfied outside investors are with the company and board.

Yet the portion of the meeting where investors could speak amounted to about 15 minutes of an almost four-hour meeting.

The rest of it was devoted to Walmart’s version of its story.

Walmart strikers and protesters will, however, continue to protest in Fayetteville and Bentonville throughout the rest of Walmart’s ‘shareholders week’.

_______________________

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License

This article originally appeared on: Common Dreams

Russia’s Strategic Missile Forces have reported a successful launch of a next-generation ICBM that can supposedly pierce any anti-ballistic missile (ABM) system. The test came after the US announced it would resume its ABM program in Europe.

The test missile launched from a mobile pad at 9:45pm (17:45 GMT)
on Thursday, the Defense Ministry said Friday. The test was
carried out in the Astrakhan region, deep inside Russian
territory, and the prototype’s payload successfully hit the
Balkhash range in Kazakhstan.

“The test launch was a success as the [simulated] warhead hit
a designated target within the set timeframe,” the Russian
Defense Ministry statement said. “This test launch was
intended to confirm technical characteristics of the missile, as
well as to check the safety of the launch procedures and
equipment.”

The launch was the third successful test of the prototype ICBM.
The development of a new solid-fuel ICBM was officially announced
in 2012, and is set to gradually replace the existing Topol-M and
later the recently developed Yars missile complex. Strategic
Missile Forces expect to finalize testing by the end of 2013 and
put the new missile into production in 2014. 

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin welcomed the test,
calling the new ICBM a “missile defense killer… Neither
current nor future American missile defense systems will be able
to prevent that missile from hitting a target dead on.”

Russia maintains at least 58 silo-based Soviet-made P36M (‘SS-18
Satan’ NATO classification) ballistic missiles, believed to be
the most powerful in the world with up to 10 megaton-class
warheads. The Strategic Missile Forces have 160 mobile Topol-M
(‘SS-25 Sickle’) missile systems, 50 silo-based and 18
road-mobile Topol-M (‘SS-27 Sickle B’) systems, and 18 RS-24 Yars
systems.

In recent years, two missile divisions were rearmed with the
newest Topol-M and Yars systems, and more will follow in 2013.
The Defense Ministry is also preparing to introduce the latest
automated battle management system (ASBU), enabling rapid
retargeting of ICBMs.

Russia sped up development of new intercontinental ballistic
missile systems after the US announced plans to continue
deploying its missile defense system in Eastern Europe, near
Russian borders.

The issue of the US missile shield in Europe has become a major
stumbling block in Russia-US relations. Moscow has demanded legal
guarantees from Washington that missile defense systems deployed
in Europe would not target Russia’s strategic nuclear deterrence
capabilities. But Washington refused, citing a need to protect
Europe from ‘rogue states’ like Iran and North Korea.

In mid-March of 2013, Washington attempted to engage Moscow in
new talks about further nuclear arms reduction, after presidents
Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev agreed to reduce their nuclear
stocks with the New START arms reduction treaty. The US said it
would no longer deploy SM-3 IIB ballistic missile interceptors in
Poland until 2022.

Nevertheless, Moscow still demands legally binding guarantees
from Washington that the system’s intentions are peaceful.

On Monday, US Secretary of State John Kerry met with the Polish
Foreign Minister, and committed to deploy missile defenses in
Poland by 2018 as planned. “We are on track to deploy a
missile defense site in Poland by 2018 as part of NATO’s
modernized approach to our security,” Kerry said.

This article originally appeared on: RT

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has called on the member states of European Union to implement further structural reforms, as Europeans continue to struggle with austerity measures.

Merkel made the comments on Saturday, saying that progress of her countryâ„¢s economy depended on the improvement of the European economy.

“That’s why it’s very much in Germany’s interest to do everything it can to ensure other states implement structural reforms, that budgets are made solid and that economic activity is stimulated in this way,” the German chancellor said added.

Merkel also praised some countries in the region for already carrying out structural reforms.

In April, French Consumer Affairs Minister Benoit Hamon slammed Merkel for her support of “failing” austerity measures in EU countries.

He added that most European leaders and economists opposed the crippling measures and that Germany was the only economy that was “resisting, opposing, vetoing.”

Merkel is seeking a third four-year term in September elections.

The European financial crisis began in early 2008. Insolvency now threatens heavily debt-ridden countries such as Greece, Portugal, Italy, Ireland, and Spain.

The worsening debt crisis has forced EU governments to adopt harsh austerity measures and tough economic reforms, which have triggered massive demonstrations in many European countries.

SZH/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Civilians inspect the scene of a car bomb attack in the Kamaliyah neighbourhood on May, 2013

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

Nightly News covers the latest on the Bilderberg protests in Britain.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 7:36 am

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Vodafone has paid no corporation tax for the second year running last year, according to the company’s annual report.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/diseases_spread_as_arctic_ice_melts_20130608/

Posted on Jun 8, 2013

This article originally appeared on: TruthDig

Spare the nation the ordeal of impeachment

Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

A new petition launched on the whitehouse.gov website demands that President Obama immediately resign over the innumerable unconstitutional actions he has overseen, notably the recent scandal surrounding wiretapping of journalists.

Image: Infowars.com

The full petition, which can be found here on the whitehouse.gov website, states the following:

President Richard Nixon resigned after wiretapping a handful of journalists, sparing the nation the ordeal of impeachment. We call on Obama to do the same. His administration vetted the NSA’s surveillance of millions of Americans and seriously violated the Fourth Amendment. He confiscated the personal records of reporters, thus violating the First Amendment, and the IRS under his watch harassed political organizations opposed to his policies. Moreover, his administration has lied under oath to Congress. In addition to violating Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution by invading Libya, his administration engaged in torture and conducted a covert drone war. Due to the severity of these crimes, we call for the immediate resignation of Barack Obama.

The petition requires 100,000 signatures before July 7 in order to mandate an official White House response.

Aside from recent wiretapping and surveillance scandals, there are a number of other issues over which Obama has clearly abused his authority and acted unconstitutionally.

– Obama failed to obtain congressional authorization for the war on Libya in 2011. Under Article 1 Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, the power to declare war lies with Congress.

– In June 2011, President Obama arrogantly expressed his hostility to the rule of law when he dismissed the need to get congressional authorization to commit the United States to a military intervention in Libya, churlishly dismissing criticism and remarking, “I don’t even have to get to the Constitutional question.”

– In July 2011, Congress specifically rejected the Obama administration’s attempt to seek approval for war on Libya but the White House later supported a NATO-led assault anyway, terming it a “kinetic” action.

– Obama tried to legitimize his failure to obtain Congressional approval for military involvement by sending a letter to Speaker of the House John Boehner in which he said the military assault was “authorized by the United Nations (U.N.) Security Council.”

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 8:18 am

Tags: constitution

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

Alex Jones and Infowars have posted a petition on the White House’s “We the People” site calling for Obama to resign.

Obama has violated the Constitution and the Bill of Rights numerous times, making him the most criminal president in history. From waging illegal wars and committing war crimes to wantonly violating the Fourth Amendment and actively plotting against the Second Amendment, he continues to flaunt the rule of law and commit impeachable offenses. It is well past time for him to go.

Here is the petition. Please sign it.

Of course, we realize that it is unlikely Obama will be impeached and he will certainly never resign. We are posting the petition in order to draw attention to crimes glossed over and even ignored by the establishment media. It is an effort to draw attention to the fact Obama has violated his oath of Office, has attacked the Constitution and betrayed the American people.

Nixon resigned and Bill Clinton was impeached for less egregious offenses. It is our duty to enumerate Obama’s crimes and call for his removal from office.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 8:22 am

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Iraqi security forces and rescue workers inspect the site of a blast in the northern Iraqi city of Kirkuk on September 7, 2012.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Lebanese Hezbollah resistance movement has denied its members were seized by foreign-backed militants in the Syrian capital, Damascus.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei meets a group of Qurâ„¢an scholars attending the 30th edition of Tehran International Qurâ„¢an Competitions on June 8, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Protests in Turkey have taken Twitter by storm, with activists and government supporters battling it out on the social network. Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan claimed the most violent protests in a decade are caused by extremists and foreign provocateurs.

While Turkish press were slow to cover the anti-government
protests that have gripped the country for the past week, Twitter
users wasted no time sounding off.

Several hashtags relating to the violent upheaval have popped up
on the social network and trended worldwide. After Turkish Prime
Minister Erdogan returned from North Africa and gave a speech to
the cheering supporters who greeted him at Istanbul’s airport,
the hashtag #ProvokatörEylemci (‘provocateur activists’) topped
the list.

The hashtag pools together Twitter users who are echoing
Erdogan’s accusation that the protests are motivated by
extremists and foreign provocateurs. The Turkish leader said that
the protest should stop immediately, condemned activists as
“vandals” and defended the use of force to suppress them.

A large proportion of those using the hashtag are members of
Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) and its youth
branch. RT source Beyza Burcak said she was inclined to believe
the hashtag “appeared arbitrarily,” while it was possible
that the AKP created it to discredit the protesters.


“He [Erdogan] keeps saying that there are vandals in the protest
who destroy everything in streets etc. but from the beginning the
aim of this protest has been to be peaceful,” Burcak told RT.

On Saturday, the tables turned and the hashtag
#provokatörbaÅŸbakanÄ°stemiyoruz (‘provocateur we don’t want the
Prime Minister’) topped the Twitter trending list.
Simultaneously, thousands of activists gathered for a mass sit-in
at Taksim Square to protest Erdogan’s authoritarian rule.

Hackivist group Anonymous and the Syrian Electronic Army also
joined the cyber-battle, saying they hacked the Turkish Prime
Minister’s network and stole personal information during the
week. Erdogan’s office confirmed to Reuters on Wednesday that the
cyber-attack had occurred.

“Anonymous has successfully infiltrated Turkish Prime
Ministry’s network (basbakanlik.gov.tr). Anonymous is sharing
with you the full user list of the domain BASBAKANLIK that is the
main domain of the Prime Ministry of Turkey,” the hackivist
group tweeted. A group calling itself @AnonsTurkey went on to
praise Gezi Turkey as one of the most noble current social
movements.

The group said they did not publicly release the information they
hacked “because Anonymous respects people’s privacy.”

The social upheaval began in Turkey last week when police cracked
down violently on a group of protesters demonstrating against the
demolition of Gezi Park. Clashes between police and protesters,
some of whom called for Erdogan to step down, followed the
initial outbreak.

The EU has called for a probe into police conduct during the
protests after numerous reports of excessive force being used to
disperse activists, with three people dead and thousands more
injured in clashes between police and demonstrators. Prime
Minister Erdogan responded by accusing the EU of hypocrisy,
claiming that such tactics were commonplace in other European
countries and the US.

This article originally appeared on: RT

[unable to retrieve full-text content]An Afghan civilian has been shot to death by US forces in Afghanistan’s northern province of Balkh, Press TV reports.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

“This creature, the so-called Conservative Party, if it goes forward will be an illegitimate creation conceived in deception and born in betrayal.” [1] Progressive Conservative leadership candidate David Orchard, October 17, 2003

“They would do all kinds of things…Organizing meetings that didn’t happen or people would go to a delegate selection meeting and the address was a pawn shop in Regina so people stood at the street corner waiting for something and nobody came…There was a kind of planned confusion…by people who really wanted us to stay out, and I think these people were people who wanted the party to be taken over.” Orchard campaign manager and political advisor Marjaleena Repo

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Length (59:31)

 This week’s programme looks back ten years to the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada’s leadership race of 2003 which turned out to be the party’s last before it merged with the rival Canadian Alliance, led by leader Stephen Harper.

The current Conservative Party has been racked with accusations of scandal and corruption. At least three Canadian Senators, hand-picked by the Prime Minister, are having their housing and living expenses reviewed, two Conservative Members of Parliament are being taken to task for improper accounting of their election expenses, and a court case recently determined that “there was an orchestrated effort to suppress votes during the 2011 election campaign by a person with access to the CIMS database” which is “maintained and controlled by the CPC (Conservative Party of Canada)”. [2][3][4]

And notoriously, one of the Prime Minister’s staffers cut Senator Mike Duffy a personal cheque for $90,000 to make up for the funds the Senator owed. [5]

This is astonishing behaviour for a political party which rose to power in 2006 promising accountability and integrity in office. [6]

But David Orchard and his supporters questioned the ethics of the party a long time ago. Orchard contested the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party back in 2003. Orchard relied on the support of grass-roots people, myself among them, who were opposed to government policies on free trade, environmental neglect, and Canadian support for imperial wars abroad. [7]

It was thorough Orchard’s support that Peter Mackay became leader of the party. Mackay then betrayed a condition of the support by orchestrating a merger with the more right-wing US-Republican style Canadian Alliance Party, which was then led by Stephen Harper. [8]

This betrayal, in addition to some of the other shenanigans which played out in the months during the leadership campaign and leading up to the vote to merge the parties in December provides a critical context for assessing this party’s commitment to ethics, responsible conduct and fair play.

Orchard, and many other traditional Progressive Conservatives, saw the Canadian Alliance as out of sync with the traditional trajectory of the PC Party, the Party which established Canada has a nation in 1867. The PCs historically championed Canadian sovereignty. The Canadian Alliance advocated closer political and economic ties with the United States.

The Canadian Alliance boasted a much larger membership than the Progressive Conservative Party in 2003. Through no great surprise therefore, the leader of the Canadian Alliance, Stephen Harper, easily secured the leadership of the merged Conservative Party, which went on to power in 2006. [9]

Orchard’s political advisor, campaign manager and long-time associate Marjaleena Repo speaks to the Global Research News Hour about the campaign, the issues, the subsequent legal battles and where she believes the Campaign for Canada needs to focus its energies.

LISTEN TO THE SHOW

Length (59:31)

References

3)     Mia Robson, June 7, 2013, “Bezan, Glover speak on spending dispute”; http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/Bezan-Glover-speak-on-spending-dispute-210594261.html

9)     CBC News, March 22. 2004; Harper wins Conservative leadership; http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2004/03/20/conservatives_040320.html

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Iranian presidential candidate Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel has once again said he will not step aside in favor of other candidates ahead of the June 14 vote.

The former Majlis Speaker said at a press conference on Saturday that he has a lot to offer to the nation, and that he will form an all-inclusive cabinet.

The Principlist candidate said it is wrong to undermine the achievements made over the past 34 years just to win more votes, adding that he will not make promises that he cannot deliver.

Haddad-Adel said he doesnâ„¢t have the financial backing of any organization and that his presence in the race does not go against the interests of the Principlist camp.

Haddad-Adel is facing Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref, Secretary of the Supreme National Security Council Saeed Jalili, Secretary of Expediency Council Mohsen Rezaei, former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi in the upcoming election.

On June 14, Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election. Expatriates will also be able to vote at 285 polling stations which will be set up in other countries.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election.

PG/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

A US Predator drone fires a Hellfire missile. (File photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

by Aubrey Bloomfield

Two recently released reports, one by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and one by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), show that not only is the number of private contractors in Afghanistan increasing, but the Pentagon is also unable to tell what they are even doing there. Citing the reports, David Francis of the Fiscal Times points out that there are now 108,000 private contractors in Afghanistan (over 30,000 of whom are Americans), far more than the 65,700 U.S. troops still there,and the number was counted at 110,404 last month. That amounts to 1.6 contractors, roughly 18,000 of which are private security contractors, for every American soldier.

Although the U.S. presence in Afghanistan is ostensibly winding down towards an eventual handover to Afghan security forces, as Francis argues, “the increase in the contractors to troop ratio is yet another indication that although the vast majority of troops are leaving Afghanistan, a private army will remain in the country for years.”

According to the CRS, the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan show the increasing reliance of the military on private contractors. But replacing the military with private contractors is not necessarily a good thing. Highlighting the abuses committed by private military contractors, Angela Snell of the University of Illinois College of Law has called this trend a “convenient way for the U.S. government to evade its legal obligations, including the responsibility to protect the human rights of civilians in war and peace, by allowing private individuals, rather than official state actors, to perform services on behalf of the U.S. military.”

Not only does the growing use of private contractors give lie to the idea of a withdrawal from the country, but they are also very costly. Although still dwarfed by the ever-mounting total costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, CRS reports that “over the last six fiscal years, DOD [Department of Defense] obligations for contracts performed in the Iraq and Afghanistan areas of operation were approximately $160 billion and exceeded total contract obligations of any other U.S. federal agency.”

Moreover, Francis points out that the CRS and GAO did not just measure the number of contractors and the cost, but the reports also assessed the Pentagon’s ability to monitor the work of contractors. And the results are damning. According to Francis, taken together the reports:

“Amount to yet another indictment of how the Pentagon deals with private workers. CRS found that the Pentagon lacked the ability to document the work each contractor is performing. It also found even when the government has information on contractors, it’s often inaccurate and doesn’t reflect the actual work being done. This leaves the Pentagon unable to determine if the hundreds of billions it’s spending are leading to effective results.”

So despite the increasing number of private contractors being used and the hundreds of billions of dollars being spent on them, the Pentagon is not even able to determine what they are doing or whether it is effective. As CRS reports, the information the Pentagon has on private contractors is probably not reliable enough to be used to make decisions “at the strategic level,” thus hindering its ability to tell whether the work of contractors is contributing to “achieving the mission.”

The U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been massive, and destructive, wastes of lives and money. Although the U.S. and its allies say that they plan to remove combat troops from Afghanistan by 2014, this will in no way be the end of the West’s presence in the country. Francis reports that much of the work currently done by the military will be done by the private contractors after the military leaves. So while the attention paid to Afghanistan is likely to continue to dwindle even further, as has been the case in Iraq, as the military withdrawal picks up, the foreign occupation, by what one analyst has called “a de facto army,” looks set to continue on.

Copyright: policymic.com, 2013

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Government Built Spy-Access Into Most Popular Consumer Program Before 9/11

In researching the stunning pervasiveness of spying by the government (it’s much more wide spread than you’ve heard even now), we ran across the fact that the FBI wants software programmers to install a backdoor in all software.

Digging a little further, we found a 1999 article by leading European computer publication Heise which noted that the NSA had already built a backdoor into all Windows software:

A careless mistake by Microsoft programmers has revealed that special access codes prepared by the US National Security Agency have been secretly built into Windows. The NSA access system is built into every version of the Windows operating system now in use, except early releases of Windows 95 (and its predecessors). The discovery comes close on the heels of the revelations earlier this year that another US software giant, Lotus, had built an NSA “help information” trapdoor into its Notes system, and that security functions on other software systems had been deliberately crippled.

The first discovery of the new NSA access system was made two years ago by British researcher Dr Nicko van Someren [an expert in computer security]. But it was only a few weeks ago when a second researcher rediscovered the access system. With it, he found the evidence linking it to NSA.

***

Two weeks ago, a US security company came up with conclusive evidence that the second key belongs to NSA. Like Dr van Someren, Andrew Fernandez, chief scientist with Cryptonym of Morrisville, North Carolina, had been probing the presence and significance of the two keys. Then he checked the latest Service Pack release for Windows NT4, Service Pack 5. He found that Microsoft’s developers had failed to remove or “strip” the debugging symbols used to test this software before they released it. Inside the code were the labels for the two keys. One was called “KEY”. The other was called “NSAKEY”.

Fernandes reported his re-discovery of the two CAPI keys, and their secret meaning, to “Advances in Cryptology, Crypto’99″ conference held in Santa Barbara. According to those present at the conference, Windows developers attending the conference did not deny that the “NSA” key was built into their software. But they refused to talk about what the key did, or why it had been put there without users’ knowledge.

A third key?!

But according to two witnesses attending the conference, even Microsoft’s top crypto programmers were astonished to learn that the version of ADVAPI.DLL shipping with Windows 2000 contains not two, but three keys. Brian LaMachia, head of CAPI development at Microsoft was “stunned” to learn of these discoveries, by outsiders. The latest discovery by Dr van Someren is based on advanced search methods which test and report on the “entropy” of programming code.

Within the Microsoft organisation, access to Windows source code is said to be highly compartmentalized, making it easy for modifications to be inserted without the knowledge of even the respective product managers.

Researchers are divided about whether the NSA key could be intended to let US government users of Windows run classified cryptosystems on their machines or whether it is intended to open up anyone’s and everyone’s Windows computer to intelligence gathering techniques deployed by NSA’s burgeoning corps of “information warriors”.

According to Fernandez of Cryptonym, the result of having the secret key inside your Windows operating system “is that it is tremendously easier for the NSA to load unauthorized security services on all copies of Microsoft Windows, and once these security services are loaded, they can effectively compromise your entire operating system“. The NSA key is contained inside all versions of Windows from Windows 95 OSR2 onwards.

***

“How is an IT manager to feel when they learn that in every copy of Windows sold, Microsoft has a ‘back door’ for NSA — making it orders of magnitude easier for the US government to access your computer?” he asked.

We have repeatedly pointed out that widespread spying on Americans began prior to 9/11.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

An overwhelming majority of US and Canadian citizens are entirely unaware that an especially dangerous device has been attached to their homes. While installation of “smart meters” across North America has continued apace since 2009 the health effects such devices pose have yet to be fully realized. Left unaddressed the broad use and continued deployment of such equipment will almost certainly influence human health for many generations to come.

On May 22 my household received a “Notification Letter” from Florida Power and Light (FPL) stating the company’s intent to replace our existing analog meter with a new device equipped to communicate with other such meters in the utility’s wireless “mesh network.”{1] According to FPL we are among roughly 20,000 of Florida homes that have rejected the new digital device in lieu of an analog model.[2]The letter carries the industry’s familiar line—that the “meter upgrade” is intended to “provide you with more information so you can take more control over your energy use and monthly bills” while more readily “identify[ing]” and resolving power outages.

