No Agenda Episode 591 - "Mipster Intercept"

No Agenda
  Feed
  Donate
  News Network
  Store
  Adam Curry
  John C Dvorak
No Agenda Episode 591 - "Mipster Intercept"
  No Agenda Episode 591 - "Mipster Intercept"
    Mipster Intercept
    Direct [link] to the mp3 file
    ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 591.noagendanotes.com
    Sign Up for the newsletter
    New: Directory Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) nashownotes.com
    The No Agenda News Network- noagendanewsnetwork.com
    RSS Podcast Feed
    Get the No Agenda News App for your iPhone and iPad
    Torrents of each episode via BitLove
    New! BitTorrent Sync the No Agenda Show
  Cover Art
    Art By:MartinJJ
    See All The Art in the Generator
  Credits
    Mipster Intercept
    Executive Producers: Sir Frank Ajzensztat, Sir Philip Meason, Anonymous, Jordan Goodfellow, Sir Berry Kroeger
    Associate Executive Producers: Rachel Anderson, Anthony Colangelo, Sir Richard Haraznek, Taphon Maddison
    Become a member of the 592 Club, support the show here
    Knighthoods:Berry Kroeger -->>Knight
    Titles: Sir Frank Ajzensztat -->> Baronett
    Art By:MartinJJ
    ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 591.noagendanotes.com
    Sign Up for the newsletter
    New: Directory Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) nashownotes.com
    The No Agenda News Network- noagendanewsnetwork.com
    RSS Podcast Feed
    Get the No Agenda News App for your iPhone and iPad
    Get the NoAgendaDroid app for your Android Phone
    Torrents of each episode via BitLove
    New! BitTorrent Sync the No Agenda Show
  Shownotes
    Search
      Ace of Spades
        Chinese Year of the Horse
        Horse=Heroin!
    PR
      Sgt Fred: Boomers for Startups
    TODAY
      Deets vs Deeds
      Comcast Set to Acquire Time Warner Cable for $45 Billion
      Obama to visit Japan, three other Asian countries in April
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Reuters: World News
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 02:44
        U.S. President Barack Obama speaks before signing an executive order to raise the minimum wage for federal contract workers to $10.10 an hour starting next year, during an event at the White House in Washington February 12, 2014.
        Credit: Reuters/Kevin Lamarque
      Executive Order -- Changing the Name of the National Security Staff to the National Security Council Staff
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:27
        The White House
        Office of the Press Secretary
        For Immediate Release
        February 10, 2014
        EXECUTIVE ORDER
        - - - - - - -
        CHANGING THE NAME OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY STAFF
        TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL STAFF
        By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to reflect my decision to change the name of the National Security Staff to the National Security Council staff, it is hereby ordered as follows:
        Section 1. Name Change. All references to the National Security Staff or Homeland Security Council Staff in any Executive Order or Presidential directive shall be understood to refer to the staff of the National Security Council.
        Sec. 2. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
        (i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or
        (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
        (b) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
        BARACK OBAMA
      Nobelity
        Turk and Christy Pipkin
        Kathy Valentine
        Willy's Kid
        Ray Benson
        Ben Harper
        John Paul and Eloise DeJoria
        Lance Armstrong
        Revolution Actors
      The Nobelity Project's Annual Awards Gala and Concert | The Salonniere
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 18:12
        The Nobelity Project's Annual Awards Gala and Concert | The Salonniere
        February 10, 2014 By Carla McDonald
        Look, Ma! Top of the world! Come on up and let me tell you about one of the best parties in Austin for table hopping.
        The Party: The Nobelity Project's Annual Awards Gala and Concert on February 9, 2014
        The Setting: The Ballroom at the Four Seasons Hotel, Austin, Texas
        The Cause: To raise funds for The Nobelity Project, a nonprofit organization based in Austin that focuses on improving the lives of children around the globe through education
        The Hosts: Christy and Turk Pipkin
        What We Loved: Fabulous crowd of Fascinators from all segments of Austin life, no hidden VIP room meant everyone felt welcome and could mingle with the luminaries, relaxed party atmosphere, wear-what-you-want dress code and musical performances made it quintessentially Austin, Turk Pipkin as emcee maintained the perfect party pace, responsible spending on gala elements meant more money went to the cause
        Who We Chatted Up: Eloise and John Paul DeJoria, Christy and Turk Pipkin, Alex Winkelman, Suzanne Deal Booth, Michael Barnes, Karen and Rick Hawkins, Micky Hoogendijk and Adam Curry, Maria and Eric Groten, Eddie Safady, Maureen Staloch, Jeannie and Mickey Klein, Diane Land and Steve Adler, Dave Steakley, Brooke Wilbratte, Laura Lee Kozusko, Kelly Willis, Karen and Joe Draker, Kyle Chandler, Melanie Barnes, Mary Tally, Kevin Smothers, Kathy Valentine, and many more
        Best moments: John Paul DeJoria's inspiring comment as he accepted the Ann Richards Founders Award: ''We all have to give back in whatever way we can; it's the rent we pay for living on the planet,'' and watching an 80s moment unfold as Go-Go Kathy Valentine chatted up original MTV VJ, Adam Curry
        John Paul DeJoria, Eloise DeJoria and Turk Pipkin pose with the Ann Richards Founders Award. Photo by Gary Miller.
        Christy and Turk Pipkin with Katherine and Kyle Chandler. Photo by Gary Miller.
        Ben Harper performs. Photo by Gary Miller/FilmMagic.
        Eric Johnson and Lukas Nelson perform. Photo by Gary Miller/FilmMagic.
        Carolyn Wonderland and Ray Benson perform. Photo by Gary Miller/FilmMagic.
        Kathy Valentine and Adam Curry
        Posted in Party Hopping: Parties We Love | 1 Comment
        Subscribe to the PartyRecent PostsSectionsChic Blog FriendsSearch the ArchivesThe Nobelity Project's Annual Awards Gala and Concert | The Salonniere
        February 10, 2014 By Carla McDonald
        Look, Ma! Top of the world! Come on up and let me tell you about one of the best parties in Austin for table hopping.
        The Party: The Nobelity Project's Annual Awards Gala and Concert on February 9, 2014
        The Setting: The Ballroom at the Four Seasons Hotel, Austin, Texas
        The Cause: To raise funds for The Nobelity Project, a nonprofit organization based in Austin that focuses on improving the lives of children around the globe through education
        The Hosts: Christy and Turk Pipkin
        What We Loved: Fabulous crowd of Fascinators from all segments of Austin life, no hidden VIP room meant everyone felt welcome and could mingle with the luminaries, relaxed party atmosphere, wear-what-you-want dress code and musical performances made it quintessentially Austin, Turk Pipkin as emcee maintained the perfect party pace, responsible spending on gala elements meant more money went to the cause
        Who We Chatted Up: Eloise and John Paul DeJoria, Christy and Turk Pipkin, Alex Winkelman, Suzanne Deal Booth, Michael Barnes, Karen and Rick Hawkins, Micky Hoogendijk and Adam Curry, Maria and Eric Groten, Eddie Safady, Maureen Staloch, Jeannie and Mickey Klein, Diane Land and Steve Adler, Dave Steakley, Brooke Wilbratte, Laura Lee Kozusko, Kelly Willis, Karen and Joe Draker, Kyle Chandler, Melanie Barnes, Mary Tally, Kevin Smothers, Kathy Valentine, and many more
        Best moments: John Paul DeJoria's inspiring comment as he accepted the Ann Richards Founders Award: ''We all have to give back in whatever way we can; it's the rent we pay for living on the planet,'' and watching an 80s moment unfold as Go-Go Kathy Valentine chatted up original MTV VJ, Adam Curry
        John Paul DeJoria, Eloise DeJoria and Turk Pipkin pose with the Ann Richards Founders Award. Photo by Gary Miller.
        Christy and Turk Pipkin with Katherine and Kyle Chandler. Photo by Gary Miller.
        Ben Harper performs. Photo by Gary Miller/FilmMagic.
        Eric Johnson and Lukas Nelson perform. Photo by Gary Miller/FilmMagic.
        Carolyn Wonderland and Ray Benson perform. Photo by Gary Miller/FilmMagic.
        Kathy Valentine and Adam Curry
        Posted in Party Hopping: Parties We Love | 1 Comment
        Subscribe to the PartyRecent PostsSectionsChic Blog FriendsSearch the Archives
    DPRK
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      North Korea to U.S.: Forget about talks over Kenneth Bae release ... again - NY Daily News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 18:56
        North Korea has once again rescinded an invitation for a senior U.S. official to visit Pyongyang to seek the release of imprisoned U.S. missionary Kenneth Bae, a State Department official said on Sunday, adding civil rights activist Jesse Jackson had offered to go to Pyongyang to try to free Bae.
        "We are deeply disappointed by the DPRK (North Korean) decision - for a second time - to rescind its invitation for Ambassador (Robert) King to travel to Pyongyang to discuss Kenneth Bae's release. The DPRK announced publicly in May 2013 it would not use the fate of Kenneth Bae as a political bargaining chip," the official said.
        "At the request of the Bae family, Reverend Jackson offered to travel to Pyongyang on a humanitarian mission focused on Bae's release. We support the efforts of the Bae family and Reverend Jackson to bring Bae home," the official said.
        North Korea's official KCNA news agency has not reported on the latest invitation to King or why it was rescinded but said on Monday a retired U.S. diplomat had arrived in its capital, Pyongyang.
        RELATED: KENNETH BAE, AMERICAN JAILED IN N. KOREA, BACK TO LABOR CAMP
        The retired diplomat, Donald Gregg, who was U.S. ambassador to South Korea in the late 1980s and 1990s and who has advocated dialogue with North Korea, arrived for a visit with a group, KCNA said. It did not elaborate.
        Earlier, the U.S. official referred to U.S.-South Korean (Republic of Korea) military exercises, which North Korea (the Democratic People's Republic of Korea) opposes.
        "We remind the DPRK that the U.S.-ROK military exercises are transparent, regularly scheduled, and defense-oriented. These exercises are in no way linked to Mr. Bae's case," the official said. "We again call on the DPRK to grant Bae special amnesty and immediate release as a humanitarian gesture so he may reunite with his family and seek medical care."
        The United States and South Korea will hold their annual joint military drills from February 24 to April 18, the combined forces command that oversees the allies said, adding it had notified Pyongyang of the plan.
        RELATED: KENNETH BAE'S FAMILY TO ATTEND STATE OF THE UNION
        The official said the United States remained prepared to send King to North Korea to seek Bae's release.
        Jackson could not immediately be reached and his office did not respond to requests for comment.
        In August, North Korea also rescinded an invitation for King to visit, saying Washington perpetrated a grave provocation by flying B-52 bombers during previous military drills with South Korea. Last week, North Korea threatened to scrap reunions of war-divided families in the two Koreas later this month because of the upcoming drills and the alleged B-52 flights.
        Bae, a 45-year-old Korean-American, has been held for more than a year in North Korea after being sentenced to 15 years of hard labor on charges of trying to overthrow the state.
        RELATED: RODMAN IS 'SORRY' HE COULDN'T HELP PRISONER KENNETH BAE
        The U.S. State Department said on Friday Bae was moved from a hospital back to a labor camp on January 20, the same day he made a public appeal for Washington to help get him home.
        North Korea rejected an offer for King, the U.S. special envoy for North Korean human rights issues, to visit Pyongyang to discuss Bae's case last August.
        ROLE FOR JACKSON?
        Bae said in an interview with a pro-North Korea newspaper published in Japan last week that a Swedish Embassy official had visited him and told him King would visit as early as Monday and by the end of the month at the latest.
        RELATED: DENNIS RODMAN APOLOGIZES TO KENNETH BAE'S FAMILY
        Bae told the Choson Sinbo newspaper the United States had offered to send Jackson, but North Korea had instead approved the visit by King.
        Jackson, who twice sought the U.S. presidency, secured the freedom of a U.S. Navy pilot held by Syria in 1983 after meeting with the late Syrian president Hafez al-Assad, father of the current president, in Damascus.
        He commented last month on Twitter on controversial visits to North Korea by retired basketball star Dennis Rodman, saying "@dennisrodman ping pong diplomacy worked in China, and Basketball seems to work in North Korea."
        In a television interview, he called Rodman's visits "illuminating" about North Korea.
        RELATED: DENNIS RODMAN SINGS FOR KIM JONG UN
        "I would not confuse the role of Dennis Rodman and basketball and the Globetrotters in the Soviet Union and ping pong in China with serious diplomacy, but entertainment does have an interesting way of illuminating," he told CNN.
        "Ping pong diplomacy" was credited with playing a role in the United States normalizing relations with China in the 1970s. It was used to refer to a tour of American table tennis players for a series of exhibition matches in China in 1971.
        Bae's sister, Terri Chung, told Reuters on Friday that Bae had been held in a labor camp from May 14 last year until August 5, when he was moved to hospital. She said the family did not know where the camp was, but that it was far from Pyongyang and Bae was working eight hours a day, six days a week.
        Chung said her brother suffered from a variety of health issues, including diabetes, an enlarged heart, kidney stones and severe back pain and that his family was very concerned about his health.
        Bae has acknowledged being a missionary and has said he conducted religious services in the North, one of the world's most isolated states and long hostile to Westerners advocating religious causes.
      PressTV - Ex-US envoy to South Korea travels to North Korea
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 18:55
        A photo of American-North Korean citizen, Kenneth Bae, who was arrested by North Korea in November 2012.
        The former US ambassador to South Korea has traveled to Pyongyang, hours after North Korea cancelled a US envoy's visit to jailed Korean American, Kenneth Bae.
        Donald Gregg traveled to North Korea after the Pyongyang government canceled the visit by the US special envoy Robert King, giving no reason for the move.
        King had been invited to Pyongyang to visit Kenneth Bae, the Korean-American, who was arrested in November 2012 after he entered the northeastern port city of Rason.
        The Korean-American, a tour operator who is known in North Korea as Pae Jun-ho, was sentenced to 15 years of compulsory hard labor in April 2013, after North Korea's Supreme Court convicted him of scheming the state's collapse.
        The cancelation came ahead of the upcoming annual joint military exercise by South Korea and the United States, which Pyongyang has repeatedly called on Seoul to halt.
        South Korea and the United States have repeatedly said that the military exercise is defensive in nature.
        The annual joint military drill is to begin late in February and will continue for two weeks. Nearly 28,500 US troops are currently stationed in South Korea.
        MM/HSN/HRB
      Pacific Century Institute
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:10
        Home > About PCI > Board of Directorst
        Board of Directors
        The Pacific Century Institute Board of Directors is made up of a distinguished group of academics, professionals and policy makers.
        These individuals share a common interest and a passion for creating an organization that will help provide the catalyst for improving understanding and developing greater communication among all peoples of the Pacific Rim region.
        Don Gregg - Chairman, Former U.S. Ambassador to KoreaKenneth J. Tuggle, Esq, President, Frost Brown Todd LLCDon Evans, Treasurer, CPA, Senior Partner, Evans and BentleyDesaix Anderson - 35-Years in U.S. Foreign ServiceKo Shioya, PCI Representative to JapanRaymond Burghardt, Director of East-West Seminar, Former U.S. Ambassador to VietnamIn Ho Lee, Chairman of Asan Institute, Former Korean Ambassador to Russia and FinlandChung In Moon, PCI Representative in Korea, Professor, Yonsei UniversityLt. General Hank C. Stackpole, USMC (Ret.)Tom Plate, Syndicated columnistLloyd Armstrong, Provost Emeritus, University of Southern CaliforniaAdrienne Madawar, Former President, Town Hall Los AngelesWilliam H. Overholt, Senior Research Fellow at Harvard's Kennedy School of GovernmentLynn Turk, APEC Advisor, Former Foreign Service OfficerRobert J. Sullivan, CPA, Marcum LLPJames A. Thomson, President Emeritus, RAND CorporationJerome A. Cohen, Professor, New York University School of Law
      Knightwatch analysis
        North Korea is once again a
        focus of American attention. Family reunions, a breakthrough on internet service at Kaesong and the Gregg
        visit offer the prospect of more cooperative and productive relations. These are the carrots.None appear
        directed at China, interestingly. The absence of high level visits to or from China tends to reinforce the
        thesis that Chang Sung-taek's management of Chinese economic dealings was an important factor in his
        execution.On the other hand, there is the stick. The stick is embodied in repeated warnings by senior
        officials and agencies about the negative impact that Allied exercises will have on reunification moves and
        outreach. The more North Korea lures the South into high profile and expensive initiatives supporting more
        benign relations, the greater will be the cost when the North applies the stick of terminating these actions
        because of the exercises.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Dennis Rodman vomits, urinates, defecates in Korean hotel
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      VIDEO-BBC News - North Korea opens first ski resort
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:30
        North Korea, not known for its winter sports or tourist industry, has opened a new high-end ski resort in the country's eastern mountains.
        One tour operator is now offering tickets to what it calls the most exotic ski destination on earth.
        Lucy Williamson reports
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    SnowJob
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Snowden worked for CIA but was a contractor for NSA through Booz Allen
        He thus remained CIA on his 'mission'
      Greenwald making NSA looking guilty of drone strikes. Not cia
      "The Intercept" sold out day#1 First Story published!
      Shitizen Droning announced
      Terrorist captrue video released
      Greenwald making NSA looking guilty of drone strikes. Not cia
      Could be a Red Herring to get Congress to Decide, makr republicans look bad?
        Will be used to remove SIGINT from the drone program
        Which probably is meaningless in regards to how the CIA already does it
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The Day We Fight Back - February 11th 2014
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 05:56
        The Day We Fight Back - February 11th 2014Call your representative '†'We'll give you a script and connect you automatically.
        What to sayI am one of your constituents, and I'm calling to ask you to take action against mass surveillance by the NSA.
        I'd like Senator/Representative ____ to support and co-sponsor the USA Freedom Act. I would also like you to oppose S. 1631, the so-called FISA Improvements Act. Moreover, I'd like you to work to prevent the NSA from undermining encryption standards and to protect the privacy rights of non-Americans.
        The FactsThe NSA "has secretly broken into the main communications links that connect Yahoo and Google data centers around the world." '-- The New York TimesThe NSA collected "almost 3 billion pieces of intelligence from US computer networks" in one month in 2013. '-- The GuardianThe NSA is collecting the content and metadata of emails, web activity, chats, social networks, and everything else as part of what it calls "upstream" collection. '-- The Washington PostThe NSA "is harvesting hundreds of millions of contact lists from personal e-mail and instant messaging accounts around the world, many of them belonging to Americans." '-- The Washington PostThe NSA "is gathering nearly 5 billion records a day on the whereabouts of cellphones around the world." '-- The Washington PostThe NSA "is searching the contents of vast amounts of Americans' e-mail and text communications into and out of the country." '-- The New York TimesRead more:
        WikipediaEFF.orgThe GuardianWhat we can doCongress is considering two major bills.
        We need to tell Congress to pass the USA Freedom Act and amend it to make it even stronger.
        Read more about each bill '†'USA Freedom ActThe USA Freedom Act (S. 1599) is a bipartisan bill introduced by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI).
        If passed, this bill would be a substantial improvement to America's laws regarding mass surveillance.
        It brings new levels of transparency to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA court)It introduces a special advocate to champion civil liberties in the FISA courtIt appears to create new statutory limits on mass surveillance by the NSA.However, this bill is a floor, not a ceiling. Here's how it could be improved:
        It could clarify in plain language that bulk surveillance is illegal and prevent the FBI from issuing National Security Letters without prior review by a judge.Include language to stop the NSA from undermining international encryption standards.Have stronger language to protect the privacy of people outside of the United States.The USA FREEDOM Act is one step in the right direction, with many more steps that need to follow.
        Read more:
        FISA Improvements ActThe FISA Improvements Act, is a bill written by the intelligence community and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA).
        If the FISA Improvements Act (S. 1631) were to pass:
        It would codify the controversial bulk telephone records surveillance program of the NSA.It would allow the NSA to continue to collect telephone records of hundreds of millions of Americans not suspected of any crime.It would permit the NSA to restart the bulk collection of Internet communication records'--an extremely invasive, secret program the government attempted under dubious legal ground but abandoned because it wasn't effective.Read more:
        Take partThe SOPA and PIPA protests were successful because we all took part, as a community. As Aaron Swartz put it, everybody "made themselves the hero of their own story." We can set a date, but we need all of you, the users of the Internet, to make it a movement.
        Add the banner to your siteOr simply copy the code below and add it just before the closing
        tag in your site's HTML.
        (function(){var e=document.createElement("script");e.type="text/javascript";e.async=true;e.src=document.location.protocol+"//d1agz031tafz8n.cloudfront.net/thedaywefightback.js/widget.min.js";var t=document.getElementsByTagName("script")[0];t.parentNode.insertBefore(e,t)})() Add the banner now.
        See the live demos here: US version, international version. The banner changes automatically based on the locations of visitors.
        For more information about the banner and optional settings, see our Github Repo.
        Tell the world you're taking partUse the #stopthensa hashtag on Twitter to help spread the word!
        Avatars and cover photosMore things you can do
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      FreedomWorks Takes on the NSA | FreedomWorks
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 21:57
        Today, FreedomWorks president Matt Kibbe joined Ken Cuccinelli and Senator Rand Paul in filing an historic class action lawsuit in defense of the Fourth Amendment. The suit's targets include high ranking officials in the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Department of Defense who have been instrumental in overseeing the agency's collection of massive amounts of telephone data known as the Mass Associational Tracking Program (MATP).
        Speaking at a press conference, Mr. Cuccinelli said that the object of the suit is an injunction to prevent further collection of telephone data, and the removal of existing records from the NSA's databases.
        This suit is an important shot across the bow not just for those of us in the freedom movement, but also for anyone who cares about their privacy and has used a phone since 1996, when the MATP began. The Fourth Amendment guarantees the rights of all Americans to be secure in their persons and property, and not to be subjected to search or seizure without reasonable suspicion of having committed a crime. Starting with the distressing revelations by now-fugitive Edward Snowden last year, we now know that there are those in the government who do not consider these important protections to be worth the paper they are printed on.
        For too long Americans have been willing to let their civil liberties slip away in the name of national security. Yet despite repeated requests, the NSA has been unable to supply any evidence that these telephone records have been effective in detecting or preventing terrorist attacks.
        While others have attempted to challenge the NSA before, it has taken until now for a large group of citizens to band together to demand a fair hearing in court with legal representation arguing for the rights of the American people. So far, the class action suit claims to represent more than 386,000 people whose information has been collected and retained by the government without an appropriate warrant. The actual number of those affected, of course, is closer to 326 million, the number of cell phone subscriber connections in the United States.
        In an era where our government is continually overstepping its bounds and exceeding its authority, it is crucial that we have principled individuals willing to stand up to big government bullies and fight to preserve the rights explicitly enshrined in the Constitution. The ultimate outcome of the case will have far reaching ramifications on how the Constitution is interpreted in the future, and even if it takes years for the court to reach a decision, the result will have an impact on our entire future as a nation.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Executive Order 13233 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 19:53
        Executive Order 13233[1] limited access to the records of former United StatesPresidents to a higher degree than the previous Order 12667, which it superseded. It was drafted by then White House CounselAlberto Gonzales and issued by George W. Bush on November 1, 2001. Section 13 of Order 13233 revoked Executive Order12667 which was issued by Ronald Reagan on January 18, 1989.
        Executive Order13233 was partially struck down in October 2007. The order was revoked on January 21, 2009 by Barack Obama's Executive Order13489,[2] which essentially restored most of the wording of Order 12667 with some modifications.
        Background[edit]In 1974, Congress passed the Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act of 1974, placing the presidential records of Richard Nixon in federal custody to prevent their destruction.[3][4] The legislative action was intended to reduce secrecy, while allowing historians to perform their responsibilities. In 1972, decades worth of official and unofficial Federal Bureau of Investigation records had been destroyed, upon the death of J. Edgar Hoover, by his longtime secretary, Helen Gandy. The Presidential Records Act of 1978 expanded such protection of historical records, by mandating that the records of former presidents would automatically become the property of the federal government upon his leaving the Oval Office, and then transferred to the Archivist of the United States, thereafter to be made available to the public after no more than 12 years.
        Thus, the presidential papers of Ronald Reagan were due to be made public when George W. Bush took office in January 2001. However, in a White House memo[5] dated March 23, 2001, the Counsel to the President conveyed the following to U.S ArchivistJohn W. Carlin:
        Section 2(b) of Executive Order 12667, issued by former President Ronald Reagan on January 16, 1989, requires the Archivist of the United States to delay release of Presidential records at the instruction of the current President. On behalf of the President, I instruct you to extend for 90 days (until June 21, 2001) the time in which President Bush may claim a constitutionally based privilege over the Presidential records that former President Reagan, acting under Section 2204(a) of Title 4, has protected from disclosure for the 12 years since the end of his Presidency. This directive applies as well to the Vice Presidential records of former Vice President George H.W. Bush.
        This instruction was repeated on June 6, 2001,[5] before the 90 days had elapsed, giving a new deadline of August 31, 2001. On the day of this deadline, Alberto Gonzales instructed the Archivist to wait a few additional weeks.[5] On November 1, 2001, Bush issued Executive Order 13233, limiting the access to the records of former U.S. Presidents:
        ...reflecting military, diplomatic, or national security secrets, Presidential communications, legal advice, legal work, or the deliberative processes of the President and the President's advisers, and to do so in a manner consistent with the Supreme Court's decisions in Nixon v. Administrator of General Services, 433 U.S. 425 (1977), and other cases...
        Criticism[edit]The Society of American Archivists[6] and the American Library Association[7] were critical of the president's exercise of executive power by issuing EO 13233. They claimed that the action "violates both the spirit and letter of existing U.S. law on access to presidential papers as clearly laid down in 44 U.S.C. §§ 2201''2207," noting that the order "potentially threatens to undermine one of the very foundations of our nation."
        John Wertman, a member of former President Bill Clinton's White House staff, wrote an op-ed piece critical of the executive order that appeared in The Washington Post on February 26, 2006.[8] Wertman asserted that Order 13233 "represents a wholesale change in the way the federal government preserves and promotes our national public memory." He also included a quote from former President Gerald Ford on the topic: "I firmly believe that after X period of time, presidential papers, except for the most highly sensitive documents involving our national security, should be made available to the public, and the sooner the better."
        Response[edit]Before January 21, 2009, there were three separate attempts to repeal Order 13233. In 2002, shortly after Order 13233 went into effect, a bipartisan group of U.S. House of Representatives members, led by Stephen Horn (R-CA), Dan Burton (R-IN), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL), and Henry Waxman (D-CA) wrote and debated a bill aimed at repealing Order 13233, thereby restoring Order 12667 to full force and effect. The bill passed the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which was chaired by Burton at the time, but never saw floor action.
        On March 1, 2007, a subcommittee of the Committee on Government Reform held a hearing on bill H.R. 1255, the Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2007. This bill was also introduced by Waxman, and its goal was again to void Order 13233.[9] At the hearing, several historians argued that Order 13233 has severely curtailed public access to presidential records and added to delays in obtaining materials from presidential libraries. The bill was reported favorably by the full committee, and on March 14, 2007, the House passed the bill in an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote of 333-93.[10] The bill also passed on June 13, 2007 in a Senate committee, but was never brought to the floor for a vote,[11] reportedly due to a hold placed on the measure by Senator Jim Bunning (R-KY).[12] As a result, the bill died when the 110th Congress ended.
        On January 7, 2009, the House of the 111th Congress passed H.R. 35, introduced by Edolphus Towns (D-NY),[13] section 3 of which would, if enacted, negate Order 13233.[14] The bill was co-sponsored by Dan Burton (R-IN), Darrell Issa (R-CA), Henry Waxman (D-CA), William Clay (D-MO), and Brad Sherman (D-CA). The bill died in the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.[15]
        Lawsuit[edit]In November 2001, the National Security Archive, the American Historical Association and other plaintiffs filed a lawsuit in the D.C. District Court against the National Archives and Records Administration and the Archivist, claiming constitutional problems with the order, and pointing out that "access to materials may be delayed for an unlimited period of time after the expiration of the 12-year restriction period while a former president and the incumbent president 'review' materials proposed for release", because of § 3(b) of the order, which states
        After receiving the records he requests, the former President shall review those
        records as expeditiously as possible, and for no longer than 90 days for requests that are not unduly burdensome. The Archivist shall not permit access to the records by a requester during this period of review or when requested by the former President to
        extend the time for review.While most of the lawsuit was found to be unjusticiable at this time due to lack of ripeness, in October 2007 the Court held that "the Archivist's reliance on § 3(b) of Executive Order 13,233 is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and not in accordance with law in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act" and enjoined "the Archivist from further relying on § 3(b) of Executive Order 13,233".[16] The rest of the lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice.
        Revocation[edit]On January 21, 2009, Executive Order 13233 was revoked by executive order of President Barack Obama.[17] Obama essentially restored the wording of Executive Order 12667, by repeating most of the text of that order with minor changes. One notable change is that vice presidential records are explicitly covered by his new order.
        See also[edit]References[edit]^Executive Order no. 13233, Further Implementation of the Presidential Records Act, 66 F.R.56025 (November 5, 2001)^Executive Order no. 13489, Presidential Records, 74 F.R.4669 (January 21, 2009)^Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act (PRMPA) of 1974, Pub.L. 93''526, title I, §§ 101''106, Dec. 19, 1974, codified at 44 U.S.C. § 2111, note.^Presidential Recordings and Materials Preservation Act (PRMPA) of 1974 at the U.S. National Archives^ abc"White House Blocks Release of Reagan-Era Presidential Records". Retrieved 2008-09-06. ^Society of American Archivists (2001-11-15). "Call to Action on Executive Order 13233". Retrieved 2007-02-14. ^American Library Association (Government Documents Roundtable) (2002-01-21). "Resolution Concerning Executive Order 13,233, Further Implementation of the Presidential Records Act". Retrieved 2007-02-14. ^John Wertman editorial in the Washington Post^[1]^http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h110-1255^http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:h.r.01255:^Court Rules Delay in Release of Presidential Papers is Illegal^2009 Congressional Record, Vol. 155, Page H45^"Executive Order No. 13233, dated November 1, 2001 (66 Fed.Reg.56025), shall have no force or effect." H.R. 35 (bill text), § 3.^H.R. 35, Library of Congress^"Opinion of the D.C. District Court" (PDF). 2007-10-01. Retrieved 2008-06-18. ^"Executive Order -- Presidential Records". Retrieved 2009-01-22. Archives.gov - 'Statement by John W. CarlinArchivist of the United States to the Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management, and Intergovernmental Relations of the Committee on Government Reform House of Representatives Congress of the United States: On the Implementation and Effectiveness of the Presidential Records Act of 1978' (November 6, 2001)Archives.gov - American Historical Association, Hugh Davis Graham, Stanley I. Kutler, National Security Archive, Organization of American Historians, Public Citizen, Inc., and The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, Plaintiffs, v. The National Archives and Records Administration, and John W. Carlin, Archivist of the United States, Defendants. Complaint for Declaratory, Injunctive and Mandamus Relief (November 28, 2001)FAS.org - 'Executive Order 13233 Further Implementation of the Presidential Records Act' (text of EO 13233), George W. Bush, (November 1, 2001)External links[edit]Executive Order 13233 - Further Implementation of the Presidential Records Act, 66 F.R.56025 (November 5, 2001): Full text of Executive Order 13233ALA.org - 'Executive Order 13233', American Library AssociationArchivists.org - 'Society of American Archivists responds to Executive Order 13233 on Presidential Papers' (November 6, 2001)Archivists.org - 'Call to Action on Executive Order 13233: A Message from President Steve Hensen', Society of American Archivists (November 15, 2001)ARL.org - 'Serious concerns with Executive Order 13233 on Further Implementation of the Presidential Records Act' (Letter to Representative Stephen Horn), American Association of Law Libraries, American Library Association, Association of Research Libraries, National Humanities AllianceFindArticles.com - 'American Political Science Association response to Executive Order 13233' (Letter to Representative Stephen Horn), Robert D. Putnam, Presidential Studies Quarterly (March, 2002)MUOhio.edu - Draft Presidential Records Act Executive Order: A "Disaster" for History', Bruce Craig, National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of History (November 1, 2001)ProjectCensored.org - 'Top 25 Censored Stories of 2005: #1 Bush Administration Moves to Eliminate Open Government', Project Censored (January, 2006)[2] - 'The Imperial Presidency Strikes Back: Executive Order 13,233, the National Archives, and the Capture of Presidential History,' Stephen H. Yuhan, New York University Law Review (October, 2004)
      Alberto Gonzales - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 19:53
        Alberto R. Gonzales (born August 4, 1955) was the 80th United States Attorney General, appointed in February 2005 by President George W. Bush, becoming the highest-ranking Hispanic in executive government to date.[1] He was the first Hispanic to serve as White House Counsel, and earlier he had been Bush's General Counsel during his governorship of Texas. Gonzales had also served as Secretary of State of Texas and then as a Texas Supreme Court Justice.