The correspondence came as quite a surprise since in late 2011 after explaining to FPL the health-related consequences of such electro-pollution and expressing concerns for my family’s well-being, the company agreed to remove the “smart meter” and replace it with one that does not emit such energy. This was done only after conducting my own investigation, providing the company with substantial medical research documenting the negative health effects of RF microwave radiation, and threatening legal action.[3]

FPL was in fact much more reasonable in addressing my concerns than was the Florida Public Service Commission, whose legal counsel informed me flatly that the body had no authority over smart meter deployment and referred me to the Federal Communications Commission.[4] Only after submitting a public records request to the agency did I discover that the information Commission members accepted to evaluate the safety of such equipment in terms of human health consisted largely of smart meter manufacturer and utility boilerplate, including a FPL “PowerPoint”-like presentation seemingly pitched to a fifth grade audience.

Upon receiving FPL’s May 22 letter I took a few hours to write a response to the company’s president, taking care to outline my past communication with them, the concerns I have over the device’s potentially negative effects on my family’s health, and the fact that they recognized and fulfilled my opt out request almost two years ago. A few days after sending my letter off, the executive’s assistant called to inform us the notification letter was likely the result of a computer glitch and should have never been sent.

The foremost danger of smart meters is that they are designed to communicate with each other by emitting substantial and frequent bursts of radio frequency (RF) microwave pollution several thousand times per day—a cumulative burden on one’s genetic and biological makeup that children and the elderly are especially vulnerable to given their respective developing and degenerative conditions. Yet the documented health effects are something FPL never voluntarily told me about, and your power utility will likely not tell you.

For example, FPL spokeswoman Elaine Hinsdale disingenuously remarked that smart meters’ radio frequencies are akin “to those in a garage-door opener and hundreds of times less than emission limits set by the Federal Communications Commission.” According to Hinsdale, “You’d have to stand right next to the smart-meter for more than a year to equal the radio-frequency exposure of a 15-minute cellphone call … Once we talk to our customers and explain how it will repair power outages faster and safer, they understand.”[5] In 2011 when I contacted FPL via telephone to inquire on the overall safety of the devices I was similarly told that RF radiation is emitted only “a few times per day.”

Yet other sources I consulted observed that such emissions are much more frequent. I thus purchased a German-made Gigahertz Solution HF35C Elektrosmog Analyzer and did my own measurements. To my surprise I found that FPL’s meter was emitting RF bursts in excess of 2,000 microwatts per square meter at a distance of five feet several times every thirty seconds to one minute. This pulsing radiation was detected in varying degrees of intensity elsewhere throughout the home and may have at least partially explained the common symptoms of electro-hypersensitivity I was experiencing.

If the US public was served by a more honest and diligent press smart meters and RF radiation in general would not endanger public health to the extent they do today. This is particularly the case since a multitude of scientific studies exist that point to the deleterious health effects of RF energy exposure—especially in children and the elderly. Such information is intentionally overlooked by power utilities and little-if-any acknowledgement of negative health effects appear in any of the vacuous paraphernalia they provide their customers—and state regulators—promoting the meters.

When I pressed FPL representatives on what studies the company had conducted on smart meter safety they sent me a privately commissioned 2011 report, Florida Power and Light Advanced Meter Infrastructure & Distribution Automation RF Exposure Survey, produced by an obscure Arlington Virginia firm called Site Safe.[6] The study’s findings assert that one receives almost the equivalent amount of RF radiation standing one meter away from a smart meter as they would within the immediate vicinity of a cell phone tower—an especially alarming observation!

However, the research’s overall flaw and deceptive nature lies in the absence of suitable methodological parameters for examining how smart meters pulse lesser amounts of such microwave radiation throughout the home up to 190,000 times per day. Germany’s Standard Building Biology Measurements of 2008 caution that specifically in terms of human health “pulsed signals [are] to be taken more seriously than continuous ones.” When I contacted the author of the Site Safe study via telephone and email to evaluate his credentials for authoring such a study, he refused to provide me with any information that might confirm such training and expertise.

In May 2011 the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified RF as a Class 2B carcinogen. This means that caution should be applied because exposure to RF and EMF may cause cancer.[7] Given such an admission power utilities should be exercising the precautionary principal lest they further endanger human health with the continued wide-scale deployment of smart meters. FPL and the broader power industry have produced no compelling scientific evidence to date that even tentatively confirms the safety of smart meters. With this in mind, and in terms specifically related to human health, the power industry writ large is executing a transparently dangerous and criminal fraud against the US public.

A half century ago tobacco and asbestos were known menaces to health and over the long term exposure to these substances culminated in a variety of cancers and other terminal diseases compelling the government to intervene on the public’s behalf. The credible scientific evidence suggests the same holds true for exposure to RF microwave radiation. In fact, government and academic research dating to the 1960s points to the potential health dangers of sustained RF and EMF exposure. While the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Communications Commission, and the American Cancer Society claim that RF and EMF pose no health risks, their conclusions are based on dubious and outdated studies often funded by the telecommunications industry itself.

Current independent scientific and medical research paints an entirely different picture. For example, in 2012 the American Academy of Environmental Medicine generated a list of 86 scientific studies and bibliographies on the health effects of EMF, RF and extremely low frequency (ELF) microwave radiation dating to 1971.[8] Referencing this literature, in January 2012 the AAEM Board issued a public statement to the California Public Utilities Commission expressing its concern over smart meter installations across the state. “[E]xisting FCC guidelines for RF safety that have been used to justify installation of ‘smart meters’ only look at thermal tissue damage and are obsolete,” the Board observed, since many modern studies [such as those used by the FCC] show metabolic and genomic damage from RF and ELF exposures below the level of intensity which heats tissues … More modern literature shows medically and biologically significant effects of RF and ELF at lower energy densities.

These effects accumulate over time, which is an important consideration given the chronic nature of exposure from “smart meters”. The current medical literature raises credible questions about genetic and cellular effects, hormonal effects, male fertility, blood/brain barrier damage and increased risk of certain types of cancers from RF or ELF levels similar to those emitted from “smart meters”. Children are placed at particular risk for altered brain development, and impaired learning and behavior. Further, EMF/RF adds synergistic effects to the damage observed from a range of toxic chemicals. Given the widespread, chronic, and essentially inescapable ELF/RF exposure of everyone living near a “smart meter”, the Board of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine finds it unacceptable from a public health standpoint to implement this technology until these serious medical concerns are resolved.[9]

Along these lines in 2007 and again in 2012 the BioInitiative Working Group, an international body of academic scientists, medical doctors and public health professionals released a comprehensive review of over 2000 scientific studies and reviews, concluding that RF and EMF exposure can contribute to childhood leukemia and lay the groundwork for a variety of adult cancers.

Aside from long term adverse health effects, smart meters also pose more immediate safety and privacy concerns. The equipment has not been inspected by and thus does not meet the protocols of the internationally recognized authority on consumer appliance safety standards, Underwriters Laboratory, a potential violation of numerous state and local municipal codes. Careless installation or the limited integrity of smart meter engineering and design have been pointed to as the possible cause of house fires. “We have encountered an unusual amount of fire incidents involving smart meters,” an Ontario Fire Marshal explains to the Vancouver Sun. “New meters may have defects that cause electrical failures (or they may be caused by) careless installation during a changeover.”[10]

Finally, the collection and uncertain wireless transmission of intimate data related to a family’s domestic power usage and everyday life encompassed in residential occupancy also serve as a potential basis for the violation of protections from illegal search and seizure guaranteed under the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. This lifestyle-related information relayed throughout the mesh network via RF microwave may be easily “hacked” and the broader network attacked by any number of third parties, including criminals and terrorists. Such data may also be easily accessed by police or other government agencies that would otherwise need a warrant and probable cause to access such information. Utility customers should remind power companies that they do not consent to any personal data related to electrical usage and living patterns aggregated and sold to third parties, including marketers, appliance manufacturers, or data analyst subcontractors.

Already RF is involuntarily yielded to through the ubiquitous radiation emitted from local area networks (“Wi-Fi”) in places of employment and public areas. This is compounded by the voluntary exposure to RF through close quarter cell phone and household Wi-Fi use. With the combined financial and advertising power of the telecommunications service and wireless-manufacturing industries the research clearly pointing to the harmful health effects of RF remains to a large degree unknown. Given their wide scale use and around-the-clock activity, smart meters complete the circle of what is now ceaseless RF bombardment; their broad deployment anticipates a not-too-distant future when they will engage with “smart” appliances within the home, further disseminating such radiation while arbitrarily exerting power over everyday energy use and unlawfully collecting vital and likely profitable data on behavior and lifestyle.

Notes

[5] Hemlock, “Some FP&L Users.”

[6] Matthew J. Butcher, Florida Power and Light Advanced Meter Infrastructure & Distribution Automation RF Exposure Survey, Arlington Virginia: Site Safe, June 10, 2011. In author’s possession.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Lebanon is keen to avoid a repeat of the sectarian nightmare which plunged the country into 15 years of civil war. The scares are still visible, not just physically, but politically also. Now the scene is set for a possible repeat, unless cooler head prevail…

Now Lebanese Army officials are warning of a plot to drag their country into neighboring Syria’s present conflict, with Lebanon’s northern city of Tripoli being the likely initial flash point for such a conflagration.

Forces outside of Lebanon are well aware of where the political and social cracks are inside Lebanon, and will pull out all the stops to exploit those divisions in order to push the Syrian situation further over the edge of destablisation. Political lines within Lebanon are already being drawn…

Within Lebanon, Future parliamentary bloc leader MP Fouad Siniora has called for Hezbollah to withdraw its fighters from Syria, calling their aid to Syria’s Assad government as “shameful”, and with calls to exclude Hezbollah from any future government. On the other side, Lebanese Foreign Minister Adnan Mansour has appeared to side with Hezbollah.

Lebanese President Michel Sleiman is being pressured behind the scenes by U.S. President Barack Obama who has condemned the Shi’ite organisation’s “active and growing role in Syria” in a telephone call this week to Sleiman.

“The two leaders agreed that all parties should respect Lebanon’s policy of disassociation from the conflict in Syria and avoid actions that will involve the Lebanese people in the conflict,” a White House statement said.

Former Lebanese PM Saad Hariri (who has a strong moderate Sunni support base in Lebanon) has also come out slamming Hezbollah for intervening in Syria: “The party is sending hundreds of Lebanese to fight alongside the regime forces and participate in invading Syrian villages and towns, in operations as repugnant as the Israeli invasions of villages in South Lebanon and the invasion by the Syrian regime forces of Lebanon in the 1970s.”

This latest multi-pronged political from abroad and within move against Hezbollah within Lebanon has materialised in the the last few weeks, which strongly hints at some major confrontation being engineered behind the scenes. Judging by the economic and political  struggle facing the Lebanese government, it’s an ideal situation for both incentives — and threats, to be dangled by the world powers and Israel in front of political factions in order to secure the favoured outcome of the west in Syria and beyond. Are the Lebanese leaders strong enough to withstand such pressure? Time will tell.

If there is a geopolitical game going on behind UN and western government doors, it is being focused around the political and military isolation of Lebanon’s  Hezbollah organisation. Last month saw its fighters engaging the foreign Islamist opposition insurgents in Syria, arguing that their interests are in protecting the Shi’ite community in Syria from attacks by takfiri factions backed by Israel, Great Britain, France, Turkey and the United States. This point has been mostly ignored by the global powers, their media, as well as pro-western political rivals within Lebanon, indicating that the game being played here extends far beyond the borders of Syria and Lebanon.

Misbah al-Ali, Antoine Amrieh
The Daily Star

The Lebanese Army warned Friday of a plot to drag Lebanon into the 2-year-old war in Syria as clashes between rival gunmen renewed, shattering a lull of several hours despite a heavy military deployment in the northern city.

The afternoon fighting, which pitted gunmen from the Hezbollah-backed Sunni Nashar family against gunmen supported by Salafist groups, wounded a man and a woman from the Nashar family, security sources said.

The two sides exchanged machine-gun fire and rocket-propelled grenades in Tripoli’s Old Souk before the Army intervened to halt the fighting by trying to silence the sources of fire.

The scene of the fighting is about 2 kilometers from the traditional frontline between the Jabal Mohsen neighborhood, whose residents support President Bashar Assad, and the rival Bab al-Tabbaneh district, whose residents back the uprising in Syria.

Since the latest round of heavy fighting erupted between the two rival districts last month, 33 people, including three soldiers and a policeman, have been killed and more than 200 wounded. The fighting in the northern city has been linked to the conflict in Syria.

The security situation in Tripoli was generally calm Friday, except for sporadic sniper fire between Jabal Mohsen and Bab al-Tabbaneh.

Armed with political cover from the caretaker government and Tripoli’s politicians, the Army boosted its deployment with armored vehicles, manning patrols, setting up checkpoints and chasing gunmen.

The Army warned of a plot to embroil Lebanon into the Syria war:

“The Lebanese Army, as firm as its security measures will be, urges citizens to be wary of the plots aimed at taking Lebanon backward and dragging it into a futile war,” it said in a statement.

It called on people to express political views regarding the Syria conflict “democratically and peacefully and without provoking anyone.”

“Do not be dragged behind groups that want to use violence as a means to achieve their objectives,” it added.

“The Army Command has been trying over the past months to work firmly, determinedly and carefully to prevent Lebanon from being turned into a battlefield for regional conflicts and to prevent any spillover of the events in Syria.”

“But in recent days, some groups have seemed determined to create tensions among the [Lebanese] against the backdrop of the political divisions in Lebanon over the military developments in Syria,” it added.

The statement said the Army had been carrying out a series of firm security measures in Tripoli, Sidon, Beirut, the Bekaa Valley and Mount Lebanon.

“The Army’s operations will be deterrent and stringent. The Army is determined to implement its security plan in Tripoli no matter what the cost,” the statement said.

President Michel Sleiman expressed satisfaction with the Army’s deployment plan in Tripoli and surrounding areas.

While appreciating the Army’s sacrifices and national role in preserving civil peace, he stressed the need for leaders and citizens to cooperate with the military’s measures to maintain the area’s security and safety of its residents, said a statement from Baabda Palace.

Sleiman urged all the parties to realize the importance of distancing Lebanon from the reverberations of the conflict in Syria, “particularly after it had been proven that the parties’ involvement in the fighting by siding with this or that side would only result in the killing of innocent Lebanese and destruction of property without making any change in the current balance of power.”

Caretaker Prime Minister Najib Mikati chaired a series of meetings at his residence in Tripoli to follow up the Army’s security measures in the city.

“The Lebanese Army is determined to carry out its security plan to restore calm and stability to the city in implementation of decisions taken previously by the Cabinet and the Higher Defense Council,” Mikati said.

The Army set up checkpoints at the entrances to Tripoli and on the city’s main roads following heavy clashes in the past few days.

Over a dozen people have been wounded since late Thursday, security sources said. Six people have been killed since violence erupted last week.

Security sources said five people were hurt overnight when a rocket-propelled grenade fell on Syria Street that separates the warring neighborhoods of Bab al-Tabbaneh and Jabal Mohsen.

An Army officer and a soldier were among the three wounded from the fighting in Jabal Mohsen, according to the sources. They were identified as Lt. George Hajj and Private Ahmad Ismail.

Despite a morning lull, Tripoli remained paralyzed. “Tripoli looked like a ghost city last night,” one resident told The Daily Star. “Only Lebanese military vehicles were visible.”

The military said Thursday that it had seized two arms depots, one in Tripoli’s Souk al-Qameh and the other in Jabal Mohsen.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Presidential candidate Saeed Jalili calls for an end to state monopoly in sports, saying private companies, athletes, voluntary groups and charities are as able to run sporting events as the government.

Speaking on a radio program on Saturday morning, the Principlist candidate added that Article 44 of the Constitution which seeks large-scale privatization of state-run entities should also include sports.

The secretary of the Supreme National Security Council argued that athletes and sporting teams can perform better in national and international events, without government intervention.

Jalili promised to bring about the most fundamental shakeup in sports as part of the reforms his future administration will undertake.

Jalili is competing against President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, MP Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Tehran Mayor Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf, former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, Expediency Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi.

On June 14, Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election. Expatriates will also be able to vote at 285 polling stations which will be set up in other countries.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election.

PG/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

On June 5, London’s Guardianreported part of it. “NSA collecting phone records of millions of Verizon customers daily,” it headlined.On June 6, a follow-up article headlined “NSA taps in to systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and others, secret files reveal.”The Washington Post followed with its own report. It said the NSA and FBI “are tapping directly into the central servers of nine US Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to trace a person’s movements and contacts over time.”

Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Paltalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple, and other online companies willingly cooperate with lawless government spying.

Doing so, in part, reflects old news. Institutional spying on Americans is longstanding. Previous articles discussed it. More on the Guardian articles below.

According to retired NSA/US Air Force/Naval Intelligence/Defense Intelligence Agency intelligence analyst-turned whistleblower Russell Tice:

What’s ongoing “is much larger and more systemic than anything anyone has ever suspected or imagined.”

It’s been widely known for years. Little was revealed publicly. Pervasive spying is much worse than suspected. Other media reports followed London’s Guardian revelations.

Few people knew before. Many more do now. A firestorm of public anger is needed to have any chance to stop it. Nothing less stands a chance. What follows remains to be seen. Based on post-9/11 extremism, expect worse ahead, not better.

All three branches of government are involved. They’re complicit in sweeping lawlessness. Congress is regularly briefly. Bipartisan leaders are fully on board. So are US courts.

Federal ones are most egregious. Right-wing extremists control them. America’s High Court is supremely pro-business. It’s profoundly unjust. It mocks judicial fairness.

It rubber stamps what demands rejection. It rejects what demands affirmation. It consistently serves wealth and power interests. So do Congress, Obama, and administration officials.

Populist ones don’t matter. Nor does constitutional law. Its inviolability is disregarded. It’s rendered null and void.

On June 5, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) headlined “Confirmed: The NSA is Spying on Millions of Americans,” saying:

London’s Guardian “confirmed what EFF (and many others) have long claimed: the NSA is conducting widespread, untargeted, domestic surveillance on millions of Americans.”

“This revelation should end, once and for all, the government’s long-discredited secrecy claims about its dragnet domestic surveillance programs.”

“It should spur Congress and the American people to make the President finally tell the truth about the government’s spying on innocent Americans.”

Domestic spying is longstanding. Post-9/11, it’s been institutionalized. In 2002, Bush authorized it by presidential order. He did so secretly.

In December 2005, New York Times writers James Risen and Eric Lichtblau headlined “Bush Lets US Spy on Callers Without Courts,” saying:

He “secretly authorized (NSA) to eavesdrop on Americans and others to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying, according to government officials.”

Mark Klein worked for AT&T for 22 years. In 2004, he retired. After doing so, he turned whistleblower. He revealed blueprints and photographs of NSA’s secret room inside the company’s San Francisco facility.

Three other whistleblowers submitted affidavits. They explained post-9/11 lawless NSA spying on millions of Americans. The FBI, CIA, Pentagon, state and local agencies operate the same way.

Spies “R” us defines US policy. America’s a total surveillance society. It’s unsafe to live in. Everyone is suspect unless proved otherwise.

The 2012 FISA Amendments Reauthorization Act renewed warrantless spying. It passed with little debate. On Sunday, December 30, 2012 Obama signed it into law. Doing so largely went unnoticed.

Warrantless spying remains law for another five years. Phone calls, emails, and other communications may be monitored secretly without court authorization.

Probable cause isn’t needed. So-called “foreign intelligence information” is sought. Virtually anything qualifies. Vague language is all-embracing.

Constitutional protections don’t matter. All major US telecommunications companies are involved. So are online ones. They have been since 9/11. Things now are worse than then.

One expert said what’s ongoing “isn’t a wiretap. It’s a country-tap.” It’s lawless. Congress has no authority to subvert constitutional provisions. Legislation passed has no legitimacy. Constitutional changes require amendments. More on that below.

The Patriot Act trampled on Bill of Rights protections. Doing so for alleged security doesn’t wash. Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment due process rights were compromised.

So were First Amendment freedom of association ones. Fourth Amendment protections from unreasonable searches and seizures were violated. Unchecked sweeping surveillance followed.

So-called “sneak and peak” searches are conducted through “delayed notice” warrants, roving wiretaps, email tracking, as well as Internet and phone use.

Section 215 pertains to alleged suspects, real or contrived. It authorizes government access to “any tangible item.”

Included are financial records and transactions, education and medical records, phone conversations, emails, other Internet use, and whatever else Washington wants to monitor.

Individuals and organizations may be surveilled whether or not evidence links them to terrorism or complicity to commit it. In other words, everyone is fair game for any reason or none at all.

On May 15, 2012, Wired.com headlined “CIA Chief: We’ll Spy on You Through Your Dishwasher.”

Virtually everything electronic is vulnerable. Devices with Internet connections for sure are. So are TVs, radios, electric clocks, car navigation systems, light switches, refrigerators, electric stoves, toasters, vacuum cleaners, and other wired items.

Before Petraeusgate, the former CIA chief said:

“Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters — all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing.”

He added that household spy devices “change our notions of secrecy.” Former rules don’t apply. Modern technology permits anything goes.

London’s Guardian revealed telecom giant Verizon spying. A top secret April 25, 2013 order authorized it. It runs through July 19. It includes domestic and foreign calls.

NSA has access to every Verizon customer’s call history for nearly three months. If so ordered, spying may be extended indefinitely. Verizon is prohibited from disclosing what it’s doing publicly.

Information obtained includes all domestic and foreign calls, phone locations, time calls made, their duration, and other “identifying information.” Patriot Act Section 215 permits it.

What’s collected is called “metadata” or transactional information. It’s not limited to what’s included above. It’s not called communications. Individual warrants aren’t sought.

As discussed above, doing so is lawless. Congress has no authority to violate constitutional provisions. Compromising Fourth Amendment protections do so brazenly.

Verizon and AT&T cooperation with NSA and other US agencies isn’t unique. It’s virtually certain that all other major US telecom companies operate the same way. So do major online ones. They do so willingly, irresponsibly and lawlessly.

Post-9/11, sweeping surveillance became policy. What Bush began, Obama escalated. Privacy rights are systematically violated. EFF and other organizations filed suits to stop it.