        Gonzales's tenure as U.S. Attorney General was marked by controversy regarding warrantless surveillance and the legal authorization of Enhanced interrogation techniques, or torture. Following bipartisan calls for his removal, Gonzales resigned from the office "in the best interests of the department", on August 27, 2007, effective September 17, 2007.[2] Democrats were particularly opposed to Gonzales for his role in the firings of several U.S. Attorneys which they believed had caused his office to become improperly politicized.[3]
        In 2008, Gonzales began a mediation and consulting practice, additionally he taught a political science course and served as a diversity recruiter at Texas Tech University. Gonzales currently holds the Doyle Rogers Distinguished Chair of Law at Belmont University, in Nashville, Tennessee where he teaches Constitutional Law, Separation of Powers, National Security Law and First Amendment Law. He is also counsel at a Nashville-based law firm, Waller, where he advises clients on special matters, government investigations and regulatory matters. He often writes opinion pieces for national newspapers [4][5] and appears on national news programs.[6][7]
        Personal life[edit]Alberto Gonzales was born to a Catholic family[8] in San Antonio, Texas, and raised in Humble, a town outside of Houston. Of Mexican descent, he was the second of eight children born to Pablo and Maria Gonzales. His father, who died in 1982, was a migrant worker and then a construction worker with a second grade education. His mother worked at home raising eight children and had a sixth grade education. Gonzales and his family of ten lived in a small, two-bedroom home built by his father and uncles with no telephone and no hot running water.[1] According to Gonzales, he is unaware whether immigration documentation exists for three of his grandparents who were born in Mexico and who, like Gonzales and his family, were poor and uneducated and thus may have entered and resided in the United States illegally from Mexico or they may have entered and resided legally.[9]
        An honors student at MacArthur High School in unincorporated Harris County, Gonzales enlisted in the United States Air Force in 1973, for a four-year term of enlistment. He served one year at a remote radar site with 100 other GIs at Fort Yukon, Alaska, located north of the Arctic Circle, before being released from active duty to attend the USAFA Prep School. Subsequently he received an appointment to the United States Air Force Academy.[10] Gonzales was on the Dean's List every semester and served as President of the Freshman Class Council at the Academy. He was on the Superintendent's List and Commandant's List for two semesters. Prior to beginning his third year at the academy, which would have caused him to incur a further service obligation, he left the Academy and was released from the enlistment contract. He transferred to Rice University in Houston, where he was a resident of Lovett College,[11] Gonzales had dreamed of attending Rice as a boy when he sold soft drinks at Rice University football games. He went on to be selected as the Charles Parkhill Scholar of Political Science and he earned a bachelor's degree with honors in political science in 1979.[12] He then earned a Juris Doctor (J.D.) degree from Harvard Law School in 1982.
        Gonzales has been married twice: he and his first wife, Diane Clemens, divorced in 1985; he and his second wife, Rebecca Turner Gonzales, have three sons.
        Early career[edit]Gonzales was an attorney in private practice from 1982 until 1994 with the Houston law firm Vinson and Elkins, where he became a partner '' the first Hispanic partner (along with one other new partner that year) in the firm's history '' and where he worked primarily with business clients. In 1994, he was named general counsel to then-Texas GovernorGeorge W. Bush, rising to become Secretary of State of Texas in 1997 and finally to be named to the Texas Supreme Court in 1999, both appointments made by Governor Bush. Gonzales received the endorsement of every statewide official and every major Texas newspaper in his election bid to remain on the court in the Republican Primary in 2000, a race he won with over 57% of the vote. The citizens of Texas elected Gonzales to a full six-year term on the Supreme Court in the November 2000 general election with 81% of the vote.[13]
        Recognition[edit]In addition to his political and legal career, Gonzales was active in the community. He was a board director of the United Way of the Texas Gulf Coast from 1993 to 1994, and President of Leadership Houston during this same period. In 1994, Gonzales served as Chair of the Commission for District Decentralization of the Houston Independent School District, and as a member of the Committee on Undergraduate Admissions for Rice University. He was a board trustee of the Texas Bar Foundation from 1996 to 1999; a board director for the State Bar of Texas from 1991 to 1994; a board director for Big Brothers and Big Sisters of Greater Houston from 1985 to 1991; a board director for Catholic Charities of Houston from 1989''1993, a board director for INROADS/Houston, Inc. in 1994; and a board director for the Association for the Advancement of Mexican-Americans from 1991 to 1992. Gonzales was Special Legal Counsel for the Houston Host Committee for the 1990 Summit of Industrialized Nations, and provided pro bono legal services to the Host Committee for the 1992 Republican National Convention in Houston. He served as Chair of the Advisory Committee of the Texas Real Estate Center (a committee to which he was appointed by Texas Governor Bill Clements), President of the Houston Hispanic Forum, President of the Houston Hispanic Bar Association and Chair of the Republican National Hispanic Assembly of Harris County. Gonzales has received numerous professional honors, including the President's Award in 1989 from the Houston Bar Association, and the Hispanic Salute Award in 1989 from the Houston Metro Ford Dealers and Ford Division, Ford Motor Company for his work in the field of education. He was recognized as the Woodrow Seals Outstanding Young Lawyer of Houston in 1992 by the Houston Young Lawyers Association and as the Outstanding Young lawyer of Texas in 1992 by the Texas Young Lawyers Association. Additionally, he received the Commitment to Leadership Award in 1993 from the United Way of the Texas Gulf Coast. He was recognized as one of the Five Outstanding Young Houstonians in 1994 by the Houston Junior Chamber of Commerce, and as one of the Five Outstanding Young Texans in 1994 by the Texas Junior Chamber of Commerce, and in 1999 was elected to the prestigious American Law Institute based upon his contributions to the law. He was a member of delegations sent by the American Council of Young Political Leaders to Mexico in 1996 and to the People's Republic of China in 1995. He received the Presidential Citation from the State Bar of Texas in 1997 for his dedication to addressing basic legal needs of the indigent. In 1999, he was named Latino Lawyer of the Year by the Hispanic National Bar Association.
        Based on his record of accomplishments, Gonzales was recognized as a Distinguished Alumnus of Rice University in 2002 by the Association of Rice Alumni and was honored the same year by the Harvard Law School Association with its Harvard Law School Association Award. He received President's Awards in 2003 from both the United States Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and the League of United Latin American Citizens. He was recognized with the Outstanding Texas Leader Award in 2002 by the John B. Shepperd Public Leadership Forum. Additionally, in 2003, he received the Gary L. McPherson Distinguished Alumni Award from the American Council of Young Political Leaders; the Chairman's Leadership Award from the Texas Association of Mexican American Chamber of Commerce, the Truinfador Award from the Hispanic Scholarship Fund, the Hispanic Hero Award from the Association for the Advancement of Mexican Americans and the Good Neighbor Award from the United States-Mexican Chamber of Commerce for his dedication and leadership in promoting a civil society and equal opportunity. In 2003, Gonzales also received the Lifetime Achievement Award from the Travis County, Texas Republican Party. In 2004, Gonzales was honored with the Exemplary Leader Award by the Houston American Leadership Forum. In 2005, he was honored with the Hector Barreto, Sr. Award by the Latino Coalition and with a President's Award by the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce.
        As the son of former migrant workers, many recognized Gonzales' appointment as Attorney General of the United States as the embodiment of the American dream. His work in the Hispanic community and his achievements as a role model earned him recognition as Hispanic American of the Year by HISPANIC Magazine in 2005 and one of The 25 Most Influential Hispanics in America by TIME Magazine. Gonzales was inducted into the Class of 2005 in the Academy of Achievement.[14] Gonzales received the Distinguished Leadership Award in 2006 from Leadership Houston. In 2007, as he left government service, he was honored with the Director's Award from the Central Intelligence Agency, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense Medal for Exceptional Public Service.
        While born in San Antonio, Gonzales is considered a native son of Houston. On May 20, 2006, Houston Mayor Bill White proclaimed ''Alberto R. Gonzales Day'' in Houston for his contributions to the betterment of the City of Houston. Academic institutions have also recognized Gonzales' achievements and contributions. He received an Honorary Doctor of Laws in 2002 from The Catholic University of America; an Honorary Degree in Arts and Letters in 2003 from Miami-Dade Community College; an Honorary Degree of Doctor of Laws in 2005 from the University of District of Columbia; an Honorary Degree in Associate of Arts in 2005 from the Houston Community College System; and an Honorary Alumnus Award in 2007 from Southern Methodist University.
        Counsel to Governor Bush[edit]As counsel to Governor Bush, Gonzales helped advise Bush in connection with jury duty when he was called in a 1996 Travis Countydrunk driving case. The case led to controversy during Bush's 2000 presidential campaign because Bush's answers to the potential juror questionnaire did not disclose Bush's own 1976 misdemeanor drunk driving conviction.[15] Gonzales made no formal request for Bush to be excused from jury duty (to the contrary, Gonzales made it clear Bush was ready to serve as a juror), however, he did raise a possible conflict of interest because as the Governor, Bush might be called upon to pardon the accused in the case. The defense counsel has stated he had already thought of this conflict of interest problem for his client and had planned on his own to ask the judge to strike Bush from the jury. Nonetheless, Texas Monthly described Gonzales' work here as ''canny lawyering''.[16]
        As Governor Bush's counsel in Texas, Gonzales also reviewed all clemency requests. A 2003 article in The Atlantic Monthly asserts that Gonzales gave insufficient counsel, and failed to second-guess convictions and failed appeals. The White House said the executive summaries prepared represented a small fraction of information provided to the Governor and sought only to document the governor's final decisions rather than recommend a course of action. Pete Wassdorf, head of the General Counsel's office for the Texas Attorney General, who served as Gonzales' deputy at the time, also said additional information about some of the cases was provided to Bush in other documents.[17] Under Section II, Article 4 of the Texas Constitution, the Governor cannot grant a pardon or commute a death sentence except with a majority vote recommendation of the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, so Bush was constrained in granting clemency even if he had wanted to do so in a case. Only one death sentence was overturned by Governor Bush, and the state of Texas executed more prisoners during Gonzales's term than any other state.[18][19] Gonzales' deputy general counsel from 1995 to 1999, Pete Wassdorf, wrote that The Atlantic Monthly story written by Berlow paints an inaccurate and incomplete picture of the clemency process under Bush. Wassdorf, who served with General Gonzales's office during the period of the clemency memo wrote:
        ''Berlow also fails to recognize that according to American jurisprudence, clemency is a discretionary act of grace bestowed by the governor under the state's constitution. It is not part of the judicial process. If the governor chooses never to grant clemency; or to exercise that constitutional authority sparingly, and then only when legitimate questions about guilt or innocence persist or when legal issues are raised that have not been reviewed by the courts, or to grant it in every case, he may clearly do so. Governor Bush took a consistent, principled position on clemency, and Gonzales' counsel served his client well by bringing all credible matters raised by the condemned to the Governor's attention. The fact that the author disagrees with the governor's standards does not make them wrong; nor does it make Gonzales' summaries deficient. Finally, I want to state for the record that the general counsel's office approved each of these cases with the greatest of care and sensitivity. I categorically disagree with any suggestions otherwise.''[20]White House Counsel[edit]Executive Order 13233[edit]Executive Order 13233, drafted by Gonzales, was issued by President George W. Bush on November 1, 2001, although the White House had been working on this order for some months. The order dealt with the release of presidential records, making it possible for current and former presidents to assert executive privilege over the release of privileged presidential records. The order gives to the President the power to delay the release of presidential records longer than the congressionally mandated period of 12 years after the president leaves office. Executive Order 13233 revoked President Ronald Reagan's Executive Order 12667 on the same subject and had the effect of delaying the release of Reagan's papers, which were due to be made public when Bush took office in 2001. While the policy was being drawn up, Gonzales as Counsel to the President issued a series of orders to the U.S. Archivist to delay the release of Reagan's records.[21] This order was the subject of a number of lawsuits and Congressional attempts to overturn it. A D. C. district court in 2007 ordered the Archivist not to obey this order, finding it to be "arbitrary, capricious, and contrary to law in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act."[22] In 2009 Executive Order 13233 was revoked by President Barack Obama, who largely restored the wording Reagan's Executive Order 12667.
        War on Terrorism[edit]Gonzales is considered a key architect in establishing the legal foundations for the war on terror.[23] His service as White House Counsel and as Attorney General in the fight on terrorism was recognized by the Director of the CIA in 2007 with a Directors Award, that includes a citation that reads: ''During a period of tremendous tumult and change brought on by an unparalleled series of terrorist attacks and continuing threats against the American people, he [Gonzales] has provided unstinting support and wise counsel to many elements of the Community in their conduct of a critical and unprecedented range of operational activities that saved countless lives and protected the nation from further attacks. He performed his role with exemplary skill, dedication, and humor, all the while ensuring that the Community could carry out its vital mission in a manner faithful to the country's laws and values. For his service, Judge Gonzales has earned the lasting gratitude and respect of U.S. intelligence officers everywhere, reflecting great credit upon himself and the Federal Service.[24]
        After consulting with lawyers from throughout the Administration, including the Department of Justice which is charged by law to provide legal advice to the Executive Branch, Gonzales helped draft a controversial memo in January 2002 that explored whether the Geneva Convention section III on the Treatment of Prisoners of War (GPW) applied to Al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters captured in Afghanistan and held in detention facilities around the world, including Camp X-Ray in Guantnamo Bay, Cuba. The memo made several arguments both for and against providing GPW protection to Al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters. The memo concluded that certain provisions of GPW were outdated and ill-suited for dealing with captured Al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters. In the memo, Gonzales described as "quaint" the provisions that require providing captured Al-Qaeda and Taliban fighters "commissary privileges, scrip, athletic uniforms, and scientific instruments," because "the war against terrorism is a new kind of war." (The British government later reached a similar conclusion when it said, ''the Geneva Conventions are failing to provide necessary protection because they lack clarity and are out of date''[25]) The memo went on, "It (the war against terrorism) is not the traditional clash between nations adhering to the laws of war that formed the backdrop for GPW. The nature of the new war places a high premium on other factors, such as the ability to quickly obtain information from captured terrorists and their sponsors in order to avoid further atrocities against American civilians, and the need to try terrorists for war crimes such as wantonly killing civilians."[26]
        Gonzales later explained, ''The old ways may not work here. That's what the memo was intended to convey to the President. I never meant to convey to the President that the basic values in the Geneva Convention were outdated." He noted that he was not the first to draw such conclusions from some of the more nitpicky requirements in the international treaties. He argued that existing military regulations and instructions from the President were more than adequate to ensure that the principles of the Geneva Convention would be applied. He also expressed a concern that undefined language in Common Article III of GPW, such as "outrages upon personal dignity" and "inhuman treatment" could make officials and military leaders subject to the War Crimes Act of 1996 if actions were deemed to constitute violations of the Act.[26] Attorney General John Ashcroft made a similar argument on behalf of the Justice Department by letter to the President dated February 1, 2002, when he wrote that a presidential determination ''against treaty application would provide the highest assurance that no court would subsequently entertain charges that American military officers, intelligence officials or law enforcement officials violated Geneva Convention rules relating to field conduct, detention conduct or interrogation of detainees. The War Crimes Act of 1996 makes violations of parts of the Geneva Convention a crime in the United States.''[27]
        Shortly after September 26, 2002, a Gulfstream government jet carrying David Addington, Gonzales, John A. Rizzo, William Haynes II, two Justice Department lawyers, Alice S. Fisher and Patrick F. Philbin, and the Office of Legal Counsel's Jack Goldsmith flew to Camp Delta to view Mohammed al-Kahtani, then to Charleston, South Carolina to view Jose Padilla, and finally to Norfolk, Virginia to view Yaser Esam Hamdi[28] and to examine related facilities to confirm they were consistent with legal requirements.
        According to a New York Times report, despite an unclassified legal opinion issued in December 30, 2004 that declared torture "abhorrent," shortly after Gonzales became Attorney General in February 2005 the Justice Department issued another, classified opinion dated May 10, 2005, which for the first time provided Central Intelligence Agency explicit authorization to apply to terror suspects a combination of uncomfortable physical and psychological tactics (under strict guidelines administered by trained personnel to ensure safety, and monitored carefully by medical personnel). The legal opinion covered 13 techniques; it was recommended by Deputy Attorney General James Comey for approval by Gonzales. That opinion echoed the earlier December 30, 2004 memo by declaring, ''Torture is abhorrent both to American laws and values and to international norms. The unusual repudiation of torture is reflected not only in our criminal laws, see, e.g., [8U.S.C. §§2340-2340A], but also in international agreements, in centuries of Anglo-American law, see, e.g., John H. Langbeen, Torture and the Law of Proof: Europe and England in the Ancien R(C)gime (1977) (''Torture and the Law of Proof''), and in the long standing policy of the United States, repeatedly and recently reaffirmed by the President. Consistent with these norms, the President has directed unequivocally that the United States is not to engage in torture.''[29] The May 10 opinion approving the 13 techniques claimed that its reasoning and conclusions are based upon and fully consistent with the legal opinion issued on December 30, 2004, stating ''Our analysis of this question is controlled by this office's recently published opinion interpreting the anti-torture statute.... Much of the analysis from our 2004 Legal Standards Opinion is reproduced below; all of it is incorporated by reference herein.''[29] Gonzales reportedly approved the a second May 10, 2005 classified legal memorandum on ''combined effects'' over the policy objections of James B. Comey, the outgoing deputy attorney general, who told colleagues at the Justice Department that they would all be ''ashamed'' when the world eventually learned of it. Patrick Leahy and John Conyers, chairmen of the respective Senate and House Judiciary Committees, requested that the Justice Department turn over documents related to the classified 2005 legal opinions to their committees for review. [30]
        Gonzales also helped draft the Presidential Order which authorized the use of military tribunals to try terrorist suspects. The order was approved as to legality by lawyers at the Department of Justice. The order directs that the accused will receive a full and fair trial, and persons charged will be entitled to be represented by competent counsel. The order was written to duplicate the military order issued by President Franklin D. Roosevelt and found to be constitutional for use against Nazi saboteurs by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Exparte Quirin, 317 U.S. 1, 30 (1942). The use of military commissions has been found to be so vital to our national security in the war on terror that their use have been approved and codified twice by Congress.[31] (In 2009, The Obama administration stated it would abide by the Geneva Convention and described some of the enhanced interrogation techniques established under Attorney General Gonzalez' tenure as torture.[32] On January 22, 2009, President Obama signed an executive order requiring the CIA to use only the 19 interrogation methods outlined in the United States Army Field Manual on interrogations "unless the Attorney General with appropriate consultation provides further guidance.")[33]
        Gonzales fought with Congress to keep Vice President Dick Cheney's Energy task force documents from being reviewed, and his arguments were ultimately upheld by courts. On July 2, 2004, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Vice President, but remanded the case back to the D.C. Circuit. On May 11, 2005, the D.C. Circuit threw out the lawsuit and ruled the Vice President was free to meet in private with energy industry representatives in 2001 while drawing up the President's energy policy.[34]
        Gonzales was also an early advocate of the controversial USA PATRIOT Act, which was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush on October 26, 2001. The PATRIOT Act was subsequently renewed by Congress and the President in March 2006 and again in February 2010. FBI Director Bob Mueller testified to the Senate Intelligence Committee that many of the FBI's operational counter-terrorism successes since September 11 are the direct result of the changes incorporated in the PATRIOT Act.[35]
        Attorney general[edit]Gonzales's name was sometimes floated as a possible nominee to the United States Supreme Court during Bush's first presidential term. On November 10, 2004, it was announced that he would be nominated to replace United States Attorney GeneralJohn Ashcroft for Bush's second term. Gonzales was regarded as a moderate compared to Ashcroft because he was not seen as opposing abortion or affirmative action. Although he has never stated publicly his support for abortion and later as Attorney General, was the plaintiff in the Supreme Court case Gonzales v. Carhart, which reinforced the ban on late-term abortion that was previously overturned, and had stated publicly his opposition to racial quotas, some people assumed Gonzales did not oppose abortion or affirmative action. According to a Texas Monthly article, Gonzales has never said he was pro-choice and he has publicly opposed racial quotas.[36]
        The perceived departure from some conservative viewpoints elicited strong opposition to Gonzales that started during his Senate confirmation proceedings at the beginning of President Bush's second term. The New York Times quoted anonymous Republican officials as saying that Gonzales's appointment to Attorney General was a way to "bolster Mr. Gonzales's credentials" en route to a later Supreme Court appointment.[37]
        Gonzales enjoyed broad bipartisan support in connection with his nomination, including the support of former Democratic HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros and Colorado Democratic Senator Ken Salazar. One writer noted, '' A senator from Pennsylvania said, ''I have always found him [Alberto Gonzales] to be completely forthright, brutally honest '' in some cases telling me things I did not want to hear but always forthright, always honest, sincere, serious. This is a serious man who takes the responsibilities that have been given to him as a great privilege and a great honor which he holds very carefully and gently in his hands.'' Said another senator, this one from Kentucky, ''Judge Gonzales is proof that in America, there are no artificial barriers to success. A man or woman can climb to any height that his or her talents can take them. For Judge Gonzales, that is a very high altitude indeed. And luckily for his country, he is not quite finished climbing yet.''[1] The nomination was approved on February 3, 2005, with the confirming vote largely split along party lines 60''36 (54 Republicans and 6 Democrats in favor, and 36 Democrats against, along with 4 abstentions: 3 Democrat and 1 Republican).[38] He was sworn in on February 3, 2005.
        Speculation over a Supreme Court nomination[edit]Shortly before the July 1, 2005 retirement announcement of Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United StatesSandra Day O'Connor, rumors started circulating that a memo had leaked from the White House stating that upon the retirement of either O'Connor or Chief Justice of the United StatesWilliam Rehnquist, that Gonzales would be the first nominee for a vacancy on the Court.
        Quickly, conservative stalwarts[39] such as National Review magazine[40] and Focus on the Family, among other socially conservative groups, stated they would oppose a Gonzales nomination.[41]
        Much of their opposition to Gonzales was based on his perceived support of abortion rights as a result of one vote on a single case before the Texas Supreme Court, In re Jane Doe 5 (43 Tex. Sup. J.910).
        In a series of cases before the Texas Supreme Court in 2000, the court was asked to construe for the first time the 1999 Texas parental notification law forbidding a physician from performing an abortion on a pregnant, unaccompanied minor without giving notice to the minor's parents at least 48 hours before the procedure. However Texas legislators adopted a policy to create a judicial bypass exception in those cases where (1) the minor is mature and sufficiently well informed to make the decision to have an abortion performed without notification to either of her parents; (2) notification will not be in the best interest of the minor or (3) notification may lead to physical, sexual or emotional abuse of the minor. The court was asked in these cases to discern legislative intent for the first time to these subjective standards, presumably included in the law as a matter of Texas policy and to make the law constitutional under U.S. Supreme Court precedents. In the seven parental notification decisions rendered by the court, Gonzales voted to grant one bypass. For In re Jane Doe 5 his concurring opinion began with the sentence, "I fully join in the Court's judgment and opinion." He went on, though, to address the three dissenting opinions, primarily one by Nathan L. Hecht alleging that the court majority's members had disregarded legislative intent in favor of their personal ideologies. Gonzales's opinion dealt mostly with how to establish legislative intent. He wrote, "We take the words of the statute as the surest guide to legislative intent. Once we discern the Legislature's intent we must put it into effect, even if we ourselves might have made different policy choices." He added, "[T]o construe the Parental Notification Act so narrowly as to eliminate bypasses, or to create hurdles that simply are not to be found in the words of the statute, would be an unconscionable act of judicial activism" and "While the ramifications of such a law and the results of the Court's decision here may be personally troubling to me as a parent, it is my obligation as a judge to impartially apply the laws of this state without imposing my moral view on the decisions of the Legislature."
        Political commentators had suggested that Bush forecast the selection of Gonzales with his comments defending the Attorney General made on July 6, 2005 in Copenhagen, Denmark. Bush stated, "I don't like it when a friend gets criticized. I'm loyal to my friends. All of a sudden this fellow, who is a good public servant and a really fine person, is under fire. And so, do I like it? No, I don't like it, at all." However, this speculation proved to be incorrect, as Bush nominated D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge John Roberts to the Supreme Court.
        After the death of Chief JusticeWilliam Rehnquist on September 3, 2005, creating another vacancy, speculation resumed that President George W. Bush might nominate Gonzales to the Court. This again proved to be incorrect, as Bush decided to nominate Roberts to the Chief Justice position, and on October 3, 2005, nominated Harriet Miers as Associate Justice, to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. On October 27, 2005, Miers withdrew her nomination, again renewing speculation about a possible Gonzales nomination. This was laid to rest when Judge Samuel Alito received the nomination and subsequent confirmation.
        On September 11, 2005 U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary chairman Arlen Specter was quoted as saying that it was "a little too soon" after Gonzales's appointment as Attorney General for him to be appointed to another position, and that such an appointment would require a new series of confirmation hearings. ''He [Gonzales] is attacked a lot,'' observes Larry Sabato, a political analyst and the director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, who adds that the serious political spats ''virtually eliminated him from the Supreme Court chase.[42]
        Achievements and controversies[edit]Gonzales has been recognized for his work in the fight against terrorism[24] and his fight against sexual predators. His leadership on behalf of children has been widely noted; Ernie Allen, President of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, described Attorney General Gonzales' example in raising this issue to prominence as a ''clear profile in courage''.[43] President Bush in accepting Gonzales' resignation as Attorney General said, ''Al Gonzales has played a role in shaping our policies in the war on terror, and has worked tirelessly to make this country safer. The PATRIOT Act, the Military Commissions Act and other important laws bear his imprint. Under his leadership, the Justice Department has made a priority of protecting children from internet predators, and made enforcement of civil rights law a top priority. He aggressively and successfully pursued public corruption and effectively combated gang violence. As Attorney General he played an important role in helping to confirm Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito. He did an outstanding job as White House Counsel, identifying and recommending the best nominees to fill critically important federal court vacancies.''[44] Hector Flores, national president of the League of United Latin American Citizens, said this about Gonzales ''He is an American leader who happens to be Hispanic. When you are breaking new ground, especially in the Attorney General's office, representing all of the federal government, he is ruling on his knowledge of the law, whether you like or don't like it.''[45]
        During Gonzales' tenure, the Justice Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation were accused of improperly, and perhaps illegally, using the USA PATRIOT Act to uncover personal information about U.S. citizens.[46] The actions taken were found by the Justice Department Inspector General to be unintentional and technical in nature. There was no finding of intent to violate the rights of citizens. Through his testimony before Congress on issues ranging from the Patriot Act to U.S. Attorney firings, he commonly admitted ignorance.[47]
        Dismissal of U.S. attorneys[edit]By law, U.S. Attorneys are appointed for a term of four years, and each U.S. Attorney serves at the pleasure of the President and is subject to removal by the President for any and no reason, so long as it is not for an illegal or improper reason.[48] When Gonzales became Attorney General in 2005, he ordered a performance review of all U.S. Attorneys[49] On December 7, 2006, seven United States attorneys were notified by the United States Department of Justice that they were being dismissed, after the George W. Bush administration sought their resignation.[50] One more, Bud Cummins, who had been informed of his dismissal in June 2006, announced his resignation on December 15, 2006 effective December 20, 2006 upon being notified of Tim Griffin's appointment as interim U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Arkansas.[51][52][53] In the subsequent congressional hearings and press reports, it was disclosed that additional U.S. attorneys were dismissed without explanation to the dismissee in 2005 and 2006, and that at least 26 U.S. attorneys were at various times considered for dismissal.[54]
        Although U.S. attorneys can be dismissed at the discretion of the president, critics claimed that the dismissals were either motivated by desire to install attorneys more loyal to the Republican party ("loyal Bushies," in the words of Kyle Sampson, Gonzales's former chief of staff) or as retribution for actions or inactions damaging to the Republican party. At least six of the eight had received positive performance reviews at the Department of Justice.[55] However, DOJ officials Will Moschella and Monica Goodling both testified under oath that EARS evaluations are office-wide reviews, they are not reviews of the U.S. Attorneys themselves[56] Gonzales testified under oath that EARS evaluations do not necessarily reflect on the U.S. Attorney.[57] In other words, these reviews were not evaluations of the performance of the fired federal prosecutors.
        In a press conference given on March 13, Gonzales suggested that "incomplete information, was communicated or may have been communicated to the Congress" and he accepted full responsibility.[58][59] Nonetheless, Gonzales avowed that his knowledge of the process to fire and select new US attorneys was limited to how the US attorneys may have been classified as "strong performers, not-as-strong performers, and weak performers." Gonzales also asserted that was all he knew of the process, saying that "[I] was not involved in seeing any memos, was not involved in any discussions about what was going on. That's basically what I knew as the Attorney General."[58]
        However, Department of Justice records released on March 23 appeared to contradict some of the Attorney General's assertions, indicating that on his Nov 27 schedule "he attended an hour-long meeting at which, aides said, he approved a detailed plan for executing the purge."[60] Despite insisting that he was not involved in the "deliberations" leading up to the firing of the attorneys, newly released emails also suggest that he had indeed been notified and that he had given ultimate approval.
        In his prepared testimony to Congress on April 19, 2007, Gonzales insisted he left the decisions on the firings to his staff. However, ABC News obtained an internal department email showing that Gonzales urged the ouster of Carol Lam, one of the fired attorneys, six months before she was asked to leave.[61] During actual testimony on April 19, Gonzales stated at least 71 times that he couldn't recall events related to the controversy.[62]
        His responses frustrated the Democrats on the committee, as well as several Republicans. One example of such frustration came in an exchange between Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama and Gonzales regarding a November 2006 meeting. Sessions is one of the most conservative members of the Senate, and was one of the Bush Administration's staunchest allies. At the meeting, the attorney firings were purportedly discussed, but Gonzales did not remember such discussion. As reported by the Washington Post, the dialogue went as follows:
        GONZALES: Well, Senator, putting aside the issue, of course, sometimes people's recollections are different, I have no reason to doubt Mr. Battle's testimony [about the November meeting].
        SESSIONS: Well, I guess I'm concerned about your recollection, really, because it's not that long ago. It was an important issue. And that's troubling to me, I've got to tell you.
        GONZALES: Senator, I went back and looked at my calendar for that week. I traveled to Mexico for the inauguration of the new president. We had National Meth Awareness Day. We were working on a very complicated issue relating to CFIUS.
        GONZALES: And so there were a lot of other weighty issues and matters that I was dealing with that week.[63]Another example came when Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, who had been the first lawmaker to call for Gonzales' ouster, declined to ask his last round of questions. Instead, a visibly angry Schumer said there was no point to further questioning and reiterated his call for Gonzales to resign. By Schumer's count, Gonzales had stated "over a hundred times" that he didn't know or couldn't recall important details concerning the firings, and also didn't seem to know about the workings of his own department. Gonzales responded that the onus was on the committee to prove whether anything improper occurred. Schumer replied that Gonzales faced a higher standard, and that under this standard he had to give "a full, complete and convincing explanation" for why the eight attorneys were fired.[64]
        The Inspector General and the Office of Professional Responsibility commenced an investigation into the removal of nine U.S. Attorneys. Their report was issued in September 2008. The report cited serious issues of accountability removing a few of the U.S. Attorneys, but there was no finding that the nine U.S. Attorneys were removed for illegal or improper reasons. To the contrary, the report concluded that Margaret Chiara and Kevin Ryan were removed appropriately for management issues. Paul Charlton was removed for his action relating to a death penalty case and unilateral implementation of an interrogation policy. The report found Carol Lam was removed because of the Justice Department's concerns about the low number of gun and immigration prosecutions in her district. The report concluded John McKay was asked to leave because of his disagreement with the Deputy Attorney General over an information-sharing program. The report could not cite to a reason Dan Bogden was asked to leave, but there was no finding that anything illegal or improper occurred with his removal. The report concluded Bud Cummins was asked to leave to make room for another political appointee that he himself conceded under oath was qualified to serve as a U.S. Attorney. These findings were consistent with testimony given by Gonzales. Politics was clearly involved. Likewise, the report concluded Todd Graves was removed to settle a political dispute in Missouri. Again, this was motivated by politics. Finally, the report found that it could not conclude that David Iglesias was removed for an improper reason. However since the IG had no authority to investigate Congress or the White House, the IG asked Attorney General Mukasey to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate the Iglesias removal.[65] This special prosecutor found no wrongdoing in the removal of David Iglesias. The DOJ IG found no criminal wrongdoing in the records. As the Wall Street Journal reported ''the Justice Department informed Congress on Wednesday that a special investigator in the case found no evidence of wrongdoing'....the investigator's final word is that no Administration official gave 'false statements' to Congress or to the DOJ Inspector General, which carried out their own investigation.''[66]
        The report also found no evidence that Gonzales made false or misleading statements to Congress, thus clearing him of accusations of perjury.[67]
        The IG report did find that some statements made by Gonzales at a March 13, 2007 press conference about his involvement were inaccurate. The report however does not conclude that Gonzales deliberately provided false information.[68] He acknowledged from the outset his misstatements, accepted responsibility, and attempted to set the record straight well before congressional testimony on April 19, 2007. Gonzales testified 18 months before the IG reports that statements he made at the March 13, 2007 press conference were misstatements and were overboard.[69] Further, in his written statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee, presented April 19, 2007, Gonzales wrote: ''I misspoke at a press conference on March 13th when I said that I ''was not involved in any discussions about what was going on.'' That statement was too broad. At that same press conference, I made clear that I was aware of the process; I said, ''I knew my Chief of Staff was involved in the process of determining who were the weak performers, where were the districts around the country where we could do better for the people in that district, and that's what I knew''. Of course, I knew about the process because of, at a minimum, these discussions with Mr. Sampson. Thus, my statement about ''discussions'' was imprecise and overboard, but it certainly was not in any way an attempt to mislead the American people.''
        In August 2009, White House documents released showed that Rove raised concerns directly with Gonzales and that Domenici or an intermediary may have contacted the Justice Department as early as 2005 to complain.[70] In contrast, Gonzales told the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2007: "I don't recall... Senator Domenici ever requesting that Mr. Iglesias be removed."[70] In July 2010, Department of Justice prosecutors closed the two-year investigation without filing charges after determining that the firings were not criminal, saying "Evidence did not demonstrate that any prosecutable criminal offense was committed with regard to the removal of David Iglesias. The investigative team also determined that the evidence did not warrant expanding the scope of the investigation beyond the removal of Iglesias."[71]
        The conclusion of the investigation caused one commentator to note, ''a career Justice Department prosecutor not beholden to any administration shows us that the witch hunt against Albert Gonzales was a politically motivated sham.''[72]
        As the Wall Street Journal noted, when referring to Iglesias, ''we'll note that his successor in New Mexico, who was appointed by a panel of judges and not by President Bush, picked up the pace considerably in prosecuting and winning convictions in political corruption cases. The contrast bears out the criticism at the time that Iglesias has mismanaged his office.''[73]
        Gonzales acknowledged in his testimony in April 19, 2007 that he should have been more involved in the process. He acknowledged this well before the Inspector General reached this conclusion. He said in his congressional testimony that he should have been more precise in his press conference statements about the firings well before the Inspector General reached this conclusion. Gonzales clarified misstatements made at the March 13 press conference in subsequent interviews. Gonzales asked the Office of Professional Responsibility to examine the records and supported the involvement of the Inspector General. He directed full cooperation with all investigations by DOJ employees and agreed to release thousands of pages of internal DOJ documents. The Inspector General found no intentional or criminal wrongdoing by Gonzales.[74]
        Controversy over the right to writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. Constitution[edit]On January 18, 2007, Gonzales was invited to speak to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he shocked the committee's ranking member, Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, with statements regarding the right of habeas corpus in the United States Constitution.[75] An excerpt of the exchange follows:
        GONZALES: The fact that the Constitution'--again, there is no express grant of habeas in the Constitution. There is a prohibition against taking it away. But it's never been the case, and I'm not a Supreme'--SPECTER: Now, wait a minute. Wait a minute. The Constitution says you can't take it away, except in the case of rebellion or invasion. Doesn't that mean you have the right of habeas corpus, unless there is an invasion or rebellion?[76]
        Senator Specter was referring to 2nd Clause of Section 9 of Article One of the Constitution of the United States which reads: "The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." This passage has been historically interpreted to mean that the right of habeas corpus is inherently established.[77] Gonzales dissents from the consensus view, siding with Professor Ervin Chemerinsky, who said ''[a]though the Constitution prohibits Congress from suspending the writ of habeas corpus except during times of rebellion or invasion, this provision was probably meant to keep Congress from suspending the writ and preventing state courts from releasing individuals who were wrongfully imprisoned. The constitutional provision does not create a right to habeas corpus; rather federal statutes [do so].''[78] Additionally, ''the Constitutional Convention prevented Congress from obstructing the states courts' ability to grant the writ, but did not try to create a federal constitutional right to habeas corpus''.[79] ''After all, if the suspension clause itself were an affirmative grant of procedural rights to those held in federal custody, there would have been little need for the first Congress to enact as it did, habeas corpus protections in the Judiciary Act of 1789.[80] Chereminksy's argument has been denied by Justice Paul Stevens in a 2001 opinion in an immigration case involving the issue, where Stevens touches upon what he believes the 'far more sensible view':
        "The dissent reads into Chief Justice Marshall's opinion in Ex parte Bollman, 4 Cranch 75 (1807), support for a proposition that the Chief Justice did not endorse, either explicitly or implicitly. See post, at 14'--15. He did note that ''the first congress of the United States'' acted under ''the immediate influence'' of the injunction provided by the Suspension Clause when it gave ''life and activity'' to ''this great constitutional privilege'' in the Judiciary Act of 1789, and that the writ could not be suspended until after the statute was enacted. 4 Cranch, at 95. That statement, however, surely does not imply that Marshall believed the Framers had drafted a Clause that would proscribe a temporary abrogation of the writ, while permitting its permanent suspension. Indeed, Marshall's comment expresses the far more sensible view that the Clause was intended to preclude any possibility that ''the privilege itself would be lost'' by either the inaction or the action of Congress. See, e.g., ibid. (noting that the Founders ''must have felt, with peculiar force, the obligation'' imposed by the Suspension Clause)."[81]
        Justice Steven's assertion is backed up by sentiments found in the Federalist No. 84, which enshrines the right to petition for habeas corpus as fundamental:
        "The establishment of the writ of habeas corpus, the prohibition of ex post facto laws, and of TITLES OF NOBILITY, to which we have no corresponding provision in our Constitution, are perhaps greater securities to liberty and republicanism than any it contains. The creation of crimes after the commission of the fact, or, in other words, the subjecting of men to punishment for things which, when they were done, were breaches of no law, and the practice of arbitrary imprisonments, have been, in all ages, the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny."[82]The Constitution presupposes that courts in the United States will have the authority to issue the writ as they historically did at common law. See, e.g., INS v. St. Cyr, 533 U.S. 289 (2001); Felker v. Turpin, 518 U.S. 651, 666 (1996). The text of the Constitution provides that ''[t]he privilege of the writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in case of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it.'' U.S. Const. art. 1, § 9m cl.2. As some commentators have noted, ''the text does not explicitly confer a right to habeas relief, but merely sets forth when the Privilege of the Writ may be suspended''.[83][84]
        As Robert Parry writes in the Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel:
        ''Applying Gonzales's reasoning, one could argue that the First Amendment doesn't explicitly say Americans have the right to worship as they choose, speak as they wish or assemble peacefully.Ironically, Gonzales may be wrong in another way about the lack of specificity in the Constitution's granting of habeas corpus rights. Many of the legal features attributed to habeas corpus are delineated in a positive way in the Sixth Amendment....[85]
        ''Support for Torture[edit]Main article: Torture MemosAlberto Gonzalez was a supporter and enabler of the Bush administration's policy of Enhanced Interrogation Techniques, or torture.
        Gonzalez oversaw President Bush's Office of Legal Counsel on August 1, 2002, at which time the OLC produced the Bybee memo, a document that provided the legal framework by which previous interpretations of the Geneva Convention and the United Nations Convention Against Torture were modified to expand Presidential authority to enable Enhanced Interrogation Techniques.[86][87]
        The memo was produced in response to a specific CIA request for clarification of the standards of interrogation under U.S. law, in the specific case of Abu Zabaydah, a man believed at the time to be a high-level Al-Qaeda leader. In response, the Justice Department issued a classified August 1, 2002 memo[88] to the CIA from Jay Bybee, the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel, and an August 1, 2002 legal opinion[89] to Gonzales from Jay Bybee defining torture as an act specifically intended to inflict severe physical or mental pain or suffering.
        Journalists including Jane Mayer, Joby Warrick and Peter Finn, and Alex Koppelman have reported the CIA was already using these harsh tactics before the memo authorizing their use was written,[28][86][90][91][92] and that it was used to provide after-the-fact legal support for harsh interrogation techniques.[93] A Department of Justice 2009 report regarding prisoner abuses reportedly stated the memos were prepared one month after Abu Zubaydah had already been subjected to the specific techniques authorized in the August 1, 2002, memo.[94]John Kiriakou stated in July 2009 that Abu Zubaydah was waterboarded in the early summer of 2002, months before the August 1, 2002 memo was written.[95][96]
        The memo described ten techniques which the interrogators wanted to use: "(1) attention grasp, (2) walling, (3) facial hold, (4) facial slap (insult slap), (5) cramped confinement, (6) wall standing, (7) stress positions, (8) sleep deprivation, (9) insects placed in a confinement box, and (10) the waterboard.''[97] Many of the techniques were, until then, generally considered illegal.[28][86][90][98][99][100] Many other techniques developed by the CIA were held to constitute inhumane and degrading treatment and torture under the United Nations Convention against Torture and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.[98] As reported later, many of these interrogation techniques were previously considered illegal under U.S. and international law and treaties at the time of Abu Zubaydah's capture.[98][99] For instance, the United States had prosecuted Japanese military officials after World War II and American soldiers after the Vietnam War for waterboarding.[99] Since 1930, the United States had defined sleep deprivation as an illegal form of torture.[28] Many other techniques developed by the CIA constitute inhuman and degrading treatment and torture under the United Nations Convention against Torture, and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.[98] These memoranda have been the focus of considerable controversy, and were repudiated by President Barack Obama in early 2009.
        NSA domestic eavesdropping program[edit]In a December 2005 article[101][102] in The New York Times, it was revealed that the National Security Agency (NSA) was eavesdropping on U.S. citizens without warrants in cases where (i) NSA intelligence agents had reason to believe at least one party to the call was a member of al Qaeda or a group affiliated with al Qaeda, and (ii) the call was international.[103] The New York Times acknowledged that the activities had been classified, and that it had disclosed the activities over the Administration's objections. As such, Attorney General Gonzales threatened The Times with prosecution under the Espionage Act of 1917,[104] since knowing publication of classified information is a federal crime. Gonzales raised the possibility that New York Times journalists could be prosecuted for publishing classified information based on the outcome of the criminal investigation underway into leaks to the Times of data about the National Security Agency's surveillance of terrorist-related calls between the United States and abroad. He said, ''I understand very much the role that the press plays in our society, the protection under the First Amendment we want to protect and respect....'' As for the Times, he said, ''As we do in every case, it's a case-by-case evaluation about what the evidence shows us, our interpretation of the law. We have an obligation to enforce the law and to prosecute those who engage in criminal activity.''[105]
        The publication led to an investigation by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) over the role of Department of Justice (DOJ) lawyers in giving legal advice to support various intelligence collection activities. OPR is responsible for investigating allegations of professional misconduct by DOJ attorneys. The objective of OPR is to ensure that DOJ attorneys perform their duties in accordance with the highest professional standards.[106]
        The Bush Administration and Attorney General Gonzales believed that OPR did not have the authority to investigate Gonzales' role as White House Counsel in connection with certain intelligence activities authorized by the President. In response to suggestions that Gonzales blocked the investigation or that the President blocked the investigation to protect Gonzales, Assistant Attorney General Richard Hertling informed Chairman John Conyers on March 22, 2007, that ''the President made the decision not to grant the requested security clearances to'' OPR staff. Judge Gonzales ''was not told he was the subject or target of the OPR investigation, nor did he believe himself to be'...'' Judge Gonzales ''did not ask the President to shut down or otherwise impede the OPR investigation''. Judge Gonzales ''recommended to the President that OPR be granted security clearance.''[107]
        In a letter to the Senate dated August 1, 2007, Gonzales disclosed that shortly after the September 11 attacks, the President authorized the NSA, under a single Presidential Authorization, to engage in a number of intelligence activities, which would later be collectively described as the "President's Surveillance Program" (PSP) by the DOJ Inspector General, Glenn A. Fine.[108] Some of these authorized activities were described as the "Terrorist Surveillance Program" (TSP) by President Bush, in an address to the nation on December 16, 2005. As the August 1 letter indicates the dispute between the President and James Comey that led to the hospital visit was not over TSP, it concerned other classified intelligence activities that are part of PSP and have not been disclosed. He defended his authorization of the program, asserting "...if you are talking with al Qaeda, we want to know why."[citation needed] In his letter, Gonzales wrote the Senate Judiciary Committee that he defined TSP as the program the President publicly confirmed, a program that targets communications where one party is outside the United States, and as to which the government had reason to believe at least one party to the communication is a member of al Qaeda or an affiliated terrorist organization.[109] Indeed, prior to the 2007 letter, Gonzales provided the same definition of TSP in several public appearances[110][111][112][113] leading up to a hearing in Congress on February 6, 2006.[114]
        In March 2004, the TSP operations, (code-named Stellar Wind,[115]) became the focal point for a dispute between the White House and then-acting-Attorney-General James B. Comey, resulting in a dramatic, late-night meeting between Gonzales, Comey, the bedridden AG John Ashcroft, and other DOJ officials, in a George Washington University Hospital room. According to initial statements by Gonzales, the disagreement was not over TSP; rather, he claimed it concerned other classified intelligence activities which fell under the PSP, which had not been disclosed. However, Comey contended that the incident, (which had culminated in a heated phone conversation following the hospital visit,) had indeed been over the activities comprising the TSP. Through a spokesperson, Gonzales later denied his original assertion that the dispute was over TSP, claiming that he had misspoken. The controversy over these conflicting statements led Senator Charles Schumer to request appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate if Gonzales had committed perjury.[116]
        In testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 15, 2007, former Deputy Attorney General Comey was asked to recall the events of the evening of March 10, 2004, when, (at the behest of President Bush,[117][118]) Gonzales and Bush's then-chief-of-staff Andrew H. Card Jr. sought to bypass Comey's refusal to authorize "a particular classified program,"[119] by appealing to the ailing John Ashcroft in a visit to his hospital bedside, as he recovered from surgery for pancreatitis. According to Comey, he had consulted with AG Ashcroft prior to his hospitalization and, (though Ashcroft had previously signed off on the program many times in previous years,[citation needed]) the two of them came to agree that there had arisen legitimate concerns, which interfered with the ability of the Attorney General's office, "to certify (the program's) legality, which was our obligation for the program to be renewed."[119] More than a week later, Comey continued, Ashcroft had become extremely ill and his wife had forbidden any visitors to his hospital room, so when he and the other officials met at his bedside on March 10, he was very concerned about General Ashcroft's ability to think clearly about the issue at hand.
        ''In walked Mr. Gonzales, carrying an envelope, and Mr. Card. They came over and stood by the bed. They greeted the attorney general very briefly, and then Mr. Gonzales began to discuss why they were there, to seek his approval...I was very upset. I was angry. I thought I had just witnessed an effort to take advantage of a very sick man, who did not have the powers of the attorney general because they had been transferred to me.[120]''Later testimony from Gonzales and others confirmed that Ashcroft did not seem disoriented, but in fact seemed lucid enough to describe to Card and Gonzales, in great detail, the basis of the Department's legal arguments, and even to complain about clearance decisions by the President relative to the TSP. Comey also testified that there was significant dissent among top law enforcement officers over the program, although he did not specifically identify it in the hearing. Moreover, in light of the incident at the hospital, "top Justice Department officials were prepared to resign over it."[120]
        Jack Goldsmith, the former head of the Office of Legal Counsel at the Justice Department, corroborates many of the details of Comey's Senate testimony regarding the March 10, 2004 hospital room visit, in a preview of his book "The Terror Presidency" which was to be published in Fall 2007. In the September 9, 2007 issue of The New York Times Magazine Jeffrey Rosen reports on an extended interview he had with Goldsmith, who was also in the hospital room that night.[121]
        ''As he recalled it to me, Goldsmith received a call in the evening from his deputy, Philbin, telling him to go to the George Washington University Hospital immediately, since Gonzales and Card were on the way there. Goldsmith raced to the hospital, double-parked outside and walked into a dark room. Ashcroft lay with a bright light shining on him and tubes and wires coming out of his body.Suddenly, Gonzales and Card came in the room and announced that they were there in connection with the classified program. ''Ashcroft, who looked like he was near death, sort of puffed up his chest,'' Goldsmith recalls. ''All of a sudden, energy and color came into his face, and he said that he didn't appreciate them coming to visit him under those circumstances, that he had concerns about the matter they were asking about and that, in any event, he wasn't the attorney general at the moment; Jim Comey was. He actually gave a two-minute speech, and I was sure at the end of it he was going to die. It was the most amazing scene I've ever witnessed.''
        After a bit of silence, Goldsmith told me, Gonzales thanked Ashcroft, and he and Card walked out of the room. ''At that moment,'' Goldsmith recalled, ''Mrs. Ashcroft, who obviously couldn't believe what she saw happening to her sick husband, looked at Gonzales and Card as they walked out of the room and stuck her tongue out at them. She had no idea what we were discussing, but this sweet-looking woman sticking out her tongue was the ultimate expression of disapproval. It captured the feeling in the room perfectly.''
        ''Comey also testified that Ashcroft "expressed himself in very strong terms."[119] Goldsmith testified that Ashcroft spoke at length about the legal issue. ''Attorney General Ashcroft'... [gave] a couple of minutes' speech in which he said that he'.... shared the Justice department's concerns.''[122] Although he was not present for the conversation between Gonzales and Ashcroft, FBI Director Bob Mueller testified, ''Ashcroft complained to Judge Gonzales about White House compartmentalization rules preventing Ashcroft from getting the advice he needed."[123] On July 24, 2007, Gonzales testified that he and Card were also concerned about Ashcroft's competency. ''Obviously there was concern about General Ashcroft's condition. And we would not have sought nor did we intend to get any approval from General Ashcroft if in fact he wasn't fully competent to make the decision.''[124] In response to a question from Senator Hatch, Gonzales continued, ''Obviously we were concerned about the condition of General Ashcroft. We obviously knew he had been ill and had surgery. And we never had any intent to ask anything of him if we did not feel that he was competent. When we got there, I will just say that Mr. Ashcroft did most of the talking. We were there maybe five minutes '' five to six minutes. Mr. Ashcroft talked about the legal issues in a lucid form, as I've heard him talk about legal issues in the White House.[125] During the July 24 hearing, Gonzales' testimony lasted for almost four hours before the Senate Judiciary Committee. He appeared to contradict the earlier statements made by James Comey regarding the hospital room meeting with John Ashcroft.
        ''Mr. Comey's testimony about the hospital visit was about other intelligence activities'--disagreement over other intelligence activities. That's how we'd clarify it.[120]''Senator Chuck Schumer confronted Gonzales over this statement: "That is not what Mr. Comey says; that is not what the people in the room say." Gonzales responded "That's how we clarify it."[120] However, the DOJ Inspector General's report concluded that there was nothing false or intentionally misleading in Gonzales' account.[citation needed]
        The Inspector General also concluded that the dispute between the White House and the DOJ concerned "Other Intelligence Activities," which, though they had been implemented through the same Presidential Authorization, were not the same as the communications interception activities that the President publicly identified as the Terrorist Surveillance Program.[126] The DOJ Inspector General agreed with Gonzales noting in his report that the ''dispute-which resulted in the visit to Attorney General Ashcroft's hospital room by Gonzales and Card and brought several senior DOJ and FBI officials to the brink of resignations '' concerned certain of the Other Intelligence Activities that were different from the communication interception activities that the President later publicly acknowledged as the Terrorist Surveillance Program, but that had been implemented through the same Presidential Authorization.[127] As the IG report confirms, the dispute involved Other Intelligence Activities, it was not about TSP.[128]
        The response to Gonzales's testimony by those Senators serving on both the Judiciary and Intelligence Committees was one of disbelief. Russ Feingold, who is a member of both the Judiciary and Intelligence committees, said, ''I believe your testimony is misleading at best,'' which Sheldon Whitehouse'--also a member of both committees'--concurred with, saying, ''I have exactly the same perception.'' Chuck Schumer said Gonzales was "not being straightforward" with the committee. Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy said, ''I just don't trust you,'' and urged Gonzales to carefully review his testimony. The ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, Arlen Specter, said to Gonzales, ''Your credibility has been breached to the point of being actionable.'' Leahy and Specter's comments were interpreted as warnings that Gonzales might have been perjuring himself. After the meeting, Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller said Gonzales was being "untruthful." Rockefeller's sentiments were echoed by Jane Harman, a senior member of the House Intelligence Committee, who accused Gonzales of "selectively declassifying information to defend his own conduct."[129]
        On July 26, 2007, the Associated Press obtained a four-page memorandum from the office of former Director of National IntelligenceJohn D. Negroponte dated May 17, 2006, which appeared to contradict Gonzales's testimony the previous day regarding the subject of a March 10, 2004 emergency Congressional briefing which preceded his hospital room meeting with former Attorney General John Ashcroft, James B. Comey and former White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr..[130] However, there is no contradiction as the July 1, 2009 IG report confirms. Shortly after the September 11 attacks, the President authorized a number of intelligence activities reported by the IG on the President's Surveillance Program (PSP). One set of activities were TSP, but the dispute was about certain of the Other Intelligence Activities. The IG report is clear on p. 37 that the TSP ''was not the subject of the hospital room confrontation or the threatened resignations.'' P. 36 of the Inspector General report goes on to say that the White House had a major disagreement related to PSP. The dispute which resulted in the visit to Attorney General Ashcroft's hospital room by Gonzales and Card and brought several senior DOJ and FBI officials to the brink of resignation-concerned certain of the Other Intelligence Activities that were different from the communications interception activities that the President later publicly acknowledged as the TSP, but that had been implemented through the same President Authorizations.[131]
        On that same day, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) Director Robert S. Mueller III also seemed to dispute the accuracy of Gonzales's Senate Judiciary Committee testimony of the previous day regarding the events of March 10, 2004 in his own sworn testimony on that subject before the House Judiciary Committee.[132]
        Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) asked Mueller "Did you have an opportunity to talk to General Ashcroft, or did he discuss what was discussed in the meeting with Attorney General Gonzales and the chief of staff?" He replied "I did have a brief discussion with Attorney General Ashcroft." Lee went on to ask "I guess we use [the phrase] TSP [Terrorist Surveillance Program], we use warrantless wiretapping. So would I be comfortable in saying that those were the items that were part of the discussion?" He responded "It was'--the discussion was on a national'--an NSA program that has been much discussed, yes."[120]
        On Thursday, August 16, 2007, the House Judiciary Committee released the heavily-redacted notes[123] of FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III regarding the Justice Department and White House deliberations of March, 2004 which included the March 10, 2004 hospital-room visit of Gonzales and Andrew H. Card Jr. on John Ashcroft in the presence of then-acting Attorney General James B. Comey. The notes list 26 meetings and phone conversations over three weeks'--from March 1 to March 23'--during a debate that reportedly almost led to mass resignations at the Justice Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. [133]
        On July 26, 2007 a letter to Solicitor GeneralPaul Clement, Senators Charles Schumer, Dianne Feinstein, Russ Feingold and Sheldon Whitehouse urged that an independent counsel be appointed to investigate whether Gonzales had perjured himself in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on the previous day. "We ask that you immediately appoint an independent special counsel from outside the Department of Justice to determine whether Attorney General Gonzales may have misled Congress or perjured himself in testimony before Congress," the letter read in part.[134] According to the July 10, 2009 DOJ Inspector General Unclassified Report on the President's Surveillance Program, Gonzales did not intend to mislead Congress. There was no finding of perjury or other criminal wrongdoing by Gonzales[135]
        On Wednesday, June 27, 2007, the Senate Judiciary Committee issued subpoenas to the United States Department of Justice, the White House, and Vice President Dick Cheney seeking internal documents regarding the program's legality and details of the NSA's cooperative agreements with private telecommunications corporations. In addition to the subpoenas, committee chairman Patrick Leahy sent Gonzales a letter about possible false statements made under oath by U.S. Court of Appeals Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings before the committee the previous year.[136] In an August 17, 2007 reply letter to Leahy asking for an extension of the August 20 deadline [137] for compliance, White House counselFred Fielding argued that the subpoenas called for the production of "extraordinarily sensitive national security information," and he said much of the information'--if not all'--could be subject to a claim of executive privilege. [138] On August 20, 2007, Fielding wrote to Leahy that the White House needed yet more time to respond to the subpoenas, which prompted Leahy to reply that the Senate may consider a contempt of Congress citation when it returns from its August recess.[139]
        On July 27, 2007, both White House Press SecretaryTony Snow and White House spokeswoman Dana Perino defended Gonzales's Senate Judiciary Committee testimony regarding the events of March 10, 2004, saying that it did not contradict the sworn House Judiciary Committee account of FBI director Robert S. Mueller III, because Gonzales had been constrained in what he could say because there was a danger he would divulge classified material.[140] Lee Casey, a former Justice Department lawyer during the Ronald Reagan and George H. W. Bush administrations, told The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer that it is likely that the apparent discrepancy can be traced to the fact that there are two separate Domestic Surveillance programs. "The program that was leaked in December 2005 is the Comey program. It is not the program that was discussed in the evening when they went to Attorney General Ashcroft's hospital room. That program we know almost nothing about. We can speculate about it. '...The program about which he said there was no dispute is a program that was created after the original program died, when Mr. Comey refused to reauthorize it, in March 2004. Mr. Comey then essentially redid the program to suit his legal concerns. And about that program, there was no dispute. There was clearly a dispute about the earlier form or version of the program. The attorney general has not talked about that program. He refers to it as "other intelligence activities" because it is, in fact, still classified."[120]
        On Tuesday, August 28, 2007'--one day after Gonzales announced his resignation as Attorney General effective September 17'--Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy indicated that it would not affect ongoing investigations by his committee. ''I intend to get answers to these questions no matter how long it takes,'' Leahy said, suggesting that Gonzales could face subpoenas from the committee for testimony or evidence long after leaving the administration. ''You'll notice that we've had people subpoenaed even though they've resigned from the White House,'' Leahy said, referring to Harriet E. Miers, the former White House counsel, and Karl Rove, who resigned this month as the president's top political aide. ''They're still under subpoena. They still face contempt if they don't appear.''[141] Gonzales testified voluntarily to Congress and provided interviews to the Inspector General on numerous occasions. He ordered full cooperation by all Department of Justice employees with ongoing investigations.
        On Thursday, August 30, 2007, Justice Department Inspector GeneralGlenn A. Fine disclosed in a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee that as part of a previously ongoing investigation, his office is looking into whether Gonzales made statements to Congress that were ''intentionally false, misleading, or inappropriate,'' both about the firing of federal prosecutors and about the terrorist-surveillance program, as committee chairman Patrick Leahy had asked him to do in an August 16, 2007 letter. Fine's letter to Leahy said that his office ''has ongoing investigations that relate to most of the subjects addressed by the attorney general's testimony that you identified." Fine said that his office is conducting a particular review ''relating to the terrorist-surveillance program, as well as a follow-up review of the use of national security letters,'' which investigators use to obtain information on e-mail messages, telephone calls and other records from private companies without court approval.[142] Fine concluded his investigation and found that Gonzales did not intend to mislead Congress.[143]
        It has been reported that a person involved in the incident of March 10, 2004 hospital room meeting with John Ashcroft has said that much of the confusion and conflicting testimony that occurred about intelligence activities was because certain programs were so classified that they were impossible to speak about clearly.[144] The DOJ Inspector General recognized that Gonzales was in the difficult position of testifying before the Senate Judiciary Committee about a highly classified program in an open forum[145] On July 31, 2007, Director of National Intelligence J. Michael McConnell confirmed, in a letter to Senator Specter, that the activities publicly referred to ''as the TSP did not exhaust the activities subject to periodic authorization by the President.[146] Gonzales was then able to explain publicly, on August 1, 2007, that while TSP ''was an extraordinary activity that presented novel and difficult issues and was, as [he understood], the subject of intense deliberations within the Department,'' the aspect of Mr. Comey's advise that prompted the Gang of Eight meeting on March 10, 2004, was not about TSP, but was about another or other aspects of the intelligence activities in question, which activities remain classified.[147] Comey himself acknowledged that the nature of the disagreement at issue on March 10, 2004, is ''a very complicated matter'', but he declined to discuss in a public setting.[148] Professor Jack Goldsmith appears to acknowledge that there is a difference between TSP and other classified intelligence activities that prompted the March 10, 2004 Gang of Eight meeting and visit to General Ashcroft's hospital room.[149]
        Objectivity[edit]Gonzales has had a long relationship with former president George W. Bush. Gonzales served as a general counsel when Bush was the governor of Texas. Such relationship made critics question whether he would maintain independence in his administration of the U.S. Department of Justice.[150][151] Gonzales has been called Bush's "yes man." Even though the advice given by Gonzales was based and supported by other lawyers, specifically the Department of Justice, charged by statute to provide legal advice to the President, Critics claim that he gave only the legal advice Bush wanted and questioned Gonzales's ethics and professional conduct.[152][153] ''To his backers, Gonzales is a quiet, hardworking attorney general notable for his open management style and his commitment to the administration of justice and to the war on terrorism.[154]
        One publication reported, ''Gonzales contends that his friendship with Bush makes him a better advocate for the rule of law within the executive branch.'' My responsibilities is to ensure that the laws are enforced, that everyone in the country receives justice under the law'--independent of my relationship with the White House, independent of my relationship with the President of the United States,'' he told National Journal''[154] However, another report states that Gonzoles has ". . . a long history of dogged obedience to the President, which often has come at the cost of institutional independence and adherence to the rule of law."[153]
        As a White House counsel, Gonzales signed a controversial memorandum in January 2002 to the president which argued that the limitations on the questioning of prisoners under the Geneva Conventions were "obsolete" when it deals with terrorism.[155][156]
        The memo also states this new paradigm of non-nation states who fight in violation of the laws of war places a premium on getting information and ''this new paradigm renders obsolete Geneva's strict limitations on questioning of enemy prisoners and renders quaint some of its provisions requiring that captured enemy be afforded such things as commissary privileges, scrip (i.e. advances of monthly pay, athletic uniforms, and scientific instruments).'' [157]
        Resignation[edit]Calls for resignation[edit]A number of members of both houses of Congress publicly said Gonzales should resign, or be fired by Bush. Calls for his ousting intensified after his testimony on April 19, 2007. But the President gave Gonzales a strong vote of confidence saying, ''This is an honest, honorable man, in whom I have confidence.'' The President said that Gonzales's testimony ''increased my confidence'' in his ability to lead the Justice Department. Separately, a White House spokeswoman said, ''He's staying''.[158]
        On May 24, 2007, Senators Charles Schumer (D-NY), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) of the Senate Judiciary Committee announced the Democrats' proposed no-confidence resolution to vote on whether "Attorney General Alberto Gonzales no longer holds the confidence of the Senate and the American People." [159] (The vote would have had no legal effect, but was designed to persuade Gonzales to depart or President Bush to seek a new attorney general.) A similar resolution was introduced in the House by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA).[160]
        On June 11, 2007 a Senate vote on cloture to end debate on the resolution failed (60 votes are required for cloture). The vote was 53 to 38 with 7 not voting and 1 voting "present" (one senate seat was vacant). Seven Republicans, John E. Sununu, Chuck Hagel, Susan Collins, Arlen Specter, Olympia Snowe, Gordon Smith and Norm Coleman voted to end debate; Independent Democrat Joseph Lieberman voted against ending debate. No Democrat voted against the motion. Not voting: Biden (D-DE), Brownback (R-KS), Coburn (R-OK), Dodd (D-CT), Johnson (D-SD), McCain (R-AZ), Obama (D-IL). Stevens (R-AK) voted "present."[161][162]
        University of Missourilaw professor Frank Bowman[163] has observed that Congress has the power to impeach Gonzales if he willfully lied or withheld information from Congress during his testimony about the dismissal of U.S. Attorneys.[164]
        Congress has impeached a sitting Cabinet member before; William W. Belknap, Ulysses S. Grant's Secretary of War, was impeached in a unanimous vote by the House in 1876 for bribery, but the Senate fell just short of the votes necessary to convict him. Belknap had resigned before the House vote, and several Senators who voted to acquit him said they did so only because they felt the Senate lacked jurisdiction, because Belknap had already departed from office.