In 2006, EFF’s Hepting v. AT&T was filed. It charged lawless company monitoring of private customer communications. Without their knowledge or approval, it supplies NSA with information they contain.

Whistleblower help provided documented proof. Nonetheless, right-wing courts are incorrigible. In June 2009, a federal judge dismissed Hepting and dozens other suits against telecoms.

In September 2008, EFF’s Jewel v. NSA was filed. It remains ongoing. It challenges lawless NSA spying. It uses documents former AT&T employee Mark Klein supplied.

In 2011, EFF filed an FOIA suit against the Justice Department. It did so for “records about the government’s use of Section 215.”

Obama’s the most lawless, secretive president in US history. So is his Justice Department. In Hepting, it claimed telecom immunity. In Jewel, it claims privileged state secrets.

In EFF’s FOIA suit, it maintains information sought is top secret. It operates extrajudicially. It turns constitutional provisions on their head. It does so secretly. It lies when confronted with facts.

“It’s time to stop hiding behind legal privileges and to come clean about Section 215 and FISA,” said EFF.

“It’s time to start a national dialogue about our rights in the digital age. And it’s time to end the NSA’s unconstitutional domestic surveillance program.”

The same goes for the FBI, CIA, Pentagon, other federal agencies, as well as state and local ones working cooperatively with Washington. It’s time for complicit companies to stop acting against the interests or their own customers and users.

According to Cato Institute surveillance expert Julian Sanchez:

“We’ve certainly seen the government increasingly strain the bounds of ‘relevance’ to collect large numbers of records at once — everyone at one or two degrees of separation from a target — but vacuuming all metadata up indiscriminately would be an extraordinary repudiation of any pretense of constraint or particularized suspicion.”

In the 1960s, Senator Frank Church warned that NSA’s “capability at any time could be turned around on the American people, and no American would have any privacy left, such is the capability to monitor everything: telephone conversations, telegrams, it doesn’t matter.”

“There would be no place to hide,” he said. Presidents could “impose total tyranny, and there would be no way to fight back.” His warning went unheeded.

Institutionalized spying is official policy. Big Brother no longer is fiction. Obama officials claim no court or judge can challenge them. What they say goes. Governing this way is called tyranny.

A Final Comment

Candidate Obama attacked lawless Bush administration practices. “I will provide our intelligence and law enforcement agencies with the tools they need to track and take out the terrorists without undermining our Constitution and our freedom,” he said.

That means no more lawless spying, he added. “No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient.”

President Obama exceeded the worst Bush administration practices. He’s done so consistently. He contemptuously disregards bedrock constitutional law.

On June 7, he offered a specious defense of lawlessness. He lied doing so, saying: “Nobody is listening to your telephone calls. That’s not what this program is about.”

That’s precisely what it’s about. It’s Big Brother writ large. He tried having things both way, adding:

“You can’t have 100% security and then also have 100% privacy and zero inconvenience. You know, we’re going to have to make some choices as a society.”

True enough when justifiable and constitutionally permitted. Irresponsible overreach has no place in free societies. Sacrificing fundamental freedoms for alleged security assures losing both.

Even New York Times editors said Obama “lost all credibility on this issue.” He “repudiate(d) constitutional principles governing search, seizure and privacy.”

Los Angeles Times editors criticized Obama’s “brave new world of government surveillance that Americans should find alarming.”

London Guardian editors said “(f)ew Americans believe they live in a police state….Yet the everyday fact that the police have the right to monitor the communications of all its citizens — in secret — is a classic hallmark of a state that fears freedom….”

Ironically, The Guardian story broke on D-Day’s 69th anniversary. It commemorates America’s Normandy landing. It was done to liberate Europe.

It wasn’t supposed to institutionalize what many gave their lives to defeat. Fascism wasn’t vanquished. It was transplanted to America. It’s visible in plain sight.

On June 6, National Intelligence head James Clapper issued a rare public statement. He did so regarding “Unauthorized Disclosures of Classified Information.” In part, he said:

Revelations “threaten potentially long-standing and irreversible harm to our ability to identify and respond to the many threats facing our nation.”

“The judicial order that was disclosed in the press is used to support a sensitive intelligence collection operation, on which members of Congress have been fully and repeatedly briefed.”

“The classified program has been authorized by all three branches of the Government.”

“Although this program has been properly classified, the leak of one order, without any context, has created a misleading impression of how it operates.”

What’s ongoing “protect(s) our nation from a wide variety of threats.”

Government authorization lacks legitimacy. It’s lawless. Police state tyranny has no place in free societies. At stake are fundamental constitutional rights. Post-9/11, they’ve been seriously eroded on route to eliminating them altogether.

Doing so for any reason doesn’t wash. So-called terrorist threats don’t exist. State terrorism threatens humanity. It does so at home and abroad.

Clapper lied saying ongoing practices “are consistently subject to safeguards that are designed to strike the appropriate balance between national security interests and civil liberties and privacy concerns.”

No safeguards whatever exist. Constitutional law is spurned. Doing so threatens freedom everywhere. Rogue states operate this way. America’s by far the worst. Obama, Clapper, Holder, and likeminded ideologues belong in prison, not high office.

On June 6, Wall Street Journal editors didn’t surprise. They headlined “Thank You for Data-Mining. The NSA’s ‘metadata’ surveillance is legal and necessary.”

It’s not “scandalous,” said Journal editors. It’s “a core part of the war on terror.” Outrage “stem(s) from the fact that the government is widely collecting call records, not merely those associated with a particular suspect or group.”

According to Journal editors, what’s ongoing “misunderstands how the program works.”

Fact check

It’s explained above clearly. It’s sweeping, all-inclusive and lawless. All major telecom and Internet companies are involved. They do so extrajudicially. They brazenly subvert constitutional rights.

Claims about mass surveillance disrupting domestic terror attacks don’t wash. Numerous ones reported were false flags. Innocent victims were targeted.

No one prosecuted planned or committed criminal acts. None conspired to do so. Accusations made were false. Political prisoners fill America’s gulag. It’s the shame of the nation for good reason.

Lawless surveillance for any reason has no place in legitimate democracies. Constitutional law principles are inviolable. No president, Congress or court may subvert them. Doing so reflects tyranny.

Amendments are required to change constitutional law. Two-thirds of both Houses may propose them. So may national legislative conventions of two-thirds of the states.

Ratification requires approval by three-fourths of the states. State ratifying conventions of three-fourths of them may do so. Congress has some say over which method is used.

Ratified amendments become constitutional law. Article V explains how. No executive, congressional or judicial process may do so.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled “Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity.”

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour

http://www.dailycensored.com/unconstitutional-us-data-mining/

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Pakistan has summoned US envoy to Islamabad to express outrage over a recent assassination drone strike that killed nine people in the country’s northwest tribal region.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

NASA’s Mars rover Opportunity has made what may be its greatest discovery: Proof freshwater once existed on the Red Planet. The rover’s previous discoveries over the last nine years suggest that water on Mars was acidic.

Since 2011, the solar-powered six-wheel Opportunity has explored
the Endeavour Crater, the largest of the five craters already
examined by the rover.

In Endeavour, the rover found minerals dating back to the first
billion years of Martian geological history. When the rover
scraped away the top layer of a light-colored rock after several
attempts, it found traces of clay minerals with an aluminum-rich
chemical signature, suggesting they were formed through
interaction with pH-neutral water.

Other stones Opportunity tested over the years have confirmed
that water was once present on Mars, but research suggested that
it was acidic, and not capable of sustaining life.

“This is water you can drink,” Opportunity mission chief
scientist Steve Squyres of Cornell University said.

In 2004, twin rovers Opportunity and Spirit landed on opposite
sides of the Red Planet. They were supposed to work for three
months, but both operated for years.

Spirit operated until 2010 when it got stuck in sand, and later
stopped communicating with mission control. Opportunity continues
to gather valuable information as it moves further on the Mars
surface, though its hardware is aging — it recent experienced a
problem with its flash memory, but the operators were able to
reboot the system. 

Curiosity, the third and the newest NASA rover on Mars, arrived
on the Red Planet on August 5, 2012. It is also still operating,
and is preparing for a key mission on a Martian mountain. Earlier
this year, Curiosity also confirmed there was once freshwater on
the surface of Mars.

In 2010, a group of scientists from Colorado University published
an article in Nature Geoscience magazine, contending that 3
billion years ago, roughly one-third of the Martian surface was
covered with water. Drawing their conclusion based on data
obtained by the NASA rovers and the EU’s ESA satellite orbiting
Mars, the geoscientists suggested that Mars had rivers, lakes and
an ocean.

The ocean on Mars is said to have occupied about 36 percent of
the Red Planet’s surface, with a total volume estimated at 124
million cubic kilometers. This is less than 1/10th than that of
planet Earth — 1386 million cubic kilometers — as Mars is roughly
half the size of our home planet.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Britainâ„¢s eavesdropping agency Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) is to explain its alleged links to a controversial US spying scheme, local media reports have said.

The agency is expected to release information to the British parliament’s Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC) detailing the use of material gathered through Prism monitoring programme.

The parliamentary committee led by Sir Malcolm Rifkind said British MPs are set to receive a report “very shortly” on the allegations that thousands of Britons could have been spied on by GCHQ.

The Prism programme, which was set up by America’s National Security Agency (NSA), would appear to have allowed GCHQ to circumvent legal barriers required to obtain personal material such as photos, videos and emails from an internet company based outside the UK.

According to documents obtained by The Guardian, the British agency has had access to the system since at least June 2010 and generated 197 intelligence reports from Prism in the 12 months to May 2012.

Under the Prism programme, the US government is said to have been secretly tapping into the servers of nine top internet companies, including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Yahoo and Skype.

Earlier in April, in a leaked letter to British Home Secretary Theresa May, the worldâ„¢s five biggest internet companies refused to voluntarily cooperate with the British governmentâ„¢s controversial Communications Data Bill, known as the Å“Snooperâ„¢s Charter”.

SSM/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Daniel Taylor
Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

In response to “revelations” that the National Security Agency is collecting vast amounts of information from Verizon customers, Obama told the press that “Nobody is listening to your phone calls.”

Whew. We can all take a deep breath of relief now. Obama says no one is watching. Or are they?

The fact is, a much wider system of surveillance is being built. It goes well beyond monitoring phone calls and e-mails. The computer you are reading this on, your washing machine, coffee maker, and other devices will be “wired” in the near future. They will be transmitting data to the “internet of things.” According to CIA chief David Patraeus these technologies will have a monumental impact on “clandestine tradecraft.”

Consumer appliances are now becoming activated and “smart.” RFID chips and wireless internet connections enable devices like televisions, refrigerators, printers, and computers to communicate with each other and generally make life easier for us. This comes at a price, however. Your privacy is eliminated.

With this surveillance grid in place, David Patraeus says that “Items of interest will be located, identified, monitored, and remotely controlled through technologies such as radio-frequency identification, sensor networks, tiny embedded servers, and energy harvesters – all connected to the next-generation internet using abundant, low-cost, and high-power computing…”

South Korea has served as a testing ground for this type of technology. The city of New Songdo was used because, according to those involved, “There is an historical expectation of less privacy.” If you want to unplug from this grid, the United Kingdom’s Ministry of Defense says that eventually, “Even amongst those who make an explicit life-style choice to remain detached, choosing to be disconnected may be considered suspicious behaviour.”

Daniel Taylor’s post first appeared on Old-thinker News.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 7:00 am

Tags: big brother, domestic news, domestic spying, technology

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

An Afghan soldier has killed three American soldiers serving with the US-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in the southeastern Paktika Province, Press TV reports.

Local authorities said the killings occurred in the Khair Kot District of the province on Saturday, when a man in Afghan army uniform opened fire on US forces.

They added that at least two other soldiers were injured in the incident, which happened on the same day that an Italian soldier was killed, and three others wounded after their armored vehicle was attacked by a group of militants in western Afghanistan.

There are reports that the vehicle was part of a convoy of the Military Advisor Team of the Transition Support Unit South (TSUS).

The latest attack by Afghan security forces on foreign troops comes at a sensitive time for the United States and its allies, since they are preparing to withdraw the majority of their troops by 2014 under a plan that requires Afghan forces to take responsibility for the country’s security.

According to official figures released by the website icasualties.org, the overall number of the US-led soldiers killed so far this year in Afghanistan stands at 81, of which 61 are American.

The month of May was designated as the deadliest month this year for US-led troops in Afghanistan with a death toll of 26.

A total of 402 US-led soldiers lost their lives in Afghanistan in 2012. However, 2010 remains the deadliest year for US-led military casualties, with a death toll of 711.

Attacks on foreign troops are expected to rise in the next months, as Taliban militants have announced the beginning of their spring offensive across Afghanistan.

The militant group said it would use “every possible tactic” to inflict casualties on Afghan and US-led forces, specifically mentioning insider and bomb attacks.

The announcement prompted the Afghan authorities to beef up security in major cities across the country, including the capital city of Kabul.

The United States and its allies invaded Afghanistan as part of Washingtonâ„¢s so-called war on terror. The offensive removed the Taliban from power, but the country is still gripped by insecurity.

MP/SS

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]A large number of militants have been deployed to Lebanon’s flashpoint city of Tripoli, reports say, adding army commandos have also arrived in the area.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Presidential candidate Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf has begun touring the provinces of Fars and Kohkylouyeh-Boyer Ahmad in the final week of campaigning.

Addressing a group of his supporters on Saturday, the Principlist candidate said the country needs changes in vision and reforms must begin from rural areas.

The Tehran Mayor lauded the efforts of previous administrations and pledged to develop the infrastructure in rural and deprived areas should he become president.

On Wednesday, Qalibaf visited Lorestan Province’s capital city of Khorramabad and blamed mismanagement for the province’s economic issues and promised to fix them as soon as possible.

Qalibaf, President of the Center for Strategic Research of the Expediency Council Hassan Rohani, lawmaker Gholam-Ali Haddad-Adel, Supreme National Security Council Secretary Saeed Jalili, former Foreign Minister Ali-Akbar Velayati, Expediency Council Secretary Mohsen Rezaei, former First Vice President Mohammad-Reza Aref, and former Telecommunications Minister Mohammad Gharazi are the eight candidates running for president.

On June 14, Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country in the nationâ„¢s 11th presidential election. Expatriates will also be able to vote at 285 polling stations which will be set up in other countries.

The president of Iran is elected for a four-year term in a national election.

PG/HGH

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]At least four people have been killed in a car bomb blast in a majority Shia area of the Iraqi capital, Baghdad, Iraqi officials say.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

This article originally appeared on: RT

Presidential candidates in Iran have held their third and final live debate on television, giving fresh impetus to the election campaign already in full swing across the country.

The debate was held on Friday, a week before Iranians go the polls on June 14th to pick the next president.

As expected, the third debate was more challenging than the two previous ones in which the candidates discussed economic and cultural issues.

The heated debate mainly focused on issues such as foreign policy, national security and resistance, developments in the Middle East and Iranâ„¢s nuclear energy program.

Å“During the last meeting that [Secretary of Iranâ„¢s Supreme National Security Council Saeed] Jalili had with the P5+1 group [of world powers] in Almaty, [Kazakhstan], they offered proposals based on which we could make progress but he did not accept those proposals,” Principlist candidate Ali Akbar Velayati said.

Å“The P5+1 group said that if you stop … enrichment and slow down the process in Fordow [nuclear facility], we will lift three sanctions. We could take a step-by-step move. In response it was said that we do this and you should lift all the sanctions. This means you donâ„¢t want to make progress. This is not diplomacy,” Velayati added.

Principlist presidential candidate Saeed Jalili said, Å“You should not manipulate information and news. What you said about the Almaty talks is absolutely wrong. Everything was recorded. In Almaty we said that we take reciprocal steps. If you take one step, we will take another. If you go 25 kilometers we will do the same.”

Reformist presidential candidate Hassan Rohani also stated, Å“Mr. Rezaei! You are the same person who said that the UN Security Council is much better than the Board of Governors and that why Mr. Rohani had prevented Iranâ„¢s nuclear dossier from being sent to the UN Security Council. You are the same person and now you are advising me.”

Å“This is a good historical experience but it should not be said that any of us should not seek to disclose secrets about others. In fact, this indicates the honesty of the officials towards people,” Independent presidential candidate Mohsen Rezaei said.

Å“Mr. Rezaei speaks in such a way as we donâ„¢t care about the news and problems of people and that he is the only one who is doing so,” Principlist presidential candidate Gholam Ali Haddad-Adel said.

The final debate was also a chance for candidates to try to address the concerns of potential voters among them media freedom, civil rights, and freedom of expression.

Å“My question is who is responsible for the current situation. People have the right to know who is responsible and itâ„¢s a good idea,” reformist presidential candidate Mohammad Reza Aref said.

Å“This debate provides an opportunity for everyone to talk about his capacities and prove his capabilities,” independent presidential candidate Mohammad Gharazi said.

Meanwhile, regarding the US-backed move by certain powers in taking a number of Iranian satellite channels off the air, Principlist candidate Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said, Å“In fact, the move by certain powers in taking a number of Iranian satellite channels off the air shows these powers only claim to defend freedom of expression and democracy so long as their interests are not threatened.”

Following the final debate, the candidates came among reporters and voiced their views.

Å“The debate was great. It was real and open. Each of the candidates could frankly express his views and now people should judge,” Velayati said.

Å“I believe the administration should be transparent and there should be a free flow of information. Otherwise, the administration will face problems,” Rohani said.

Å“The winning card of each candidate can be his views and ideas and that how honest he has on his part and how much people like his views,” Jalili said.

It is still unclear who won over the TV audience, however, analysts believe that the high number of candidates will likely split the votes which will lead the race to the second round.

In the coming days, it will become clear if any one of the candidates will quit the race in favor of others.

Iranians will cast their ballots at over 66,000 polling stations across the country in the upcoming presidential election, and some 285 polling stations will be set up abroad for Iranian expats.

Nearly 50.5 million Iranians are eligible to vote in the election, with more than 1.6 million first-time voters.

SF/NN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]An Afghan soldier has killed three American soldiers serving with the US-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in the southeastern Paktia Province.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has slammed a recently exposed NSA mass-surveillance scheme as a “calamitous collapse in the rule of law.” Google, Facebook and other tech giants apparently involved have denied giving the NSA access to their servers.

Assange accused the US government of trying to “launder” its
activities concerning the large-scale spying program PRISM. The
system was made public after a leaked classified
National Security Agency (NSA) document was revealed earlier this
week.

“The US administration has the phone records of everyone in
the United States and is receiving them daily from carriers to
the National Security Agency under secret agreements. That’s
what’s come out,” he said.

President Barack Obama earlier defended PRISM, saying it was a key part of
the country’s counterterrorism efforts and that privacy was a
necessary sacrifice for the sake of security. He also lashed out
at the media, and those who leaked information on the massive
spying program.

“If every step that we are taking to try to prevent a
terrorist act is on the front page of the newspapers or any
television, then presumably the people that are trying to do us
harm are going to be able to get around our preventative
measures,” Obama said.

Critics of the Obama Administration have accused it of an
unprecedented crackdown on whistleblowers — more government
officials are being prosecuted for leaks under Obama than all
previous administrations combined. News of PRISM comes just after
reports that the Justice Department secretly obtained two months
of AP reporters’ telephone records and tapped Fox News reporter James
Rosen’s private email.

“Over the last 10 years, the US justice system has suffered
from a collapse, a calamitous collapse, in the rule of law,”
Assange said.

The US tech giants apparently involved in PRISM have rushed to
deny they participated in the program; their logos were visible
on each the 41 PowerPoint slides of the leaked NSA document.

“Indeed, the US government does not have direct access or a
‘back door’ to the information stored in our data centers. We had
not heard of a program called PRISM until yesterday,” Google
CEO Larry Page and Chief Legal Officer David Drummond said in a
statement.

Google’s remarks mirrored those by Apple, Facebook, Microsoft,
Yahoo. All have claimed they have no knowledge of whether the NSA
had direct access to their servers, and that only upon legal
orders do they provide the government with data on specific
persons.

While activists debate the legality and ethics of online
espionage and high-tech firms try to distance themselves from the
revelations, a former NSA official believes PRISM is largely
ineffective, as the amount of data it collects cannot be
effectively digested by a surveillance system.

“In fact it adds more of a problem because what that means,
quite simply, is that if you go into a larger database, you get
more data back no matter what the query is. It’s like making a
query with Google. If you go in with a Google query you can get
tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands or even a million
returns. Well, there’s no way you can go through that, all of
that, to see what you’re really interested in. So what that does
is make them less proficient at doing their jobs,” former NSA
analyst William Binney told RT.

This article originally appeared on: RT

Los Angeles Police Department officers along with Los Angeles County Sheriff deputies search the campus of Santa Monica College after a reported shooting on Friday, June 7.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Syrian army has retaken control of the last militant bastion near the strategic town of Qusayr, which borders Lebanon, Press TV reports.

Government forces restored security in the village of Eastern Bweida on Saturday.

On Friday, Syrian troops managed to retake control of several villages near Qusayr in Homs province.

According to Syrian sources, the army pushed foreign-backed militants out of the central villages of Salhiyeh and Masoudiyeh, just north of Qusayr.

Scores of militants are reported to have been killed in the clashes.

The latest series of military successes come a day after government forces recaptured the nearby village of al-Dabaâ„¢a and retook control of a border crossing in the Golan Heights.

Syrian troops established control over the key city of al-Qusayr on Wednesday following weeks of heavy clashes with militants. Al-Qusayr, which lies 10km from the Lebanese border, was a major supply route for militants fighting against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The Syrian Army is now in control of most of the towns and villages near the border with Lebanon.

There have been reports of heavy clashes between government forces and militants in Aleppo, Lattakia, Idlib, Deir Ezzor and several Damascus suburbs.

According to Syria’s official news agency SANA, Saudi and Yemeni nationals were among those killed in Lattakia clashes.

Syria has been gripped by a deadly unrest since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of government forces, have been killed in the violence.