        On July 30, 2007, MSNBC reported that Rep. Jay Inslee announced that he would introduce a bill the following day that would require the House Judiciary Committee to begin an impeachment investigation against Gonzales.[165][166] There were many, however, who supported Gonzales. One commentator wrote, ''Attorney General Alberto Gonzales shouldn't go quietly. In fact, he shouldn't go at all.[167] The Latino Coalition issued a press statement in March 2007 announcing their continued and unwavering support of Alberto Gonzales saying, ''we strongly oppose what is nothing but patently political calls for the resignation of Alberto Gonzales. He has been, and continues to be, a leading example to all in the Hispanic community of what we can accomplish through hard work and by keeping true to our dreams.''[168] The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association wrote expressing support for Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, ''Attorney General Gonzales is a man held in high regard by the men and women of Federal law enforcement who put their lives on the line every day to keep our nation safe. He is a strong law enforcement leader who is willing to listen to those of us out on the street every day serving and protection our nation. Mr. President, I urge you to convince Attorney General Gonzales to remain in his current position as our nation's chief law enforcement officer. Our nation and the men and women who carry the badge and the gun need his leadership.''[169]
        Partial list of Members of Congress calling for departure
        Democrats calling for departure:
        Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), Senate Majority Leader: "It's foolishness if (President Bush) hangs on to him"[170]Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Vice-Chairman of Senate Democratic Conference, chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and member of the Senate Judiciary Committee: "doesn't accept or doesn't understand that he is no longer just the president's lawyer,"[171] "carrying out the political wishes of the President"[172] (first member of either chamber to call for ouster)Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee: "I don't think he can be effective"[173]Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee: "I think we'd be better off if he did (resign), but that's a judgment the president is going to have to make"[174]Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA): "perplexed by the attorney general's testimony,"[175] "he has served as the president's lawyer, not our nation's"[174]Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY): "buck should stop somewhere"[176]Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT): "egregious lapses in judgment"[177]Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee: "I believe he should step down. ... the nation is not well served by this"[178]Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee: "his resignation is long overdue"[179]Sen. John Kerry (D-MA): "there must be accountability from the top down"[180]Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR): "serious breach between the Justice Department and Congress"[181]Sen. Bill Nelson (D-FL): "lost his credibility"[174]Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL): "subverted justice to promote a political agenda"[182]Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR): "when the Attorney General lies to a United States Senator '... it's time for that Attorney General to go"[183]Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee: "he had a hard sell to make to me, and he didn't make it"[184]Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO): "I believe it is in the best interest of our Nation for the Department of Justice to get a fresh start with a new Attorney General."[174]Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Speaker of the House of Representatives:"has lost the trust of the American people"[185]Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV): "shredded his credibility"[174]Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA): "has not been forthcoming"[174]Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), member of the House Judiciary Committee: told Gonzales in House testimony that it "makes me ill to see what has happened" to the Justice Department, and that "I don't think you're the one to fix it"[174]Republicans calling for Gonzales to leave:
        Sen. John E. Sununu (R-NH), first Republican to call for ouster: "If I were the president, I would fire the attorney general"[186]Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR): ouster "would be helpful"[186]Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), member of the Senate Judiciary Committee: told Gonzales at hearing that "the best way to put this behind us is your resignation";[187] had earlier described affair as "idiocy"[188]Sen. John McCain (R-AZ): "very disappointed in his performance", "it would be best for Gonzales to quit"[189]Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL), member of Senate Judiciary Committee: "If he and the President decide that he cannot be an effective leader moving forward, then he should resign."[190]Sen. Norm Coleman (R-MN): "deeply concerned"[191]Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), ranking Republican on Senate Judiciary Committee: called failure to step down "bad for the Justice Department"[192]Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE): "lost the moral authority to lead"[193]Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA): "the president should have an attorney general who is less a personal friend and more professional in his approach"[194]Rep. Paul Gillmor (R-OH): "lightning rod"[195]Rep. Vern Ehlers (R-MI): "he's hurt the President by what he's doing '... he's damaged himself and the President"[196]Rep. Jon Porter (R-NV): "egregiously mishandled," "we need to restore confidence"[197]Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV): "it's become a distraction"[174]Rep. Lee Terry (R-NE): "I trusted him before, but I can't now"[198]Rep. Adam Putnam (R-FL), House Republican Conference Chairman, 1st top House Republican to call for ouster: "time for fresh leadership"[199]Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-CO): "a series of leadership failures"[200]In addition, several Republicans were critical of Gonzales, without calling for his resignation or firing:
        Republican Senators Trent Lott and Orrin Hatch expressed support for Gonzales, although Hatch conceded that Gonzales had "bungled."[206]
        OthersThose calling for Gonzales's resignation included Presidential contenders from both parties:Republican Senator McCain and Representative TancredoDemocratic New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson[207] and Senators Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Edwards, and Obama.
        Resignation announcement[edit]Gonzales submitted his resignation as Attorney General effective September 17, 2007,[208] by a letter addressed to President Bush on August 26, 2007. In a statement on August 27, Gonzales thanked the President for the opportunity to be of service to his country, giving no indication of either the reasons for his resignation or his future plans. Later that day, President Bush praised Gonzales for his service, reciting the numerous positions in Texas government, and later, the government of the United States, to which Bush had appointed Gonzales. Bush attributed the resignation to Gonzales's name having been "dragged through the mud" for "political reasons".[208] Senators Schumer (D-NY), Feinstein (D-CA) and Specter (R-PA) replied that the resignation was entirely attributable to the excessive politicization of the Attorney General's office by Gonzales, whose credibility with Congress, they asserted, was nonexistent.
        Successor[edit]On September 17, 2007, President Bush announced the nomination of ex-Judge Michael B. Mukasey to serve as Gonzales's successor. Bush also announced a revised appointment for acting Attorney General: Paul Clement served for 24 hours and returned to his position as Solicitor General; the departing Assistant Attorney General of the Civil Division, Peter Keisler was persuaded to stay on, and was appointed acting Attorney General effective September 18, 2007.[209]
        After resignation[edit]Investigations[edit]Soon after departure from the DOJ in September 2007, continuing inquiries by Congress and the Justice Department led Gonzales to hire a criminal-defense lawyer George J. Terwilliger III, partner at White & Case, and former deputy attorney general under former president George H. W. Bush. Terwiliger was on the Republican law team involved in Florida presidential election recount battle of 2000.[210]
        On October 19, 2007, John McKay, the former U.S. Attorney for Washington's Western District, told The (Spokane) Spokesman-Review that Inspector GeneralGlenn A. Fine may recommend criminal charges against Gonzales.[211] The Inspector General did not recommend criminal charges against Gonzales. To the contrary, the Inspector General found no criminal wrongdoing and no perjury.[212]
        On November 15, 2007, The Washington Post reported that supporters of Gonzales had created a trust fund to help pay for his legal expenses, which were mounting as the Justice Department Inspector General's office continued to investigate whether Gonzales committed perjury or improperly tampered with a congressional witness.[213] The Inspector General determined that Gonzales did not commit perjury or improperly tamper with a congressional witness.[212]
        On September 2, 2008, the Inspector General found that Gonzales had stored classified documents in an insecure fashion, at his home and insufficiently secure safes at work.[214] The Inspector General investigation found no evidence showing that there was any unauthorized disclosure of classified information resulting from his mishandling and storage of the materials in question, and the IG did not make a referral to the National Security Division for violation of a criminal statute.[215]
        Some members of Congress criticized Gonzales for selectively declassifying some of this information for political purposes.[214] The Justice Department declined to press criminal charges.[214] because there was no evidence of intent and no referral by the IG of criminal wrongdoing.
        Later career[edit]In April 2008, The New York Times reported that Gonzales was having difficulty securing a new job, unusual for a former Attorney General.[216] Gonzales had a mediation and consulting practice in Austin, TX and taught at Texas Tech.[when?] In October 2011, Belmont University College of Law announced that Gonzalez would fill the Doyle Rogers Distinguished Chair of Law.[217] Gonzalez also joined the Nashville law firm of Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis as Of Counsel.[218]
        Gonzales gave an interview to the Wall Street Journal on December 31, 2008, in which he discussed the effect that controversies in his Bush Administration roles had had on his career and public perception.[219][220] He stated:
        For some reason, I am portrayed as the one who is evil in formulating policies that people disagree with. I consider myself a casualty, one of the many casualties of the war on terror.[220][221]
        Since leaving public office he has appeared on a number of television and radio news shows, including The Situation Room with Wolf Blitzer, to discuss the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court,[222]Larry King Live to discuss the challenges of immigration,[223] and Geraldo at Large to discuss terrorism related issues.[224] He has given numerous radio interviews on shows such as NPR's Tell Me More, covering such topics as Guantanamo Bay and Supreme Court nominations.[225] Additionally, he has written opinion pieces for The Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, and USA Today, covering issues ranging from immigration to sexual predators.[226] He stated an intention to write a book about his roles, with the intention of publishing the book "for my sons, so at least they know the story." No publishing company had agreed to promote the book at the time of the interview.[221]
        Gonzales was featured in the 2008 Academy Award-winning documentary Taxi to the Dark Side.[227]
        Texas Tech University[edit]In 2009, Texas Tech University System hired Gonzales. He acted as the diversity recruiter for both Texas Tech University and Angelo State University.[228] Additionally, at Texas Tech, he taught a political science "special topics" course dealing with contemporary issues in the executive branch,[229] and a graduate level course to students pursuing a masters degree in public administration. He began the new job on August 1, 2009.[230] After the announcement, more than 40 professors at Texas Tech signed a petition opposing the hiring.[231] Texas Tech Chancellor Kent Hance said Gonzales has generated interest in the University by recruiting outside of Lubbock and through his reputation in the news. ''I had a young man come up to me Monday in a restaurant and he said, ''I'm in Judge Gonzales's class, and it's the best class I've ever taken. Thank you for providing him to the community.'' Hance said.[232]
        Grand jury indictment[edit]In November 2008 Gonzales was indicted by a grand jury in Willacy County in Texas. He was accused of stopping an investigation into abuses at the Willacy Detention Center, a federal detention center. Vice president Dick Cheney and other elected officials were also indicted.[233] A judge dismissed the indictments and chastised the Willacy County district attorney, Juan Angel Gonzales, who brought the case.[234] The district attorney himself had been under indictment for more than a year and a half before the judge dismissed the indictment. The district attorney left office after losing in a Democratic primary in March 2008.[235] All charges were dropped after further investigation.[236]
        International investigation[edit]On November 14, 2006, invoking universal jurisdiction, legal proceedings were started in Germany against Gonzales for his alleged involvement under the command responsibility of prisoner abuse by writing the controversial legal opinions.[237] On April 27, 2007, Germany's Federal Prosecutor announced she would not proceed with an investigation. In November 2007, the plaintiffs appealed the decision. On April 21, 2009, the Stuttgart Regional Appeals Court dismissed the appeal.
        On March 28, 2009, a Spanish court, headed by Baltasar Garz"n, the judge who ordered the arrest of former Chilean President Augusto Pinochet, announced it would begin an investigation into whether or not Gonzales, and five other former Bush Justice and Defense officials violated international law by providing the Bush Administration a legal framework and basis for the torture of detainees at Guantanamo Bay. Garz"n said that it was "highly probable" the matter would go to court and that arrest warrants would be issued. Also named in the Spanish court's investigation are John Yoo, Douglas Feith, William Haynes II, Jay Bybee, and David Addington.[238][239] Judge Garzon faces charges from earlier this year for knowingly overstepping the bounds of his authority in a probe of Spanish Civil War atrocities covered by an amnesty. Garzon has other cases against him pending. Critics say he has a mixed record winning convictions, cuts procedural corners, and that he's less interested in promoting justice than in self-promotion.[240] In April 2010, on the advice of the Spanish Attorney General Cndido Conde-Pumpido, who believes that an American tribunal should judge the case (or dismiss it) before a Spanish Court ever thinks about becoming involved, prosecutors recommended that Judge Garzon should drop his investigation. As CNN reported, Mr. Conde-Pumpido told reporters that Judge Garzon's plan threatened to turn the court ''into a toy in the hands of people who are trying to do a political action''.[241]
        Main article: The Bush SixTexas Supreme Court opinions[edit]This is a list of opinions in which Alberto Gonzales wrote the majority court opinion, wrote a concurring opinion, or wrote a dissent. Cases in which he joined in an opinion written by another justice are not included. A justice "writes" an opinion if the justice has primary responsibility for the opinion. Justices are assisted by a law clerk who may play an important role in the actual analysis of legal issues and drafting of the opinion. The Texas Supreme Court issued 84 opinions during Gonzales's tenure on the court, according to LexisNexis.
        Majority opinions[edit]Fitzgerald v. Advanced Spine Fixation Systems, 996 S.W.2d 864 (Tex. 1999).Texas Farmers Insurance Company v. Murphy, 996 S.W.2d 873 (Tex. 1999).Mid-Century Insurance Company v. Kidd, 997 S.W.2d 265 (Tex. 1999).General Motors Corporation v. Sanchez, 997 S.W.2d 584 (Tex. 1999).In re Missouri Pac. R.R. Co., 998 S.W.2d 212 (Tex. 1999).Mallios v. Baker, 11 S.W.3d 157 (Tex. 2000).Gulf Insurance Company v. Burns Motors, 22 S.W.3d 417 (Tex. 2000).Southwestern Refining Co. v. Bernal, 22 S.W.3d 425 (Tex. 2000).Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362 (Tex. 2000).City of Fort Worth v. Zimlich, 29 S.W.3d 62 (Tex. 2000).Prudential Insurance Company of America v. Financial Review Services, Inc., 29 S.W.3d 74 (Tex. 2000).Texas Department of Transportation v. Able, 35 S.W.3d 608 (Tex. 2000).Pustejovsky v. Rapid-American Corp., 35 S.W.3d 643 (Tex. 2000).John G. & Marie Stella Kenedy Memorial Foundation v. Dewhurst, 44 Tex. Sup. J. 268 (2000), withdrawn.[242]Concurring opinions[edit]In re Dallas Morning News, 10 S.W.3d 298 (Tex. 1999).Osterberg v. Peca, 12 S.W.3d 31 (Tex. 2000).In re Jane Doe 3, 19 S.W.3d 300 (Tex. 2000).In re Doe, 19 S.W.3d 346 (Tex. 2000). (This case is popularly referred to as "In re Jane Doe 5".)Grapevine Excavation, Inc. v. Maryland Lloyds, 35 S.W.3d 1 (Tex. 2000).Partial dissent, partial concurrence[edit]Lopez v. Munoz, Hockema, & Reed, 22 S.W.3d 857 (Tex. 2000)See also[edit]References[edit]^ abcAlberto Gonzales, Attorney General, by Lisa Tucker McElroy, 2006, Millbrook Press^"The Gonzales Resignation", Washington Post (August 27, 2007).^Shenon, Philip; Johnston, David (August 28, 2007). "A Defender of Bush's Power, Gonzales Resigns". The New York Times. ^"Alberto R. Gonzales: Targeting the Lone Star State", USA Today (August 7, 2013).^New York Times "What the Courts Didn't Say" July 18, 2013^Fox News "Has Holder's Ability to Lead been Irrecoverably Damaged?" June 6, 2013^CNN "Alberto Gonzales on Race and the Law" July 20, 2013^Alberto Gonzales (June 3, 2005). Living the American Dream. Interview with Academy of Achievement. New York City. Archived from the original on April 3, 2007. http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/gon0int-2. Retrieved May 6, 2007.^Zaleski, Katharine (May 17, 2006). "Alberto Gonzales Admits His Grandparents May Have Been Illegal Immigrants From Mexico..". The Huffington Post. Retrieved April 24, 2007. ^"Profile: Attorney General Alberto Gonzales". ABC News. 2005-01-026. Archived from the original on April 24, 2009. Retrieved March 12, 2009. ^Evans, Jennifer. "Alum Gonzales to Give Grads Send-off". Rice University. Retrieved August 19, 2009. [dead link]^Kaplan, Mitch. "An Interview with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales". Sallyport. Rice University. Archived from the original on August 20, 2009. Retrieved August 21, 2009. ^Secretary of State of Texas official tabulation for 2000 Primary Election and General Election^Academy of Achievement Website: http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/pagegen/newsletter/2005/^"George W. Bush arrest record". , The Smoking Gun.^Texas Monthly, ''The Outsider'', July 2010^Washington Post, ''Gonzales's Clemency Memos Criticized'', Page A04, January 6, 2005^"The Texas Clemency Memos". ^"White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales's Texas Execution Memos: How They Reflect on the President, And May Affect Gonzales's Supreme Court Chances". ^Letter from Pete Wassdorf to The Atlantic Monthly, Letters to the Editor, 2003^"White House Blocks Release of Reagan-Era Presidential Records". Retrieved May 3, 2011. ^"Opinion of the D.C. District Court" (PDF). October 1, 2007. Archived from the original on May 10, 2011. Retrieved May 2, 2011. ^Washington Post, May 19, 2003, ''Counsel to Assertive Presidency'', by Mike Allen^ abDirector's Award, 2007, Central Intelligence Agency^House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee, visit to Guantanamo Bay, Second Report of Session 2006''07, page 27, paragraph 85.^ ab"Decision Re Application of the Geneva Convention on Prisoners of War to the Conflict with Al Qaeda and the Taliban, Memorandum for the President". Archived from the original on January 31, 2011. ^Letter dated February 1, 2008 from Attorney General John Ashcroft to the President of the United States.^ abcdMayer, Jane, "The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals", 2008. p. 199^ abMemorandum For John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency, Re: Application for 18 U.S.C. §§ 2340-2340A to Certain Techniques That May be Used In The Interrogation of a High Value al Qaeda Detainee, May 10, 2005^David Johnston (October 4, 2007). "Congress Seeks Justice Dept. Documents on Interrogation". The New York Times. Archived from the original on October 12, 2007. Retrieved October 4, 2007. ^Military Commissions Act of 2006, 10 USC § 948, and Military Commissions Act of 2009^Obama: U.S. will not torture '' politics '' White House '' msnbc.com^Ensuring Lawful Interrogations | The White House^Los Angeles Times, Court Lets Cheney Keep Talks Secret, May 11, 2005^transcript '' Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Hearing on USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, Federal News Service, Monday, July 9, 2007^Texas Monthly, The Outsider by Mimi Swartz, July 2010^Bumiller, Elisabeth; Lewis, Neil A. (November 12, 2004). "Choice of Gonzales May Blaze a Trail for the High Court". The New York Times. Retrieved April 23, 2010. ^"On the Nomination (Confirmation Alberto R. Gonzales to be Attorney General)". United States Senate, Roll Call Votes 109th Congress, 1st Session. ^""Do As We Say, Not As We Do" Says the Right Wing on Judicial Nominees". Archived from the original on June 29, 2011. ^"No to Justice Gonzales". ^"The Holy War Begins: Bush must choose between the big tent or the revival tent". [dead link]^HISPANIC Magazine, December 2005, January 2006, p.28^USA Today, ''Gonzales concentrates outrage on child abuse'', December 14, 2006^Statement of President George W. Bush, The White House, August 27, 2007^Hispanic Magazine, December 2005/January 2006, p.28^"A Review of the Federal Bureau of Investigation's Use of National Security Letters" (PDF). US Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General. Archived from the original on April 19, 2007. Retrieved April 12, 2007. ^Dahlia Lithwick (July 10, 2007). "Hardly Working: How Alberto Gonzales's incompetence became a defense for his wrongdoing". Slate Magazine. ^28 U.S.C. §§ 541^Testimony by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales before Senate Judiciary Committee, April 19, 2007^"Plan for Replacing Certain United States Attorneys" (PDF). Archived from the original on July 23, 2011. ^"Justice Department Announces Appointment of J. Timothy Griffin as Interim United States Attorney" (PDF). Press Release. Department of Justice. December 15, 2006. Archived from the original on August 9, 2007. Retrieved May 28, 2007. ^Waas, Murray (May 10, 2007). "Administration Withheld E-Mails About Rove". National Journal (National Journal Group). Archived from the original on May 22, 2007. Retrieved May 28, 2007. [dead link]^Q & A from Committee for Bud Cummins[dead link] (no date). United States House Committee on the Judiciary Retrieved May 18, 2007. (Written responses by Bud Cummins to committee interrogatories, post-hearing.)^See Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy for full details.^Johnston, David (February 25, 2007). "Reviews of 6 fired attorneys positive". Washington Post. Retrieved March 7, 2006. ^Will Moschella, House Judiciary Committee Testimony, March 6, 2007, at 8 & 15; Monica Goodling, House Judiciary Committee Testimony, May 23, 2007, at 14^Alberto Gonzales, Senate Judiciary Committee Testimony, April 29, 2007 at 27^ ab"Transcript of Media Availability With Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales". PRNewswire-USNewswire. March 13, 2007. Archived from the original on September 29, 2007. Retrieved August 28, 2007. "incomplete information, was communicated or may have been communicated to the Congress" ^"Prosecutor Firings Are My Bad'--Gonzales". AP. March 13, 2007. [dead link]^Jakes Jordan, Lara (March 26, 2007). "White House Backs AG As Support Wanes". San Francisco Chronicle. Associated Press. Archived from the original on 2008-06-24. Retrieved September 1, 2007. ^Jan Crawford Greenburg and Ariane de Vogue (April 16, 2007). "Gonzales Contradicts His Own Testimony". ABC News. Retrieved September 3, 2007. ^Johnson, Kevin (April 20, 2007). "Gonzales seeks GOP support". USA Today. ^CQ Transcripts Wire (April 19, 2007). "Gonzales Testifies Before Senate Panel, Part II". The Washington Post. ^YouTube '' Schumer 4^U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility, ''An Investigation Into the Removal of Nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006'', September 2008^The Wall Street Journal, Review & Outlook, ''General Pi±ata's Exoneration, July 23, 2010^U.S. Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General and Office of Professional Responsibility, ''An Investigation Into the Removal of Nine U.S. Attorneys in 2006'', September 2008. See also Letter dated July 21, 2010 from Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich to Chairman John Conyers of the House Judiciary Committee regarding the investigation by Assistant United States Attorney Nora R. Dannehy.)^IG Report at p 347^Alberto Gonzales, Senate Judiciary Committee Testimony, April 19, 2007 at 7, 48 '' 49 & 62^ abHouse Judiciary Chairman Says U.S. Attorney Firings Were ‚‘Petty Patronage' '' washingtonpost.com^DOJ: Prosecutor firing was politics, not crime[dead link].^Philadelphia Daily News, ''An apology for Alberto? Shirley, you jest'', by Christina M. Flowers, posted July 23, 2010^Wall Street Journal, Review & Outlook, ''General Pi±ata's Exoneration, July 23, 2010^DOJ IG Report, September 2008^Egelko, Bob (January 24, 2007). "Gonzales says the Constitution doesn't guarantee habeas corpus". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved June 19, 2007. ^"Gonzales: There Is No Express Grant of Habeas Corpus In The Constitution". Think Progress. January 18, 2007. ^Hamilton, Alexander (July 1788). "The Federalist Papers : No. 84". The Avalon Project. Archived from the original on May 3, 2007. Retrieved April 24, 2007. ^E. Chemerinsky, Federal Jurisdiction, 679 (1989)^W. Duker, A Constitutional History of Habeas Corpus, 135''136 (1980)^Judiciary Act of 1789, Ch. 20, 1 stat. 73^Ins V. St. Cyr^The Federalist #84^R. Fallon, et al., Hart and Wechsler's The Federal Courts and the Federal System 1289 (5th ed. 2003)^See also, Kennedy 200, Department of Justice responses to Questions for the record posed to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Senate Judiciary Committee Oversight Hearing, January 18, 2007 (Part 3) Submitted to the Honorable Patrick Leahy, by letter dated April 13, 2007 from Richard A. Hertling, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legislative Affairs^Parry, Robert (January 19, 2007). "Gonzales Questions 'Habeas Corpus'". Commentary (Baltimore Chronicle & Sentinel). Archived from the original on August 21, 2007. Retrieved August 28, 2007. ^ abcPreviously Secret Torture Memo Released CNN.com, July 24, 2008^C.I.A. Interrogations. New York Times, April 28, 2009^Memorandum for John Rizzo, Acting General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency, re: Interrogation of Al-Qaeda operative, dated August 1, 2002 from the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice.^Memorandum for Alberto R. Gonzales, Counsel to President, re: Standards of Conduct for Interrogation Under 18 U.S.C. 2340-2340A, dated August 1, 2002 from the Office of Legal Counsel at the Department of Justice.^ abMark Mazzetti, "Bush Aides Linked to Talks on Interrogations", New York Times, September 24, 2008^Joby Warrick and Peter Finn, "Harsh Tactics Readied Before Their Approval", The Washington Post, April 22, 2009^Alex Koppelman, "Ashcroft suggests CIA sought legal approval after torture began", Salon, July 17, 2008^David Johnston and James Risen "The Reach Of War: The Interrogations; Aides Say Memo Backed Coercion Already In Use", New York Times, June 27, 2004^Jason Leopold DOJ Report Says Yoo's Torture Memo Failed To Cite Supreme Court Case,The Public Record, February 22, 2009^Hilary Andersson, "Did America break its torture law?", BBC Panorama, July 13, 2009^"US 'waterboarding' row rekindled", BBC, July 13, 2009^Jay Bybee and John Yoo, "Memorandum for John Rizzo Acting General Counsel of the Central Intelligence Agency: Interrogation of al Qaeda Operative" U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, August 1, 2002^ abcdEnforced Disappearance, Illegal Interstate Transfer, and Other Human Rights Abuses Involving the UK Overseas Territories: Executive Summary, Reprieve^ abcWalter Pincus, "Waterboarding Historically Controversial", The Washington Post, 5 October 2006^Amy Goodman, "'The Dark Side': Jane Mayer on the Inside Story of How the War on Terror Turned Into a War on American Ideals, Interview Transcript", Democracy Now, 18 July 2008^"Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts". NYT's Risen & Lichtblau's December 16, 2005 Bush Lets U.S. Spy on Callers Without Courts. Archived from the original on February 6, 2006. Retrieved February 18, 2006. via commondreams.org^Byron Calame (August 13, 2006). "Eavesdropping and the Election: An Answer on the Question of Timing". ^President George W. Bush Radio Address to the Nation, December 17, 2003^Pincus, Walter (2006-05-22) Prosecution of Journalists Is Possible in NSA Leaks, Washington Post^Washington Post, ''Prosecution of Journalists is Possible in NSA Leaks,'' May 22, 2006^USDOJ and OPR webpage^Letters from R. Hertling, Acting Assistant Attorney General to Rep. Conyers, March 22, 2007; see also DOJ000748-63, Letter from R. Hertling to Sen. Feingold, Sen. Schumer, Sen. Durbin, Sen. Kennedy, Rep. Hinchy, Rep. Lewis and Rep. Woolsey (same); DOJ 000772, Letter from R. Hertling to Sen. Leahy, June 21, 2007 at 1 (explaining that Attorney General Gonzales does not have authority to grant access to classified information relating to TSP); DOJ 000774 (same, to Senator Specter).^Inspector General Report dated September 2008^Senate Judiciary Hearing, February 6, 2006 (statement of Alberto Gonzales)^Alberto Gonzales, Prepared Remarks at the Georgetown University Law Center (January 24, 2006), http://www.usdoj.gov/archive/ag/speeches/2006/ag_speech_0601241.html^Alberto Gonzales Hosts ''Ask the White House'' (January 25, 2006) (interview on line forum with Alberto Gonzales), http://web.archive.org/web/20060130181756/http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/print/20060125.html[dead link]^The Situation Room (CNN television broadcast February 2, 2006), available at http://edition.CNN.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0602/02/sitroom.02/html[dead link]^U.S. Department of Justice, The NSA Program to Detect and Prevent Terrorist Attacks: Myth v. Reality 2, 4 (January 27, 2006), http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/documents/nsa_myth_v_reality.pdf^Larry King Live (CNN television broadcast January 16, 2006) (interview by Larry King with Alberto Gonzales), available at http://ediction.CNN.com/TRANSCRIPTS/-6-1/16/LKL.HTML^Klaidman, Daniel (2008-12-13). "Now We Know What the Battle Was About". Newsweek. Archived from the original on 2010-11-13. ^Schumer Calls for Special Prosecutor for Gonzales' Perjury '' YouTube^Decision Points, by George W. Bush, 2010^Johnston, David (May 16, 2007). "Bush Intervened in Dispute Over N.S.A. Eavesdropping". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 26, 2010. Retrieved April 23, 2010. ^ abcJ. Comey, Testimony to the S. Judiciary Committee, May 15, 2007 at 6^ abcdefRay Suarez (July 27, 2007). "Democrats Seek Perjury Charge for Attorney General". PBS NewsHour. ^Jeffrey Rosen (September 7, 2007). "Conscience of a Conservative". The New York Times. Archived from the original on September 7, 2007. Retrieved September 5, 2007. ^J Goldsmith, Testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee, October 2, 2007 at 10^ ab"Text: F.B.I. Director's Notes" (PDF). The New York Times. August 17, 2007. ^A. Gonzales testimony to Senate Judiciary Committee, July 24, 2007 at 10^p.15 '' Senate Judiciary Committee testimony, July 24, 2007 by A. Gonzales^Inspector General report p, 36)^Unclassified Report on the President's Surveillance Program, July 10, 2009, p. 36 prepared by Office of the Inspector General of the DOD, DOJ, CIA, NSA and Office of the DNI^Unclassified Report on the President's Surveillance Program, July 10, 2009, Prepared by Office of Inspector General of the DOD, DOI, CIA, NSA and Office of the DNI^David Johnston and Scott Shane (July 25, 2007). "Gonzales Denies Improper Pressure on Ashcroft". The New York Times. ^"Documents Dispute Gonzales' Testimony". The New York Times. Associated Press. July 26, 2007. [Link out-of-date.]^p. 36 of the July 2009 DOJ Inspector General Report^David Stout (July 26, 2007). "F.B.I. Chief Challenges Gonzales's Testimony". The New York Times. Archived from the original on April 24, 2009. ^David Johnston and Scott Shane (August 17, 2007). "Notes Detail Pressure on Ashcroft Over Spying". The New York Times. ^[Link out-of-date. "Leahy: Gonzales Must Clarify Statements"]. Associated Press. July 29, 2007. [dead link]^DOJ Inspector General July 10, 2009 Report^Michael Fletcher (June 28, 2007). "Senators Subpoena The White House". Washington Post. ^"Letter to Fred Fielding, Esq., Counsel to the President" (PDF). United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Patrick Leahy, Chairman. August 8, 2007. Archived from the original on June 29, 2011. ^Deb Riechmann (August 18, 2007). "White House Wants More Time on Subpoenas". The Washington Post. Associated Press. ^Jesse J. Holland (August 20, 2007). "Leahy Threatens Bush Aides With Contempt". The Washington Post. Associated Press. ^David Stout (July 27, 2007). "White House Backs Gonzales on Testimony". The New York Times. Archived from the original on April 24, 2009. ^Philip Shenon and David Johnston (August 29, 2007). "Democrats Say They Will Press Gonzales Inquiries". The New York Times. ^Philip Shenon (August 30, 2007). "Testimony by Gonzales Is Subject of Inquiry". The New York Times. ^Unclassified Report in the President's Surveillance Program, July 10, 2009, DOJ Inspector General Report^Mimi Swartz (July 30, 2010). "The Outsider". Texas Monthly. ^Unclassified Report on the President's Surveillance Program, July 10, 2009, at 37^FN: letter from J.M. McConnell, Director of National Intelligence, to Senator Arlen Specter, Ranking Member, Senate Committee on the Judiciary (July 31, 2007)^Letter from Alberto Gonzales, Attorney General, to Senator Patrick Leahy, Chairman, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, at 1''2 (August 1, 2007); Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing, February 6, 2006, supra note 21, at 200 (Questions and Answers, Responses and Alberto R. Gonzales to Questions from Senator Russell Feingold (July 17, 2006); id at 62 (statement of Alberto Gonzales)^Preserving Prosecutorial Independence Hearing Before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Part IV, 110th Congress 7 (May 15, 2007) at 15; id at 19 (Statement of James Comey) (''I've tried Senator, not to confirm that I'm talking about any particular program. I just don't feel comfortable in open forum.'')^Preserving the Rule of Law in the Fight Against Terror: Hearing Before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 110th Congress 12 (October 2, 2007) at 18 (Statement of Jack Goldsmith) (''Well, let me just say in [Judge Gonzales'] defense that'....there is a technical interpretation of what he said that is true'...but it's very difficult to talk about it [,]'...there's confusion about what the labels refer to [,] and it's very difficult to talk about it in an unclassified setting. I could'...certainly explain it to you in much greater detail in a closed session.''^"Gonzales, Bush Go Back a Long Way". NPR. March 20, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2007. ^"Gonzales explains bedside meeting with ailing Ashcroft". Politics (CNN). July 24, 2007. Archived from the original on March 9, 2008. Retrieved September 1, 2007. ^"Gonzales Rapped As President's 'Yes Man'". ABC News. May 19, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2007. [dead link]^ abAndrew Cohen (April 3, 2007). "Part I: Alberto Gonzales: A Willing Accessory at Justice". Washington Post. Retrieved August 27, 2007. ^ abNational Journal, ''For the Defense'', March 3, 2006^Berlow, Alan (November 21, 2004). "The President's Yes Man". Washington Post. p. B07. Retrieved April 24, 2007. ^Barton Gellman and Jo Becker (June 25, 2007). "Pushing the Envelope on Presidential Power". Washington Post. Retrieved August 27, 2007. ^Memorandum For the President from Alberto R. Gonzales dated 1/25/2002^AP ''Bush expresses fresh confidence in embattled Attorney General Gonzales'', by Terrence Hunt, April 23, 2007^David Stout (May 24, 2007). "Bush Backs Gonzales in Face of No-Confidence Vote". The New York Times. Retrieved August 28, 2007. ^"H.Res. 417". Library of Congress. May 21, 2007. Retrieved May 24, 2007. ^Roll call, 110th congress, 1st Session, Senate vote number 207, June 11, 2007, 05:55 PM On the Cloture Motion (Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Motion to Proceed to the Consideration of S.J.Res.14.) United States Senate. Retrieved June 12, 2007.