Damascus says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

HM/KA/DB/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Italian soldiers with the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force help a wounded comrade.(file photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Britainâ„¢s operating of killer drones in Afghanistan may be violating the international law, a legal firm representing peace campaigners has argued in an opinion piece.

The legal opinion by Public Interest Lawyers argues that the use of killer drones in Afghanistan is a breach of the international law under the European Convention for Human Rights (ECHR).

The document says that the ECHRâ„¢s article 2 requires the governments to use Å“no more [force] than absolutely necessary” during conflicts.

“Only when it is absolutely necessary to kill someone rather than arrest/disable them will the use of drones be lawful. And even then, drones may only be used for … self defence under 2(2)(c),” it says.

According to the Public Interest Lawyers, this means that the ECHR obliges Britain to the use of killer drones only in Å“situations in which there is an immediate threat to life” that Å“prevents the carrying out of ‘targeted killings’ and narrowly circumscribes their use even on ‘the battlefield'”.

“There is therefore a strong presumption that the UK’s drones programme is in breach of international law,” it adds.

The British Ministry of Defense announced back in April that they are operating killer drones in Afghanistan by remote-pilots from RAF Waddington base in Lincolnshire.

The ministry claims its operations are in accordance with applicable international humanitarian law.

This comes as drone attacks normally come with extreme Å“collateral damage” to the civilian population even when taking the American and British claims that they are targeting terrorists by terror drones as true.

Hundreds of civilians have been killed the remote-controlled killer drones strikes on various parts of Afghanistan over the past years.

Civiliansâ„¢ casualties have triggered widespread protests against killer drone attacks in the Asian country with the Afghan government repeatedly calling for an end to the deadly assaults.

AMR/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iranian Presidential candidate Mohsen Rezaei addresses a crowd of supporters in the central city of Isfahan.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]An Italian soldier has been killed and three others wounded in an attack in Afghanistan.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]The Syrian Army has retaken control of the last militant bastion near the strategic town of Qusayr, which borders Lebanon, Press TV reports.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Argentina’s Jorge Bergoglio, elected Pope Francis I, appears on the balcony of St. Peter’s Basilica after being elected by the conclave of cardinals at the Vatican on March 13, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iran launched its first indigenous Omid (Hope) satellite in 2009 aboard Safir (Ambassador) carrier. (File photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The US Army chief in Japan has been suspended for allegedly failing to properly report or investigate a sexual assault complaint, the Pentagon says.

The Pentagon said in a statement on Friday that Major General Michael Harrison was suspended due to allegations that he Å“failed in his duties as a commander to report or properly investigate an allegation of sexual assault.”

The Pentagon did not immediately provided further details on the sexual assault in question.

Harrison was suspended by Army Secretary John McHugh and Army chief General Ray Odierno, and will be replaced by Major General James Boozer, former deputy commanding general of the US Army in Europe, until the investigation is complete, the statement further read.

A newly-released report by the Pentagon on sexual assaults in the military indicates that unwanted sexual contact in the military soared by 37 percent in 2012 to reach 26,000 cases from 19,000 a year earlier.

The sharp increase in the number of sexual assault cases comes as the Pentagon is planning to integrate women into front-line combat roles.

According to a survey conducted in 2011, about one out of five military women said they had been the victims of sexual assault by another service member since joining the military.”

YH/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/obama_should_have_given_americans_a_choice_20130608/

Posted on Jun 8, 2013

This article originally appeared on: TruthDig

The Facebook page of the premier of the Russian government has reached the landmark of 1 million ‘likes.’ Dmitry Medvedev said the result is due to Russians’ genuine interest in the work of their government.

“Thanks to everyone who takes interest in the work of the
government. Your opinion is very important to me and my
team,” Prime Minister Medvedev wrote in a recent Facebook
post.

In a short video address the PM posted on his Facebook — with one
million ‘likes’ shown as the background — Medvedev said it is
important the government maintain a presence on social networks.
During his presidency, Medvedev pioneered the idea of “Internet
government” as a way of encouraging “true democracy” in Russia.

“We can get a quick response to any of our decisions or
actions — and we actually do receive it. We can listen to your
remarks and wishes, discuss something. We always tried to do it
that way, but with the social networks in place it has become
much easier — and also more difficult, because comments are so
numerous,” Medvedev said.

“I do personally check out your comments and try to reply to
some of them — when I have time. So please do write [to us],
speak out, share your observations: we’ve got to help each other
to keep the track of events,” he added.

Medvedev is known for his love of gadgets and new media: He
maintains accounts on Facebook and Twitter, and also on both of
Russia’s biggest social networks, VKontakte (‘in contact’) and
Odnoklassniki (‘classmates’).

In October 2012, Medvedev welcomed Facebook founder Mark
Zuckerberg to his governmental residence in Gorki near Moscow.
The American guest presented Medvedev with a white t-shirt
emblazoned with the address of Medvedev’s Facebook page.

The Russian PM — and former president — has still some way to go:
the Facebook page of US President Barack Obama boasts more than
35 million likes.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has never expressed a particular
interest in social networks, though there are other politicians
in Moscow working to forge closer ties with the electorate
through the web. 

This article originally appeared on: RT

A pregnant woman from the US state of Texas has been charged with threatening President Barack Obama after allegedly sending a ricin-tainted letter to him.

Shannon Guess Richardson, 35, who is an actress and mother of five appeared in a court in the city of Texarkana on Friday after being arrested earlier in the day.

The 35-year-old first accused her husband of mailing the ricin-laced letters as officials say she contacted the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) on May 30 to implicate Nathaniel Richardson.

However, according to an FBI affidavit, investigators detected a number of inconsistencies in her story. She also failed a polygraph test.

Richardson is said to have admitted sending the letters afterwards, knowing they included ricin, but she claimed that her husband had typed them and made her mail them.

No charges have been filed against Richardsonâ„¢s husband whose attorney says might be set up by his wife since the couple is going through a divorce.

The threatening letters were mailed to the White House, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the mayorâ„¢s Washington gun-control group. They were sent from Shreveport, Louisiana, on 20 May, without a return address.

On June 5, FBI agents in protective suits searched Richardsonsâ„¢ house in nearby New Boston, about 241 kilometers (150 miles) northeast of Dallas near the Arkansas and Oklahoma borders.

At least three cases have been investigated by the FBI over the past two months in which ricin was posted to the US president and other public figures.

If swallowed, ricin can result in death by closing the liver and other organs. It is also said that a tiny amount of ricin that can fit on the head of a pin is sufficient to kill an adult if appropriately prepared.

MR/NN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

Yes, Government Spooks May Be Listening

The Obama administration has been caught spying on the Verizon phone calls of tens of millions of Americans.

But the government has sought to “reassure” us that it is only tracking “metadata” such as the time and place of the calls, and not the actual content of the calls.

That claim is patently absurd.

The American government is in fact collecting and storing virtually every phone call, purchases, email, text message, internet searches, social media communications, health information, employment history, travel and student records, and virtually all other information of every American.

All U.S. intelligence agencies — including the CIA and NSA — are going to spy on Americans’ finances. The IRS will be spying on Americans’ shopping records, travel, social interactions, health records and filesfrom other government investigators.

As the top spy chief at the U.S. National Security Agency — William Binney — explained, the NSA is collecting some 100 billion 1,000-character emails per day, and 20 trillion communications of all types per year.

Binney says that the government has collected all of the communications of congressional leaders, generals and everyone else in the U.S. for the last 10 years.

Binney further explains that he set up the NSA’s system so that all of the information would automatically be encrypted, so that the government had to obtain a search warrant based upon probably cause before a particular suspect’s communications could be decrypted. But the NSA now collects all data in an unencrypted form, so that no probable cause is needed to view any citizen’s information. He says that it is actually cheaper and easier to store the data in an encrypted format: so the government’s current system is being done for political — not practical — purposes.

Binney says that if anyone gets on the government’s “enemies list”, then the stored information will be used to target them. Specifically, he notes that if the government decides it doesn’t like someone, it analyzes all of the data it has collected on that person and his or her associates over the last 10 years to build a case against him. This includes whistleblowers, activists or even government insiders … like the head of the CIA.

Indeed, whistleblowers revealed years ago that the NSA was vacuuming up virtually all Internet communications.

The Other Types of Spying the Government Is Doing On Us

In addition, the amount of money and effort the government is putting into spying on Americans using a wide variety of other technologies tends to discredit any notion that the government is exercising restraint in monitoring our phone calls (which are already being tapped) for content.

For example, the government is flying drones over the American homeland to spy on us.

Senator Rand Paul correctly notes:

The domestic use of drones to spy on Americans clearly violates the Fourth Amendment and limits our rights to personal privacy.

Emptywheel notes in a post entitled “The OTHER Assault on the Fourth Amendment in the NDAA? Drones at Your Airport?”:

***

As the map above makes clear—taken from this 2010 report—DOD [the Department of Defense] plans to have drones all over the country by 2015.

Many police departments are also using drones to spy on us. As the Hill reported:

At least 13 state and local police agencies around the country have used drones in the field or in training, according to the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International, an industry trade group. The Federal Aviation Administration has predicted that by the end of the decade, 30,000 commercial and government drones could be flying over U.S. skies.

***

“Drones should only be used if subject to a powerful framework that regulates their use in order to avoid abuse and invasions of privacy,” Chris Calabrese, a legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union, said during a congressional forum in Texas last month.

He argued police should only fly drones over private property if they have a warrant, information collected with drones should be promptly destroyed when it’s no longer needed and domestic drones should not carry any weapons.

He argued that drones pose a more serious threat to privacy than helicopters because they are cheaper to use and can hover in the sky for longer periods of time.

A congressional report earlier this year predicted that drones could soon be equipped with technologies to identify faces or track people based on their height, age, gender and skin color.

Moreover, Wired reports:

Transit authorities in cities across the country are quietly installing microphone-enabled surveillance systems on public buses that would give them the ability to record and store private conversations….

The systems are being installed in San Francisco, Baltimore, and other cities with funding from the Department of Homeland Security in some cases ….

The IP audio-video systems can be accessed remotely via a built-in web server (.pdf), and can be combined with GPS data to track the movement of buses and passengers throughout the city.

***

The systems use cables or WiFi to pair audio conversations with camera images in order to produce synchronous recordings. Audio and video can be monitored in real-time, but are also stored onboard in blackbox-like devices, generally for 30 days, for later retrieval. Four to six cameras with mics are generally installed throughout a bus, including one near the driver and one on the exterior of the bus.

***

Privacy and security expert Ashkan Soltani told the Daily that the audio could easily be coupled with facial recognition systems or audio recognition technology to identify passengers caught on the recordings.

RT notes:

Street lights that can spy installed in some American cities

America welcomes a new brand of smart street lightning systems: energy-efficient, long-lasting, complete with LED screens to show ads. They can also spy on citizens in a way George Orwell would not have imagined in his worst nightmare.

With a price tag of $3,000+ apiece, according to an ABC report, the street lights are now being rolled out in Detroit, Chicago and Pittsburgh, and may soon mushroom all across the country.

Part of the Intellistreets systems made by the company Illuminating Concepts, they havea number of “homeland security applications” attached.

Each has a microprocessor “essentially similar to an iPhone,” capable of by Text-Enhance” href=”http://rt.com/news/big-brother-street-lamps-286/#” target=”_blank”>wireless communication. Each can capture images and count people for the police through a digital camera, record conversations of passers-by and even give voice commands thanks to a built-in speaker.

Ron Harwood, president and founder of Illuminating Concepts, says he eyed the creation of such a system after the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the Hurricane Katrina disaster. He is“working with Homeland Security” to deliver his dream of making people “more informed and safer.”

Cell towers track where your phone is at any moment, and the major cell carriers, including Verizon and AT&T, responded to at least 1.3 million law enforcement requests for cell phone locations and other data in 2011. (And — given that your smartphone routinely sends your location information back to Apple or Google — it would be child’s play for the government to track your location that way.) Your iPhone, orother brand of smartphone is spying on virtually everything you do (ProPublica notes: “That’s No Phone. That’s My Tracker“).

Fox news notes that the government is insisting that “black boxes” be installed in cars to track your location.

The TSA has moved way past airports, trains and sports stadiums, and is deploying mobile scanners to spy on people all over the place. This means that traveling within the United States is no longer a private affair.

You might also have seen the news this week that the Department of Homeland Security is going tocontinue to allow searches of laptops and phones based upon “hunches”.

What’s that about?

The ACLU published a map in 2006 showing that nearly two-thirds of the American public — 197.4 million people — live within a “constitution-free zone” within 100 miles of land and coastal borders:

The ACLU explained:

• Normally under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, the American people are not generally subject to random and arbitrary stops and searches.

• The border, however, has always been an exception. There, the longstanding view is that the normal rules do not apply. For example the authorities do not need a warrant or probable cause to conduct a “routine search.”

• But what is “the border”? According to the government, it is a 100-mile wide strip that wraps around the “external boundary” of the United States.

• As a result of this claimed authority, individuals who are far away from the border, American citizens traveling from one place in America to another, are being stopped and harassed in ways that our Constitution does not permit.

• Border Patrol has been setting up checkpoints inland – on highways in states such as California, Texas and Arizona, and at ferry terminals in Washington State. Typically, the agents ask drivers and passengers about their citizenship. Unfortunately, our courts so far have permitted these kinds of checkpoints — legally speaking, they are “administrative” stops that are permitted only for the specific purpose of protecting the nation’s borders. They cannot become general drug-search or other law enforcement efforts.

• However, these stops by Border Patrol agents are not remaining confined to that border security purpose. On the roads of California and elsewhere in the nation — places far removed from the actual border — agents are stopping, interrogating, and searching Americans on an everyday basis with absolutely no suspicion of wrongdoing.

• The bottom line is that the extraordinary authorities that the government possesses at the border are spilling into regular American streets.

Computer World reports:

Border agents don’t need probable cause and they don’t need a stinking warrant since they don’t need to prove any reasonable suspicion first. Nor, sadly, do two out of three people have First Amendment protection; it is as if DHS has voided those Constitutional amendments and protections they provide to nearly 200 million Americans.

***

Don’t be silly by thinking this means only if you are physically trying to cross the international border. As we saw when discussing the DEA using license plate readers and data-mining to track Americans movements, the U.S. “border” stretches out 100 miles beyond the true border. Godfather Politics added:

But wait, it gets even better! If you live anywhere in Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey or Rhode Island, DHS says the search zones encompass the entire state.

Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have a “longstanding constitutional and statutory authority permitting suspicionless and warrantless searches of merchandise at the border and its functional equivalent.” This applies to electronic devices, according to the recent CLCR “Border Searches of Electronic Devices” executive summary [PDF]:

Fourth Amendment

The overall authority to conduct border searches without suspicion or warrant is clear and longstanding, and courts have not treated searches of electronic devices any differently than searches of other objects. We conclude that CBP’s and ICE’s current border search policies comply with the Fourth Amendment. We also conclude that imposing a requirement that officers have reasonable suspicion in order to conduct a border search of an electronic device would be operationally harmful without concomitant civil rights/civil liberties benefits. However, we do think that recording more information about why searches are performed would help managers and leadership supervise the use of border search authority, and this is what we recommended; CBP has agreed and has implemented this change beginning in FY2012.***

The ACLU said, Wait one darn minute! Hello, what happened to the Constitution? Where is the rest of CLCR report on the “policy of combing through and sometimes confiscating travelers’ laptops, cell phones, and other electronic devices–even when there is no suspicion of wrongdoing?” DHS maintains it is not violating our constitutional rights, so the ACLU said:

If it’s true that our rights are safe and that DHS is doing all the things it needs to do to safeguard them, then why won’t it show us the results of its assessment? And why would it be legitimate to keep a report about the impact of a policy on the public’s rights hidden from the very public being affected?

***

As Christian Post wrote, “Your constitutional rights have been repealed in ten states. No, this isn’t a joke. It is not exaggeration or hyperbole. If you are in ten states in the United States, your some of your rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights have been made null and void.”

The ACLU filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the entire DHS report about suspicionless and warrantless “border” searches of electronic devices. ACLU attorney Catherine Crump said “We hope to establish that the Department of Homeland Security can’t simply assert that its practices are legitimate without showing us the evidence, and to make it clear that the government’s own analyses of how our fundamental rights apply to new technologies should be openly accessible to the public for review and debate.”

Meanwhile, the EFF has tips to protect yourself and your devices against border searches. If you think you know all about it, then you might try testing your knowledge with a defending privacy at the U.S. border quiz.

Wired pointed out in 2008 that the courts have routinely upheld such constitution-free zones:

Federal agents at the border do not need any reason to search through travelers’ laptops, cell phones or digital cameras for evidence of crimes, a federal appeals court ruled Monday, extending the government’s power to look through belongings like suitcases at the border to electronics.

***

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the government, finding that the so-called border exception to the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition on unreasonable searches applied not just to suitcases and papers, but also to electronics.

***

Travelers should be aware that anything on their mobile devices can be searched by government agents, who may also seize the devices and keep them for weeks or months. When in doubt, think about whether online storage or encryption might be tools you should use to prevent the feds from rummaging through your journal, your company’s confidential business plans or naked pictures of you and your-of-age partner in adult fun.

Going further down the sci fi Big Brother rabbit hole, Verizon has applied for a patent that would allow your television to track what you are doing, who you are with, what objects you’re holding, and what type of mood you’re in. (And some folks could conceivably be spying on you through your tv using existing technology.)

And they’re probably bluffing and exaggerating, but the Department of Homeland Security claims they will soon be able to know your adrenaline level, what you ate for breakfast and what you’re thinking …from 164 feet away.

Indeed, technology has made pervasive spying more possible than ever before.

TechDirt notes:

In a radio interview, Wall Street Journal reporter Julia Angwin (who’s been one of the best at covering the surveillance state in the US) made a simple observation that puts much of this into context: the US surveillance regime has more data on the average American than the Stasi ever did on East Germans.

Postscript: This is not some “post-9/11 reality”. Spying on Americans started before 9/11. 

And the national security boys can choose to share U.S. civilian information with federal, state, local, or foreign entities for analysis of possible criminal behavior, even if there is no reason to suspect them.

And many say that the spying isn’t being done to keep us safe … but to crush dissent and to smear people who uncover unflattering this about the government … and to help the too big to fail businesses compete against smaller businesses (and here).

Note: Here’s a full report card on how well the government has been balancing civil liberties with other concerns.

Hattip Satori

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

Please Spread The Word And Share This Post

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

With the United States having reached unprecedented levels of debt and no end in sight, Europe close to widespread destabilization, and Japan now having lost control of their bond market, it should be quite apparent that there is no turning back.

Governments around the world are doing everything in their power to maintain the perception that all is well. Despite their best efforts, however, the coming catastrophe cannot be stopped.

The following video and accompanying excerpt recorded on the Hagmann and Hagmann Report Nightly Radio Show features Steve Quayle and financial insider “V,” also known as the Guerrilla economist.

This is critical knowledge and foresight into what is happening, what the triggers for the next collapse will be, and how the world’s elite plan on making their exits.

You will never hear information like this from mainstream media sources until after the fact, if ever.

Be forearmed and forewarned, because as “V” notes, what’s coming will leave no one on this planet untouched.

Video excerpt produced by The Daily Sheeple with permission from The Hagmann and Hagmann Report

The collapse that’s going to occur here is going to be a trifecta of bonds, stocks and real estate combined.

…

The Fed over here has ordered — and I want everybody to listen because this is insider information — the Fed has ordered the U.S. pension funds to begin to acquire U.S. debt. That is coming down the pike, it’s going to start happening, the states are going to start carrying it in order to fatten up their books… So, we are moving into the last stages before an all out collapse.

That’s exactly where we’re headed.

Now the Rubicon has been crossed… the armies are surrounding the Capital itself.

Excerpt continued…

We’re at a very critical juncture, and that’s what’s got me freaked out the most. The Japanese have lost control and they don’t know what to do at this point. .. They’re telling the public “don’t worry, everything’s ok.”

That is a signs, folks, that they are panicking. That is a sign that everything is not OK… that there is a great fear and trepidation that has begun.

And when this thing goes bust, this is the trigger that’s going to bring this whole thing down.

…

We’re on the last leg for this whole storybook. Unfortunately, it’s not going to be a storybook ending. So we’re in the last few pages of a chapter that’s been written about a hundred years ago, and it’s soon coming to an end.

…

 Now the question becomes, what exactly are they going to do?

They’re going to bring this thing to a halt. They’re going to create economic turmoil and a crash. And then they’re going to sell the population on some sort of armed conflagration, some sort of a massive global war. 

That is typically the playbook of the globalists. That is typically what we see, a pattern that is repeated often.

…

A small scale controlled regional war is not going to fix the $1.5 Quadrillion derivative debt globally.

A small scale regional war is not going to fix the massive levels of unemployment in America, in Europe, in Japan…

It’s not going to fix the economic problems that have festered in much of the western world and parts of the world that utilize a western style of banking.

It’s not going to fix it this time.

…

This time they’re going to drag everybody in. This time there’s not going to be anybody who’s going to be unaffected.

…

Let me tell you right now. It is mathematically impossible to pull this back. It’s mathematically impossible.

You cannot recall this. 

Recorded May 24, 2013 (full interview here)

Video excerpt courtesy The Hagmann and Hagmann Report, Steve Quayle and The Guerrilla Economist

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

This article originally appeared on: SHTF Plan

South African President Jacob Zuma’s office says former President and anti-apartheid icon Nelson Mandela is transferred to hospital, as his lung infection deteriorates.

On Saturday, the presidency said Mandela who was taken to a hospital in Pretoria for recurrence of lung infection is in “serious but stable condition.”

According to a statement from Zuma’s office, the 94-year-old was taken to hospital around 1:30 am. “The former president is receiving expert medical care and doctors are doing everything possible to make him better and comfortable,” the statemen added.

Mandela has a history of lung problems dating back to when he contracted tuberculosis as a political prisoner. On Mar 28, he was rushed to a South African hospital for the same problem. He also spent about three weeks in hospital for a similar infection and gallstones in December 2012.