^Lipton, Eric (June 11, 2007). "No-Confidence Vote on Gonzales Fails in the Senate". The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 8, 2007. Retrieved July 11, 2007. ^"Frank O. Bowman III, Floyd R. Gibson Missouri Endowed Professor of Law". Faculty. University of Missouri School of Law. Archived from the original on March 8, 2007. Retrieved May 5, 2007. ^Bowman, Frank (May 3, 2007). "He's Impeachable, You Know". New York Times. Archived from the original on May 5, 2007. Retrieved May 5, 2007. ^"BREAKING: House Democrats Introducing Bill To Investigate Impeachment Of Alberto Gonzales". Crooks and Liars. ^Representative Jay Inslee Democrat Washington (July 31, 2007). "That the Committee on the Judiciary shall investigate fully whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to impeach Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General". Retrieved August 27, 2007. ^Reuben Navarrette, Jr., March 21, 2007^Press Release, dated March 16, 2007 from the Latino Coalition, ''The Latino Coalition Supports Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and calls for an end to Political Persecution against Leading Hispanic Americans^Letter from Art Gordon, National President of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association to President George W. Bush, dated March 16, 2007^Batt, Tony (March 15, 2007). "Reid expects attorney general to quit". Las Vegas Review-Journal. ^"Recent Posts". The Washington Post. ^Sen. Charles Schumer (March 13, 2007). Schumer Calls For Gonzales's Resignation (Television production). CNN. Retrieved August 27, 2007. "carrying out the political wishes of the President" ^"Gonzales Vows To Stay On The Job". Politics (CBS News). April 23, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2007. "I don't think he can be effective" ^ abcdefghCalling for Gonzales's Resignation '' Common Cause^"Cantwell calls for Gonzales to resign". KEPR-TV. April 25, 2007. Archived from the original on September 30, 2007. Retrieved September 1, 2007. ^Hillary Clinton calls for Gonzales's resignation March 13, 2007^Presidential Hopefuls Speak Up on Prosecutor Dismissals^Werner, Erica (March 25, 2007). "Feinstein calls for Attorney General Gonzales to resign". United States Senator Dianne Feinstein. Archived from the original on October 15, 2007. Retrieved September 1, 2007. "I believe he should step down." ^Kennedy: Resignation is long overdue^Kerry calls on Bush to fire Attorney General[dead link]^Lincoln and Pryor call for Gonzales's ouster^"Obama Renews Call for Gonzales to be Replaced as Attorney General". Barack Obama. March 29, 2007. Archived from the original on June 13, 2007. Retrieved August 27, 2007. "subverted justice to promote a political agenda" ^"Pryor Calls for Attorney General Gonzales to Resign". Senate office of Mark Pryor. March 15, 2007. Retrieved April 17, 2007. "'...when the Attorney General lies to a United States Senator '... it's time for that Attorney General to go'..." [dead link]^Gonzales not convincing. (April 19, 2007). National Public Radio. Retrieved on August 28, 2007.^Gonzales must resign. (April 20, 2007). Press Office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi. United States House of Representatives. Retrieved on August 28, 2007.[dead link]^ abKiely, Kathy; Kevin Johnson (March 15, 2007). "Second GOP senator suggests Gonzales should go". USA Today. Retrieved April 20, 2007. ^Lara Jakes Jordan (April 19, 2007). "Gonzales Confronts Call for Resignation". ABC News. ^Sheryl Gay Stolberg and Jeff Zeleny (March 14, 2007). "Mistakes Made on Prosecutors, Gonzales Admits". New York Times. ^"McCain: It would be best for Gonzales to quit". MSNBC. Associated Press. April 26, 2007. Archived from the original on April 28, 2007. Retrieved April 27, 2007. ^"GOP Senator says Gonzales should consider resigning". CNN. April 20, 2007. Retrieved April 20, 2007. ^Kiely, Kathy; Kevin Johnson (March 15, 2007). "Second GOP senator suggests Gonzales should go". USA Today. Retrieved September 1, 2007. "GOP Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota said he is "deeply concerned about how this whole process has been handled."" ^Schemo, D.J. (April 23, 2007). Gonzales 'bad for Justice Department,' Specter says.Deseret Morning News (UT). Retrieved on August 28, 2007.^Kellman, Laurie (May 16, 2007). "Hagel Demands Gonzales's Resignation". The Washington Post. Retrieved September 1, 2007. ^Strategist Says Gonzales Is "Finished." (March 15, 2007). CBS News. Retrieved on August 28, 2007.^Congressman Paul Gillmor (blog). In B. Roode (March 23, 2007). Gillmor joins in calls for Gonzales to go.Sandusky Register (OH). Retrieved on August 28, 2007.^Goetz, Kaomi (April 5, 2007). "Ehlers Says U.S. Attorney General Should Resign". Michigan Radio News (NPR). Retrieved April 22, 2007. ^"Nevada Republican congressman calls for Gonzales to step down". Las Vegas Sun. April 21, 2007. Archived from the original on April 26, 2007. Retrieved April 22, 2007. ^"Bipartisan questioning about Gonzales needs to continue". Daily Nebraskan. April 10, 2007. Retrieved April 16, 2006. ^"House Republican leader says Gonzales should go". News (Muzi.com). April 21, 2007. Archived from the original on September 28, 2007. Retrieved September 1, 2007. ""[...] I think it is time for fresh leadership at the Department of Justice," Putnam said in a brief telephone interview." ^Tancredo: Gonzales should 'move on' - politics - Decision '08 - Tom Tancredo News - msnbc.com^White House insiders: Gonzales hurt himself before panel April 23, 2007^Bogden out for 'wrong reasons': Justice Department called incompetent March 22, 2007^Republican support for Gonzales erodes '' Politics '' MSNBC.com^Gonzales Fall For Attorney Firings? March 16, 2007^Gonzales rejects calls for resignation March 13, 2007^Bozell III, L. Brent (March 29, 2007). "Sunday's Pseudo-Republicans". Media Research Center. Archived from the original on September 27, 2007. Retrieved September 1, 2007. ^"Richardson calls for Gonzales resignation". KOB. April 20, 2007. Archived from the original on September 28, 2007. Retrieved September 1, 2007. ^ ab"Bush Ally Gonzales resigns post". BBC News. August 27, 2007. Retrieved August 28, 2007. ^Eggen, Dan; Elizabeth Williamson (September 19, 2007). "Democrats May Tie Confirmation to Gonzales Papers". Washington Post. pp. A10. Retrieved September 19, 2007. ^Isikoff, Michael; and Mark Josenball (October 10, 2007). "Gonzales Hires a Top Gun: Still under investigation by Congress and Justice Department lawyers who once worked for him, the former attorney general has turned to a leading Washington attorney to help him beat the rap". Newsweek. Archived from the original on October 12, 2007. Retrieved October 13, 2007. ^SR.com: Gonzales could be prosecuted, McKay says^ abDOJ IG Report dated July 2009^Dan Eggen (November 15, 2007). "Gonzales Defense Fund Set Up '' Former Attorney General's Legal Fees Mount in Probe". The Washington Post. Retrieved November 15, 2007. ^ abcReport: Ex-AG Gonzales Mishandled Classified Info by Nina Totenberg. All Things Considered, National Public Radio. September 2, 2008.^Report of Investigation Regarding Allegations of Mishandling of Classified Documents by Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General, September 2, 2008^Lewis, Neil A. (April 13, 2008). "In Searching for New Job, Gonzales Sees No Takers". New York Times. Retrieved June 12, 2013. ^"Doyle Rogers Distinguished Chair of Law to be Filled by Alberto Gonzales" Belmont University Press Release, Retrieved November 10, 2011^"Former United States Attorney General Judge Alberto Gonzales Joins Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis"[dead link] Press Release from Waller Lansden, Retrieved 10-11-11^Wall Street Journal (2008). Alberto Gonzales: Interview Excerpts. Retrieved January 1, 2009.^ abDaily News website, opinions archives "Editorial, "Gonzo the Clown,"". Daily News. January 5, 2009. Retrieved January 12, 2009. ^ abPerez, Evan (December 31, 2008). "Gonzales Defends Role in Antiterror Policies". Wall Street Journal. ^The Situation Room, Wolf Blitzer, May 26, 2009^Larry King Live, Larry King, April 29, 2010^Geraldo at Large, Geraldo Rivera, December 22, 2009^Tell Me More, NPR, January 26, 2009; Tell Me More, NPR, May 13, 2009^Washington Post, August 22, 2010, ''Anchor Babies aren't the problem with immigration''; Los Angeles Times, July 2, 2008, ''The Latino Factor''; USA Today, May 14, 2008, ''We owe it to our children to protect them''^Taxi to the Dark Side (2007) '' IMDb^"Controversial former U.S. Attorney General hired at Texas Tech". Lubbock Avalanche-Journal. July 7, 2009. Retrieved July 7, 2009. ^"Former AG Gonzales to teach at Texas Tech". Associated Press. July 7, 2009. Retrieved July 7, 2009. [dead link]^Post, Sally (July 7, 2009). "Alberto Gonzales Brings Expertise, Experience to Texas Tech". Texas Tech Today. Retrieved July 8, 2009. ^"Inside Higher Ed '' Texas Tech Profs Oppose Hiring of Alberto Gonzales". Texas Tech Today. July 27, 2009. Retrieved August 13, 2009. ^The Daily Toreador, March 30, 2009, ''Gonzales Adapts to West Texas life, Tech professorship^"Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales indicted in S. Texas". Houston Chronicle. November 18, 2008. Archived from the original on June 27, 2009. ^Los Angeles Times,December 2, 2008, ''Cheney indictment dropped''^Houston Chronicle,November 18, 2008^"Cheney indictment dropped". Los Angeles Times. December 2, 2008. ^Universal jurisdiction * "Text of criminal complaint" (PDF). The Center for Constitutional Rights. 2006. * Adam Zagorin, Adam (November 10, 2006). "Charges Sought Against Rumsfeld Over Prison Abuse". Time Magazine. * "War Crimes Suit Prepared against Rumsfeld". Democracy Now. November 9, 2006. * Jeremy Brecher and Brendan Smith (November 3, 2006). "War Criminals, Beware". The Nation. ^Marlise Simons (March 28, 2009). "Spanish Court Weighs Inquiry on Torture for 6 Bush-Era Officials". New York Times. Archived from the original on May 2, 2009. ^"Spain may decide Guantanamo probe this week". Reuters. March 28, 2009. Archived from the original on April 26, 2009. Retrieved March 29, 2009. mirror^The Huffington Post, ''Baltazar Garzon Falls From Grace'', May 10, 2010, by Daniel Woolls^The Huffington Post, posted September 8, 2009, by Andy Worthington^The Texas Supreme Court granted rehearing and reversed its own judgment, in an opinion written by Justice Hecht. 90 S.W.3d 268 (Tex. 2002).External links[edit]
      '‹Snowden used common web crawler tool to collect NSA files
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: RT - USA
        Mon, 10 Feb 2014 04:00
        Published time: February 09, 2014 05:12AFP Photo / Paul J. Richards
        Whistleblower Edward Snowden used ''inexpensive'' and ''widely available'' software to gain access to at least 1.7 million secret files, The New York Times reported, quoting senior intelligence officials investigating the breach.
        The collection process was ''quite automated,'' a senior intelligence official revealed. Snowden used ''web crawler'' software to ''search, index and back up'' files. The program just kept running, as Snowden went about his daily routine.
        ''We do not believe this was an individual sitting at a machine and downloading this much material in sequence,'' the official said.
        Investigators concluded that Snowden's attack was not highly sophisticated and should have been easily detected by special monitors. The web crawler can be programmed to go from website to website, via embedded links in each document, copying everything it comes across.
        The whistleblower managed to set the right algorithm for the web crawler, indicating subjects and how far to follow the links, according to the report. At the end of the day, Snowden was able to access 1.7 million files including documents on internal NSA networks and internal ''wiki" materials, used by analysts to share information across the world.
        Reportedly, Snowden had full access to the NSA's files, as part of his job as the technology contractor in Hawaii, managing computer systems in a faraway outpost that focused on China and North Korea.
        Officials added that the files were accessible because the Hawaii outpost was not upgraded with the latest security measures.
        The web crawler used by Snowden was similar to, but not as advanced as the Googlebot crawler, used by Google and its search engine to access billions of websites and download their contents for fast search results.
        The whistleblower did raise some flags while working in Hawaii, prompting questions about his work, but he was able to ward off criticism successfully.
        ''In at least one instance when he was questioned, Mr. Snowden provided what were later described to investigators as legitimate-sounding explanations for his activities: As a systems administrator he was responsible for conducting routine network maintenance. That could include backing up the computer systems and moving information to local servers, investigators were told,'' according to the report.
        Snowden admitted in June to taking an undisclosed number of documents, which in the last half-year have been regularly relied on by the international media for a number of high-profile reports about the US National Security Agency and its British counterpart, GCHQ. He was then granted political asylum by Russia and now resides in Moscow.
        The leaks have unveiled a number of previously unreported NSA operations, including those involving dragnet surveillance programs that put the digital lives of millions, if not billions, of individuals across the world into the possession of the US government.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Obama Nation
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Pen and Phone Campaign = Good
        Total mind programming; Costco-Government
        Shame your employer
        Aaaatlas Shrugged!
      Executive Order -- Minimum Wage for Contractors
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:09
        The White House
        Office of the Press Secretary
        For Immediate Release
        February 12, 2014
        EXECUTIVE ORDER
        - - - - - - -
        ESTABLISHING A MINIMUM WAGE FOR CONTRACTORS
        By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, 40 U.S.C. 101 et seq., and in order to promote economy and efficiency in procurement by contracting with sources who adequately compensate their workers, it is hereby ordered as follows:
        Section 1. Policy. This order seeks to increase efficiency and cost savings in the work performed by parties who contract with the Federal Government by increasing to $10.10 the hourly minimum wage paid by those contractors. Raising the pay of low-wage workers increases their morale and the productivity and quality of their work, lowers turnover and its accompanying costs, and reduces supervisory costs. These savings and quality improvements will lead to improved economy and efficiency in Government procurement.
        Sec. 2. Establishing a minimum wage for Federal contractors and subcontractors. (a) Executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the extent permitted by law, ensure that new contracts, contract-like instruments, and solicitations (collectively referred to as "contracts"), as described in section 7 of this order, include a clause, which the contractor and any subcontractors shall incorporate into lower-tier subcontracts, specifying, as a condition of payment, that the minimum wage to be paid to workers, including workers whose wages are calculated pursuant to special certificates issued under 29 U.S.C. 214(c), in the performance of the contract or any subcontract thereunder, shall be at least:
        (i) $10.10 per hour beginning January 1, 2015; and
        (ii) beginning January 1, 2016, and annually thereafter, an amount determined by the Secretary of Labor (Secretary). The amount shall be published by the Secretary at least 90 days before such new minimum wage is to take effect and shall be:
        (A) not less than the amount in effect on the date of such determination;
        (B) increased from such amount by the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (United States city average, all items, not seasonally adjusted), or its successor 2
        publication, as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics; and
        (C) rounded to the nearest multiple of $0.05.
        (b) In calculating the annual percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for purposes of subsection (a)(ii)(B) of this section, the Secretary shall compare such Consumer Price Index for the most recent month, quarter, or year available (as selected by the Secretary prior to the first year for which a minimum wage is in effect pursuant to subsection (a)(ii)(B)) with the Consumer Price Index for the same month in the preceding year, the same quarter in the preceding year, or the preceding year, respectively.
        (c) Nothing in this order shall excuse noncompliance with any applicable Federal or State prevailing wage law, or any applicable law or municipal ordinance establishing a minimum wage higher than the minimum wage established under this order.
        Sec. 3. Application to tipped workers. (a) For workers covered by section 2 of this order who are tipped employees pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 203(t), the hourly cash wage that must be paid by an employer to such workers shall be at least:
        (i) $4.90 an hour, beginning on January 1, 2015;
        (ii) for each succeeding 1-year period until the hourly cash wage under this section equals 70 percent of the wage in effect under section 2 of this order for such period, an hourly cash wage equal to the amount determined under this section for the preceding year, increased by the lesser of:
        (A) $0.95; or
        (B) the amount necessary for the hourly cash wage under this section to equal 70 percent of the wage under section 2 of this order; and
        (iii) for each subsequent year, 70 percent of the wage in effect under section 2 for such year rounded to the nearest multiple of $0.05.
        (b) Where workers do not receive a sufficient additional amount on account of tips, when combined with the hourly cash wage paid by the employer, such that their wages are equal to the minimum wage under section 2 of this order, the cash wage paid by the employer, as set forth in this section for those workers, shall be increased such that their wages equal the minimum wage under section 2 of this order. Consistent with applicable law, if the wage required to be paid under the Service Contract Act, 41 U.S.C. 6701 et seq., or any other applicable law or regulation is higher than the wage required by section 2, the employer shall pay additional cash wages sufficient to meet the highest wage required to be paid.
        Sec. 4. Regulations and Implementation. (a) The Secretary shall issue regulations by October 1, 2014, to the extent permitted by law and consistent with the requirements of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act, to implement the requirements of this order, including providing 3
        exclusions from the requirements set forth in this order where appropriate. To the extent permitted by law, within 60 days of the Secretary issuing such regulations, the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council shall issue regulations in the Federal Acquisition Regulation to provide for inclusion of the contract clause in Federal procurement solicitations and contracts subject to this order.
        (b) Within 60 days of the Secretary issuing regulations pursuant to subsection (a) of this section, agencies shall take steps, to the extent permitted by law, to exercise any applicable authority to ensure that contracts as described in section 7(d)(i)(C) and (D) of this order, entered into after January 1, 2015, consistent with the effective date of such agency action, comply with the requirements set forth in sections 2 and 3 of this order.
        (c) Any regulations issued pursuant to this section should, to the extent practicable and consistent with section 8 of this order, incorporate existing definitions, procedures, remedies, and enforcement processes under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.; the Service Contract Act, 41 U.S.C. 6701 et seq.; and the Davis-Bacon Act, 40 U.S.C. 3141 et seq.
        Sec. 5. Enforcement. (a) The Secretary shall have the authority for investigating potential violations of and obtaining compliance with this order.
        (b) This order creates no rights under the Contract Disputes Act, and disputes regarding whether a contractor has paid the wages prescribed by this order, to the extent permitted by law, shall be disposed of only as provided by the Secretary in regulations issued pursuant to this order.
        Sec. 6. Severability. If any provision of this order, or applying such provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of the provisions of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.
        Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
        (i) the authority granted by law to an agency or the head thereof; or
        (ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
        (b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
        (c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.4
        (d) This order shall apply only to a new contract or contract-like instrument, as defined by the Secretary in the regulations issued pursuant to section 4(a) of this order, if:
        (i) (A) it is a procurement contract for services or construction;
        (B) it is a contract or contract-like instrument for services covered by the Service Contract Act;
        (C) it is a contract or contract-like instrument for concessions, including any concessions contract excluded by Department of Labor regulations at 29 C.F.R. 4.133(b); or
        (D) it is a contract or contract-like instrument entered into with the Federal Government in connection with Federal property or lands and related to offering services for Federal employees, their dependents, or the general public; and
        (ii) the wages of workers under such contract or contract-like instrument are governed by the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Service Contract Act, or the Davis-Bacon Act.
        (e) For contracts or contract-like instruments covered by the Service Contract Act or the Davis-Bacon Act, this order shall apply only to contracts or contract-like instruments at the thresholds specified in those statutes. For procurement contracts where workers' wages are governed by the Fair Labor Standards Act, this order shall apply only to contracts or contract-like instruments that exceed the micro-purchase threshold, as defined in 41 U.S.C. 1902(a), unless expressly made subject to this order pursuant to regulations or actions taken under section 4 of this order.
        (f) This order shall not apply to grants; contracts and agreements with and grants to Indian Tribes under the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (Public Law 93-638), as amended; or any contracts or contract-like instruments expressly excluded by the regulations issued pursuant to section 4(a) of this order.
        (g) Independent agencies are strongly encouraged to comply with the requirements of this order.
        Sec. 8. Effective Date. (a) This order is effective immediately and shall apply to covered contracts where the solicitation for such contract has been issued on or after:
        (i) January 1, 2015, consistent with the effective date for the action taken by the Federal Acquisition Regulatory Council pursuant to section 4(a) of this order; or
        (ii) for contracts where an agency action is taken pursuant to section 4(b) of this order, January 1, 2015, consistent with the effective date for such action.5
        (b) This order shall not apply to contracts or contract-like instruments entered into pursuant to solicitations issued on or before the effective date for the relevant action taken pursuant to section 4 of this order.
        (c) For all new contracts and contract-like instruments negotiated between the date of this order and the effective dates set forth in this section, agencies are strongly encouraged to take all steps that are reasonable and legally permissible to ensure that individuals working pursuant to those contracts and contract-like instruments are paid an hourly wage of at least $10.10 (as set forth under sections 2 and 3 of this order) as of the effective dates set forth in this section.
        BARACK OBAMA
      Companies Must Justify Their Workforce Decisions Under Obama's Latest Rewrite | CNS News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 15:47
        President Barack Obama signs the health care bill on March 23, 2010. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite, File)
        (CNSNews.com) '' Once again acting without Congress, President Obama has unilaterally changed his signature health insurance law, delaying its employer mandate '' the second time he's done this -- to 2016, after the mid-term elections.BUT: To be eligible for the additional delay, the Obama administration says an employer ''may not reduce the size of its workforce or the overall hours of service of its employees'' unless it can justify those reductions to the Internal Revenue Service.
        The Affordable Care Act, as passed by Congress, says companies with more than 50 full-time-equivalent employees must provide ''minimum essential coverage'' starting on Jan. 1, 2014 or pay a fine.
        On Monday, the administration issued new regulations saying that employers with 50 to 99 workers don't need to provide minimum essential coverage until 2016 '' two years beyond what's written in the law.
        And large employers (those with 100 or more workers) must provide coverage to only 70 percent of their workers in 2015.
        But the regulations also say that effective yesterday, employers may not shed employees or work hours just to get below the 100-employee threshold '' and thus avoid Obamacare's penalties for another full year.
        One scholar called the latest changes ''Orwellian.''
        ''So, figure out what that means,'' Marc Thiessen of the American Enterprise Institute told Fox News's Megyn Kelly Monday night. ''American businesses have to justify their hiring decisions and firing decisions to the IRS. So, if you have 101 employees and you lay off two people (to get into the 50- to 99-employee category), you have to tell Big Brother why you did it. And you have to justify it. I mean, that is Orwellian.''
        Thiessen said hiring and layoff decisions are none of the government's business:
        ''We have a free market economy, not a command economy. It's not the government's business to tell you.''
        Thiessen said under Obamacare, ''the government creates a false incentive to lay off workers and then punishes you on pain of perjury, a criminal offense, for doing what the incentive leads to you to do'...I mean, it is just insane.''
        The regulations say employers that reduce workforce size or overall hours ''for bona fide business reasons'' are still eligible for the relief, but the changes must be certified with the IRS.
        Also, the regulation says there will be no ''relief'' for employers who fail to maintain their previously offered health coverage during the period beginning Feb. 9, 2014 through Dec. 31, 2015.
        Thiessen of the American Enterprise Institute called the latest Obamacare delay ''an act of desperation.''
        ''First of all, they've been telling us for years now that all the Obamacare critics who said the employer mandate will lead to lay-offs, some cuts in hours -- that was just a right-wing myth. But now all of a sudden, it looks like they're kind of worried about it. They're kind of worried that millions of people are going to lose their jobs and have their hours cut. And so they're taking these desperation tactics.''
        ---------------------------
        In a Q&A on the final regulations issued Monday, Feb. 10, 2014, the Obama administration spells out the new ''maintenance of workforce'' mandate in question 34, as follows:
        34. Is additional transition relief available for employers with at least 50 but fewer than 100 full-time employees (including full-time equivalents)?
        Yes. For employers with fewer than 100 full-time employees (including full-time equivalents) in 2014, that meet the conditions described below, no [penalty] will apply for any calendar month during 2015...
        In order to be eligible for the relief, an employer must certify that it meets the following conditions:
        (1) Limited Workforce Size. The employer must employ on average at least 50 full-time employees (including full-time equivalents) but fewer than 100 full-time employees (including full-time equivalents) on business days during 2014...
        (2) Maintenance of Workforce and Aggregate Hours of Service. During the period beginning on Febr. 9, 2014 and ending on Dec. 31, 2014, the employer may not reduce the size of its workforce or the overall hours of service of its employees in order to qualify for the transition relief. However, an employer that reduces workforce size or overall hours of service for bona fide business reasons is still eligible for the relief.
        (3) Maintenance of Previously Offered Health Coverage. During the period beginning on Feb. 9, 2014 and ending on Dec. 31, 2015...the employer does not eliminate or materially reduce the health coverage, if any, it offered as of Feb. 9, 2014....
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Returning vets and trauma disorders
      Childless by choice almost like political choice
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      America's "Black Gold" Rush Is Leading To Soaring Homelessness
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Zero Hedge
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:12
        Lured by the promise of jobs created by the oil and gas boom, unemployed people are flocking to North Dakota en masse. This is heralded by many in the mainstream media as great news - labor mobility at its best - however, there is a darker side: rents are surging and finding a place to live at any price is difficult. As Reuters reports, amid all the boomtime plenty, however, is a housing affordability crisis. North Dakota saw a 200% jump in homelessness last year, the biggest increase of any state - "people are coming because it's widely publicized that we have jobs, but it's not widely publicized that we don't have housing."
        Via Reuters,
        "Homelessness is a quickly growing problem in North Dakota, which hasn't received the attention it deserves," said Heitkamp in a statement.
        Amid all the boomtime plenty, however, is a housing affordability crisis. North Dakota saw a 200 percent jump in homelessness last year, the biggest increase of any state. There are now 2,069 homeless people in the state of 699,628, according to data from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. That translates into 28.6 homeless people per 10,000. The national average is 19.
        Williston is perhaps the most extreme example of a phenomenon that researchers say has followed frackers across the country as the shale boom draws large numbers of people to sparsely populated and remote areas of the country. As frackers move in, demands are placed on limited housing stock and rents climb, according to research from Cornell University.
        Williston - not so long ago a place where a traffic jam was two people at a stop sign - saw its population more than double, to an estimated 33,547 last year from 14,716 in 2010, according to estimates from North Dakota State University. The number of homeless in the area is 986, according to official town estimates.
        Rents have skyrocketed. One-bedroom apartments, which cost $500 per month a few years ago, command as much as $2,000 per month. It's difficult to get a real estate agent on the phone, and waiting lists for apartment houses and RV spaces overflowing. People are renting out rooms in their homes for as much as $1,000. Starter houses cost $300,000 or more to buy.
        There are no homeless shelters in Williston, and the city says it does not have the resources to cope with its new homeless population.
        "People are coming because it's widely publicized that we have jobs, but it's not widely publicized that we don't have housing,"
        ...
        "The common scenario is that these people spent their last dollar to take a bus to come here to make a better life for their family back home," said Captain Joshua Stansberry of the Williston Salvation Army. "But with the high cost of living, they are forced to live a transient lifestyle."
        ...
        "The jobs are here," he said. "But you can be damn sure of one thing: None of us can find housing."
        It's not just workers who are affected. Student homelessness in North Dakota increased 212 percent last year, according to the U.S. Department of Education.
        ...
        "As early as three to four years ago, the homeless were a number that we didn't even calculate, nor did we monitor it," said Steve Holen, superintendent of the McKenzie County School District, which includes Watford City. "We didn't feel the need to as we had virtually no situations in which this was occurring."
        The Salvation Army in Williston is now buying one-way bus tickets for people to go back home.
        Average:Your rating: NoneAverage: 2.2(5 votes)
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Clarence Thomas: Society is overly sensitive about race - Yahoo News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:57
        HomeMailNewsSportsFinanceWeatherGamesGroupsAnswersScreenFlickrMobileMoreCelebrityShineMoviesMusicTVHealthShoppingTravelAutosHomesYahoo NewsSearch NewsSearch WebSign InMailHelpAccount InfoHelpSuggestionsYahoo
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      10 Prison Security Techniques Being Implemented on the American People
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: BlackListedNews.com
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:19
        Americans are not typically aware of how their federal and state prison systems work. What we think we know, we learned from watching television. When I took my first walk through at FCI (Federal Correctional Institution) El Reno Oklahoma as a new employee, I was surprised at how non-Hollywood real prison life is. Frankly, all I knew about prison life was what I saw on television or at the movies. Not even close.
        As I got closer to retiring from the Federal Bureau of Prisons (FBOP), it began to dawn on me that the security practices we used in the prison system were being implemented outside those walls. ''Free worlders'' is prison slang for the non-incarcerated who reside in the ''free world.'' In this article I am going to compare a number of practices used in federal prisons to those being used today in the ''free world.''
        You might find that our country may be one giant correctional institution.
        Cameras & Movement Tracking(Source: Joern Haufe / Getty Images)
        In federal prisons, cameras are everywhere. The reason, of course, is to help maintain security and keep track of prisoners. Inmates know that if they break any rules or policies, they can be readily identified if the event occurred in view of a camera. The cameras remind the inmates that they do not have any freedom or privacy, and that they live under total control.
        Unfortunately, the ''free world'' is now subject to the widespread use of video surveillance and movement tracking. This goes beyond cameras, which have become virtually ubiquitous now. The federal government has been handing out grants to create sophisticated surveillance grids in cities across the country.
        These surveillance grids frequently include license plate readers '-- some with the ability to log 1,200 license plates per hour, logging timestamps and location data '-- giving the government a way to track people and analyze their movement patterns. Some cities post license plate readers to log every single vehicle that enters or leaves its boundaries. Many cities have turned their police cars into roving data collectors by outfitting them with mobile license plate scanners. A man from California discovered that he had been photographed 112 times over the course of a couple years '-- from just one police cruiser mounted with a license plate scanner! The local databases of movement data are integrated with the federal government through its fusion centers located all over the country.
        The government also has the ability to use facial-recognition software in conjunction with its surveillance grid to instantly identify individuals by comparing their photograph to biometric databases created using BMV photographs. Facial recognition cameras can be set up to accurately identify a person against a database of millions of images in less than one second. The government can then potentially log their locations and using the data for any purpose it wants.
        As the usage of these technologies grows, the ''authorities'' will practically know where you are at any time. The British have the greatest level of electronic surveillance in the world. Their movements are said to be recorded 3,000 times a week. The United States is not that far behind. In some ways, with the numerous NSA spying programs, the USA leads the world in destroying personal privacy. Today's youngest generation will grow up never knowing what privacy is.
        Drug TestingThe federal prison inmate drug abuse monitoring program has been going on for decades since the capability was invented. At any time, a prisoner can be tested for intoxicants using urine, sweat, saliva, and hair samples taken by force. After years of perfecting the process on inmates, it was introduced to the American public.
        On September 15, 1986, President Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order 12564, establishing the goal of a Drug-Free Federal Workplace. Additionally, in 2010, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) finalized a new rule that allows federal agencies to use sweat, saliva and hair in federal drug testing programs that only tested urine. Since then, many private businesses and corporations had to begin testing their employees in order to keep or obtain federal contracts. Under federal guidelines for employee testing, if a person takes medicine that was not prescribed to him, he has committed a federal drug abuse offense and may be fired. Children in public schools are also subjected to involuntary random drug testing.
        The inmates were the guinea pigs for a program now being regularly employed on Americans. This process conditions Americans to be accustomed to regularly submitting bodily fluid samples to the government, lessening their resistance to data collection and intrusion in other areas.
        Metal Detection & Weapon ConfiscationIn prison, detection and confiscation of weapons is a necessity. Prisoners cannot be allowed the freedom to possess objects that could potentially be used to cause harm to others. The security of the facility relies on the prisoners remaining disarmed.
        With that said, not even prisons can be guaranteed to be weapon free. Inmates are clever, and can fashion any piece of metal into a makeshift weapon. They are also prolific smugglers. To mitigate this risk, prisoners and visitors are put through metal detector checkpoints to keep them disarmed. Any metallic contraband is confiscated.
        Treating prisoners this way is one thing. In a prison setting, security trumps liberty. The liberties of the inmates have been curtailed through due process on an individual basis. But these prison tactics have crept out into the ''free world.'' Now, virtually all government buildings use metal detectors to screen incoming visitors and even their own personnel. This establishes a climate of fear of weapons and a false sense of security among those within such ''weapon free zones.'' If a prison can't proclaim to be weapon free, how can any place outside of prison make such arrogant and naive claims?
        Crowd ControlHelmets, face shields, batons, knee guards, tear gas, wedge formations, line formations, half steps, full steps, pinning tactics '-- all of these phrases are associated with prison crowd control. As I look at today's police and how they attempt crowd control it reminds me of my days in federal prison as the Hostage Negotiation Team (HNT) leader. The HNT worked closely with the Special Operations and Response Team (SORT) on both monthly local training and annual training at Fort Gruber in Muskogee Oklahoma. SORT membership is selective and highly practiced. The teams must be familiar with hand signals and verbal commands, as well as certain maneuvers that are often referred to as ''stomp and drag.'' These tactics are designed to help quell disturbances '-- the FBOP word for ''riot'' '-- by forcing inmates in the direction that SORT wants them to move. This training takes place monthly for SORT members and annually for the rest of the FBOP staff.
        The next time you see police engaged in crowd control on television you are watching what was perfected by prisons official through years of practice and real life action. I participated in five disturbances. After observing law enforcement agencies dress up in intimidating riot suits and mimic the behavior of SORT, it is clear that police are using prison tactics to intimidate and control civilian protesters.
        Checkpoints & Random Pat SearchesIn federal prison, all inmates are subject to an immediate pat search by any staff member, anywhere, at any time. If the inmate refuses, he or she is ''arrested,'' which entails being cuffed and escorted to administrative segregation '-- otherwise known as the jail within the jail. The pat search is used to detect contraband. All inmates returning from industrial work programs in medium and low security institutions are pat searched and metal detected before being allowed to return to their dorm. Additionally, inmates in medium and low security institutions are pat searched when they leave food service or the ''chow hall.'' In high and maximum security institutions, inmates are pat searched every time they move. Movement in these institutions is highly controlled.
        Compare this to police roadblocks and checkpoints used to perform warrantless searches for contraband. When a person is stopped by city, county, or state police, they are visually inspected, asked questions concerning their activities, and may be asked to submit to a vehicle or personal search. At federal roadblocks, a subject can be directed to a secondary search area at the discretion of the observing officer. There, the person can be searched for contraband regardless of any objections, just like in a federal prison. There are dozens of federal roadblocks on roads in the southwestern United States, many of them permanent and located up to 100 miles away from the border.
        It isn't just drivers being put through such intrusion. There is also the matter of ''stop and frisk'' searches which are taking place in several areas of the country. These intrusive stops involve the stopping of a pedestrian for any reason, followed by being subjected to a police officer's questioning and a warrantless search of their pockets, purses, bags, and property '-- just like a prisoner.
        Mail Surveillance(Source: Justin Sullivan / Getty Images)
        Every piece of mail sent to an inmate in federal prison is opened, searched, and may be read depending on the dictates from the institutions intelligence office. In medium and high security institutions, all mail is delivered to the unit officer unsealed so that it can be read before being delivered to the mail room. Inmate mail is controlled and may be copied if it is determined that there is possible criminal activity being discussed either blatantly or in code. If something is detected it may be rejected and returned to the inmate if it violates policy. Two examples of ''rejected correspondence'' are an inmate's attempt to conduct unapproved business, or writing another inmate without permission.
        Recent revelations have made it clear that Americans' mail is being surveilled as well. The New York Times reported on how the United States Postal Service uses a ''Mail Isolation Control and Tracking program'' to create a permanent record of who is corresponding with each other via snail mail. The program '-- secretly established in 2001 and not revealed for over a decade '-- assists the government in implementing blanket surveillance of every single resident of the United States. Each piece of physical mail is photographed and stored in a database. Law enforcement has unfettered access to this data without even the requirement of obtaining a warrant. About 160 billion pieces of mail end up being recorded per year.
        Telephone MonitoringIs the NSA listening to your phone calls?
        For decades the FBOP has possessed the capability to monitor outgoing telephone calls. However, their system required staff to sit and listen to the calls which took staff away from direct supervision of inmates. In the early 2000s, a new system was put in place that allowed any and every phone in an institution to be immediately monitored and the call recorded.
        Just like in a federal prison, the NSA has the capability to track and monitor anyone's phone conversations without recourse. The agency can monitor text messages. They can collect locations, times, and a log of every phone number that has been dialed by any phone in the United States. The government can set up fake base stations to intercept phone calls. They can hack the applications on a person's smart phone and spy on their usage. The NSA can even crack cellphone encryption.
        Unlike the inmates who have no choice in the matter of telephone monitoring, the American people have been told about the spying but have decided not to do anything about it.
        LockdownsNational Guard soldiers lock down city streets in Boston. April 2013. (Source: Jesse Costa / WBUR)
        When a correctional institution has its daily operations disturbed, often times it results in a lockdown. Lockdowns usually occur after a disturbance, weather concerns, inmate escapes, rumors of a disturbance about to occur, rumored escape attempts, and institution wide searches are some reasons to lockdown.
        The most notable ''free world'' lockdown in recent memory occurred in Boston, Massachusetts. This lockdown mirrors a federal prison lockdown that is called when the entire institution is to be searched. That is exactly what occurred in Boston. In April 2013 the Boston suburb of Watertown was locked down to the point where no one could enter or leave the town, while 9,000 law enforcement personnel and military took part in searching just about every backpack, vehicle, and home that they could get away with.
        Some of the searches were voluntary, but many were not. As SWAT teams performed systematic house-to-house searches, videos were captured of families being ripped from their home without a warrant so the police could help themselves to the inside of their homes. What resulted had the look of prisoners being removed from their cells by a SORT unit. Watch for yourself:
        The Watertown lockdown was practice for future declarations of martial law. Those tactics had been used and perfected in our prison systems for years. Now the ''free world'' is getting the prison treatment with little objection from the public. The lockdown was not necessary and served mostly to measure the public's reaction and to establish a sense of fear and intimidation. I think it worked.
        SnitchingHomeland Security propaganda poster. (Source: DHS.gov)
        The last thing I want to mention is what I call the ''Moscow Law.'' While growing up during the cold war, I was taught that in the USSR, people were expected to watch their neighbors, strangers, and even family and friends, and report any suspicious activity to the local police. We in America have that law. Read it below. Did you know it exists?
        Title 18 U.S.C. § 4: Misprision of felony: Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
        In prison, there are ''snitches'' everywhere. Believe me, they are not just the inmates, they are also staff. Programs like Infragard are attempting to do the same thing in the ''free world'' as it is in the imprisoned world. Once these programs get started, they are almost impossible to stop. What are we paying our law enforcement to do? Protect us or detect us? You decide.
        Policy and program statements from the Bureau of Prisons are available at: http://www.bop.gov/
        { Support Police State USA }
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      FACT SHEET: United States-France Economic and Commercial Partnership
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:27
        The White House
        Office of the Press Secretary
        For Immediate Release
        February 11, 2014
        France is one of the United States' largest and most important commercial partners. The strength of our economic relationship is based on extensive bilateral trade as well as substantial investment in each other's markets, both of which create high quality, well-paying jobs. Our dynamic economic partnership also drives cooperation in other cooperative fora such as the G8 and G20.
        Jobs and Investment
        France is a key source of foreign direct investment (FDI) and jobs in the United States. The total stock of French FDI in the United States stood at $222 billion at the end of 2012. France is one of the top five sources of jobs created by FDI in the United States, with U.S. affiliates of French firms employing approximately 525,000 Americans in 2011 at an average wage of nearly $80,000. At the same time, the United States was the leading job-creating investor in France in 2012, with U.S. FDI stock in France totaling $83 billion. More than 1,240 affiliates of U.S. firms were present in 2012 in France, supporting an estimated 440,000 jobs.
        Trade
        France was the United States' 8th largest goods trading partner in 2013, with U.S. goods exports to France valued at $32 billion and imports from France totaling $45 billion. The United States is France's largest customer for goods outside of the European Union. Almost 25 percent of bilateral goods trade is in the aerospace sector, evidencing the interconnectedness of the global supply chains of major aircraft manufacturers on both sides of the Atlantic. France and the United States are also key trading partners in services, with U.S. services exports to France reaching $15.1 billion in the first nine months of 2013 and services imports from France valued at $11.7 billion during the same period. The United States and France, through its membership in the European Union, are engaged in negotiation of a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP). The United States seeks to deepen economic ties with Europe through an ambitious and comprehensive agreement.
        Launching of Bilateral Economic-Commercial Dialogue
        The U.S. Department of Commerce and French Ministry of Economy and Finance have agreed to establish a ''U.S.-France Economic-Commercial Dialogue'' to enhance bilateral cooperation and to expand trade and investment. The dialogue aims to facilitate the exchange of information and encourage bilateral discussions to identify ways to boost jobs and growth in both countries and to improve competitiveness through innovation and entrepreneurship. Potential items for discussion and cooperation include: development and support of small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs); encouragement of direct investment in both directions; strategies to promote advanced manufacturing, innovation, and entrepreneurship; workforce training; promotion of green products and energy technologies; market access issues; and the potential benefits of the T-TIP. The dialogue will be co-chaired by the Commerce Assistant Secretary for Global Markets and an equivalent level Economy Ministry official. The two sides aim to hold a first meeting of the dialogue in May or June of 2014.
      FACT SHEET: U.S.-France Cooperation on Science and Technology
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:26
        The White House
        Office of the Press Secretary
        For Immediate Release
        February 11, 2014
        The United States and France have long collaborated on science and technology, which enhances the well-being of our citizens, promotes commercial innovation and economic growth, and advances the human condition not just for our citizens, but for people across the globe. In 2008, the United States and France signed agreements on science and technology, including in the area of homeland security. Significant work has been carried out under these agreements, and the United States remains firmly committed to collaborating with France over a wide range of disciplines '' including civil space, global health, innovation and research exchanges, the environment, and protecting our citizens. Hallmarks of our bilateral cooperation include:
        Civil Space
        The United States and France have a strong partnership in civil space activities, including human space flight, space science, and Earth observation. In human space flight, the French Space Agency (CNES) has been indispensable to Europe's partnership on the International Space Station, and the Government of France was a key participant in the recent International Space Exploration Forum, where spacefaring nations renewed their commitment to cooperative exploration of the solar system. CNES has been a key partner with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in Mars exploration over the past 20 years and continuing into the future with the MAVEN mission that will arrive at Mars later this year. The United States and France are signing an agreement for the Mars Insight mission planned for launch in 2016 and are continuing to negotiate an agreement on solar activity and space weather, both of which will push the boundaries of scientific exploration. Earth Science collaboration with France on a series of currently operating missions is improving life on Earth by enhancing our ability to observe changes in the Earth's systems, which provides such benefits as more accurate weather forecasting and increased understanding of global climate change.
        Global Health
        In 2014 and 2015, the United States and France will both host events building on the G8 Summit on Dementia, hosted by the United Kingdom in 2013. The United States and France partner on HIV/AIDS research, as well as on neurological aspects of substance abuse. The United States also continues to work jointly with France on computational neuroscience, which is part of President Obama's Brain Research through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies (BRAIN) Initiative. Cooperation between the U.S. government and French and American NGOs includes work to prevent meningococcal meningitis in Africa. Nearly 300 French researchers were involved in National Institutes of Health (NIH) supported grants in FY 2013.
        Innovation and Research Exchanges
        The U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF) currently supports several hundred research projects involving U.S. and French investigators. This includes 13 bilateral research projects in the areas of nanomaterials, nanochemistry, and joint multi-million dollar investments on supercomputing research infrastructure. France hosts 16 NSF Graduate Research Opportunities Worldwide (GROW) graduate research fellows, the largest number in GROW's first year, which expands international research opportunities and furthers collaborative research between our two countries. The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has worked with French partner institutions on nanometrology, metals speciation, fire research, information technology, optical lattices, and muonic hydrogen with visiting researchers from each country working in the other.
        Environment
        The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Office of Research and Development and a French cosmetics firm are investigating new screening methods that are faster, cheaper, and reduce the use of laboratory animals and, if successful, could be used to evaluate thousands of chemicals found in commonly used products. EPA collaborated with another French firm to evaluate nitrogen and ozone air sensor performance, which contributes to efforts to advance low-cost sensor technology for monitoring air quality. Additionally, work between NIST and the University of Pau has advanced understanding of measurement of metal species, particularly in situations associated with environmental contamination.
        Homeland Security
        Since the signing of the Science and Technology Agreement in December 2008, the United States and France have conducted information sharing activities in the areas of explosives detection, infrastructure protection, and chemical and biological remediation research. Last November, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) conducted a study at Charles De Gaulle Airport in Paris, France to evaluate the certification and use of explosives detection dogs. Working with the French Directorate General for Civil Aviation, DHS reviewed the test standards, protocols, methodologies, and operation implementation of canine teams. The two governments also shall conduct information exchanges on chemical and biological risk assessment, detection, forensics, and remediation to advance joint efforts to counter biological threats.
      Expected Attendees at Tonight's State Dinner
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:22
        The White House
        Office of the First Lady
        For Immediate Release
        February 11, 2014
        Below is a list of expected attendees at tonight's State Dinner. Additional details about the State Dinner are available HERE.
        THE PRESIDENT and MRS. OBAMA
        HIS EXCELLENCY FRAN‡OIS HOLLANDE, PRESIDENT OF THE FRENCH REPUBLIC
        Mr. J.J. Abrams, Pacific Palisades, CA
        Ms. Katie McGrath
        The Honorable Stacey Abrams, United States Representative (Georgia)
        Mr. Ben Jealous
        Ms. Jill Abramson, The New York Times, New York, NY
        Mr. William Woodson
        Mr. Charles Adams, Jr., Washington, DC
        General Keith Alexander, Director of NSA and Cybercom
        Mrs. Debbie Alexander
        Mr. Peter G. Angelos, Baltimore, MD
        Mrs. Georgia Angelos
        Mr. Kader Arif, Minister Delegate for Veterans Affairs, French Republic
        The Honorable Caroline Atkinson, Deputy Assistant to the President & Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economics
        Mr. Geoffrey Boyd Lamb
        Ms. Jennifer Bado-Aleman, Gaithersburg, MD
        Mr. Frank Skinner
        Mr. Caleb Ballew, Huntsville, AL
        Mrs. Kourtney Ballew, Huntsville, AL
        Mr. Dan Barber, New York, NY
        Mr. David Barber
        The Honorable Karen Bass, United States Representative (California)
        Ms. Barbara Jordan
        Mr. Terrence Bean, Portland, OR
        Mr. Robert Iwasaki
        Mr. Joel Benenson, New York, NY
        Mrs. Lisa Benenson, New York, NY
        The Honorable Michael Bennet, United States Senator (Colorado)
        Ms. Susan Daggett
        Mrs. Andrea Bernstein, New York, NY
        Mr. Tom Bernstein
        Mr. Peter Beshar, Rye, NY
        Mrs. Sarah Beshar
        The Honorable Steven Beshear, Governor of the Commonwealth of Kentucky
        Mrs. Jane Beshear
        The Honorable Joseph Biden, Jr., Vice President of the United States
        Dr. Jill Biden
        Mr. Robert Hunter Biden, Washington, DC
        Mrs. Kathleen Biden
        Ms. Mary J Blige, Saddle River, NJ
        Mr. Kendu Isaacs
        The Honorable Tony Blinken, Assistant to the President and Deputy National Security Advisor
        The Honorable Evan Ryan, Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of State
        Mr. Joseph Blount, Miami Beach, FL
        Ms. Katherine Blount
        Mrs. Nicole Bricq, Minister for Foreign Trade, French Republic
        The Honorable William Burns, Deputy Secretary of State
        Ms. Lisa Ann Carty
        The Honorable Sylvia Burwell, Director of the Office of Management and Budget
        Mr. Steve Burwell
        The Honorable Eric Cantor, United States Representative (Virginia)
        The Honorable Jay Carney, Assistant to the President and Press Secretary
        Ms. Claire Shipman
        Mr. Jim Chanos, New York, NY
        Ms. Crystal A Connors
        Mr. Brian Cladoosby, LaConner, WA
        Mrs. Nina Cladoosby
        The Honorable James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence
        Mrs. Susan Clapper
        The Honorable Max Cleland, Secretary of the American Battle Monuments Commission
        Mrs. Linda Dean
        Mr. Steve Clemons, The Atlantic, Washington, DC
        Mr. Andrew Oros
        The Honorable David L. Cohen, Philadelphia, PA
        Mrs. Rhonda Cohen
        The Honorable David Cohen, Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence, U.S. Department of the Treasury
        Mrs. Suzy Cohen
        Mr. Stephen Colbert, New York, NY
        Mrs. Evie Colbert
        Ms. Joanna Coles, Cosmopolitan Magazine, New York, NY
        Mr. Peter Godwin
        Mr. Jason Collins, Los Angeles, CA
        Mr. Brunson Green
        Mr. Jean-Marie Colombani, JMC Media, French Republic
        Mr. Marcello Conviti, Carmat, French Republic
        Mr. Bradley Cooper, New York, NY
        Ms. Suki Waterhouse
        Mr. James Crane, Houston, TX
        The Honorable Danielle Crutchfield, Assistant to the President and Director of Scheduling and Advance
        The Honorable Elijah Cummings, United States Representative (Maryland)
        Dr. Maya Rockeymoore Cummings
        Mr. Philippe Dauman, New York, NY
        Mrs. Deborah Dauman
        His Excellency Fran§ois Delattre, Ambassador of the Republic of France to the U.S.
        Mrs. Sophie L'H(C)lias Delattre
        General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
        Mrs. Diane Dempsey
        Mr. St(C)phane Distinguin, Cap Digital, French Republic
        Dr. Karen Donfried, Special Assistant to the President, Senior Director for European Affairs
        Mr. Alan Untereiner
        The Honorable Mike Donilon, Alexandria, VA
        Mrs. Trish Donilon
        Mr. Roland Du Luart, Senator from Sarthe, President of the Franco-American Friendship Committee, French Republic
        Mrs. Shefali Duggal, San Francisco, CA
        Mr. Rajat Duggal
        Mr. Ken Ehrlich, Westlake Village, CA
        Mrs. Harriet Ehrlich
        His Excellency Laurent Fabius, Minister for Foreign Affairs, French Republic
        Mr. Matthias Fekl, Representative of the National Assembly, French Republic
        Mrs. Genevi¨re Fioraso, Minister for Higher Education and Research, French Republic
        Mr. Ken Fisher, Rockville, MD
        Mrs. Tammy Fisher
        The Honorable Anthony Foxx, Secretary of Transportation
        Mrs. Samara Foxx
        Mr. Ken Frazier, Whitehouse Station, NJ
        Mrs. Andrea Frazier
        The Honorable Michael Froman, Ambassador and U.S. Trade Representative
        Ms. Nancy Goodman
        The Honorable Jason Furman, Chairman, Council of Economic Advisors
        Ms. Eve A. Gerber, Washington, DC
        Mr. Mark Gallogly, New York, NY
        Ms. Elizabeth Strickler
        Mr. Pierre Gattaz, President of MEDEF, French Republic
        Ms. Thelma Golden, New York, NY
        Mr. Duro Olowu
        Mr. John Goldman, Atherton, CA
        Mrs. Marcia Goldman
        Ms. Julianna Goldman, Bloomberg News, New York, NY
        The Honorable Mike Gottlieb, Associate Counsel to the President
        The Honorable Philip H Gordon, Special Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs
        Mrs. Rachel Gordon
        The Honorable Danielle Gray, Assistant to the President and Cabinet Secretary
        Ms. Jaunique Sealey
        The Honorable Chuck Hagel, Secretary of Defense
        Ms. Allyn Hagel
        Ms. Laura G Haim, Canal Plus and I-Tele French TV, Washington, DC
        Mr. Ara Aprikian
        The Honorable William Haslam, Governor of the State of Tennessee
        Mrs. Crissy Haslam
        Mr. Samuel Heins, Wayzata, MN
        Ms. Stacey Mills
        Mr. Jean-Paul Herteman, Safran, French Republic
        The Honorable Heather Higginbottom, Deputy Secretary of State
        Ambassador Daniel Sepulveda, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State and U.S. Coordinator for International Communications and Information Policy
        The Honorable Eric Holder, Jr., United States Attorney General
        Dr. Sharon Malone
        The Honorable John P. Holdren, Assistant to the President for Science and Technology
        Dr. Patricia Falcone, Associate Director for National Security and International Affairs
        Mrs. Laura Holgate, Senior Director for WMD Terrorism and Threat Reduction
        Dr. Rick Holgate
        Mr. Steve Holland, Reuters, Alexandria, VA
        Mrs. Lucie Holland
        Mr. Jean-Paul Huchon, Paris Region President, French Republic
        Mr. Irwin Jacobs, La Jolla, CA
        Mrs. Joan Jacobs
        Mr. Jean-Marc Janaillac, Transdev, French Republic
        The Honorable Valerie Jarrett, Senior Advisor and Assistant to the President for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Engagement
        Mr. Paul Jean-Ortiz, Diplomatic Advisor to the President, French Republic
        The Honorable Sally Jewell, Secretary of the Interior
        The Honorable Mike Connor, Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner
        The Honorable Jeh Johnson, Secretary of Homeland Security
        Dr. Susan DiMarco
        The Honorable Kevin Johnson, Mayor of the City of Sacramento
        Ms. Michelle Rhee
        Mr. Hubert Joly, Richfield, MN
        Ms. Natalie Jones, Acting Chief of Protocol, U.S. Department of State
        Justice Elena Kagan, Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States
        Ms. Mindy Kaling, Universal City, CA
        Ms. Jocelyn Leavitt
        Ms. Roberta Kaplan, New York, NY
        Ms. Rachel Lavine
        The Honorable Cody Keenan, Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting
        Ms. Kristen Bartoloni
        The Honorable Patrick F. Kennedy, Under Secretary for Management, U.S. Department of State
        Ms. M. Elizabeth Swope
        The Honorable John Kerry, Secretary of State
        The Honorable Leslie Kiernan, Deputy Assistant to the President and Deputy Counsel to the President
        Mr. Paul Kiernan
        The Honorable Ronald Klain, Chevy Chase, MD
        Ms. Monica Medina
        Ms. Christine Lagarde, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund
        Mrs. Anne Lauvergeon, Chairwoman of ''Innovation 2030'' Committee, French Republic
        Mr. Jonathan Lavine, Weston, MA
        Ms. Emily Lavine
        Mr. Jean-Yves Le Gall, CNES, French Republic
        The Honorable Patrick Leahy, United States Senator (Vermont)
        Mrs. Marcelle Leahy
        Mr. Fr(C)d(C)ric Lefebvre, Representative of the National Assembly, French Republic
        Ms. Corine Lesnes, Le Monde. Paris, France
        Mr. John Ruddy
        The Honorable Jack Lew, Secretary of the Treasury
        Dr. Ruth Schwartz
        Dr. Tara Leweling, Director for NATO & European Affairs
        Mr. Harun Dogo
        Ms. Julia Louis-Dreyfus, Mt. Kisco, NY
        Mr. William Louis-Dreyfus
        Mr. Emmanuel Macron, Deputy Chief of Staff to the President, French Republic
        Ms. Kathy Manning, Greensboro, NC
        Mr. Randall Kaplan
        The Honorable Alyssa Mastromonaco, Assistant to the President and Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations
        The Honorable Denis McDonough, Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff
        Mrs. Kari McDonough
        Mr. Cappy McGarr, Dallas, TX
        Mrs. Janie McGarr
        Mr. Raymond McGuire, New York, NY
        Ms. Crystal McCrary
        The Honorable Brian McKeon, Deputy Assistant to the President, Executive Secretary and Chief of Staff
        Ms. Lizabeth Tankersley
        Mr. Eliseo Medina, La Canada-Flintridge, CA
        Ms. Arcelia Rocio Saenz
        Ms. Constance Milstein, Washington, DC
        Mr. Jehan Christophe de la Haye St. Hilaire
        Ms. Nicola Miner, San Francisco, CA
        Mr. Robert Mailer Anderson
        The Honorable Lisa Monaco, Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and Deputy National Security Advisor
        Mr. Mark Monaco
        The Honorable Ernest Moniz, Secretary of Energy
        Mrs. Naomi Moniz
        Mr. Bobby Monks, Portland, ME
        Mr. Arnaud Montebourg, Minister for Industrial Renewal, French Republic
        Mr. Aquilino Morelle, Political Advisor to the President, French Republic
        Mr. Pierre Moscovici, Minister for Economy and Finance, French Republic
        Mr. Bruce Mosler, New York, NY
        Mr. Willard Freeman
        The Honorable Cecilia Mu±oz, Assistant to the President and Director of the Domestic Policy Council
        Mr. Amit A. Pandya
        Mr. Elon Musk, Los Angeles, CA
        Mrs. Talulah Musk
        Mr. Pierre Nanterme, Accenture, French Republic
        Ms. Karen Narasaki, Washington, DC
        Mr. Vivek Malhotra
        The Honorable Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, U.S. Department of State
        Mr. Robert Kagan
        The Honorable Michael Nutter, Mayor of the City of Philadelphia
        Mrs. Lisa Nutter
        Mr. Kevin F. O'Malley, St. Louis, MO
        Mrs. Dena O'Malley
        Ms. Julie Pace, Associated Press, Washington, DC
        Mr. Michael Ferenczy
        The Honorable Jennifer Palmieri, Assistant to the President and Communications Director
        Mr. James Lyons
        Mrs. Fleur Pellerin, Minister Delegate for SMEs, Innovation and the Digital Economy, French Republic
        The Honorable Nancy Pelosi, United States Representative (California)
        Mrs. Jacqueline Kenneally
        Mr. Fabien Penone, Deputy Diplomatic Advisor to the President, French Republic
        Mr. Guillaume Pepy, SNCF, French Republic
        The Honorable Tom Perez, Secretary of Labor
        Ms. Ann Marie Staudenmaier
        The Honorable Dan Pfeiffer, Assistant to the President and Senior Advisor
        Mr. Richard Plepler, New York, NY
        Mrs. Lisa Plepler
        The Honorable John Podesta, Counselor to the President
        Mrs. Mary Podesta
        The Honorable Samantha Power, Permanent Representative of the U.S. to the United Nations
        Mr. Cass Sunstein
        The Honorable Penny Pritzker, Secretary of Commerce
        Mr. Nicholas Pritzker
        General Beno®t Puga, Military Advisor to the President, French Republic
        Mr. Tangi Qu(C)m(C)ner, Agence France-Presse, Bethesda, MD
        Ms. Anne Porquet
        Ms. Azita Raji, Tiburon, CA
        Mr. Gary Syman
        The Honorable Stephanie C Rawlings-Blake, Mayor of the City of Baltimore
        Mr. Kent Blake
        The Honorable Ben Rhodes, Assistant to the President, Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications & Speechwriting
        Ms. Ann Norris
        The Honorable Steven Ricchetti, Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff to the Vice President
        Mrs. Amy Ricchetti
        The Honorable Susan Rice, Assistant to the President and National Security Advisor
        Mr. Ian Cameron
        Mrs. Claudine Ripert-Landler, Press Advisor, French Republic
        Mr. Charles H Rivkin, Washington, DC
        Ms. Susan Tolson
        Mrs. Rachel Robinson, New York, NY
        Mr. Norman Siegel
        The Honorable Harold Rogers, United States Representative (Kentucky)
        Mrs. Cynthia Rogers
        Mr. James Roosevelt, Jr., Cambridge, MA
        Mrs. Ann Roosevel
        Mrs. Laura Ross, New York, NY
        Mr. James Ross
        Mr. Alain Rousset, Aquitaine Region President, French Republic
        The Honorable Edward Randall Royce, United States Representative (California)
        Mrs. Marie Royce, Washington, DC
        The Honorable Kathy Ruemmler, Assistant to the President and Counsel to the President, Washington, DC
        Ms. Margaret-Ang¨le Russell, New York, NY
        Mr. Robert Kaplan
        The Honorable Paul Ryan, United States Representative (Wisconsin)
        Mrs. Janna Ryan
        Mr. Lee Saunders, Washington, DC
        Mrs. Lynne Saunders
        Mrs. Barbara Schmidt, Boca Raton, FL
        Mr. Richard Schmidt
        The Honorable Charles Schumer, United States Senator (New York)
        Ms. Iris Weinshall
        Mr. Pete Selleck, Greenville, SC
        Mrs. Nancy Selleck
        The Honorable Thomas A. Shannon, Jr., Counselor to the Secretary of State
        Mrs. Maria Shannon
        Reverend Alfred Sharpton, New York, NY
        Ms. Aisha I. McShaw
        Mrs. Beth Shaw, New York, NY
        Ms. Rebecca Shaw
        The Honorable Wendy Sherman, Under Secretary for Political Affairs, U.S. Department of State
        Mr. Bruce Stokes
        The Honorable Liz Sherwood-Randall, White House Coordinator for Defense Policy
        Dr. Jeffrey Randall
        The Honorable Peter Shumlin, Governor of the State of Vermont
        Ms. Sarah Schmidt
        The Honorable David Simas, Assistant to the President and Deputy Senior Advisor for Communications and Strategy
        Ms. Shauna McCarty
        Ms. Liz Simons, Atherton, CA
        Mr. Mark Heising
        Mrs. Sarah Smiley, Bangor, ME
        Commander Dustin Smiley
        Mr. Chuck Smith, Jr., Winnetka, IL
        Mrs. Melissa Smith
        Mr. Keith Smith, Ashland, VA
        Mr. Burton Smith
        Mr. Michael Smith, Los Angeles, CA
        Ms. Natalie Massenet
        Ms. Kim Snow, Thorton, PA
        Mr. James Snow
        Mr. Kenneth Solomon, Pacific Palisades, CA
        Mrs. Melissa Solomon
        Mr. Arne Sorenson, Bethesda, MD
        Mrs. Ruth Sorenson
        The Honorable Gene Sperling, Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Director of the National Economic Council
        Mr. Rick Sperling
        Ms. Alexandra Stanton, New York, NY
        Ms. Domna Stanton
        Mr. Laurent Stefanini, Chief of Protocol, French Republic
        Mr. Randall Stephenson, Dallas, TX
        Mrs. Lenise Stephenson
        Mr. David Stern, New York, NY
        Mrs. Dianne Stern
        The Honorable Todd Stern, United States Special Envoy for Climate Change
        Ms. Jennifer Klein
        Mrs. Jane Stetson, Norwich, VT
        Mr. Bill Stetson III
        Mr. Mark Taplin, Charge d'Affaires, U.S. Department of State
        Ms. Kathy Kavalec
        The Honorable Tina Tchen, Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff to the First Lady
        Mr. Benoit Thieulin, Digital National Committee President, French Republic
        Mr. Andrew Tobias, New York, NY
        Ms. Marie Brenner
        Ms. Cicely Tyson, New York, NY
        Mr. Reginald Austin Henry
        The Honorable David Wade, Chief of Staff to the Secretary of State
        Ms. Elizabeth Alexander
        The Honorable Debbie Wasserman Schultz, United States Representative (Florida)
        Mr. Steven Schultz
        Mr. Frank White, Jr., Washington, DC
        Mr. William Kirk
        Ms. Edith Windsor, New York, NY
        Ms. Julie Milligan
        Mr. Richard Winter, Auriga USA
        Mrs. Alexandra Winter
        Mr. Jeff Zucker, CNN, New York, NY
        Mrs. Caryn Zucker
      A dip into the pool reports: Al Sharpton shows off his French at White House dinner
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: TheBlaze.com - Blog
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:22
        From a White House pool report on the state dinner taking place at the White House Tuesday evening for French President Fran§ois Hollande:
        Al Sharpton said he's been practicing his French and he offered some at the press' urging. ''Oui oui oui.''
        Sharpton is one of dozens of celebrity guests attending the dinner. Others include singer Mary J. Blige, who will also perform, comedienne Mindy Kaling and Comedy Central's Stephen Colbert.
      Op-ed by President Obama and President Hollande: An Alliance Transformed
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:26
        The White House
        Office of the Press Secretary
        For Immediate Release
        February 10, 2014
        The full text of an op-ed by President Obama and President Hollande of France is printed below. The piece, published today in the Washington Post and in Le Monde, can be read online HERE.