In South Africa, Mandela is often known as Madiba, his clan name, or as tata, which means father. He is widely regarded as the father of the nation for leading the struggle against apartheid. Mandela served as South Africaâ„¢s first Black president from 1994 to 1999.

The former South African president has received more than 250 awards over four decades, including the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize. In recent years, Mandelaâ„¢s health problems have worried his supporters.

IA/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Chairman of British Conservative Party Grant Shapps has tried to silence emails that showed he Å“misled MPs” when he was housing minister.

New embarassing revelations show Shapps asked his former colleagues at the Department for Communities and Local Government to prevent the release of internal correspondence relating to him, at a cost of thousands of pounds.

The emails, finally released after a year-long battle and intervention by the Information Commissioner, contained civil servantsâ„¢ expression of concerns that Shapps deceived MPs on the number of affordable houses the government was building when he was housing minister.

Shapps had claimed in an address to the parliament that the current coalition government of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats will built more affordable homes in five years than the previous Labour governments had done between 1997 and 2010.

However, the correspondence showed that his colleagues had warned him about using such inaccurate figures again.

The disclosure drew angry reactions from the Labour Party with shadow Communities Secretary Hilary Benn saying the attempt by Communities Secretary Eric Pickle to shore up Shappsâ„¢s position has been a huge waste of taxpayer money to cover up his departmentâ„¢s failure in dealing with the affordable housing problem.

Å“Instead of wasting taxpayersâ„¢ money to try and avoid his duty to come clean he should have been working to stop the drastic decline in affordable housing,” Benn said.

AMR/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

Two icons of the liberty movement embrace for the first time in the shadow of the Bilderberg meeting.

Video streaming by Ustream

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 2:49 am

Tags: bilderberg

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill
London Guardian
June 8, 2013

Barack Obama has ordered his senior national security and intelligence officials to draw up a list of potential overseas targets for US cyber-attacks, a top secret presidential directive obtained by the Guardian reveals.

The 18-page Presidential Policy Directive 20, issued in October last year but never published, states that what it calls Offensive Cyber Effects Operations (OCEO) “can offer unique and unconventional capabilities to advance US national objectives around the world with little or no warning to the adversary or target and with potential effects ranging from subtle to severely damaging”.

It says the government will “identify potential targets of national importance where OCEO can offer a favorable balance of effectiveness and risk as compared with other instruments of national power”.

The directive also contemplates the possible use of cyber actions inside the US, though it specifies that no such domestic operations can be conducted without the prior order of the president, except in cases of emergency.

Full article here

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 2:49 am

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Justin Sink
The Hill
June 8, 2013

President Obama on Friday defended a pair of recently disclosed surveillance programs as striking the “right balance” between national security and civil liberties following a speech Friday in California.

“You can’t have 100 percent security and also have 100 percent privacy and zero inconvenience. We’re going to have to make some choices as a government,” Obama said.

“You can complain about Big Brother and how this is a potential program run amok, but when you actually look at the details, I think we’ve struck the right balance.”

The administration acknowledged Thursday that the National Security Agency (NSA) had monitored domestic telephone data and international Internet traffic from tech companies like Google, Microsoft and Facebook.

Full article here

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 2:48 am

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

Reuters, AP, Channel 4 News, the Times, the Telegraph, the Press Association, London Tonight. The BBC had at least three radio reporters at Bilderberg.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 2:48 am

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Infowars.com
June 8, 2013

In a freshly strimmed corner of the grounds of the Grove Hotel, half a mile from the most important international policy conference in the world, something remarkable happened: the mainstream press showed up. In droves.

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 2:47 am

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Tim Ross
London Telegraph
June 8, 2013

Full article here

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Saturday, June 8, 2013 at 2:50 am

Tags: bilderberg

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Iran is awaiting Russiaâ„¢s response to Tehranâ„¢s proposal to drop its lawsuit against Moscow over its failure to honor a contract on the delivery of S-300 air defense systems to Iran.

Å“The ball is in Russia’s court, but we are ready to continue cooperation on S-300,” Iranian Ambassador to Moscow Mahmoud Reza Sajjadi said on Friday, Interfax News Agency reported.

Iran filed a complaint with the International Court of Arbitration in Geneva against Russiaâ„¢s state-run arms export company Rosoboronexport in 2011 after Moscow failed to comply with its commitments to deliver S-300 air defense systems to the Islamic Republic.

On June 6, Sajjadi told Interfax News Agency that Tehran will withdraw its lawsuit if Russia honors its contract. He said if Iran sees that Russia has changed its position on the delivery of S-300 systems, the Islamic Republic will also Å“change its conduct.”

The Iranian ambassadorâ„¢s remarks came after Russian Technologies (Rostech) CEO Sergei Chemezov said on May 30 that Moscow seeks to reach a settlement with Tehran to withdraw its lawsuit against Rosoboronexport over the canceled deal as Russiaâ„¢s chances Å“to win the case are very slim.”

Chemezov said that the US had applied heavy pressure on Moscow to stop the agreement under the pretext that the deal was against the sanctions of the UN Security Council.

The Russian official, added, however, that Washington later changed its rhetoric, saying the UN resolution did not specifically mention the S-300 system and claiming that Russia had acted on its own.

Under a contract signed in 2007, Russia was required to provide Iran with at least five S-300 defense systems.

Russia, however, refused to deliver the systems to Iran under the pretext that they were covered by the fourth round of the UN Security Council resolutions against Iran.

The Iranian Army has previously announced that it is manufacturing an indigenous missile defense system similar to the Russian S-300 and will unveil it in the next Iranian calendar year (beginning March 21, 2014).

SF/NN/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

[unable to retrieve full-text content]Poland’s Institute of National Remembrance (IPN) says it has found a mass grave containing the bodies of about 83 people thought to have been victims of a Stalin-era campaign of terror.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

June 3, 2013
 |

In the great American debate over education, the education and technology corporations, bankrolled politicians and activist-profiteers who collectively comprise the so-called “reform” movement base their arguments on one central premise: that America should expect public schools to produce world-class academic achievement regardless of the negative forces bearing down on a school’s particular students. In recent days, though, the faults in that premise are being exposed by unavoidable reality.

Before getting to the big news, let’s review the dominant fairy tale: As embodied by New York City’s major education announcement this weekend, the “reform” fantasy pretends that a lack of teacher “accountability” is the major education problem and somehow wholly writes family economics out of the story (amazingly, this fantasy persists even in a place like the Big Apple where economic inequality is particularly crushing). That key – and deliberate – omission serves myriad political interests.

For education, technology and charter school companies and the Wall Streeters who back them, it lets them cite troubled public schools to argue that the current public education system is flawed, and to then argue that education can be improved if taxpayer money is funneled away from the public school system’s priorities (hiring teachers, training teachers, reducing class size, etc.) and into the private sector ( replacing teachers with computers, replacing public schools with privately run charter schools, etc.). Likewise, for conservative politicians and activist–profiteers disproportionately bankrolled by these and other monied interests, the “reform” argument gives them a way to both talk about fixing education and to bash organized labor, all without having to mention an economic status quo that monied interests benefit from and thus do not want changed.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

June 6, 2013
 |

Last month Senator Elizabeth Warren put forward her first bill as a senator, a proposal to allow students to borrow for college at a 0.75 percent interest rate, the same rate that the Federal Reserve Board charges banks for borrowing reserves. In putting forward the bill Warren noted the rapid run up in student debt at a time when recent graduates face an especially bleak job market.

As much as I think it would be good to help struggling students, I initially did not like the proposal. As a general rule it is best for the government to be transparent in its subsidies, which means appropriating money directly from the budget.

The failure to be transparent can have large amounts of money going places where we do not especially want it to go. For example, the largest chunk of housing subsidies goes to families with incomes over $100,000 in the form of the tax deduction on mortgage interest.

It is unlikely that many politicians would stand up and argue that the rest of us should pay higher taxes so that the richest 10 percent can buy bigger homes, but that is the effect of our current housing policy. It is largely unchallenged because few people understand the implications of the mortgage interest deduction.

There are many other areas where hidden subsidies have similar effects in redistributing income upwards. One of my favorites is the implicit too big to fail insurance that we give to the country’s largest banks.

This implicit insurance allows them to borrow at below market interest rates, a subsidy that has been estimated at more than $80 billion a year by Bloomberg. This money is enriching the banks’ shareholders and top executives, some of the richest people in the country. It’s hard to imagine even Mitt Romney openly advocating an $80 billion handout for the Wall Street crew.

By tapping the Federal Reserve Board for below market loans, the Warren proposal creates the risk of yet another subsidy which could go badly awry. Depending on the conditions, we may see a lot of relatively affluent students borrowing money to invest in the stock market while completing their Stanford MBA. That one would not be a high priority for most people.

But the proposal would also have the effect of making a college education more affordable to millions of students with more limited means. Since there is not much else on the table in this respect, why not grab it?

Somehow sound economics are only important in discussions of policies that are intended to help the poor or middle class. After all, in addition to the too big to fail subsidy, our government also supports the financial industry by exempting it from the sort of sales taxes that other industries pay.

Even the IMF has written about the unfairness of the financial sector’s special tax exemption.

Yet the Obama administration has not only obstructed a sales tax on financial products in the United States, the Treasury Department has done unpaid lobbying work for Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan to block financial taxes in Europe.

Of course the financial sector is not the only industry that gets special protection from the government. The pharmaceutical industry is able to pull in hundreds of billions of dollars a year in additional revenue as a result of government granted patent monopolies.

One of the top items on our “free trade” agenda is increasing the strength of patent and related forms of protectionism in other countries. The policy types in Washington won’t even consider a discussion of more efficient, less corrupt, mechanisms for support the development of new drugs.

And we see a similar story with the requirements of Internet intermediaries that the entertainment industry was pushing for the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). After massive public outrage sent SOPA down in flames last year, the Obama administration is now trying to make everyone a copyright cop through the trade agreements it is negotiating. That’s hardly good economics or good public policy.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

June 6, 2013
 |

From being a space to organize social justice movements to providing listeners with life-saving information, low power FM (LPFM) radio stations have given thousands an opportunity to strengthen their communities.

LPFM stations are non-commercial radio stations that use only about 100 watts of power to operate – the same amount as a light bulb. These stations, however, can reach hundreds of thousands of listeners and have a reach of a three to ten mile radius. 

The FCC began granting LPFM licenses in 2000, after smaller broadcasters were increasingly getting kicked off air due to media consolidation. Congress halted the dispersal of these licenses, however, after large, powerful broadcasters lobbied them – falsely arguing that LPFMs would cause interference with their stations. While an independent, taxpayer-funded study disproved their interference claims, and the FCC urged Congress to revoke their restriction, Congress took no action for ten years.

Pressured largely by the Prometheus Radio Project, a non-profit committed to democratizing radio airwaves, Congress finally passed the Local Community Radio Act in 2011.

Now thousands of new LPFM licenses are up for grabs come October, when the FCC will open a short application window – of about five days – for non-profit organizations to apply.

The Prometheus Radio Project is now in the process of assisting people interested in applying.

“People are very excited about the opportunity. Our phones are ringing off the hook with people who want to have the piece of the dial for their communities,” said, Julia Wierski, Prometheus’s development and communications director.

But the group hopes to continue to spread the word, as June is the final month of outreach in Prometheus’s 15-year campaign. They hope to identify and support at least 1000 organizations by the end of June who are interested in obtaining a LPFM license.

In order to apply, groups who are interested should already have existing community support. Starting a station costs about $15,000 – for equipment and engineering and legal fees – but groups will have years to fundraise for the start-up money and obtain underwriters. More information is available on Prometheus’s website, where groups can sign up to express their interest. Prometheus will be providing various types of support, from webinars to maintaining a help desk.

Wierski said that radio is still an important medium – with 90 percent of Americans tuning into radio at least once a week. And while some people can’t afford Internet or live in areas without current access to broadband, radio is free and the most accessible form of media.

LPFM stations then provide communities with access to local music and information as well as a physical space to bring people together and organize. Unsurprisingly, they persevere the most disastrous times. For instance, one LPFM near New Orleans was the only informational resource for people during Hurricane Katrina. The station manager there even swam across floodwaters to gather batteries to keep it going.

At a time when media consolidation continues and the Koch brothers look into buying some of the nation’s top newspapers, these LPFM licenses are being distributed at a crucial time.

“People with corporate interests will use media to their ends. And who gets left out of those conversations?” Wierski said. “It’s a really powerful thing for people to feel like they have a place and that they own a piece of the media in their town where they can tell their own stories.”

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

June 7, 2013
 |

For a gay woman, it can often be a struggle to determine where exactly she fits in the spectrum of gender identity in both the lesbian and heterosexual communities. Many lesbians are faced with having their sexuality evaluated purely on the basis of their looks, as if sexuality is something that can be “seen” on the body to warrant approval, while others are not “accepted” for failing to act in a certain way. Such narrow-minded, misguided stereotypes create numerous social problems in advancing gay rights and raise an important question of what gender identity means for lesbians today.

According to mental health counselor Tara Lombardo, of the LGBT psychotherapy center, Institute for Human Identity (IHI), gender stereotypes about lesbians are merely an extension of “internalized homophobia.” In other words, the LGBT community has adopted society’s standard of what it means to be straight or gay based on the only model it knows–heterosexual relationships. In essence, it has had to borrow from this prototype.

“For lesbians, representation appears to be ‘owned’ by heterosexual attitudes that personify what lesbians are and are not, and this is related to women’s sexuality being invisible and based on attraction. A lot of femininity is based on the male gaze. If you remove the male perspective, you have to figure out the female gaze and at this point we still don’t know what exactly that is in the gay community. It has been a long trek for lesbians to come out and work out where they identify within these pre-determined social scripts that exist,” Lombardo explained to AlterNet.

A growing body of social science research suggests that the proliferation of gay marriage is redefining the way we view gender and specifically gender roles within family life. According to Liza Mundy in her recent article, “The Gay Guided to Wedded Bliss,” research has shown that same-sex unions are happier than heterosexual marriages, with lesbian couples experiencing the most intimate relationships compared with their heterosexual and male gay counterparts.

“Same-sex spouses, who cannot divide their labor based on pre-existing gender norms, must approach marriage differently than their heterosexual peers. From sex to fighting, from child-rearing to chores, they must hammer out every last detail of domestic life without falling back on assumptions about who will do what. In this regard, they provide an example that can be enlightening to all couples,” Mundy said.

While the critics of gay marriage warn of the effects of a “genderless” society, Mundy believes gay marriage can help us to shed ancient, old-fashioned stereotypes by re-evaluating gender norms.

“If a genderless marriage is a marriage in which the wife is not automatically expected to be responsible for school forms and childcare and dinner preparation and birthday parties and midnight feedings and holiday shopping, I think it’s fair to say that many heterosexual women would cry, bring it on! Beyond that, gay marriage can function as a controlled experiment, helping us to see which aspects of marital difficulty are truly rooted in gender and which are not,” she said.

We are certainly making some headway, at least in the eyes of the law, with over 14 nations now having legalized gay marriage. Such efforts have generated extensive media coverage of gay weddings and enhanced the visibility of the many different types of gay couples that exist in the LGBT community. Moreover, such transparency has helped to normalize lesbian identity for heterosexuals and thus paint a clearer picture of society’s evolving gender norms.

Despite the enthusiasm surrounding such progress, hiccups and push-backs remain in the struggle for equality. As we celebrate Pride Month this June, we still find ourselves living in a world where gay people are subject to discrimination and anti-gay hate crimes. While some lesbians are fortunate enough to escape such prejudice by slipping under the radar and not being recognizable as gay, these women face other obstacles such as the effects of “femme invisibility.”

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

June 7, 2013
 |

Americans may be upset about the latest revelations in the government’s ability to spy on citizens via their online lives, but no one should be surprised. We’ve underestimated and overlooked many key aspects of the government’s ability to track our lives for years.

Let’s go through 10 points about these latest revelations of domestic spying to better understand what Americans have underestimated and overlooked about electronic eavesdropping.

“Now, unfortunately, people like the former director of NSA, Michael Hayden, and others have recast the Fourth Amendment from one that is based on probable cause in presenting evidence for subsequent invasion of privacy to one of reasonable suspicion,” Wiebe said. “That phrase has not been defined except by some managers controlling this information about you and me.”

4. Overlooked: How the NSA is getting away with this. If you really want to know how the NSA has been able to get away with this–and how the Obama administration has been able to say it has been doing nothing that has not been approved by Congress–you have to look at the reality that high-ranking lawyers inside the government have been exploiting legal loopholes to let NSA do what it wants.

“So the NSA gets to obtain information in a more intrusive way than it might otherwise be allowed,” wrote Rachel Levinson-Waldman, counsel at the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School for the blog.

5. Underestimated: Loss of privacy. Americans need to realize that every electronic transaction can be traced and seen by the government–period. There’s no e-mail, smart phone app, or even visit to a porn website that’s not traceable. This is much bigger than posting an unflattering picture on Facebook that will not disappear and be discovered by a potential co-worker or employer. Unless people want to live without electricity in the woods, modern life has evolved to the point where expectations of privacy are a myth, not a reality anymore.

7. Underestimated: Corporate America doesn’t like this either. One of the most curious aspects of these disclosures about NSA eavesdropping is that the corporations involved are not exactly fans of it. That is not to say that they would not want to be using similar data-mining and customer profiling technology to sell more products, but they worry that it is a public relations nightmare for them to be caught turning over customer information. 

8. Overlooked: It’s easier for businesses to comply than to say no. Americans’ sympathies for corporate executives like the ex-Verizon president should only go so far, because let’s face it–people at the highest echelons of corporate power have more access and influence than ordinary Americans into Washington’s halls of power and they are not saying “No, this goes too far.” Instead, Friday’s papers were filled with comments from Apple, Google, Facebook, Verizon and others all saying they value their customers but they follow the law as required. That’s not really corporate citizenship, that’s caving in.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

June 7, 2013
 |

While the U.S. Congress deliberates over proposed changes in the nation’s immigration laws, one group of immigrants who became naturalized citizens and who retired and have grown old in this country are seeking a congressional change that is the reverse of what most immigrants want.

Baby boomers, war veterans, widows and retirees originally from the Philippines are hoping welfare assistance and entitlement benefits they have earned would follow them should they decide to return to the land of their birth. Many are World War II veterans who fought under U.S. command and were promised federal compensation only partly provided since then. Advocates believe the United States could save money were it to permit the seniors to return home with their benefits, especially for Medicare.

Understandably, the accessibility of health insurance at this time in their lives is a major consideration as they dream of making their “giant leap” back home. Medicare recipients must be at least 65 or be disabled.

WWII-Era Seniors Assess Their Future

In Seattle’s Filipino-American community, aging WWII veterans and widows meet twice weekly at a senior center where they frequently share meals subsidized through the Older Americans Act.  At these gatherings they assess their hopes and future plans.

Veteran Tomas Villanueva, 90, and his wife Esther, 87, have lived in a subsidized senior housing facility in downtown Seattle for the past 21 years.

During World War II, Villanueva served in Guam as a Philippine Scout recruit of the U.S. Army. Following the war, he returned to his home province in Southern Luzon where he served as a constabulary officer. He and Esther decided to emigrate to the U.S. in 1991.

After securing their American citizenship in 1994, the couple filed petitions for some of their six adult children to receive visas enabling them to join their parents in Seattle. The Villanuevas were especially hoping that as they grow old, two of their daughters would provide them a family safety net.

Eventually, the U.S. government approved four visas for the Villanueva children–but they have remained on the waiting list in the Philippines since 1994, because of tight annual numerical immigration quotas the U.S. sets for some countries.

Two of the Villanueva children eventually lost interest in emigrating to the U.S.  And the two daughters, still determined to join their parents, learned that worldwide demand for U.S. family visas was so large in 2010 that the demand triggered a retrogression rule, effectively freezing visas and adding several years of wait time to the backlog of applicants.

According to the National Visa Center, the agency that releases visas for all approved applications processed by the U.S. Customs and Immigration Service (CIS), such a rule applies when the number of visa applications exceeds a given threshold. As of June 2013, CIS is processing applications filed as far back as 1992, two years before the Villanuevas petitioned for their daughters. Based on the past experience of petitioners, a delay of five or more years may be likely in this case.

As they waited, the aging couple needed medical attention. Medicare covered Esther’s pacemaker in 2008, and she has elevated blood pressure. Tomas, once active as an officer in Seattle’s Filipino war veterans’ association, has shown symptoms of dementia and oncoming diabetes.

Esther has been debating whether to keep waiting for her daughters to arrive, or to return to the Philippines for good. Keeping her Medicare coverage has been the single, most important factor, she said.

Care Unaffordable in U.S.

“But whether or not Medicare will be accessible to us in the Philippines, there is no other choice but to go back home because we cannot afford caregiver services or retirement home expense in the States,” she explained. Experts say that despite Medicare coverage, uncovered out-of-pocket costs for seniors in the U.S. are now close to 20 percent of their income.

Esther continued, “The long delay of our daughters’ coming has made us decide to go home. We will be nearer to them if we need help.”

An unofficial survey conducted by a coalition of Filipino organizations and community groups across the U.S. shows that about 100 Filipino American professionals retire every day.

While they can take their Social Security retirement benefits and savings anywhere in the world, it is a different story for their Medicare coverage overseas. Until Medicare extends coverage to them outside the U.S., they will need private medical insurance.

Elderly couples in Washington State whose combined income does not exceed $18,000 a year are entitled to a monthly average of $500 in Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Esther and Tomas qualified for SSI and receive a combined monthly supplemental income of $800.

Esther also receives a monthly pension of $100 after retiring as an employee of Volunteers of America. Because Tomas receives a military pension only from his military service with the Philippine Constabulary, equivalent to $120 a month, he is entitled to SSI benefits as a senior residing in Seattle.

If retirees return to the Philippines, they receive 75 percent of their Social Security pension. For Esther it will be a meager $75 per month.  If veterans choose to reside in the U.S., they receive burial benefits and each widow receives an average lump sum of $9,000, with the amount partly depending on a departed soldier’s rank.