        Obama and Hollande: France and the U.S. enjoy a renewed alliance
        By Barack Obama and Fran§ois Hollande,
        Monday, February 10
        Barack Obama is president of the United States. Fran§ois Hollande is president of the French Republic.
        Today, American and French diplomats are preparing for talks with Iran that build on the agreement that has halted progress on and rolled back key elements of the Iranian nuclear program. French and American officials share information daily to combat terrorism around the world. Our development experts are helping farmers across Africa and on other continents boost their yields and escape poverty. In forums such as the Group of Eight and the Group of 20, the United States and France promote strong, sustainable and balanced growth, jobs and stability '-- and we address global challenges that no country can tackle alone. At high-tech start-ups in Paris and Silicon Valley, American and French entrepreneurs are collaborating on the innovations that power our global economy.
        A decade ago, few would have imagined our two countries working so closely together in so many ways. But in recent years our alliance has transformed. Since France's return to NATO's military command four years ago and consistent with our continuing commitment to strengthen the NATO- European Union partnership, we have expanded our cooperation across the board. We are sovereign and independent nations that make our decisions based on our respective national interests. Yet we have been able to take our alliance to a new level because our interests and values are so closely aligned.
        Rooted in a friendship stretching back more than two centuries, our deepening partnership offers a model for international cooperation. Transnational challenges cannot be met by any one nation alone. More nations must step forward and share the burden and costs of leadership. More nations must meet their responsibilities for upholding global security and peace and advancing freedom and human rights.
        Building on the first-step agreement with Iran, we are united with our ''P5+1'' partners '-- Britain, Germany, Russia and China '-- and the E.U. and will meet next week in Vienna to begin discussions aimed at achieving a comprehensive solution that prevents Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. In Syria, our credible threat of force paved the way for the plan to eliminate Syria's chemical weapons; now, Syria must meet its obligations. With the Syrian civil war threatening the stability of the region, including Lebanon, the international community must step up its efforts to care for the Syrian people, strengthen the moderate Syrian opposition, and work through the Geneva II process toward a political transition that delivers the Syrian people from dictatorship and terrorism.
        Perhaps nowhere is our new partnership on more vivid display than in Africa. In Mali, French and African Union forces '-- with U.S. logistical and information support '-- have pushed back al-Qaeda-linked insurgents, allowing the people of Mali to pursue a democratic future. Across the Sahel, we are partnering with countries to prevent al-Qaeda from gaining new footholds. In the Central African Republic, French and African Union soldiers '-- backed by American airlift and support '-- are working to stem violence and create space for dialogue, reconciliation and swift progress to transitional elections.
        Across the continent, from Senegal to Somalia, we are helping train and equip local forces so they can take responsibility for their own security. We are partnering with governments and citizens who want to strengthen democratic institutions, improve agriculture and alleviate hunger, expand access to electricity and deliver the treatment that saves lives from infectious diseases. Our two countries were the earliest and are among the strongest champions of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.
        Alongside a revitalized alliance on the world stage, we're also working to deepen our bilateral economic relationship. Already, France is one of America's top export markets, and the United States is the largest customer for French goods outside the European Union '-- trade that supports nearly a million jobs in our two countries. Our cooperation in science and education is illustrated by existing partnerships between our universities, top research laboratories and space agencies. But as entrepreneurial societies that cherish the spirit of invention and creativity, we need to do more to lead the world in innovation.
        The trade and investment partnership that we are pursuing between the European Union and the United States is a major opportunity to build on millions of jobs on both sides of the Atlantic already supported by U.S.-E.U. trade. Such an agreement would result in more trade, more jobs and more export opportunities, including for small businesses in both of our countries. It would also build a lasting foundation for our efforts to promote growth and the global economic recovery.
        This includes our leadership to combat climate change. Even as our two nations reduce our own carbon emissions, we can expand the clean energy partnerships that create jobs and move us toward low-carbon growth. We can do more to help developing countries shift to low-carbon energy as well, and deal with rising seas and more intense storms. As we work toward next year's climate conference in Paris, we continue to urge all nations to join us in pursuit of an ambitious and inclusive global agreement that reduces greenhouse gas emissions through concrete actions. The climate summit organized by the U.N. secretary general this September will give us the opportunity to reaffirm our ambitions for the climate conference in Paris.
        The challenges of our time cannot be wished away. The opportunities of our interconnected world will not simply fall into our laps. The future we seek, as always, must be earned. For more than two centuries, our two peoples have stood together for our mutual freedom. Now we are meeting our responsibilities not just to each other '-- but to a world that is more secure because our enduring alliance is being made new again.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Hillary 2016
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Will she announce before mid-terms to bolster the party?
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Palin Calls Out Chris Christie '' Hints At Presidential Run
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: The Ulsterman Report
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 22:48
        This is certain to get the liberals in a scoffing uproar, as well as grate the much declined pro-Christie for President crowd.
        DWULSTERMAN.COM
        _____________________________
        (Via WHD)
        Palin questioned the honesty of the man who is currently leading the field, Chris Christie, suggesting it's unlikely he didn't know what his aides were up to when they screwed up traffic on the George Washington Bridge. Christie has insisted he was out of the loop. Palin thinks that's unlikely:
        It's hard to be the CEO of an organization and not know what the closest people to you are up to. It's tough not to know. I know when I was Mayor and manager of this city, and then Governor of the state, certainly you know what your top aides are up to.
        I just want to make sure that every politician, everyone who's elected, who's given that honor and that sacred honor of a vote, people's trust, that we don't blow it. And you blow it if you ever try to hide anything. Whatever's hidden, eventually light shines upon it. I just hope that truth is being told right now.
        And then finally, there's her new show ''Amazing America,'' which debuts on the Sportsman Channel April 3rd.
        According to the Sportsman Channel, the show will take her all over the country to celebrate America, and not just to places where people hunt:
        Amazing America with Sarah Palin is an anthology of stories that explore some of the most original, interesting '' and sometimes inspiring '' people, places and pastimes connected to America's outdoors lifestyle. Governor Palin takes viewers coast-to-coast into what Sportsman Channel calls ''Red, Wild and Blue America'' '' where the American Spirit and the Great Outdoors are celebrated in equal measure.
        From everyday people to business leaders and celebrities; in cities, suburbs and towns; the leader of the ''Status Go'' movement '' Palin '' will find the stories of people and places that share and reflect her passion for what makes America the great, amazing nation that it is. LINK
        ____________________________________
        Yes, it could be a bit of self promotion for her upcoming TV series, but the direct hit upon Chris Christie suggests something more than just that. Perhaps Palin is placing herself into the upcoming election battle as a force to be reckoned with not so much as an actual candidate, but a voice for small government, free market principles who is willing to lend her still considerable support to those candidates who best represent such ideals.
        Either way, she'll be in the mix, and frankly, so much of what she warned regarding Barack Obama has proven true. Despite the media's false portrayal that would have you believe otherwise, Sarah Palin has strong political instincts regarding what is right, and what is wrong with this country.
        I look forward to hearing more from her.
        ____________________________________
        ''A must read for any political junkie.''
        ''Love him or hate him, Frank Bennington is one of the most interesting new characters to come along in quite some time.''
        LINK
        BENNINGTON P.I. ''BONITA''
        After decades working within the murky political underbelly of the nation's capital, hard living D.C. politico Frank Bennington finds himself out of a job, recovering from a heart attack, and wondering what the hell he's supposed to do next.Then a phone call from a long ago acquaintance gives Frank an opportunity to use his particular brand of talents and insights to reveal a cover-up with global implications. It is a scandal involving powerful and influential figureswho wish for the truth to remain hidden, and the lie tocontinue to be perpetrated, for it is a lie worth TRILLIONS of dollars to those who control itsmessage. In Frank Bennington's new world of private investigations, dead men tell no truths, and that is exactly what his enemies hope to make of him.
        ''Bennington P.I. ''Bonita'' is the much anticipated follow up to D.W. Ulsterman's novel, ''The Second Oldest Profession''.
        Paperback Version: HERE
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The Hillary Papers | Washington Free Beacon
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:44
        AP
        BY:Alana GoodmanFebruary 9, 2014 9:58 pm
        On May 12, 1992, Stan Greenberg and Celinda Lake, top pollsters for Bill Clinton's presidential campaign, issued a confidential memo. The memo's subject was ''Research on Hillary Clinton.''
        Voters admired the strength of the Arkansas first couple, the pollsters wrote. However, ''they also fear that only someone too politically ambitious, too strong, and too ruthless could survive such controversy so well.''
        Their conclusion: ''What voters find slick in Bill Clinton, they find ruthless in Hillary.''
        The full memo is one of many previously unpublished documents contained in the archive of one of Hillary Clinton's best friends and advisers, documents that portray the former first lady, secretary of State, and potential 2016 presidential candidate as a strong, ambitious and ruthless Democratic operative.
        The papers of Diane Blair, a political science professor Hillary Clinton described as her ''closest friend'' before Blair's death in 2000, record years of candid conversations with the Clintons on issues ranging from single-payer health care to Monica Lewinsky.
        The archive includes correspondence, diaries, interviews, strategy memos and contemporaneous accounts of conversations with the Clintons ranging from the mid-1970s to the turn of the millennium.
        Diane Blair's husband, Jim Blair, a former chief counsel at Tyson Foods Inc. who was at the center of ''Cattlegate,'' a 1994 controversy involving the unusually large returns Hillary Clinton made while trading cattle futures contracts in the 1970s, donated his wife's papers to the University of Arkansas Special Collections library in Fayetteville after her death.
        The full contents of the archive, which before 2010 was closed to the public, have not previously been reported on and shed new light on Clinton's three decades in public life. The records paint a complex portrait of Hillary Clinton, revealing her to be a loyal friend, devoted mother, and a cutthroat strategist who relished revenge against her adversaries and complained in private that nobody in the White House was ''tough and mean enough.''
        On July 28, 1997, President Clinton was facing yet another wave of allegations from yet another woman. Kathleen Willey had accused Clinton of sexually assaulting her, and Blair faxed a Drudge Report item about her claims to one of the president's aides.
        Blair's handwritten note attached to the story: ''Do we take Matt Drudge seriously?''
        Six months later, Drudge would break the story of an affair between Clinton and 22-year-old White House intern Monica Lewinsky, setting in motion the events that would lead to the president's impeachment.
        When Clinton finally admitted to the relationship after repeated denials, Hillary Clinton defended her husband in a phone call with Blair. She said her husband had made a mistake by fooling around with the ''narcissistic loony toon'' Lewinsky, but was driven to it in part by his political adversaries, the loneliness of the presidency, and her own failures as a wife.
        She told Blair that the affair did not include sex ''within any real meaning'' of the term and noted President Clinton ''tried to manage'' Monica after they broke up but things spiraled ''beyond control.''
        Blair described the contents of the Sept. 9, 1998, phone call in a journal entry.
        ''[Hillary] is not trying to excuse [Bill Clinton]; it was a huge personal lapse. And she is not taking responsibility for it,'' Blair wrote.
        ''But, she does say this to put his actions in context. Ever since he took office they've been going thru personal tragedy ([the death of] Vince [Foster], her dad, his mom) and immediately all the ugly forces started making up hateful things about them, pounding on them.''
        ''They adopted strategy, public strategy, of acting as tho it didn't bother them; had to. [Hillary] didn't realize toll it was taking on him,'' Blair continued. ''She thinks she was not smart enough, not sensitive enough, not free enough of her own concerns and struggles to realize the price he was paying.''
        Hillary Clinton told Blair she had received ''a letter from a psychologist who does family therapy and sexual infidelity problems,'' who told the Yale Law School graduate, ''most men with fidelity problems [were] raised by two women and felt conflicted between them.''
        The psychologist suggested that Bill's infidelity had its roots in his childhood.
        ''He'd read about Bill's bio; grandmother despised [Bill's mother] Virginia, tried to get custody of Bill; Bill adored by his mother, but she left him, etc. etc.''
        In her conversations with Blair, the first lady gave her husband credit for trying to end the affair with Lewinsky, and said he did not take advantage of his White House intern.
        ''It was a lapse, but she says to his credit he tried to break it off, tried to pull away, tried to manage someone who was clearly a 'narcissistic loony toon'; but it was beyond control,'' wrote Blair.
        ''HRC insists, no matter what people say, it was gross inappropriate behavior but it was consensual (was not a power relationship) and was not sex within any real meaning (standup, liedown, oral, etc.) of the term.''
        Hillary Clinton's blunt assessments were not confined to Monica Lewinsky. In a Dec. 3, 1993, diary entry, Blair recounted a conversation with the first lady about ''Packwood'''--a reference to then-Sen. Bob Packwood, an influential Republican on health care embroiled in a sexual harassment scandal.
        ''HC tired of all those whiney women, and she needs him on health care,'' wrote Blair. ''I told her I'd been bonding w. creeps; she said that was the story of her whole past year. Fabio incident'--sweeping her up, sending her roses.''
        Privately, the Clinton White House was acutely sensitive to public perceptions of President Clinton's treatment of women.
        Supreme Court nominations were not immune from such considerations. In a three-page May 11, 1994, memo, Blair recounted her phone conversation with President Clinton about reservations he had about his preferred nominee to the high Court, the late Arkansas Judge Richard Arnold.
        Noting Clinton allies had ''really been trying to keep the women's groups in line since Paula Jones filing,'' Bill Clinton, according to Blair's account, was concerned feminist groups ''might blow sky high'' if he appointed Arnold to the Supreme Court. Arnold had ruled that the Jaycees club could bar women from full membership'--a decision later overturned by the highest court in the land.
        The president was also concerned about accusations of infidelity in Arnold's divorce records'--allegations the president believed had the potential to reignite scrutiny of his own background.
        ''Stuff is in the [divorce] record'--apparently includes other people'--and no matter what Hatch says, this will come out, and will make it sound like the only friends [Bill] has in Arkansas are adulterers,'' wrote Blair.
        ''This thing is so sick, according to [Bill], in a way he wants to stand up to it, but will come out and will be part of the pattern of sleaze.''
        The president asked Blair to discuss the Arnold nomination with Hillary Clinton, who was dismissive of ''grassroots'' women's groups.
        ''[Bill] wanted me to talk to [Hillary], so we got plugged in (at one point had 2 White House operators trying to get me),'' wrote Blair.
        ''[Hillary] listened to what I had to say re women; thought those grassroots groups didn't count for much; it was the DC groups who would be doing damage, and obviously [Hillary] concerned about [the] 'climate' because of the sexual harassment charge.''
        The Clinton camp found itself dealing with Bill Clinton's infidelity early on. In a confidential Feb. 16, 1992, memo entitled ''Possible Investigation Needs,'' Clinton campaign staff proposed ways to suppress and discredit stories about the then-Arkansas governor's affairs.
        Campaign operatives Loretta Lynch and Nancy McFadden wrote the memo, addressed to campaign manager David Wilhelm.
        The first item on the itinerary discussed ''GF,'' a reference to Gennifer Flowers, the actress and adult model who had recently disclosed her 12-year affair with Bill Clinton.
        ''Exposing GF: completely as a fraud, liar and possible criminal to stop this story and related stories, prevent future non-related stories and expose press inaction and manipulation,'' said the memo.
        In 1998 Bill Clinton admitted he had had a sexual relationship with Flowers.
        Another item, headlined ''Women,'' referred to Elizabeth Ward and Lencola Sullivan, also rumored to have had relationships with Bill.
        ''Elizabeth Ward '... determine attitude & check out background; Any Reep connections? When does Playboy come out?''
        One of the documents in the Blair archive is an unsigned note from Bill Clinton, handwritten on the personal letterhead he used in the mid-1970s. The addressee is unknown. A cover page reads: ''Tomorrow is Thursday.''
        The undated letter is written on the same personal letterhead that Clinton was using in 1976, prior to becoming attorney general of Arkansas. Hillary Rodham and Bill Clinton began dating in 1971 and were married on Oct. 11, 1975.
        ''Yesterday the recurring shakes came over me again and to rid myself of them I decided to go and buy something for you as much to be doing it as to actually wind up with things,'' Clinton wrote.
        He said he recently had bought books, including One Hundred Years of Solitude by Gabriel Garcia Marquez and Bread and Wine by Italian anti-Communist Ignazio Silone.
        ''By the time I could call last night it was too late and I was too spent,'' the future founding chairman of the Clinton Global Initiative went on.
        ''Today is Thursday. I will be at the little place downstairs in the union at 11:30. If you aren't there, I'll understand. And if you are, I will.''
        The fast-food lover and amateur sax player closed by confessing that he had fallen asleep the night before while reading an erotic love poem from the seventeenth century.
        ''At 3:30 this morning I fell asleep over Andrew Marvell's To His Coy Mistress,'' wrote Clinton. ''It has been a while since I could feel something so sharply across three hundred years.''
        Attached to the letter is a photo of a young Bill Clinton holding a saxophone, with the note, ''I thought you might get a kick out of this'--I was once even younger.''
        Days after President Clinton's impeachment in 1998, the first lady called Blair in good spirits, telling her friend that, ''Most people in this town have no pain threshold.''
        ''[Hillary] sounded very up, almost jolly,'' wrote Blair. ''Told me how she and Bill and Chelsea had been to church, to a Chinese restaurant, to a Shakespeare play, greeted everywhere with wild applause and cheers'--this, she said is what drives their adversaries totally nuts, that they don't bend, do not appear to be suffering.''
        Hillary Clinton's ''adversaries'' included the media, Republicans, and top members of President Clinton's staff, according to a Washington Free Beacon analysis of the contents of the Blair archive.
        ''HC says press has big egos and no brains,'' wrote Blair on May 19, 1993, during the White House travel office controversy. ''That [the White House is] just going to have to work them better; that her staff has figured it out and would be glad to teach [Bill's] staff.''
        The First Lady often confided in Blair about her ''hellacious'' first year in the White House, and her many clashes with staffers, administration figures, and her husband. By the spring of 1994, Hillary was ''furious'' at Bill for ''ruining himself and the Presidency.''
        ''She keeps trying to shape things up, knows what's wrong, but [Bill] can't fire people, exert discipline, punish leakers,'' Blair wrote on May 17, 1994. ''Never had strategy for Whitewater, troopers, Paula [Jones]. '... Inability to organize, make tough choices, drives her nuts.''
        Blair, a frequent guest at the White House, recounted two nights in mid-March 1993 when President Clinton spoke on the ''theme of being spied on, taped, watched, imprisoned.''
        ''[Bill] told me last 2, 3 months hideously stressful, and has really never had a break since campaign,'' Blair wrote. ''Said when he named [Warren] Christopher to [State Department], screwed up the transition.''
        The insularity of the Clinton White House was not lost on administration officials.
        ''Chat w. [Attorney General] Janet Reno,'' Blair wrote on April 24, 1993. ''She concerned that [Hillary Clinton is] resenting her 'celebrity' status.''
        ''Janet wants to connect w. HC; not communicate thru Carol Rasco,'' Blair added. ''Finds HC a 'mask.'''
        On Feb. 23, 1993, Blair joined the Clintons for a family dinner at the White House. The subject of health care reform came up.
        ''At dinner, [Hillary] to [Bill] at length on the complexities of health care'--thinks managed competition a crock; single-payer necessary; maybe add to Medicare,'' Blair wrote.
        The account is at odds with public statements by the former First Lady that she never supported the single-payer option.
        In an interview with the New York Times as she ran for president in 2008, Hillary Clinton said she had never seriously considered adopting a single-payer system, in which the government, using funds appropriated from taxpayers, pays for all health care expenses.
        ''You know, I have thought about this, as you might guess, for 15 years and I never seriously considered a single payer system,'' said Clinton in the interview.
        At the time of Blair's account, the First Lady recently had been appointed to the president's health care task force and had started her push for an insurance reform that hinged on the ''managed competition'' model.
        However, at the February 1993 dinner, the First Lady already seemed to regret her decision to take on health care reform.
        ''[Bill's] tenderly hugging and thanking [Hillary] for sucking up to all thos ego's nd taking all this shit [sic],'' wrote Blair. ''She's signaling him what a mess health care is, bu also, sweetly, 'Don't worry' [sic].''
        By the spring, the First Lady seemed deeply anxious about the effort.
        ''[Hillary] adamant; [Bill] must devise new outside strategy; we're getting killed. Congress a bunch of whiners; no courage. Her health care plan will save billions in long run but will cost big $ up front. [Members of Congress] don't work; only 3 days a week; only care for re-election,'' wrote Blair. ''[Bill] clearly not very happy w. his own crew and advisors. [Hillary] urging hard ball.''
        As the First Lady prepared to testify before Congress in September 1993, Blair wrote that ''she's begun to see that they don't really care about the issues but want to feel they're part of the process. So she's slobbering over their 'craft' as she testifies.''
        Hillary Clinton's testimony is seen in retrospect as the high point of her failed health care campaign.
        ''The week may have been the pinnacle of her career as First Lady,'' wrote Carl Bernstein in his 2008 book Woman in Charge. ''Hillary was making history, and there were comparisons on the floor of Congress to Martha Washington, Eleanor Roosevelt, and in one particularly tortured leap of logic, Abraham Lincoln.''
        On April 21, 1993, during a speech at the opening reception for the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C., President Clinton drew parallels between the genocide in Bosnia and the Holocaust.
        That same month, he met with top U.S. military officials, diplomats, and aid workers advocating for military action against the Serbian forces of Slobodan Milosevic.
        At the time, however, Hillary Clinton was not on board with the use of deadly force. According to Blair's April 29, 1993 account, the First Lady said she ''was very much against any intervention'--had been killing each other for 900 yrs.''
        Blair later spoke with President Clinton in mid-May and gave him ''messages a la [Hillary's] instructions: stop ruminating aloud re Bosnia.''
        The White House was under increasing pressure to address the atrocities in the Balkans. Yet the United States waited more than two years before taking military action.
        Blair's papers are not the first indication that Hillary privately opposed U.S. intervention in Bosnia prior to 1995.
        An unnamed friend of the Clintons told Newsweek in 1993 that the First Lady''regards [Bosnia] as a Vietnam that would compromise health-care reform.''
        The author and controversialist Christopher Hitchens laterreporteda similar account fromthen-Secretary of Defense Les Aspin.
        Since leaving the White House, however, Hillary Clinton has said that she favored earlier intervention in the Balkans, decrying ''the tragic failures in Rwanda, early Bosnia, and up to now, the inadequate response in Darfur'' in a 2005 speech to the United Nations.
        Hillary Clinton's influence on White House decisions went beyond policy, according to the Blair papers.
        A three-page memo written by Blair on May 11, 1994, shows the First Lady privately urging President Clinton to reject his preferred 1994 candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court because of political considerations.
        While Bill Clinton favored the late Arkansas Judge Richard Arnold, he and his wife had concerns about the judge's health.
        Hillary Clinton also argued that rejecting Arnold would send a ''message'' to the judge's ally, Arkansas Democrat-Gazette publisher Walter Hussman, Jr., whose paper often printed unflattering stories about the Clintons.
        ''Goddamn Hussman needs to know that it's his own goddamn fault; that he can't destroy everybody from Ark. and everything about the state and not pay the price for his precious Richard [Arnold],'' Hillary said, according to Blair's account.
        ''He needs to get the message big-time, that Richard might have a chance [to be appointed to the Supreme Court] next round if Hussman and his minions will lay off all this outrageous lies and innuendo.''
        The details in Blair's memo challenge the contemporary understanding of Hillary Clinton's role in the debate over the 1994 appointment. The First Lady has been credited as one of the few members of the president's inner circle who lobbied in favor of Arnold's nomination.
        However, that seems not to be the case.
        President Clinton has said he did not appoint Arnold for health reasons. The judge had been diagnosed with advanced lymphoma, and according to the Blair memo his doctors could not guarantee he would live more than five years.
        He died in 2004.
        The health concerns were related to President Clinton's fear that Arnold could be his last Supreme Court appointment.
        ''At this point BC not sure he can get re-elected; they're killing him in the South, rise of fundamentalism, the Nazi's. Some of that he did to himself'--gay rights in the military. Others just hate the one who's in,'' Blair wrote in an account of one of her conversations with the president.
        According to the memo, Bill Clinton dispatched Blair to discuss the issue with Hillary, but the First Lady stood her ground.
        ''If HRC carried the day, and it sounds as if she is, [the nominee] will be [Bruce] Babbitt,'' wrote Blair. ''She's not wild about him. Wishes there were a 3rd choice.''
        President Clinton ended up appointing Stephen Breyer, who became an associate justice of the Supreme Court in August 1994.
        As Hillary Clinton prepares for a possible 2016 presidential run, the Clinton team has a great incentive to focus on the future.
        However, recent weeks have made it clear this will not be easy.
        Sen. Rand Paul's remark about Bill Clinton's ''predatory behavior'' on a recent Sunday talk show generated a days-long media firestorm and reignited the decades-old Lewinsky controversy.
        While Hillary Clinton has gone from the White House to the Senate to the State Department, experts say she will likely be forced to readdress some of the controversies that defined her husband's presidency if she decides on a 2016 bid.
        Neither a Clinton spokesman nor a spokesman for the Clinton Foundation returned a request for comment from the Free Beacon on the materials contained in the Blair archive.
        As the 2016 contest draws near, however, the contents of this little-known archive of one of the closest friends of the most famous woman in the world are sure to receive fresh scrutiny.
        While thousands of Diane Blair's papers are available to the public at the University of Arkansas Library, an undisclosed number of documents remain kept in a restricted section of the archive. The Free Beacon was unable to gain access to those documents.
        ''With this collection, [Diane Blair's] contributions will grow and live on, enlarging our understanding of history, politics and culture,'' Hillary Clinton said in a video address at the opening of Blair's archive in 2010.
        ''I hope also that some young scholar will come along and write the story of Diane,'' she added. ''We miss her still but this, along with so many of her contributions to us, lives on.''
        The Clinton Files by WashingtonFreeBeacon
      Hillary blamed Monica affair on her failure as a wife | New York Post
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 00:36
        Hillary Clinton described Monica Lewinsky as a ''narcissistic loony toon'' in a private chat with her best pal '' and even blamed herself in part for Bill's philandering ways, according to newly revealed documents.
        The papers include correspondence, journal entries, memos and interviews from the mid-1970s to about 2000 belonging to Clinton's friend and confidant Diane Blair, a political science professor who died in 2000.
        After it was reported that President Clinton had Oval Office trysts with Lewinsky, Hillary angrily told Blair the young intern was a nut case '' and blamed the affair on politics, the loneliness of the presidency and her own failures as a wife.
        ''She thinks she was not smart enough, not sensitive enough, not free enough of her own concerns and struggles to realize the price he was paying,'' Blair wrote.
        ''[Hillary] is not trying to excuse [Bill Clinton]; it was a huge personal lapse. And she is not taking responsibility for it,'' she wrote.
        ''But, she does say this to put his actions in context. Ever since he took office they've been going thru personal tragedy ([the death of] Vince [Foster], her dad, his mom) and immediately all the ugly forces started making up hateful things about them, pounding on them,'' she wrote.
        ''They adopted strategy, public strategy, of acting as tho it didn't bother them; had to. [Hillary] didn't realize toll it was taking on him,'' Blair continued.
        When Clinton finally admitted to the affair after repeatedly lying that he did not have sex with ''that woman, Miss Lewinsky,'' Hillary defended her philandering spouse in a phone chat with Blair.
        ''HRC insists, no matter what people say, it was gross inappropriate behavior but it was consensual (was not a power relationship) and was not sex within any real meaning (standup, liedown, oral, etc.) of the term.''
        While the papers have been open to the public at the University of Arkansas library since 2010, The Washington Free Beacon published them for the first time Sunday night.
        The first lady gave Bubba credit for trying to cut off the affair with Lewinsky, and insisted he did not take advantage of the young intern.
        ''It was a lapse, but she says to his credit he tried to break it off, tried to pull away, tried to manage someone who was clearly a 'narcissistic loony toon'; but it was beyond control,'' wrote Blair, whose husband, Jim Blair, was a former chief counsel at Tyson Foods and a Clinton confidant.
        Hillary told Blair she spoke with an expert on sexual infidelity, who told her that Bill's philandering was a result of his childhood, when his mother and grandmother fought over his custody.
        Jim Blair was in the middle of the controversy surrounding 1994's ''Cattlegate,'' in which Hillary Clinton made a bundle while trading cattle futures.
        Blair donated his wife's papers to the University of Arkansas after she died.
        Monica wasn't the only woman in Hillary's crosshairs.
        In a December 1993 diary entry, Blair recalled a conversation she had with Hillary about ex-Sen. Robert Packwood, who was then embroiled in a sexual harassment scandal.
        ''HC tired of all those whiney women, and she needs him on health care,'' Blair wrote, referring to Packwood's possible support for her health care reform effort. ''I told her I'd been bonding w. creeps; she said that was the story of her whole past year.''
        Blair also referred to the ''Fabio incident'--sweeping her up, sending her roses,'' when the hunky, flaxen-haired Italian model embraced Hillary in a romantic hug at the 1993 National Italian American Foundation dinner.
        Gennifer Flowers '' another woman Clinton admitted to having an affair with '' was also on Hillary's radar.
        In a February 1992 memo entitled ''Possible Investigation Needs,'' Clinton operatives plotted ways to discredit spreading stories about the horndog Arkansas governor's love life.
        One item discussed was ''GF,'' a reference to Flowers, the blonde model who had just claimed a 12-year affair with Bill.
        ''Exposing GF: completely as a fraud, liar and possible criminal to stop this story and related stories, prevent future non-related stories and expose press inaction and manipulation,'' the memo said.
        Clinton later admitted he had bedded Flowers.
        The first lady also confided her surprisingly ''upbeat'' attitude after Clinton's impeachment by the House in 1998.
        ''[Hillary] sounded very up, almost jolly,'' wrote Blair. ''Told me how she and Bill and Chelsea had been to church, to a Chinese restaurant, to a Shakespeare play, greeted everywhere with wild applause and cheers'--this, she said is what drives their adversaries totally nuts, that they don't bend, do not appear to be suffering.''
        Hillary also had some harsh words for her many ''adversaries,'' which included predictable targets such as the press and GOP opponents '' but also members of the president's own staff.
        ''HC says press has big egos and no brains,'' Blair wrote in May 1993, a time she was heavily criticized for the ham-handed firing of veteran White House travel office staff.
        ''[Hillary said] that [the White House is] just going to have to work them better; that her staff has figured it out and would be glad to teach [Bill's] staff.''
        The First Lady , according to Blair, was ''furious'' at Bill for ''ruining himself and the Presidency'' by 1994.
        ''She keeps trying to shape things up, knows what's wrong, but [Bill] can't fire people, exert discipline, punish leakers,'' Blair wrote that May. ''Never had strategy for Whitewater, troopers, Paula [Jones]. '... Inability to organize, make tough choices, drives her nuts.''
        Blair, a frequent White House guest, also expressed her own sympathy for the president.
        ''[Bill] told me last 2, 3 months hideously stressful, and has really never had a break since campaign,'' Blair wrote. ''Said when he named [Warren] Christopher to [State Department], screwed up the transition.''
        The papers also shed light on Hillary's ultimately disastrous effort to reform the US health care system in the early 90s.
        At a February 1993 White House dinner, Hillary argued with Bill that a single-payer system was necessary to fix health care '' contradicting her stated public position at the time.
        ''At dinner, [Hillary] to [Bill] at length on the complexities of health care'--thinks managed competition a crock; single-payer necessary; maybe add to Medicare,'' Blair wrote.
        Hillary had only recently been named to head up the effort, but already seemed to be having second thoughts, Blair wrote.
        ''[Bill's] tenderly hugging and thanking [Hillary] for sucking up to all thos ego's nd taking all this sh-t [sic],'' wrote Blair. ''She's signaling him what a mess health care is, bu also, sweetly, 'Don't worry' [sic].''
        Months later, the effort had descended into chaos, Blair wrote.
        ''[Hillary] adamant; [Bill] must devise new outside strategy; we're getting killed. Congress a bunch of whiners; no courage. Her health care plan will save billions in long run but will cost big $ up front. [Members of Congress] don't work; only 3 days a week; only care for re-election,'' wrote Blair. ''[Bill] clearly not very happy w. his own crew and advisors. [Hillary] urging hard ball.''
        Hillary was also skeptical of her husband's decision to intervene militarily in the Bosnian genocide.
        The first lady, according to Blair's April 1993 memo, said she ''was very much against any intervention '-- [they] had been killing each other for 900 yrs.''
        The US finally intervened two years later.
        Despite her opposition then, Hillary has said more recently that she backed earlier intervention in the Balkans, decrying ''the tragic failures in Rwanda, early Bosnia, and up to now, the inadequate response in Darfur'' in a speech to the UN in 2005.
        Other disclosures in the papers show that Team Clinton worried about voters finding Hillary too ''ruthless'' '' even though they liked Bill.
        In May 1992, Clinton pollster Stan Greenberg issued a confidential memo titled ''Research on Hillary Clinton.''