Medicare Portability

“Filipino-American war veterans and their widows are leading the way in the campaign for Medicare portability. In the 65-and-above age group are 200,000 Filipino elderly in the U.S.,” explained Eric Lachica, organizer of U.S. Medicare Philippines, a nonprofit advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C.

Lachica conducts monthly teleconferences among advocates of the movement based in key American cities, from Honolulu to Boston.

A seasoned lobbyist in the U.S., Lachica spearheads the campaign for Medicare portability, an extension that will allow retired Filipino-American immigrant professionals access to their Medicare benefits at internationally accredited hospitals and health care providers in the Philippines.

The campaign by Filipino-American community advocates and elderly leaders for Medicare coverage for retirees wherever they decide to live has been bolstered by a study published in May by the journal Health Affairs.

According to the study, immigrants in recent years contributed about $14 billion more per year to Medicare than they received from the program. As a result, foreign-born U.S. residents produced a $115 billion surplus from 2002-2009, while the rest of the population created a $28 billion deficit over that same period.

The study points out that the aging U.S. population was sucking money from Medicare faster than it could replenish those funds, and immigrants helped cover the shortfall.

South of Seattle, Filipinos in Tacoma who are officers and members of the Filipino-American Physicians of Washington (FAPWA) take a differing view and are skeptical about the proposed Medicare portability.

Change Unlikely, Say Some

Former FAPWA president Nic Panlasigui believes that Medicare “is simply too big an institution that it would take time for Congress and CMS [Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services] to formulate any significant change.”

Panlasigui, a physician who is also a noncommissioned colonel in the U.S. Army and does work at nearby Fort Lewis, explains his view: “Because U.S. Medicare will demand higher standards of performance, any official extension to so-called Third World countries would entail extensive work. There are concerns about quality of facilities in overseas hospitals, physicians’ credentials, equipment, support functions and the ever-present concern over fraud.”

He continued, “20,000 Filipino doctors and 200,000 Filipino nurses practicing in countless medical centers across the U.S. know the score and we would be the first to wish that such benefits work their way to the native land to help retirees and old folks.”

Following weeks of deliberation and earnest discussions among seniors at the nutrition site about the immigration reform bill pending in the U.S. Congress and Medicare, Esther decided to bring home Tomas.

The old soldier had started to wander about the halls of the housing facility in the wee hours and this has alarmed Esther. After informing her daughters about her decision, she and Tomas flew home on May 21.

Her parting words to friends: “If the immigration reform bill will bring my daughters to the U.S., well and good. But the safety net we need as we age is not certain. Back in the old village, the caring family network I know can always take the place of Medicare.”

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

June 7, 2013
 |

From his California beach house at San Clemente, Richard Nixon once watched three reactors rise at nearby San Onofre. As of June 7, 2013, all three are permanently shut.

It’s a monumental victory for grassroots activism and it marks an epic transition in how we get our energy.

In the thick of the 1970s Arab oil embargo, Nixon said there’d be 1000 such reactors in the US by the year 2000. As of today, there are 100. Four have shut here this year. Citizen activism has put the “nuclear renaissance” into full retreat.  

Just two of 54 reactors now operate in Japan, where Fukushima has joined Chernobyl and Three Mile Island in permanently scarring us all.

Germany is shutting its entire fleet and switching to renewables. France, once the poster child for the global reactor industry, is following suit. South Korea has just shut three due to fraudulent safety procedures. Massive demonstrations rage against reactors being built in India. Only the Koreans, Chinese and Russians remain at all serious about pushing ahead with this tragic technology.

Cheap gas has undercut the short-term market for expensive electricity generated by obsolete coal and nuke burners. But the vision of Solartopia—a totally green-powered Earth—is now our tangible long-term reality.

With falling prices and soaring efficiency, every moving electron our species consumes will be generated by a solar panel, wind turbine, bio-fueled or geothermal generator, wave machine and their green siblings.

As of early this year, Southern California Edison’s path to a re-start at San Onofre seemed as clear as any to be expected by a traditional atomic tyrannosaur. But with help from Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Senator-to-be Ed Markey (D-MA), a powerful citizen uprising stopped it dead.

So did the terrifying incompetence and greed that has defined the nuclear industry from the days of Nixon and before.

San Onofre Unit One shut in the 1990s due largely to steam generator problems. In the early 2000s, Units 2 & 3 needed new steam generators of their own. In the usual grasp for more profits, Edison chose untested, unlicensed new designs.  But they failed. And the whole world was watching. In the wake of Fukushima, two more leaky tsunami-zone reactors surrounded by earthquake faults were massively unwelcome.

So a well-organized non-violent core of local, state and national activists and organizations rose up to stop the madness.

At Vermont Yankee, Indian Point, Seabrook, Davis-Besse and dozens of other reactors around the US and world, parallel opposition is escalating.

Make no mistake—this double victory at San Onofre is a falling domino. Had the public not fought back, those reactors would have been “fixed” at public expense.

Today, they are dead.

Worldwide, there are some 400 to go. Each of them—including the 100 remaining in the US—could do apocalyptic damage. We still have our work cut out for us.

But a huge double-step has been taken up the road to Solartopia. There will be no Fukushimas at San Onofre.  A green-powered Earth is that much closer.  And we have yet another proof that citizen action makes all the difference in our world.

So seize the day and celebrate!

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

‘;
jQuery(‘div.media-image’).each( function(index){
src = String(jQuery(this).children(‘img.media-image’).attr(‘src’));
if( src != ” && src != ‘undefined’ ){
parts = src.split(‘/’);
if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘slideshow’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/slideshow/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘AFP’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/images/AFP/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘public’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-3] == ‘public’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/’+parts[parts.length-2]+’/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else { new_src = false; }
if( new_src ){ jQuery(this).html(‘‘+jQuery(this).html()+enlarge_html+’‘); }
}
});

var slideshowdiv; var new_html; var img_obj; var sourcediv; var titlediv; var captiondiv; var title; var caption;

jQuery(‘div.slideshow-body div.slideshow div.field-item’).each( function(index){

slideshowdiv = jQuery(this).find(‘div.altslideshow-embedded-gallery’);
img_obj = slideshowdiv.find(‘img’);
src = img_obj.attr(‘src’);

title = slideshowdiv.children(‘div.altslideshow-title’).html();
if( title == null ){ title = ”; }

caption = slideshowdiv.children(‘div.altslideshow-caption’).html();
if( caption == null ){ caption = ”; }

if( src != ” && src != ‘undefined’ ){
// alert( ‘SRC: ‘+src );
parts = src.split(‘/’);
if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘slideshow’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/slideshow/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘AFP’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/images/AFP/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-2] == ‘public’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else if( parts[parts.length-3] == ‘public’ ){ new_src = ‘/files/’+parts[parts.length-2]+’/’+parts[parts.length-1]; }
else { new_src = false; }
// alert( ‘New SRC: ‘+new_src );
if( new_src ){
img_obj.parent().attr(‘href’,new_src).attr(‘rel’,’lightbox[slides]’).attr(‘title’,title+’
‘+caption).append(‘

Click to enlarge.

‘);
}
}

//sourcediv = jQuery(this).find(‘div.altslideshow-source’);
//titlediv = jQuery(this).find(‘div.altslideshow-title’);
//captiondiv = jQuery(this).find(‘div.altslideshow-caption’);
//sourcediv.after( titlediv ).after( captiondiv );

});

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

June 7, 2013
 |

This article originally appeard on The Fix.

The crimes are heinous: murdering a pizza deliveryman for his uniform, then wearing it to shoot down Colorado’s state prison chief; hiring a hit man to kill your parents; stabbing both of your grandfathers to death. Besides the horror, these recent homicides share a surprising common element: In each case, the alleged or convicted perpetrator had been sent to an unregulated tough-love camp known as Paradise Cove.

Evan Ebel, the 28-year-old ex-con who is now notorious for the Colorado killings and the high-speed Texas car chase and shootout that ultimately led to his own death in March, attended at least two such programs, including Paradise Cove. His parents apparently sent him there around age 12 because they were concerned about his destructive behavior and suspicious that he was using hard drugs and alcohol. 

But Paradise Cove was anything but paradise for the boys who attended. The Samoa-based camp was part of a “troubled teen” chain–variously known as the World Wide Association of Specialty Programs and Schools (WWASP), Teen Revitalization Inc., and Youth Foundation Inc.–that has had over a dozen of its programs (including Paradise Cove) closed down following reports of abuse. Former participants link at least 11 suicide or overdose deaths as well as three homicides to this particular camp–and many more to the network overall. Although apparently not using the WWASP name these days, the same high-level management is still involved in residential youth programs today, mainly in Utah.

The boys at Paradise Cove slept in straw-roofed huts on mats on a concrete floor. To prevent escapes, fluorescent lights burned all night, attracting mosquitos. Flip-flops were the only shoes permitted–another security measure–but these were rapidly destroyed by the sharp coral beaches where the boys exercised and worked. The cuts that resulted attracted flies and infections. “They’d just swarm on you,” Paul Richards, who attended Paradise Cove in 1997, told me for my book on troubled teen programs,  Help at Any Cost.

Breaking any of the program’s strict rules–for example, sitting in the wrong position or talking out of turn–resulted in severe, escalating punishment. Beatings by staff were common. But the worst consequence was “The Box,” a three-foot-square windowless, wooden hut with a concrete floor, where teens were made to stay for days to months, subsisting on rice and water. Sometimes, they were thrown in hog-tied and left for hours. Other times, they were made to kneel or sit in stress positions, which rapidly became agonizing.

“You’d have to sit cross-legged with your hands on top of your head with your elbows sticking out,” says Bill Boyles, who attended Paradise Cove from 1997 through 1999 and is now an activist with the Coalition for the Safe and Ethical Treatment of Youth. “It’s ridiculously uncomfortable on concrete in the hot summer sun in the tropics and they wouldn’t let you take a shower.” (A website called WWASP Survivors advocates for people who attended WWASP-related camps and serves as a watchdog over the “troubled teen” industry in general. Bill Boyles runs the Paradise Cove Survivorswebsite, which vividly details the brutal, squalid conditions at the camp.)

Unlike Ebel, Boyles had not been sent because of aggressive behavior–he was moody and had refused to go to school, but did not take drugs or commit crime. Paul Richards, who attended at the same time as Boyles, had been a straight-A student and star high school basketball player. In both cases, their main problem had been not getting along with their parents, but Paradise Cove accepted any child a parent labeled as troubled, so long as the tuition was paid.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

June 7, 2013
 |

“Right to work” is the most dishonest phrase in American political discourse. It sounds like it’s defending people’s right to earn a living. But as used by its supporters, it means making it impossible for workers to form an effective union, couched in the language of “freedom” and “choice.”

Specifically, it means laws banning “union shops,” in which everyone in a workplace has to join the union or pay a fee to cover the cost of union representation. Twenty-four states have such laws. All were in the South and West until last year, when Indiana and Michigan enacted them. Michigan’s law was rammed through the Republican-dominated legislature in a lame-duck session last December.

The Michigan law was “pretty devastating for the labor movement,” says Erin Johansson of American Rights at Work. It came in the state where the United Auto Workers’ six-week occupation of General Motors plants in Flint in 1937 won the victory that opened the doors for unions throughout American industry, the state whose union labor defined the working-class prosperity of World War II to the 1970s.

Both Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder and Dick DeVos, the heir to the multibillion-dollar Amway fortune who bankrolled the campaign for the law, stuck to the party line about “freedom.” Snyder said the law would give workers “the freedom to choose” and unions “an opportunity to be more responsible to their workers,” because instead of automatically collecting dues, they’d have to show workers “a value proposition.”

“Absolute horseshit,” responds Ed Ott, former head of the New York City Central Labor Council. “This is a total offensive against workers. They don’t want workers to have any say. After workers vote for a union, they don’t want them to maintain membership.”

This year, “right to work” measures were introduced in 17 states, according to Peggy Shorey, director of state government relations at the AFL-CIO. Ten were defeated, including those in Missouri, Kentucky, and New Hampshire, where Gov. John Lynch vetoed one in 2011. Republicans in the Ohio legislature introduced one in early May, but the state senate president said he didn’t want to give Democrats an issue to raise funds on. (Ohio voters overwhelmingly overturned draconian limits on unions in 2011.) Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced one in January, but it hasn’t gotten a committee hearing.

“It’s striking that they were not successful in passing it in Missouri,” says Shorey. The most significant measures still pending, she says, are in North Carolina and Pennsylvania. In North Carolina, House Speaker Thom Tillis proposed making the state’s “right to work” law and a ban on public-worker unions an amendment to its constitution, after declaring that he wanted to keep North Carolina “the least unionized state in the United States.” In Pennsylvania, the sponsor is Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, chair of the State Government committee, who also sponsored the state’s voter-ID law and fulminates against “illegal alien invaders.”

Neither measure has made it out of committee, but “after Michigan, anything could happen,” warns Ott.

– – –

The Michigan and Indiana laws came as part of the 2011—’12 offensive against worker rights in the upper Midwest, but the concept emerged after the great union victories of the late 1930s. The phrase “right to work” was coined in 1941 by William B. Ruggles, an editorial writer at the Dallas Morning News who didn’t want to join a union. His bosses feared that federal laws and regulations backing union rights were forcing unions down the throats of employers and socializing industry. Ruggles proposed a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to work with or without union membership.

This article originally appeared on: AlterNet

Egypt’s President Mohamed Morsi has dismissed calls for early presidential elections.

On Friday, in an interview with the state-run Al-Ahram daily, Morsi said calls for an early presidential election are both “absurd and illegal.”

“We are in a country with a constitution and law. We had free and fair elections and the talk about early presidential elections is absurd and illegal,” Morsi said.

“Violating the law, the use of violence or inciting for it are unacceptable and will not be permitted,” he added.

On Friday evening, clashes broke out in Cairo between security forces and members of the Black Block, a group of young masked men opposed to president Morsi’s. Protesters threw stones at the Central Security forces, MENA State news agency reported.

The clashes came after the groupâ„¢s campaign headquarter was set ablaze by unidentified attackers early in the day.

The group blamed Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood for the attack. However, a Brotherhood spokesman, Mourad Aly, rejected the allegation, saying there is no reason to “burn the office of a group (of activists) as weak as this.”

On June 30, Morsi marks one year in power as Egypt’s first freely elected president.

Egypt has witnessed continuing anti-government protests since Morsi took office in June 2012 in landmark elections held following the ouster of Mubarak after 30 years in power.

The opposition groups accuse the government of being dominated by Muslim Brotherhood.

On February 24, the protesters gathered near Cairoâ„¢s main administrative building, Mugamma where they chanted anti-Morsi slogans. Demonstrators also called on the president of the North African country to fulfill his election promises. The protesters reportedly shut the doors of the Mugamma.

On February 8, thousands of Egyptian opposition protesters took to the streets to rally against Morsi after calls from nearly 40 opposition parties and groups for mass demos across the country on the “Friday of dignity.”

IA/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The British public should be prepared to put up with more austerity measures, at least by 2020, two key British thinktanks have warned.

According to the Institute for Government (IfG) and the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) the financial meltdown that began in 2008 would continue to plague Britain by at least 2020, that means the governmentâ„¢s sweeping spending cuts will persist for longer than the 2015 election.

IfGâ„¢s deputy director Julian McCrae said despite comments by Chancellor George Osborne that lack of growth will probably extend austerity measures by another two years to 2017, international experience shows that people should be prepared for the savings plan to be further extended to at least 2020.

“If the UK experience proves to be as drawn-out as the Canadian one [in the 1980s and 1990s], we should expect not just 2015, but also 2020 to be an austerity election,” IfG said.

Meanwhile, IFS’s deputy director Carl Emmerson suggested an incoming government can ease the cutbacks on state departments by increasing taxes after the 2015 that will lead to further pressure on the public.

According to the EU statistics authority, Eurostat, Britain still has one of the highest budget deficits in the European Union despite massive spending cuts.

Eurostat figures showed in April that Britainâ„¢s ratio of budget deficit to gross domestic product (GDP) was 6.3 percent in 2012 that is only behind debt-ravaged Spain, Ireland, Greece and Portugal in the worst-performing EU economies.

This is only slightly better than the situation in 2009 in the wake of the financial meltdown when budget deficit comprised 11.5 percent of the GDP in 2009, which put it behind Ireland and Greece.

AMR/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

This file photo shows a view of the infamous US Guantanamo prison in Cuba.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

US President Barack Obama shakes hands with his Chinese opposite number Xi Jinping in Rancho Mirage, California, on June 7, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

File photo shows Muslim Rohingyas at the Say Thamagyi Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camp, located on the outskirts of Sittwe, capital of Myanmar’s western Rakhine state.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Iraqi soldiers patrol after a bomb damaged a bus carrying Iranian religious tourists in Karbala, southwest of Baghdad. (File photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan has hit back at western statesâ„¢ criticism of his governmentâ„¢s handling of the ongoing protests in the country.

“Those who are trying to teach us lessons, where were they when the Wall Street events in America were unfolding? Teargas was used, 17 people died, this happened. It happened in the UK, in France, in Germany and to a greater extent in Greece. These protests happen in these countries and they’re all EU members,” Erdogan said on Friday.

Erdogan accused the western states of adopting double standards regarding anti-government protests in the country.

“In any European country, whenever there is a violent protest against a demolition project like this, believe me, those involved face a harsher response,” he said.

The comments came after European Union Enlargement Commissioner Stefan Fule called for a “swift and transparent” probe into police attacks against Turkish anti-government protesters.

“Peaceful demonstrations constitute a legitimate way for these groups to express their views,” Fule said at an Istanbul conference attended by Erdogan.

“Excessive use of force by police against these demonstrations has no place in such a democracy,” he said.

His comments come as Turkish police have been criticized strongly for using excessive force against peaceful protests.

Anti-government demonstrations have been held in Istanbul, Ankara, Izmir, Mugla, Antalya, and many other cities and towns since May 31. Protesters call for the resignation of Erdogan.

According to Turkish reports, at least four people, including a policeman, have been confirmed dead during the protests so far.

The national doctors’ union says 4,785 people have been injured in the countrywide protests, 48 of them severely. The Turkish government says dozens of police officers have been injured.

The anti-government unrest began after police broke up a sit-in staged in Taksim Square on May 31 to protest against the demolition of Gezi Park.

The protesters say the park, which is a traditional gathering point for rallies and demonstrations as well as a popular tourist destination, is the city’s last green public space.

Amnesty International has censured the Turkish police for the tactics they have used to control the protests.

DB/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

UN High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres holds a press conference in Tehran on September 16, 2012.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Chinese police investigate the burnt wreckage of a double-decker bus . (file photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Three men have been arrested by the British police as part of investigations into a paedophile ring that raped underage school girls, drugged them and forced them into prostitution.

The three men being held were arrested after police executed a court warrant under suspicion of the trio letting a premise at Nanford guest house in Oxford to be used in connection with child prostitution.

This comes as seven members of a paedophile gang are facing long prison sentences after being found guilty at the Central Criminal Court of England and Wales last month.

Their offences include conspiracy to rape, child prostitution and trafficking over a period of 8 years.

“The warrant is in relation to information that came to light during the recent trial at the Old Bailey, where evidence was heard that the guest house had been used to facilitate child sexual exploitation,” a Thames Valley police spokesman said.

Police officials added they also executed another warrant at a property in Sunningwell, near Oxford.

Last month, Detective Chief Superintendent Rob Mason had to acknowledge that the Thames Valley Police should have identified the horrific crimes sooner.

BGH/AMR/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Lebanese President Michel Sleiman has warned that his country is unable to host any more Syrian refugees escaping violence in their homeland.

During a meeting with the ambassadors of the permanent members of the UN Security Council in Beirut on Friday, Sleiman urged the world body to pay more attention to the burden that the influx of Syrian refugees has had on Lebanon.

He also called for equal responsibility of receiving the refugees, tightening the control of refugee status, hosting refugees inside Syria, and increasing the international aids to the Lebanese government in this regard.

The latest figures from the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) indicate that over half a million Syrians have sheltered in Lebanon after fleeing unrest in their country. But the figure covers those who have registered with the UNHCR and those who are waiting to register.

Lebanese government officials, aid workers and experts believe that the refugee figure is higher by an additional several hundred thousand people, and it does not include the tens of thousands of displaced Syrians in Lebanon who are well-off or otherwise supporting themselves, and not relying on humanitarian assistance.

Syria has been gripped by a deadly unrest since March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of government forces, have been killed in the violence.

Damascus says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

The Syrian government says the West and its regional allies including Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey are supporting the militants.

Several international human rights organizations have accused militants operating in Syria of committing war crimes.

MP/HN

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
var pCount = $(‘#content’).children(‘p’).length;
var position = Math.floor(pCount*0.1);
$(‘#content’).children(‘p’).eq(position).before(html);
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}

function appendBottomAppeal() {
if (!$(‘#content’).is(‘.width72,.category’)) {
var htmlArray = [
‘

‘
];
var html = htmlArray.join(”);
if ($(‘#article-tools’).length > 0) {
$(‘#article-tools’).before(html);
} else {
$(‘#content’).append(html);
}
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘form’).children(‘.more-options’).children(‘a’).click(function() {
$(‘#inline-appeal’).children(‘.initially-hidden’).show();
$(this).parent().hide();
return false;
});
}
}
$(document).ready(function(){
appendInlineAppeal();
appendBottomAppeal();
});

This article originally appeared on: World Socialist Web Site

Militants of the al-Qaeda-linked Ansar Dine extremist group sit in a vehicle near Timbuktu on April 24, 2012.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/rethinking_american_exceptionalism_20130607/

Posted on Jun 7, 2013

This article originally appeared on: TruthDig

Scotland has seen a rapid increase in rent arrears, causing Scots further financial difficulties, since the British government introduced the contentious bedroom tax.

The controversial tax has drained £50 million from the housing benefit system, designed to help the worst-off in Scotland pay their rent.

Now, only £10 million of emergency funds are accessible in the form of housing benefits in Scotland, which means only the most destitute can get help.

The Scottish Federation of Housing Associationsâ„¢ chief executive Mary Taylor said those affected had “raced” to the £10 million emergency fund.

She added housing associations have been hit by a soar in rent arrears, which could add to the Å“already significant financial challenges faced by social landlords”.

The bedroom tax targets social housing tenants believed to have a Å“spare” room, even if the room is used for children of parents living apart and are sharing care of their offspring.

Scottish Housing Minister Margaret Burgess said that Scotlandâ„¢s parliament strongly opposes the Westminster governmentâ„¢s bedroom tax Å“which is why we have said we will revoke it if Scotland votes for independence in 2014.”

Meanwhile, similar problems are being reported in towns and cities across the rest of the UK.

Sheffield is a case in point where applications for emergency financial help have risen by 400 percent.

BGH/AMR/HE

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) has urged the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) against adopting a selective and political approach with regard to the issue of human rights.

Speaking as the head of NAM in an address to a UNHRC session, Iranian Ambassador to the UN Office in Geneva Mohsen Naziri-Asl voiced the blocâ„¢s deep concern over the UNHRCâ„¢s growing trend of adopting resolutions against developing countries.

Unfortunately, this trend has been used as a tool to serve political interests and is in violation of the founding principles of the UNHRC, Naziri-Asl said, warning that such a policy could undermine cooperation in promoting and supporting human rights.

NAM believes that the international community should investigate the human rights situation in different countries without any discrimination, and not differentiate between developed and developing nations, he noted.

He said that NAM attaches great significance to the promotion and support of human rights. Naziri-Asl further highlighted the movementâ„¢s determination to promote, observe, implement and support human rights based on the universally acknowledged principles of human rights as well as the UN Charter and international law.

NAM believes that the issue of human rights must be pursued via a constructive, non-hostile, unselective, and apolitical approach and based on dialog, justice, impartiality and transparency, he said.

Naziri-Asl emphasized that such an approach should be based on respect for national sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference in the domestic affairs of countries.

AR/NN/HMV

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

While the intelligence community has succeeded in duping the US administration into allowing mass surveillance, it did not help improve national security at all, former NSA analyst William Binney told RT.

William Binney, who worked for the NSA for over 30 years as a
cryptanalyst-mathematician but resigned in 2001 as a
whistleblower, explained why the notion that mass surveillance is
necessary in order to combat terrorism is false.

RT: You have first hand knowledge on how the NSA works, is
this just the tip of the iceberg?

William Binney: Well, in terms of the number of companies
in the amount of data, yes that’s pretty much the case. It’s a
direct violation of the constitution, that’s why I left the NSA
in 2001. They started to do this, and that’s why I left. I could
not stay there and be a party to the violation of my
constitution, plus it was in violation of any number of laws at
the time.

RT: President Obama has said that the invasion of
privacy is done in the name of security, is he right about that?
Does mass surveillance help security?

WB: No, it doesn’t. In fact it adds more of a problem
because what that means, quite simply, is that if you go into a
larger database, you get more data back no matter what the query
is. It’s like making a query with Google. If you go in with a
Google query you can get tens of thousands, or hundreds of
thousands or even a million returns. Well, there’s no way you can
go through that, all of that, to see what you’re really
interested in. So what that does is make them less proficient at
doing their jobs.

RT: And what about the cost of this to the
taxpayer?

WB: Well all of that is being borne by the taxpayer. We
had proposed to them a number of years ago, about 2004, that we
design a system and build it for them for about $250 thousand,
where it would select only the relevant data that they wanted to
look at, out of the entire worldwide system. And we did it based
on a simple two-degree principle – that is, if you had a
terrorist calling somebody in the United States that was one
degree, and that person in the US calling others in the US was
the second degree. So, in other words what you would’ve been
looking at was being able to find the cells inside the country,
as well as being able to monitor terrorists worldwide. You would
get it all, the rest of it was just extra information.

RT: Do you think that the impact of 9-11 and the
war on terror is so great that Americans are content to allow
security to trample over anything else, even personal
privacy?

WB: I think, initially, it began that way. People were
trusting their government, I think that’s basically the case.
Congress and the administration at the time was being bamboozled
by the intelligence community, saying that you have to collect
all this data to find the bad guys, and if we don’t do that you
won’t be able to achieve that, which is absolutely false.

RT: Now there have been ongoing controversies
surrounding the US spying on its citizens, is anything likely to
make the government rein in its security services now?

WB: It’s going to be very difficult, because they have so
much invested in doing what they’re doing. It costs a lot of
money to do this, and their budgets have been almost tripled, I
think, since 9-11, so that kind of spending is hard to waste. So
what they’re really doing is saying we have to use what we have,
which is the problem with power — when you give power to an
organization or to people they tend to use it. And assembling
this kind of information about all the citizens in the United
States, or anybody else for that matter, gives you power against
them, you have leverage, and you can use that power against them.
Or you can use other agencies of the US like the IRS to
investigate people, and use your knowledge about people in the
country to use the IRS to target them. For example, if they
wanted to know who was in the Tea Party, they already have that
from the telephone and email networks. The communities built from
that data will tell them who’s participating in the Tea Party,
the central figures, and who are not central to the Tea Party,
and then from that if they are asking for tax exempt status, you
can send the IRS after them to harass them. That’s what’s
possible, that’s what this power of knowledge does, it gives them
that power to do that.

RT: In your experience with the NSA, is there a culture
of surveillance which is prevailing there?

WB: No, I’m pretty sure there are a lot of people who are
upset, at least from the ones who are retired. I’m getting
feedback from them that they’re really upset at what NSA has been
doing. And, of course, just the disclosure of the FISA warrants
and this PRISM program says there are others who are working in
government and in NSA who are upset by what they’re doing,
otherwise they wouldn’t have been leaked.

RT: If this was practice, in both George W Bush’s
administration and now apparently president Obama’s, it suggests
both seem to agree on this surveillance of its citizens, what
does this mean for the future, where is this all going?

WB: Well, what that simply means is that we have to start
electing people who are smart enough to realize when they’re
being bamboozled by the intelligence community or anybody else,
we can’t just take people and elect them who accept what they’re
being told by departments of government. You have to have people
who do real oversight, from not only the courts — because after
all, the courts, the judge that signed the orders for Verizon, he
didn’t know any more than the government told him. So, he was
totally dependent on what the government was telling him to
justify their warrant, or their order. And that’s not acceptable.

This article originally appeared on: RT

A US Predator drone fires a Hellfire missile. (file photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The payroll jobs report for May released today continues the fantasy.

Goods producing jobs declined, with manufacturing losing another 4,000 jobs, but the New Economy produced 179,000 service jobs.

Are these jobs the high-powered, high-wage “innovation jobs” that economists promised would be our reward from Globalism. I’m afraid not.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the jobs created are the usual lowly paid non-exportable domestic service jobs—the jobs of a third world country.

Retail trade accounts for 27,700 of the jobs.

Wholesale trade accounts for 7,900 jobs.

Ambulatory health care services accounts for 15,300 of the jobs.

Waitresses and bartenders account for 38,100 of the jobs.

Local government accounts for 13,000 of the jobs.

Amusements, gambling, and recreation account for 12,500 of the jobs.

Temporary help services provided 25,600 jobs.

Business support services provided 4,300 jobs.

Services to buildings and dwellings provided 6,400 jobs.

Accounting and bookkeeping services provided 3,100 jobs.

Architectural and engineering services provided 4,900 jobs.

Computer systems design and related provided 6,000 jobs (most likely filled by H-1B work visas).

Management and technical consulting services provided 3,200 jobs.

For a decade this has been the jobs profile of “the world’s most powerful economy.” It is the profile of third world India 40 years ago. The jobs that made the US the dominant economy have been moved off shore by corporations threatened by Wall Street with takeovers if they did not increase their profits.

The easiest way for corporations to increase profits is to take advantage of cheap labor in countries with massive quantities of unemployed labor.

So, if we believe the BLS report, and the reported new jobs are not simply a product of faulty season adjustments and a faulty birth-death model, why is the financial press happy that the US economy can only create third world jobs? Why was the stock market up on the news that the US economy has created 179,000 third world jobs? Would rational markets be up on such discouraging news?

But are the jobs really there?

With retail sales going nowhere, why 35,600 new jobs in wholesale and retail trade?

With real median incomes declining, why 38,100 more waitresses and bartenders? For every month as long as I can remember the BLS reports numerous new jobs in waitresses and bartenders, despite the long-term decline in real median income.

In the May jobs report, where are the jobs for the vast number of new college graduates?

The US now has more hotel maids, bartenders, and waitresses than it has manufacturing workers. The US has twice as many people employed in government than in manufacturing.

The services of maids, bartenders, waitresses, and government cannot be exported.
Therefore, the US trade deficit remains large and without exports to reduce it, a crisis in itself.

What the BLS jobs reports have been telling us for many years is that the US economy is in crisis, in a death-spiral. Yet, not a handful of economists’ voices have been raised.

Today president obama’s economist said that the notch upward in the unemployment rate was because the economic outlook was so good that more people were encouraged to enter the labor market than there were new jobs available.

The conclusion is inescapable: The same government that lies about weapons of mass destruction, Saddam Hussein’s al-Qaeda connections, Iranian nukes, and so on, also lies about jobs, the unemployment rate, the inflation rate, rigs every financial and commodity market, pretends that terrorism is such a threat that the US Constitution must be set aside and that Americans are safer without the protection of habeas corpus and due process.

It is amazing how rare terrorism is, especially with Washington in the second decade of trying to stir up terrorism by invading countries on totally false pretenses, murdering citizens of countries, such as Pakistan and Yemen with drones, and supporting Israel’s never-ending murder and dispossession of the Palestinians.

After such massive provocations from Washington, one would think that the world would be ablaze with terrorism. But it isn’t.

As there is so little terrorism, Washington and its presstitute media call those who resist
Washington’s invasion of their countries “terrorists.” Everyone who resists Washington’s military aggression is a terrorist. Just ask the New York Times, Fox News, or any neoconservative. Or, for that matter, the Bilderbergs, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and Homeland Security, the Gestapo organization that now defines all American dissenters to be “domestic extremists.”

Washington’s claim that Americans have “freedom and democracy” is the sickest joke in human history.

In 21st century America, defendants have no more rights than the accused in Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia. The FBI now shoots suspects brought in for questioning in the back of the head even before the suspect is arrested. http://lewrockwell.com/spl5/fbi-executed-my-boy.html ^[1]

Long before Bradley Manning’s trial the presstitutes have convicted the accused based on lies leaked by the prosecutors. Consider Bradley Manning. After three years of detention, including one year of torture, he is brought to a rigged trial as a national security danger. All that Bradley Manning did was to comply with the Military Code and report war crimes. As his corrupt superiors did not want to know, he complied with his duty, apparently, by going public.

Now he is being made an example. The message is clear: Support Washington’s war crimes or be destroyed.

The Amerika that exists today has more in common with Nazi Germany than with the America in which I grew up. The young don’t know any different. But those my age realize that we have lost our country. America no longer exists.

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Los Angeles County Sheriff deputies search the grounds of Santa Monica College, California, after a shooting spree on June 7, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Twenty-five years ago the Tawana Brawley case enflamed race relations in America and catapulted Al Sharpton into the national limelight. But Sharpton’s race demagoguery had begun years before that, and his notoriety as a racial arsonist continues up to the present, as testified by his leadership role in turning the Trayvon Martin shooting into a national racial confrontation.

The Tawana Brawley case is the subject of a short, excellent new documentary by Retro Report that expertly combines historic photos, documents, and news footage with recent interviews (including with Al Sharpton himself) along with important perspective on the tactics and sordid record of one of America’s most (in)famous agitators and race hucksters. Surprisingly, the New York Times and Newsweek/Daily Beast, two of the MSM flagships that helped boost Sharpton to prominence and shield him from the consequences of his violent advocacy, have promoted the recent Retro Report exposé of Sharpton. The Daily Beast article went further, not only highlighting Sharpton’s role in the Brawley affair but also touching upon the “Rev. Al’s” incendiary role as both the gasoline and the spark in the Crown Heights riots and the Freddy’s Fashion Mart murder/arson tragedy. 

Tawana Brawley: Rev Al’s Launchpad

In November 1987, Tawana Brawley, a 15-year-old black girl from Wappingers Falls, New York, knew she was in trouble. Although she had been grounded, she had gone out with her older boyfriend anyway and had been gone for four days. She knew from past experience that when she went home she could expect a beating from her mother’s live-in boyfriend, a violent ex-con and alcoholic who had served time for murder. To avoid those consequences she concocted a lurid story that ended up being transformed – once Sharpton got ahold of it – into a racially polarizing incident at the national (and then global) level.

Tawana claimed that she had been abducted, raped, and abused by a group of white men, who smeared her with feces and wrote “B****,” “KKK,” and “N*****” on her clothes and body. If true, this would have been a horrendous crime. But Sharpton turned this hoax of a troubled teen into a malicious cause célèbre to advance his own career. Sharpton and his fellow activists, attorneys C. Vernon Mason and Alton Maddox, turned the case into a three-ring media circus that ran for months in 1988, capturing the top headlines of many of the MSM daily news cycles.

Under Sharpton’s tutelage, two of Miss Brawley’s four anonymous white men developed names: local police officer Harry Crist, Jr. and local prosecutor Steven Pagones. Not only that, but Sharpton accused Gov. Mario Cuomo and other state officials of covering up the crime. Officer Crist, who, according to testimony of family and friends, was already dealing with despondency over personal issues, committed suicide, very likely pushed over the edge by the onslaught of defamatory accusations and hateful publicity orchestrated by Rev. Al. But Sharpton, ever the audacious opportunist, even exploited the Crist suicide, accusing Pagones of murdering Crist to keep secret their rape of Miss Brawley. As with all of his other outrageous charges, he offered no evidence.

A special New York State Grand Jury composed of both white and black members spent seven months examining evidence and hearing from 180 witnesses, including forensic experts. One of the witnesses, a black woman who was a resident of the apartment complex where Tawana Brawley was “found” in a garbage bag, said she had seen Brawley climb into the bag. Forensic experts said there was no evidence of rape and the evidence overwhelmingly indicated that the alleged abuses were self-inflicted. While the Grand Jury was conducting its investigation, Sharpton & Co. were conducting daily rallies and marches, as well as busing in demonstrators to lay siege to the Grand Jury and milk the MSM press corps for as much publicity as they could get. The Grand Jury released its 170-page report in October 1988. In its conclusion, after summarizing the key evidence, the Grand Jury stated:

Based upon all of the evidence that has been presented to the Grand Jury, we conclude that Tawana Brawley was not the victim of a forcible sexual assault by multiple assailants over a four-day period. There is no evidence that any sexual assault occurred.

(The conclusion of the Grand Jury can be read here.)

The Grand Jury also exonerated prosecutor Steven Pagones, who later was awarded $345,000 in a defamation lawsuit against Sharpton, Maddox, and Mason.

Sharpton: Brawley Case Will Make Us “the Biggest N*****s in New York”

However, even several months before the Grand Jury issued its report, one of Sharpton’s top aides revealed Sharpton’s mercenary motive. Perry McKinnon, a decorated black Vietnam vet and former police officer, told federal investigators that Rev. Al had admitted privately that he didn’t believe Tawana Brawley’s story, but intended to ride it to fame and glory. McKinnon stated: 

Sharpton acknowledged to me early on that “The Brawley story do (sic) sound like bull****, but it don’t matter. We’re building a movement. This is the perfect issue. Because you’ve got whites on blacks. That’s an easy way to stir up all the deprived people, who would want to believe and who would believe – and all [you’ve] got to do is convince them – that all white people are bad. Then you’ve got a movement…. It don’t matter whether any whites did it or not. Something happened to her … even if Tawana don’t (sic) it to herself.” 

Perry McKinnon submitted to a lie detector test administered on camera and passed all questions. In the Retro Report video, McKinnon further remarked, on camera: 

This whole situation is not about Tawana Brawley. It’s about Mason, Maddox, and Sharpton taking over the town. Their exact words were, “We beat this, we will be the biggest N****** in New York.”

Tellingly, when Sharpton is confronted with McKinnon’s accusations, he doesn’t deny them. In his interview with Retro Report, Sharpton utilizes his standard evasiveness and weasel-worded response. He refuses to apologize, admit that he was wrong, or concede that Brawley was lying. He resorts to his standard line that “something happened,” as if that absolves him of all the unethical and criminal activities he and his team employed. “Whatever happened, you’re dealing with a minor who was missing for four days, so it’s clear that something wrong happened,” Sharpton says. He goes on in a pathetic attempt to cloak his activities in righteousness, declaring: “Even if you think I was wrong on some cases, don’t act like I wasn’t geared towards social justice.”

Yes, no matter how wrong, corrupt, dishonest, or criminal his tactics, they can all be rationalized as acceptable, or even good, because they are employed in the pursuit of  Rev. Al’s warped definition of “social justice.”

As Sharpton predicted, the Brawley hoax did indeed catapult him to new levels of fame and political power, even though it should have landed him in jail and forever exposed him as a malicious charlatan. The Tawana Brawley hoax cost New York taxpayers over a million dollars, but the far greater cost in terms of poisoning black-white race relations is incalculable. 

Serial racial arsonist, liar, demagogue, media celebrity

Even before the Tawana Brawley case had made him a household name, Sharpton had established himself as a racist demagogue. An in-depth, 49-page report by Carl F. Horowitz entitled Mainstreaming Demagoguery: Al Sharpton’s Rise to Respectability (published by the National Legal and Policy Center) traces Rev. Al’s sordid career as an incendiary race baiter and race hater from the famous 1984 Bernard Goetz “Subway Vigilante” shooting, through the Howard Beach conflict (1986), the Tawana Brawley hoax (1987-88), the Central Park “Wilding” rape case (1989), the Bensonhurst siege (1989-90), the Crown Heights riots and Rosenbaum murder (1991), the Freddy’s Fashion Mart murder/arson tragedy (1995), the Amadou Diallo shooting (1999), and much more.

Rev. Sharpton’s sordid career also has been ably summarized by John Perazzo in “The Nine Lives of Al Sharpton” for FrontPageMag.com. 

Sharpton’s role in the vicious racist campaign against Jewish storeowner Fred Harari, owner of Freddy’s Fashion Mart in Harlem, that resulted in the murder of seven people, should have spelled curtains for the hate-spewing “reverend.” Sharpton and Morris Powell, a lieutenant in Sharpton’s National Action Network (NAN), organized an ongoing street demonstration against Freddy’s, with escalating rhetoric that culminated in a shooting rampage by one of Sharpton’s followers, Roland J. Smith, aka Abubunde Mulocko, who burst into the store and shot four people, torched the shop, and then shot himself. Three others died in the fire. In all, eight people, including Smith/Mulocko, died. Sharpton immediately tried to distance himself from the deadly debacle, insisting he had nothing to do with it. However, it was Sharpton and Powell who launched the incendiary boycott and demonstrations against Freddy’s, and Sharpton’s man Powell who daily stoked the rallies with vitriolic denunciations of the Jewish “crackers.” It was Sharpton who publicly denounced Fred Harari as a “white interloper” and an “outsider,” even though he had been a Harlem merchant for decades. Sharpton turned up the vitriol in his speeches attacking Freddy’s in broadcasts over black radio stations WWRL, WLIB and KISS.

What neither the Horowitz or Perazzo exposés mention is that Sharpton’s radical racial activities go back much further, to his activities with Communist Party activists and violent revolutionaries and terrorists in the 1970s. 

The KeyWiki website points out, for instance, that as far back as 1971 Sharpton was supporting the Communist Party’s effort to aid terrorist Angela Davis, who later went on to run twice as the official candidate of the Communist Party USA for vice president of the United States. In 1971 Sharpton endorsed the Communist Party’s Free Angela Davis campaign. Moreover, he has worked closely over the years with communists and Marxist-Leninists, and radical racists such as William Kunstler, Sonny Carson, Ben Chavis, Khalid Muhammad, Malik Zulu Shabazz, Ron Kuby, Michael Ratner, Leslie Kagan, and many others.

Why do NBC, MSNBC, Fox promote this Sociopath?

Considering his toxic record and his cartoonish, buffoonish persona, Al Sharpton should be considered a pariah, a leper, whom no politician and no media organization would dare go near or quote. But Rev. Al leads a charmed life and serves a purpose for various powers that be; not only has he not paid a price for his despicable actions, he has actually prospered.

In his Daily Beast article cited earlier, Stuart Stevens writes: 

There are a lot of angry, twisted individuals in America and Sharpton is hardly alone in having spent decades vomiting hate, leaving innocent victims in his wake. What distinguishes Sharpton is the willingness of powerful people and organizations to look past the hate when they believe it may benefit them.

The Democratic Party and its candidates for president in 2004 were perfectly content to have Sharpton appear in presidential debates. Not one candidate called Sharpton out for his outrageous history of hate.

And today one of the great American news organizations, NBC News, is spending millions of dollars to rehabilitate and promote Al Sharpton. Americans have been pretty good at sniffing out and discarding haters, but here is Al Sharpton on NBC and MSNBC being promoted as a credible source of information. Sharpton has gone from manipulating the news with vile accusations to delivering the news for NBC. When the Boston-bombing story broke, there was Al Sharpton delivering breaking news for MSNBC. 

Yes, the man who has set back race relations in America more than David Duke, the KKK, and the Aryan Nations combined, has been rewarded with his own network platform. He can be viewed daily on NBC’s Politics Nation with Al Sharpton, where he continues his attacks on conservatives, “white America,” Republicans, capitalism, and traditional morality, while promoting Big Government, gun control, homosexual marriage, and other pet hobby horses of the far-left agenda. But NBC is far from being Sharpton’s only media gig; he also has a regular blog on the Huffington Post and has replaced his friend and ally Jessie Jackson as the go-to “black leader” the MSM pundits shower with the most face time.

Fox, O’Reilly, Hannity: What Gives With the Sharpton Lovefest?

If the MSM love affair with Sharpton is reprehensible, the ongoing romance Sharpton enjoys at the Fox network has been doubly so. The top offender at Fox has probably been Bill O’Reilly, who has featured Sharpton as a guest many times, according him a credibility he does not deserve. Moreover, the “tough guy” O’Reilly treats Sharpton with kid gloves, never calling him out on his outrageous antics and never giving him the bully treatment he (O’Reilly) dishes out to conservatives.

Back in 2007, Accuracy In Media’s Cliff Kincaid called O’Reilly out for his support of Sharpton, pointing out that the Fox celebrity anchor was also a featured “special guest” at Sharpton’s annual National Action Network conference, along with Democratic presidential candidate Senator John Edwards. That Democrats such as Edwards, Clinton, Obama, Kerry, et al, find it expedient to associate with the likes of Sharpton is at least somewhat understandable, considering that “the party of Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson” long ago gave up any pretense of being shocked at the even the most extreme radical-left political activities or the sexual scandals of its heroes (think Barney Frank, Bill Clinton, Anthony Weiner). But what is it that makes Fox’s Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, Mike Huckabee, or politicians such as Newt Gingrich so chummy with charlatan Sharpton? It’s not like Rev. Al’s sordid record is any secret. In fact, regular Fox commentator Michelle Malkin has repeatedly exposed Sharpton over the years (see here, here, and here).

Stuart Stevens concluded his Daily Beast column with this common-sense recommendation: 

Here’s a simple test that doesn’t involve market research or complicated board meetings. If you are an NBC exec and have kids, sit down with them and watch the Times documentary on Tawana Brawley. And when your kids ask why your colleague Al Sharpton is working for NBC, you can explain to them why everything you’ve tried to teach them about honesty, fair play, and decency is wrong and Al Sharpton is right. 

Sound advice not only for NBC, but also CNN, ABC, CBS, PBS, FOX, and all the other MSM organizations that regularly give Sharpton a platform for his hate mongering and racial agitation.

^{Photo of Al Sharpton: AP Images}

Related stories:

Gingrich, Sharpton Still Odd Couple

Zimmerman Injury Photo Raises Questions About Prosecution, Media

Sharpton, Jackson, Media Silent About Hate Crime in S.C.

Medical Report Shows Martin Attacked Zimmerman

This article originally appeared on: The New American

Obama Asks Military to Draw Up Plans for Offensive Overseas Cyber-Strikes

Glenn Greenwald — who broke the phone and internet spying stories this week — has a new exposé … this time on offensive cyber-warfare:

Barack Obama has ordered his senior national security and intelligence officials to draw up a list of potential overseas targets for US cyber-attacks, a top secret presidential directive obtained by the Guardian reveals.

***

An intelligence source with extensive knowledge of the National Security Agency’s systems told the Guardian … “We hack everyone everywhere. We like to make a distinction between us and the others. But we are in almost every country in the world.”

***

The full classified directive repeatedly emphasizes that all cyber-operations must be conducted in accordance with US law and only as a complement to diplomatic and military options. But it also makes clear how both offensive and defensive cyber operations are central to US strategy.

Under the heading “Policy Reviews and Preparation”, a section marked “TS/NF” — top secret/no foreign — states: “The secretary of defense, the DNI [Director of National Intelligence], and the director of the CIA … shall prepare for approval by the president through the National Security Advisor a plan that identifies potential systems, processes and infrastructure against which the United States should establish and maintain OCEO capabilities…” The deadline for the plan is six months after the approval of the directive.

The directive provides that any cyber-operations “intended or likely to produce cyber effects within the United States” require the approval of the president, except in the case of an “emergency cyber action”. When such an emergency arises, several departments, including the department of defense, are authorized to conduct such domestic operations without presidential approval.

Obama further authorized the use of offensive cyber attacks in foreign nations without their government’s consent whenever “US national interests and equities” require such nonconsensual attacks. It expressly reserves the right to use cyber tactics as part of what it calls “anticipatory action taken against imminent threats”.

The directive makes multiple references to the use of offensive cyber attacks by the US military.

Greenwald and others have long reported that the Obama administration claims the right to be judge, jury and executioner in both drone assassinations and offensive cyber attacks.

Greenwald also reports that the head of the cyber command is the NSA boss … the same guy responsible for much of the spying we’ve been hearing about:

In January, the Pentagon announced a major expansion of its Cyber Command Unit, under the command of General Keith Alexander, who is also the director of the NSA. That unit is responsible for executing both offensive and defensive cyber operations.

(There are other overlaps and interconnections between spying and warfare as well.)

The War Comes Home

Offensive cyber operations are not only occurring overseas …

The Department of Defense has long waged cyber-war against Americans by censoring and manipulating social media and other websites. More proof here and here.

This is not entirely surprising, given that:

This article originally appeared on: Global Research

Syrian army soldiers have killed dozens of foreign-sponsored militants during mop-up operations on the outskirts of Damascus.

On Friday, a number of militants were killed during intense clashes with Syrian troops in the town of Harasta, which is located northeast of Damascus, the official news agency SANA reported.

Two militant commanders, identified as Obada Dahdouh and Noureddin Najjar, were among the dead.

Syrian bomb disposal teams also found and defused five remote-controlled improvised explosive devices at the al-Rasas farms — located between the town of Harasta and the city of Douma, about 10 kilometers (six miles) northeast of Damascus.

On the same day, Syrian troops clashed with militants from the al-Qaeda-linked al-Nusra Front terrorist group in the town of Masraba, killing and injuring a number of them. Two militant commanders, identified as Samir Abdullhai and Omar Sallam, were killed in the skirmishes.

Syrian troops stormed several terrorist hideouts in the town of Babyla, and shot and killed scores of militants. Large amounts of weapons and ammunition were also destroyed after fierce gun battles.

Syrian soldiers also raided a number of terrorist hideouts in the town of Daraya, located about eight kilometers (five miles) southwest of Damascus and killed many armed anti-government rebels.

In addition, units of the Syrian Army attacked gunmen and killed a large number of them in the town of al-Ziyabiyeh. Taher Mandil, the leader of the so-called Ansar al-Furat militant group, was identified among the dead.

In the town of Zamalka, about four kilometers (2.5 miles) east of Damascus, Syrian soldiers raided a terrorist hideout and killed many militants. A large amount of munitions was destroyed after heavy clashes.

Syrian soldiers also attacked armed men in the town of Barzeh, located five kilometers (three miles) north of Damascus, and killed scores of them.

The Syria crisis began in March 2011, and many people, including large numbers of government forces, have been killed.

Damascus says the chaos is being orchestrated from outside the country, and there are reports that a very large number of the militants are foreign nationals.

The Syrian government says the West and its regional allies, such as Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, are supporting the militants.

In addition, several international human rights organizations say the militants operating in Syria have committed war crimes.

MP/HGL

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Syrian forces stand in the main square of al-Qusayr on June 5, 2013 after regaining control of the town.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

The US-China cyber battle is just a distraction designed by the Obama Administration to pressure China at a time when the Washington is implementing its “Pivot to Asia” foreign policy initiative, geopolitical analyst William Engdahl told RT.

The California summit meeting between American President Barack
Obama and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping comes as the world’s
two largest economies clash over a range of divisive issues –
including accusations that China has launched a cyber war against
the United States.

The meeting follows reports of Chinese hackers resuming their
attacks against targets in the US and the most recent the
revelations that the American NSA’s PRISM program allegedly spied
on millions of emails.

RT: The US has been very active in the field of cyber
espionage lately, so why get so touchy when somebody uses its own
methods against it?

William Engdahl: The US is probably the number one cyber
warfare force on the planet right now. China is probably playing
a defensive game.

I think that’s a red herring issue right now designed by
Washington, by the Obama administration to put pressure on China
at a time when the US is doing just that with the so-called Asia
pivot. Which really is a China pivot that Obama announced in
Australia back in 2011 to re-direct the American military force
posture towards Japan with the missile defense which is [aimed]
directly against China, towards the supporting of Japan in the
Diaoyu Islands dispute which are in the South China sea, which is
very critical for China’s access to potentially vast mineral
resources as well as its military sovereignty.  

So, I think this cyber-warfare is really a red herring in this
whole dialogue. 

RT: China is planning to strengthen its military with
so-called ‘digitized’ troops – armed with intense IT
capabilities. Is Beijing preparing for a storm?

WE: I think they are preparing. In fact I know they are
from my recent time in Beijing with leading people there. They
read the writing on the wall; they read that the US is pressuring
them through their support of the Arab Spring uprisings in Libya,
in Egypt, in Tunisia and now putting all their efforts into
trying to topple the regime in Syria and direct it toward Iran,
which are the links to the secure oil supply lines for the
Chinese economy. So, they are very well aware.

I think what’s significant about this Xi Jinping visit to Obama
is the sequence of it. He became president in early spring this
year and his first visit as a head of state was to Russia’s
Putin.

The second visit was to South Africa for the BRICS summit and
several African countries — Tunisia and Congo. Then, he comes to
the Caribbean, Mexico and Costa Rica among them before he meets
with the President of the United States. Some 10-15 years ago
that would never have happened.

With the latest NSA scandal it became even clearer that the US is
controlling most of cyberspace “that America is the vigilante
in cyberspace,” but will eventually lose its dominance,
investigative journalist and author Pepe Escobar told RT

“A year and a half ago they started talking about the
cyber-war from China but before that the US already
launched a horrendously vicious attack via the Styxnet virus
against Iran,” Escobar said. “So if we are going to have
cyber-wars from now on it’s not going to come only from the US or
from China. It is going to come from the European Union as well
sooner or later. It’s going to come from Iran and from other
developing countries out there as well.”

“If countries see that they are having extreme problems —
trade problems, financial problems — they could counter-attack on
cyberspace,” he said.

Escobar believes that Barack Obama is going to hand over to his
Chinese counterpart a “very detailed dossier” about all
the alleged cyber-attacks coming from China and “how much this
whole thing cost in terms of US business.”

“The thing is, how is president Xi Jinping going to act upon
this dossier,” Escobar says. “Is he going to
get somebody in China — the usual two or three scapegoats — so he
can satisfy Obama, person-to-person of course; it’s not going to
do anything; or in fact these affiliated hackers which in fact
can have a military connection — or not — in China are going to
keep on improving what they are doing.”

This article originally appeared on: RT

Riot police stand ready to confront protesters during a demonstration in Ankara on June 5, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

A North Korean army officer stands on watch at the truce village of Panmunjom between North and South Korea . (file photo)

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Jonathan Feldman
InformationWeek
June 7, 2013

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper confirmed Thursday that the U.S. government has been secretly collecting information since 2007, exploiting backdoor access to the systems and data of major Internet and tech companies in search of national security threats. That NSA dragnet, revealed by The Washington Post and The Guardian and code-named PRISM, reportedly taps into user data from Facebook, Google, Apple and other U.S.-based companies. (Those providers have mostly denied that the NSA has such backdoor access.)

If news of the NSA dragnet is true – and it’s hard to believe at this point that it’s not – it’s hard to justify combing through all of the providers’ data and records without a specific due process. One contributor to Forbes.com, a fellow at the Adam Smith Institute in London, thinks it’s a capital idea: “This is in fact what governments are supposed to do, so I’m at something of a loss in understanding why people seem to be getting so outraged about it.”

I strongly disagree. While Clapper’s release states that surveillance is “subject to oversight by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, the Executive Branch and Congress” and must be “specifically approved by the court to ensure that only non-U.S. persons outside the U.S. are targeted,” the release also acknowledges that information about U.S. persons could be acquired in this dragnet. The release states that such acquisition, retention and dissemination of “incidental” findings about citizens will be minimized, but surely there are other, more nuanced ways to catch bad guys.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Friday, June 7, 2013 at 8:39 pm

Tags: big brother, domestic spying, technology

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

<!–Sam Sacks–>

Sam Sacks is a political commentator and journalist, the last five years spent covering politics in Washington, DC.

We know of the NSA’s domestic telecom and internet surveillance programs today not because of the efforts of Congress and esteemed Senators like Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Mark Udall (D-CO), but instead thanks to brave whistleblowers.

This fact speaks not only to the critical role whistleblowers are
playing and will continue to play in the struggle against an
emerging, monstrous surveillance state, but it also speaks to the
dereliction of duty of the legislative branch, entrusted with
holding the power of the Executive in check, and utterly failing
in this primary task over the last decade.

It began with the PATRIOT Act which greatly expanded the powers
of the executive to conduct domestic surveillance. Specifically
related to domestic spying, the PATRIOT Act’s section 215 is the
linchpin for the modern surveillance state. How was the NSA able
to use a FISA court to snoop on the calling data of millions of
Verizon customers? Section 215 — also known as the business
records section.

As Sen. Dianne Feinstein noted after news broke of the Verizon
snoop, “This renewal is carried out by the FISA court under the
business records section of the Patriot Act. Therefore it is
lawful. It has been briefed to Congress.”

The ACLU argues, “Section 215 of the Patriot Act allows the FBI
to force anyone at all – including doctors, libraries,
bookstores, universities, and Internet service providers – to
turn over records on their clients or customers.” You can add
telecom companies like Verizon to that list, too.

The only check on this is a secret FISA court, with secret
rulings, and a gag on any warrants that come out of this court.

Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), the author of the original PATRIOT
Act and section 215, reacted with outrage to the news of the
NSA’s collection of Verizon users’ data. “How could the phone
records of so many innocent Americans be relevant to an
authorized investigation as required by the Act?” he asked in a
letter to Attorney General Eric Holder.

Sensenbrenner argued that he does not believe the NSA action “is
consistent with the requirement of the Patriot Act.” If only he
listened to the warnings from privacy experts back when he was
drafting the legislation.

Despite privacy concerns routinely raised by certain lawmakers,
section 215 has been renewed along with the larger PATRIOT Act
which was extended another four years in 2011.

But in its mission to cede all oversight power to the Executive,
the Legislative branch didn’t stop at the PATRIOT Act. With the
Protect America Act of 2007 and later the FISA Amendments Act,
Congress removed the need of executive intelligence agencies to
even obtain a warrant from a FISA court. It codified electronic
monitoring of communications of all Americans who may be
communicating with foreign agents, as long as it was “reasonably
believed” that the specific target of that surveillance was not
inside the country. And to discourage telecom companies from not
complying, they were granted full legal immunity to betray their
customers’ privacy.  

In regards to the latest revelation about the massive internet
snooping operation known as “PRISM,” the ACLUnotes that
subsections of the Protect America Act of 2007, “create the
enforcement mechanism, allowing the AG or DNI to direct a
communications company to immediately allow access to its
facilities.” The ACLU adds this provision is, “one of the most
dangerous…It allows the government to directly tap into
telecommunications facilities.”

This appears to be exactly what the NSA was doing with PRISM.

So, it’s pretty clear: all this outrageous domestic surveillance
coming out of the Executive that’s long been speculated and only
recently confirmed, was made possible thanks to Congress. That
explains why Congress has largely been unsurprised by these
revelations.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) admitted that lawmakers had a “general
sense” of the scope of NSA spying, “but with no specificity.”

Going a step further, Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) admitted,
“Everyone’s been aware of it for years, every member of the
Senate.”

And Sen. Dianne Feinstein also said news of these surveillance
programs doesn’t come as a surprise to her and her colleagues and
they are regularly briefed on it.

The Senate knows because they wrote the laws giving the President
the power to conduct this sort of surveillance.

The actions of both parties in Congress as well as both a
Democrat and Republicans in the White House over the last decade
proves that political change has done little to rein in the
growth of surveillance. The pervasive effects of money in
politics and the media’s obsession with fear-driven stories,
means lawmakers who do want to reassert Congressional oversight
into domestic surveillance will face consequences and charges of
being “soft on national security.” Paralyzed by fear, the
legislative branch has neutered itself.

So, now that Congress has abdicated from its responsibility to
provide oversight and hold the Executive accountable for
preserving first and fourth amendment constitutional rights, we
must rely on our fellow citizens — on whistleblowers for the
oversight. Luckily for all of us, they are up to the task.

The Washington Post reports that the individual who handed them
information about PRISM had, “first-hand experience of these
systems” and was in “horror at their capabilities.” The officer
told the newspaper, “They quite literally can watch your ideas
form as you type.”

Glenn Greenwald who broke the NSA/Verizon story with The
Guardian, said he obtained the information from one of his
readers who trusted Greenwald’s reporting on domestic
surveillance and treatment of whistleblowers.

These new whistleblowers are the latest in a line of citizens —
from Thomas Drake to John Kiriakou — who’ve seen first-hand what
the United States government is up to, and believe that the only
way to stop these abuses is to expose them.

And while there were fears that aggressive actions by the DOJ
toward AP and Fox News reporters James Rosen may discourage
whistleblowers and journalists in the future, the exact opposite
has happened. DOJ and NSA actions have only emboldened
truth-tellers.

The succession of bombshell leaks laying bare the NSA and DOJ’s
surveillance of Americans can best be described as a “revolt”
against the security state. These individuals realize that absent
an aggressive legislative and judicial branch, they — and all of
us, really — are the final check against misuse of power by our
President and his intelligence agencies.

As we’ve seen over the last decade, it’s true that without
oversight, the Executive branch can run amok. But, as we’ll learn
in the coming years, this can only last for so long before people
of conscience step up to expose it. Armed with the facts about
what’s going on, “we the people” will take care of the rest.

As Abraham Lincoln believed, “Give the people the facts and the
Republic will be saved.”

Years from now, we may look at these two fateful days in June,
when massive components of the security state were dragged into
the light, as the beginning of a great unraveling — the beginning
of the end for the post-9/11 security state apparatus. 
  

It’s too early to tell if these revelations will compel Congress
— the most democratically responsive of the three branches of
government — to find its oversight footing once again and serve
as a needed check on overblown powers of the Executive. There
have been a few hollow calls from Capitol Hill for investigations
and hearings into the NSA since this news broke.

But if Congress chooses to lie down once again while the
Executive runs roughshod over the Constitution, then it will be
up to “we the people” to build the movements necessary to correct
the balance of power in our government. And it will be
whistleblowers marching as the vanguard of this movement.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

This article originally appeared on: RT

President Barack Obama has ordered top US officials to prepare a list of potential targets for US cyber-attacks abroad, a report says.

Britainâ„¢s daily The Guardian said on Friday it obtained a top secret presidential directive, issued last October but never made public, which states that the attacks, called Offensive Cyber Effects Operations (OCEO), “can offer unique and unconventional capabilities to advance US national objectives around the world.”

The 18-page Presidential Policy Directive 20 says the government will “identify potential targets of national importance where OCEO can offer a favorable balance of effectiveness and risk as compared with other instruments of national power.”

The document does not specify if the attacks are only carried out in reprisal for similar operations by another country and implies that the US can employ the tool in a first-use rule as long as it advances Washingtonâ„¢s national interests worldwide. It clarifies how both offensive and defensive cyber operations are instrumental in US strategy.

Security researchers have frequently warned that large-scale cyber attacks could lead to full-fledged military conflicts.

“When militarist cyber rhetoric results in use of offensive cyber attack it is likely that those attacks will escalate into physical, kinetic uses of force,” said Sean Lawson, assistant professor in the department of communication at the University of Utah.

The revelation could overshadow Obamaâ„¢s two-day summit with China’s President Xi Jinping on the weekend in Southern California where, according to US officials, the American president would bring up the alleged Chinese cyber-hacking of major US organizations, a claim Beijing has rejected.

An intelligence source told The Guardian that the US allegations against China regarding cyber-hacking are hypocritical. “We hack everyone everywhere. We like to make a distinction between us and the others. But we are in almost every country in the world.”

The White House has also been put on the defensive by another revelation by the British paper which reported on Thursday that a top secret court order in the US allows the NSA to collect data on millions of Americans who are customers of Verizon Communications.

MA/MHB

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Indian Border Security Force (BSF) soldiers patrol along the border fence at the Suchategarh border of Ranbir Singh Pura sector, about 27 kilometers from Jammu, the winter capital of Kashmir, India on January 10, 2013.

This article originally appeared on: Press TV

Choe Sang-Hun
nytimes.com
June 7, 2013

North and South Korea agreed Thursday to hold their first government dialogue in years, an abrupt change after tensions over the North’s nuclear program this year escalated into one of the divided peninsula’s worst crises.

The announcement raised hopes that the two countries were moving toward a thaw in relations after a prolonged standoff in recent years that included military provocations from the North and retaliatory economic penalties from the South.

The agreement came after North Korea made a surprise overture on Thursday, proposing official negotiations with the South on reopening two shuttered joint economic projects, including the recently closed Kaesong industrial park, as well as humanitarian programs. South Korea, which has demanded such talks in recent months, quickly accepted the offer, proposing a cabinet minister-level meeting in the South Korean capital, Seoul, next Wednesday.

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Friday, June 7, 2013 at 7:27 pm

Tags: foreign affairs

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars

Kathleen M. Howley & Prashant Gopal
bloomberg.com
June 7, 2013

Rob Braunstein said his search for a three-bedroom home on a quiet street in Needham, Massachusetts, is taking on more urgency as he watches mortgage rates tick higher. Every increase, he worries, shrinks his budget by boosting monthly payments, he said.

The average rate for a 30-year fixed mortgage has risen for each of the past five weeks and is at the highest level in more than a year, according to government mortgage-buyer Freddie Mac. While that’s already put a dent in the refinancing boom that has powered bank earnings this year, for buyers like Braunstein, the message is clear: buy quickly.

“Refinancing depends only on mortgage rates and therefore is very sensitive to changes in rates,” said Jed Kolko, chief economist at San Francisco-based Trulia Inc., an online property listing service. When it comes to buying, “some people might want to hurry up and make a purchase, but with inventory so tight they might not be able to move that fast.”

Read more

<!–

–>

This article was posted: Friday, June 7, 2013 at 7:32 pm

Tags: domestic news, economics

–>

This article originally appeared on: Infowars