        Voters admired Arkansas' first couple, but, ''what voters find slick in Bill Clinton, they find ruthless in Hillary.''
        As Hillary gears up for a potential run for the presidency in 2016, critics are expected to dredge up issues from her past, from the Arkansas Governor's Mansion to the White House, US Senate and State Department.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Ministry of Truth
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Reporters Without Borders-Freedom of the Press Index
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:46
        The 2014 index underscores the negative correlation between freedom of information and conflicts, both open conflicts and undeclared ones. In an unstable environment, the media become strategic goals and targets for groups or individuals whose attempts to control news and information violate the guarantees enshrined in international law, in particular, article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Protocols Additional 1 and 2 to the Geneva Conventions.
        Syria (unchanged at 177th) has been an extreme example of this since March 2011. Now one of the countries where freedom of information and its actors are most in danger, it rubs shoulders with the bottom three. The Syrian crisis has also had dramatic repercussions throughout the region, reinforcing media polarization in Lebanon (106th, -4), encouraging the Jordanian authorities to tighten their grip, and accelerating the spiral of violence in Iraq (153rd, -2), where tension between Shiites and Sunnis is growing.
        In Iran (173rd, +2), one of the Middle East's key countries, there has so far been no implementation of the promises to improve freedom of information that the new president, Hassan Rouhani, made. Coverage of the Syrian tragedy in both the official Iranian press and on the blogosphere is closely watched by the regime, which cracks down on any criticism of its foreign policy.
        This negative correlation is also seen in the big falls registered by Mali (122nd, -22) and Central African Republic (109th, -34). The open or internecine warfare destabilizing Democratic Republic of Congo (151st, -8) and the activities of guerrillas and terrorist groups in Somalia (176th, unchanged) and Nigeria (112th, +4) prevented any significant improvement in their ranking.
        It was unquestionably a step in the right direction, complementing Resolution 1738 condemning attacks on journalists in armed conflicts, which the Security Council adopted in December 2006 on Reporters Without Borders' initiative, and the UN Plan of Action on the Safety of Journalists and Impunity, adopted in April 2012. Reporters Without Borders now wants the UN to create a group of independent experts with the task of monitoring respect by member states for their obligations, in particular, their obligation to protect journalists, to investigate all cases of violence against them, and bring those responsible to justice.
        Countries that pride themselves on being democracies and respecting the rule of law have not set an example, far from it. Freedom of information is too often sacrificed to an overly broad and abusive interpretation of national security needs, marking a disturbing retreat from democratic practices. Investigative journalism often suffers as a result.
        This has been the case in the United States (46th), which fell 13 places, one of the most significant declines, amid increased efforts to track down whistleblowers and the sources of leaks. The trial and conviction of Private Bradley Manning and the pursuit of NSA analyst Edward Snowden were warnings to all those thinking of assisting in the disclosure of sensitive information that would clearly be in the public interest.
        The United Kingdom (33rd, -3) distinguished itself in the war on terror by the disgraceful pressure it put on The Guardian newspaper and by its detention of David Miranda, journalist Glenn Greenwald's partner and assistant, for nine hours. Both the US and UK authorities seem obsessed with hunting down whistleblowers instead of adopting legislation to rein in abusive surveillance practices that negate privacy, a democratic value cherished in both countries.
        The ''special intelligence protection bill'' that the National Diet in Japan (59th, - 5) adopted in late 2013 would reduce government transparency on such key national issues as nuclear power and relations with the United States, now enshrined as taboos. Investigative journalism, public interest and the confidentiality of journalists' sources are all being sacrificed by legislators bent on ensuring that their country's image is spared embarrassing revelations.
        The ''war on terror'' is also being exploited by governments that are quick to treat journalists as ''threats to national security.'' Dozens of journalists have been jailed on this pretext in Turkey (154th), especially for covering the Kurdish issue. In Morocco, unchanged in 136th position, the authorities readily confused journalism with terrorism since the case of online newspaper editor Ali Anouzla. In Israel (96th, +17), freedom of information is often sacrificed to purported security requirements.
        In India's northern Kashmir region, mobile Internet and communications are suspended in response to any unrest. In the north of Sri Lanka (165th, -2), the army reigns supreme, tolerating no challenge to the official vision of the ''pacification'' process in Tamil separatism's former strongholds. Alarmed by the Arab Spring turmoil, authoritarian regimes in the Arabian Peninsula and Central Asia have stepped up media censorship and surveillance to head off any ''attempt at destabilization.''
        PRIVATIZATION OF VIOLENCENon-state groups constitute the main source of physical danger for journalists in a number of countries. The militias fomenting chaos in the new Libya (137th, -5) and Yemeni armed groups linked to Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula are leading examples of this privatization of violence. Al-Shabaab in Somalia (176th, unchanged) and the M23 movement in Democratic Republic of Congo (151st, -8) both regard journalists as enemies. Jihadi groups such as Jabhat Al-Nosra and Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) use violence against news providers as part of their drive to control the regions they ''liberate.''
        Organized crime is a fearsome predator for journalists in many parts of the world, especially Honduras (129th, -1), Guatemala (125th, -29), Brazil (111th, -2) and Paraguay (105th, -13), but also Pakistan, China, Kyrgyzstan and the Balkans. In organized crime's shadow, it is hard if not impossible to refrain from self-censorship on such sensitive subjects as drug-trafficking, corruption and criminal penetration of the state apparatus. The passivity or indifference often shown by authorities towards crimes of violence against the media, or sometimes even their connivance or direct involvement, reinforces the impunity enjoyed by those responsible and fuels the cycle of violence against news providers.
        L'indice annuel de la libert(C) de la presse, inaugur(C) lors du Classement 2013, confirme une d(C)gradation, l'(C)chelle mondiale, de la situation du droit d'informer et d'ªtre inform(C). L'indice passe de 3 395 3 456 (+61), soit une augmentation de 1,8 % qui r(C)v¨le une l(C)g¨re d(C)gradation globale de la libert(C) de l'information entre l'(C)dition 2013 et l'(C)dition 2014 du Classement mondial.Si l'ann(C)e 2013 a (C)t(C) moins meurtri¨re pour les journalistes que la pr(C)c(C)dente, marqu(C)e par une h(C)catombe pour la profession, les agressions et menaces ont (C)t(C) plus nombreuses. La hausse de l'indice s'explique par l'(C)volution non seulement des exactions, mais aussi de l'ensemble des indicateurs utilis(C)s pour compiler le classement :
        '-- Pluralism, meaning the representation of different views in the media; '-- Independence of the media vis- -vis political, economic, religious and military centres of power; '-- Quality of the legislation governing the media; '-- Transparency of the bodies regulating the media; '-- Performance of the infrastructure supporting the media; '-- Overall climate for freedom of information.
        The indicator is a tool for measuring overall performance. The breakdown of the indicator's scores by region shows a worsening in all continents except Asia, where it was unchanged. Like last year, the European Union and Balkans obtained the best score (17.6), followed by the Americas (30.3), Africa (35.6), Asia-Pacific (42.2), Eastern Europe and Central Asia (45.5) and finally Middle East and North Africa (48.7).
        Annual media freedom indicator: 3456 in 2014 (3395 in 2013)
        European Union and Balkans: 17.6 (17.5)Americas: 30,3 (30,0)Africa : 35,6 (34,3)Asia-Pacific: 42,2 (42,2)Eastern Europe and Central Asia: 45,5 (45,3)Middle East and North Africa: 48,7 (48,5)NOTEWORTHY FALLSIn the Americas, the 13-place fall registered by the United States (46th, -13) was more than doubled by Guatemala (125th, -29), which saw a two-fold increase in the number of physical attacks on journalists, including four murders, and was equalled by Paraguay (105th, -13), where the pressure on journalists to censor themselves keeps on mounting. Paraguay had already plummeted last year, following a coup in June 2012, three years after a coup sent Honduras (129th, -1) to the level where it remains in the current post-election chaos.
        In Africa, the two most noteworthy falls, by Mali and Central African Republic, were due to armed conflicts mentioned above. In Burundi, where a presidential election is imminent, the senate passed a law restricting the freedom of journalists. In Kenya (90th, -18), the government's much criticized authoritarian response to the media's coverage of the Westgate Mall attacks was compounded by dangerous parliamentary initiatives, above all a law adopted at the end of 2013 creating a special court to judge audiovisual content.
        In Guinea (102nd, -15), journalists found it dangerous and difficult to work during elections marked by many protests. Several journalists were attacked or injured by over-excited demonstrators or by members of the security forces dispersing the protests. Zambia (93rd, -20), which had progressed in recent years, was dragged down by measures to censor and block news websites. Finally, rulers who have clung to power for years and fear change got tougher with the media, resulting in abusive prosecutions in Chad (139th, -17) and several closures in Cameroon (131st, -10).
        The 13-place fall by Kuwait (91st) reflects the tougher measures being taken with the media including the adoption of a law that allows the authorities to fine journalists up to 300,000 dinars (1 million dollars) for criticizing the emir or the crown prince, or misrepresenting what they say, and impose sentences of up to 10 years in prison on journalists who insult God, the Prophets of Islam, or the Prophet Mohamed's wives or companions.
        These spectacular changes should not make us forget the tragic immobility at the bottom of the index where Vietnam (173rd, -1), Uzbekistan (166th, -1) and Saudi Arabia (164th, unchanged), to name but three, continue to tighten their grip on news and information and adapt their methods of radical censorship to the digital era. The cruellest punishments await those of their citizens who have the courage to resist. In Kazakhstan (161st, unchanged) and Azerbaijan (160th, -3), media pluralism is in the process of succumbing to the increasingly repressive tendencies of rulers clinging to power.
        NOTEWORTHY RISESViolence against journalists, direct censorship and misuse of judicial proceedings are on the decline in Panama (87th, +25), Dominican Republic (68th, +13), Bolivia (94th, +16) and Ecuador (94th, +25), although in Ecuador the level of media polarization is still high and often detrimental to public debate.The past year was marked by laudable legislative developments in some countries such as South Africa (42nd, +11), where the president refused to sign a law that would have endangered investigative journalism.
        In Georgia (84th, +17), the 2013 presidential election was less tense that the previous year's parliamentary elections, which were marked by physical attacks and hate campaigns against journalists. Thanks to political cohabitation and then a change of government through the polls, Georgia has recovered some of the terrain lost in recent years as the Saakashvili administration's reforming zeal ran out of steam. Media polarization will nonetheless continue to be a challenge in the coming years.
        Israel's 17-place rise must be offset against its 20-place fall in the 2013 index as a result of Operation ''Pillar of Defence'' in November 2012, when two Palestinian journalists were killed, and the many raids it carried out against Palestinian media. Security needs continue to be used as an excuse to limit freedom of information. The Israeli media are able to be outspoken but media located in ''Israeli territory'' must comply with prior military censorship and gag orders. Investigative reporting involving national security is not welcome.
        Abusive treatment of Palestinian and foreign journalists by the Israel Defence Forces is common, especially during the weekly demonstrations at the Separation Wall. Many photojournalists were deliberately targeted when leaving the demonstrations in November 2013. On 4 December, an Israeli high court endorsed the seizure of equipment from Wattan TV during an IDF raid in February 2012.
        Timor-Leste (77th) rose 14 places in the wake of a historic journalists' congress in Dili on 25-27 October at which a code of professional conduct and the creation of a seven-member Press Council were approved. But continuing vigilance is needed. The media law currently before parliament is the next challenge for media freedom in Timor-Leste.
        REGIONAL MODELS IN DECLINE?The movements of some countries in the index, which are indicative of their approach to freedom of information, has an impact not only on their own population but also on neighbouring countries because of their regional importance and influence and the fact that they are regarded '' rightly or not '' as models to be watched or followed. South Africa's 11-place rise to 42nd position contrasts with the performance of other countries regarded as regional models, which have either shown no improvement or are in decline.
        The European Union's members are becoming more dispersed in the index, a development accelerated by the effects of the economic crisis and outbreaks of populism. Greece (99th, -14) and Hungary (64th, -7) are the most notable examples. In Greece, journalists are often the victims of physical attacks by members of Golden Dawn, the neo-Nazi party that entered parliament in June 2012. The government's actions have also contributed to the fall. By closing the state broadcaster under pressure from the Troika (the European Commission, European Central Bank and IMF), Prime Minister Antonis Samaras seems to be cutting back on democracy to save money.
        In Hungary, Prime Minister Viktor Orban's government gives the impression of having abandoned EU values in its zeal for draconian reforms. As a direct result of the European model's erosion, the EU is finding it harder to get membership candidates to improve their position in the index. Membership negotiations are no longer necessarily accompanied by efforts to increase respect for civil liberties. Macedonia (123rd), for example, has never been so low in the index.
        The western hemisphere's giants '' United States (46th, -13) and Brazil (111th, -2) '' have not set an example either. Since 9/11, the former has been torn by the conflict between national security imperatives and respect for the principles of the First Amendment. Thanks to organized crime's impact, the latter is one of the continent's deadliest countries for the media, while its media pluralism is handicapped by the phenomenon of powerful politicians who are also big businessmen and media owners, with the result that Brazil has been dubbed ''the country of 30 Berlusconis.''
        Russia (148th) might have been lower in the index had it not been for the stubbornness and resistance shown by its civil society. But the authorities keep on intensifying the crackdown begun when Vladimir Putin returned to the Kremlin in 2012 and are exporting their model throughout the former Soviet Union. From Ukraine (127th, unchanged) and Azerbaijan (160th, -3) to Central Asia, Russia's repressive legislation and communications surveillance methods are happily copied. Moscow also uses UN bodies and regional alliances such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization in its efforts to undermine international standards on freedom of information.
        Despite its regional aspirations, Turkey (154th) registered no improvement and continues to be one of the world's biggest prisons for journalists. The Gezi Park revolt highlighted the repressive methods used by the security forces, the increase in self-censorship and the dangers of the prime minister's populist discourse. In view of the upcoming elections and the unpredictability of the peace process with the Kurdish separatists, 2014 is likely to be a decisive year for the future of civil liberties in Turkey.
        Chine (175th, -1) failed to improve its ranking because, despite having an astonishing vital and increasingly militant blogosphere, it continues to censor and jail dissident bloggers and journalists. This new power is also using its economic might to extend its influence over the media in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan, compromising their independence.
        India (140th, +1) experienced an unprecedented wave of violence against journalists, with eight killed in 2013. They are targeted by both state and non-state actors. Almost no region is spared but Kashmir and Chhattisgarh continue to be the only two where violence and censorship are endemic. Those responsible for threats and physical violence against journalists, who are often abandoned by the judicial system and forced to censor themselves, include police and security forces as well as criminal groups, demonstrators and political party supporters.
        The substantial reforms in Burma, which could become a regional model for a transition to democracy, were reflected in a big leap in the 2013 index. As the reform process begins to flag, the ''Burmese model'' has yet to prove itself.
      Reporters Without Borders releases 2014 Press Freedom Index - Reporters Without Borders
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:19
        See the World Press Freedom Index and the 3-dimensional map "freedom of the press worldwide"
        The 2014 Reporters Without Borders World Press Freedom Index spotlights major declines in media freedom in such varied countries as the United States, Central African Republic and Guatemala and, on the other hand, marked improvements in Ecuador, Bolivia and South Africa.
        The same trio of Finland, Netherlands and Norway heads the index again, while Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea continue to be the biggest information black holes, again occupying the last three positions.
        ''The World Press Freedom Index is a reference tool that is based on seven criteria: the level of abuses, the extent of pluralism, media independence, the environment and self-censorship, the legislative framework, transparency and infrastructure,'' said Reporters Without Borders secretary-general Christophe Deloire.
        ''It makes governments face their responsibilities by providing civil society with an objective measure, and provides international bodies with a good governance indicator to guide their decisions.''
        Reporters Without Borders head of research Lucie Morillon said: ''This year, the ranking of some countries, including democracies, has been impacted by an overly broad and abusive interpretation of the concept of national security protection.
        ''The index also reflects the negative impact of armed conflicts on freedom of information and its actors. The world's most dangerous country for journalists, Syria, is ranked 177th out of 180 countries.''
        The index's annual global indicator, which measures the overall level of violations of freedom of information in 180 countries year by year, has risen slightly. The indicator has gone from 3395 to 3456 points, a 1.8% rise. The level of violations is unchanged in the Asia-Pacific region, but has increased in Africa.
        The index is available in print for the first time. An enhanced version is being published (in French) by the French publishing house Flammarion in its Librio collection. The index, together with regional and thematic analyses, continues to be available in English, French and other languages on the Reporters Without Borders website (rsf.org). Reporters Without Borders has also introduced a three-dimensional visualization of the performances of the 180 ranked countries.
        This year's index covers 180 countries, one more than the 179 countries covered in last year's index. The newcomer is Belize, which has been ranked in the enviable position of 29th.
        See the 2014 World Press Freedom Index on rsf.org
        Armed conflicts, political instability and national security
        The 2014 index emphasizes the negative correlation between armed conflicts and freedom of information. In an unstable environment, the media become strategic goals or targets for groups or individuals trying to control news and information in violation of the guarantees enshrined in international conventions.
        Syria (177th) is rubbing shoulders with the last three countries in the index. Around 130 professional and citizen-journalists were killed in connection with the provision of news and information from March 2011 to December 2013. They are being targeted by both the Assad government and extremist rebel militias. The Syrian crisis has also had dramatic repercussions throughout the region.
        In Africa, Mali continued its fall and is now ranked 122nd. Progress in the conflict in north of the country has stalled, preventing any real revival in media activity. Central African Republic (109th) has followed suit, falling 43 places. In Egypt (159th), President Morsi's ouster by the army led by Al-Sisi freed those media that the Muslim Brotherhood had gagged ever since coming to power, but it marked the start of a witchhunt against journalists suspected of supporting the Brotherhood.
        Far from these conflicts, in countries where the rule of law prevails, security arguments are misused as grounds for restricting freedom of information. Invoked too readily, the protection of national security is encroaching on hard-won democratic rights.
        In the United States (46th, -13), the hunt for leaks and whistleblowers serves as a warning to those thinking of satisfying a public interest need for information about the imperial prerogatives assumed by the world's leading power. The United Kingdom (33rd, -3) has followed in the US wake, distinguishing itself by its harassment of The Guardian.
        There are many examples of governments abusing the ''fight against terrorism.'' In Turkey (154th), dozens of journalists have been detained on this pretext, above all those who cover the Kurdish issue.
        In Israel (96th), which regained some of the places it lost in the previous index because of Operation Pillar of Defence's impact on freedom of information, the territorial integrity imperative often suppresses freedom of information about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
        In Sri Lanka (165th, - 2), the army shapes the news by suppressing accounts that stray too far from the official vision of ''pacification'' in the former Tamil separatist strongholds.
        A few noteworthy developments
        Central Africa Republic, currently the site of a violent conflict, suffered the biggest fall, losing 43 places after a year marked by extreme violence and repeated attacks and threats against journalists.
        Aside from the 13-place fall by the United States (46th, -13), Guatemala's dizzying plunge (125th, -29) was due to a sharp decline in the safety of journalists, with four murders and twice as many attacks as the previous year.
        In Kenya (90th, -18), the government's much criticized authoritarian response to the media's coverage of the Westgate Mall attack was compounded by dangerous parliamentary initiatives. Chad (139th) fell 17 places after distinguishing itself by abusive arrests and prosecutions in 2013.
        Suffering from the effects of the economic crisis and a surge in populism, Greece (99th) fell 14 places.
        Violence against journalists, direct censorship and misuse of judicial proceedings fell in Panama (87th, +25), Dominican Republic (68th, +13), Bolivia (94th, +16) and Ecuador (94th, +25), although in Ecuador the level of media polarization is still high and often detrimental to public debate.
        The past year was marked by laudable legislative developments in some countries such as South Africa (42nd, +11), where the president refused to sign a law that would have threatened media freedom.
        Contrasting with South Africa's improvement, other countries regarded as regional models registered no progress or even significant declines.
        Read more on rsf.org
      'žPersvrijheid in VS rap achteruit'' - Buitenland - Reformatorisch Dagblad
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:18
        Edward Snowden. Beeld AFP
        De VS zijn veertien plaatsen gezakt, van nummer 32 naar 46, op de wereldranglijst van de persvrijheid die journalistenorganisatie Reporters sans Fronti¨res jaarlijks publiceert. Nederland staat op de woensdag gepubliceerde lijst tweede, na Finland, net zoals vorig jaar.
        Reden voor het vernietigende oordeel over de VS is behandeling van klokkenluiders zoals Edward Snowden en Bradley Manning. Volgens Reporters sans Fronti¨res voert de Amerikaanse overheid een ontmoedigingsbeleid om te voorkomen dat wantoestanden aan de kaak worden gesteld. 'žIn de VS heeft de vervolging van onderzoeksjournalisten en hun tipgevers binnen het veilgheidsapparaat een nooit eerder gekende omvang bereikt'', aldus Reporters sans Fronti¨res. De organisatie stelt ook het afluisteren van persbureau AP aan de kaak. De VS zijn op de ranglijst nu 'ingehaald' door landen als Roemeni en El Salvador.
        Hekkensluiters qua persvrijheid wereldwijd zijn Turkmenistan, Noord-Korea en Eritrea.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      EconomicPolicyJournal.com: Is The New York Times An Agent of the Government?
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:07
        I note some commentary following the Walter Block post, Walter Block: The Case for Suing the New York Times for Libel,in which it is suggested that whether NYT is an agent of government is a subjective matter and not an objective fact. I vehemently disagree and suggest the following thought experiments and examination of facts to understand the nature of NYT as a government agent.Let us think about a town, The Town of Lost Liberty, where there is a parking garage and two parking attendants, Lew and Paul, who valet park all the cars. Let us also assume that in this town the reading of Murray Rothbard is banned and that even the possession of a Rothbard book is considered a crime.
        Let us go on to theorize that Lew is a live and let live kind of guy and that if he occasionally sees a Rothbard book in someone's car that he parks, he says nothing about it to anyone. However, Paul reports the owner of the car to the authorities every time he sees a Rothbard book in a car.
        Clearly, Paul is an agent of the state, while Lew is not. This is an objective fact. They are both parking cars but, while at his job, Paul is also an informant for the state.
        Now, let us imagine a court trial that goes on in this town, where an innocent man is accused of murder. Lew testifies truthfully and reports that the man was clear across town at the time of the murder and, thus, couldn't possibly have committed the murder. But Paul, who wants to get in good with the mayor, and knows the mayor wants this innocent man in jail, lies and testifies that he saw the innocent man pull the trigger. Thus, again, we see that Paul is acting, in objective fashion, as an agent of the state, while Lew is not.
        Let us also assume that the town has 2 newspapers. Lew's News and Paul's News. Lew's News reports all the local goings on , the weddings, the crime blotter, the next parade and reports on the local sports teams.
        Let us say that Paul's News reports all this, but also plants bogus stories that will panic the community for the benefit of the mayor and that Paul hires "reporters," who are cronies of the mayor and who are less interested in reporting facts, and more interested in planting slanted or outright phony stories that will boost the agenda of the mayor and "reporters" who are willing to spy for the mayor under the cover of being a Paul's News reporter.
        Clearly, Lew's News is a straight shooting newspaper and Paul's News serves, objectively, as an agent of the government.
        So which category does the New York Times fall into?
        Here's wikipedia on Operation Mockingbird:
        In 1948, Frank Wisner was appointed director of the Office of Special Projects (OSP). Soon afterwards OSP was renamed the Office of Policy Coordination (OPC). This became the covert action branch of the Central Intelligence Agency. Wisner was told to create an organization that concentrated on "propaganda, economic warfare; preventive direct action, including sabotage, anti-sabotage, demolition and evacuation measures; subversion against hostile states, including assistance to underground resistance groups, and support of indigenous anti-Communist elements in threatened countries of the free world."[2] Later that year Wisner established Mockingbird, a program to influence foreign media. Wisner recruited Philip Graham from The Washington Post to run the project within the industry. According to Deborah Davis in Katharine the Great; "By the early 1950s, Wisner 'owned' respected members of The New York Times, Newsweek, CBS and other communications vehicles."[3] Wisner called this propaganda network the "Mighty Wurlitzer"
        Here's Carl Bernstein on the CIA and the New York Times (my highlights):The history of the CIA's involvement with the American press continues to be shrouded by an official policy of obfuscation and deception[...]Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were Williarn Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Tirne Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the LouisviIle Courier'‘Journal, and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps'‘Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, the Miami Herald and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald'‘Tribune.
        By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with the New York Times, CBS and Time Inc.[...]During the 1976 investigation of the CIA by the Senate Intelligence Committee, chaired by Senator Frank Church, the dimensions of the Agency's involvement with the press became apparent to several members of the panel, as well as to two or three investigators on the staff. But top officials of the CIA, including former directors William Colby and George Bush, persuaded the committee to restrict its inquiry into the matter and to deliberately misrepresent the actual scope of the activities in its final report. The multivolurne report contains nine pages in which the use of journalists is discussed in deliberately vague and sometimes misleading terms. It makes no mention of the actual number of journalists who undertook covert tasks for the CIA. Nor does it adequately describe the role played by newspaper and broadcast executives in cooperating with the Agency[...]American publishers, like so many other corporate and institutional leaders at the time, were willing to commit the resources of their companies to the struggle against ''global Communism.'' Accordingly, the traditional line separating the American press corps and government was often indistinguishable: rarely was a news agency used to provide cover for CIA operatives abroad without the knowledge and consent of either its principal owner, publisher or senior editor. Thus, contrary to the notion that the CIA insidiously infiltrated the journalistic community, there is ample evidence that America's leading publishers and news executives allowed themselves and their organizations to become handmaidens to the intelligence services. ''Let's not pick on some poor reporters, for God's sake,'' William Colby exclaimed at one point to the Church committee's investigators. ''Let's go to the managements. They were witting.''[...]The CIAs relationship with most news executives differed fundamentally from those with working reporters and stringers, who were much more subject to direction from the Agency. A few executives'--Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times among them'--signed secrecy agreements.[...]Three of the most widely read columnists who maintained such ties with the Agency are C.L. Sulzberger of the New York Times, Joseph Alsop, and the late Stewart Alsop, whose column appeared in the New York Herald'‘Tribune, the Saturday Evening Post and Newsweek[...]On one occasion, according to several CIA officials, Sulzberger was given a briefing paper by the Agency which ran almost verbatim under the columnist's byline in the Times. ''Cycame out and said, 'I'm thinking of doing a piece, can you give me some background?''' a CIA officer said. ''We gave it to Cy as a background piece and Cy gave it to the printers and put his name on it.''[...]
        In November 1973, after many such shifts had been made, Colby told reporters and editors from the New York Times and the Washington Star that the Agency had ''some three dozen'' American newsmen ''on the CIA payroll,'' including five who worked for ''general'‘circulation news organizations.''
        Bernstein is discussing, mostly, the NYT allowing CIA agents to work as reporters as cover, but this still counts as government agency work.The historian Ralph Raico has commented on reporters at NYT and their outrageous lies which have provided cover for US government overseas aggressions:
        I recall their D. C. correspondent Judith Miller's role in promoting the lie of Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction. What's your guess on how much blood she, and the Times, have on their hands for that? But this tradition for our Newspaper of Record goes back to the 1930s. Then its Moscow correspondent, Walter Duranty, did a good comrade's job denying the very existence of the Stalinist terror famine in the Ukraine and the North Caucasus that led to the death of many millions. The Old Gray State Whore would be a better name for that paper.
        Can there really be any question that NYT is an agent of the state, taking part in far more obscene assignments for the US government, than our fictional parking attendant snitch, Paul, and that this cooperation with the government is sanctioned by NYT controlling ownership,the Sulzberger family? It is difficult to see how NYT can be seen any other way than as an agent for the government. One may dispute the above facts, but if one accepts the facts, as I do, then it is clear that The Old Gray State Whore has been putting out for the government for a very long time.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Shut Up Slave!
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Ohio National Guard Training Envisions Right-Wing Terrorism
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:32
        OhioBy: Jesse Hathaway | February 10, 2014
        Organizations Ohio National Guard 52nd Civil Support TeamDocuments from an Ohio National Guard (ONG) training drill conducted last January reveal the details of a mock disaster where Second Amendment supporters with ''anti-government'' opinions were portrayed as domestic terrorists.
        The Ohio National Guard's Civil Support Team practices in a May 2013 drill at Put-in-Bay
        The ONG 52nd Civil Support Team training scenario involved a plot from local school district employees to use biological weapons in order to advance their beliefs about ''protecting Gun Rights and Second Amendment rights.''
        Portsmouth Chief of Police Bill Raisin told NBC 3 WSAZ-TV in Huntington, West Virginia that the drill accurately represented ''the reality of the world we live in,'' adding that such training ''helps us all be prepared.''
        Internal ONG documents provided to Media Trackers after repeated delays provide further context to what WSAZ-TV reported last winter.
        In the disaster-preparedness scenario, two Portsmouth Junior High School employees poisoned school lunches with mustard gas, acting on orders from white-nationalist leader William Pierce.
        The ONG team discovered biological weapons being produced in the school, requiring activation of containment and decontamination procedures.
        Participants in the disaster drill located documents expressing the school employees' ''anti-government'' sentiments, as well as a note identifying Pierce as the fictional right-wing terrorists' leader.
        ONG's 52nd Civil Support Unit participated in a similar drill involving left-wing terrorists with Athens County first responders last year; public officials apologized for that training the next day in response to complaints from local environmentalist groups.
        No apology to Ohioans who supported limited government and the Second Amendment appears to be forthcoming.
        Scioto County Emergency Management Agency director Kim Carver refused to comment, telling Media Trackers she was ''not going to get into an Ohio Army National Guard issue that you have with them.''
        Ohio National Guard Communications Director James Sims II suggested Media Trackers was ''inferring'' from the ONG document's contents as opposed to ''what's actually in the report.''
        After excerpts of the report were read to him, Sims said it was ''not relevant'' to understand why conservatives may feel unduly targeted by ONG's training scenario.
        ''Okay, I'm gonna stop ya there. I'm going to quit this conversation,'' Sims concluded. ''You have a good day.''
        Buckeye Firearms Association spokesman Chad Baus told Media Trackers that ''it is a scary day indeed when law enforcement are being trained that Second Amendment advocates are the enemy,''
        ''The revelation of this information is appalling to me, and to all citizens of Ohio who are true conservatives and patriots, who don't have guns for any other reason than that the Second Amendment gives them that right,'' Portage County TEA Party Executive Director Tom Zawistowski said in a separate Media Trackers interview.
        Media Trackers reached out to Portsmouth-area state legislators Representative Terry Johnson and Senator Joe Uecker for comment about the drill, which took place within their respective districts. Neither replied to phone calls or emails in time for publication.
        ONG's January 2013 training exercise is one of many instances where government officials have identified those with limited-government or pro-Second Amendment opinions as potential terror threats.
        In 2009, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security warned law enforcement agencies that a predicted rise in''right-wing extremism'' would be fueled by ''proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans'' and ''the election of the first African American president.''
        Throughout modern history, groups and individuals associated with left-wing causes have proven far more likely to commit acts of domestic terror.
        In 2012, members of the anarcho-socialist Occupy Cleveland movement were arrested and prosecuted for attempting to destroy the Brecksville-Northfield High Level Bridge with explosives, to commemorate International Workers' Day.
        Last year, leftist groups Earth First and the Animal Liberation Front (ALF) claimed responsibility for the sabotage and property destruction of businesses in Washington and Van Wert counties.
        /MediaTrackersOHTrending ArticlesLike what you're reading? Donate to Media TrackersSee breaking news? Submit a Tip
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Queensland's plan to crack down on wild parties branded 'anti-fun' - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 18:04
        By Brad Ryan
        Updated November 18, 2013 08:46:30
        A move to crack down on wild parties in Queensland has been criticised as an attack on the right to have fun.
        The Police Powers and Responsibilities and Other Legislation Amendment Bill, currently before State Parliament, proposes jail terms and fines of more than $12,000 for the organisers of events that are deemed to be out-of-control.
        Take a look at the bill here.
        It defines an out-of-control event as a gathering of 12 people or more if three of them interfere with the public by swearing, making excessive noise or being drunk in a public place.
        What is an 'out-of-control event'?The bill defines it as an event at which 12 or more people are gathered and three or more people do any of the following...Unlawfully enter property.Use offensive or threatening language.Fight or assault another person.Cause property damage.An indecent act such as wilful exposure.Excessive noise.Burn-outs in a motor vehicle.Unlawfully light fires or fireworks.Throw dangerous objects.Unreasonably obstruct a person or vehicle.Litter in a way that could harm a person, property or the environment.Public drunkenness.Break liquor or drug laws....if the conduct could cause people to fear violence or property damage, or to suffer substantial interference with their rights or peaceful movement in a public place.But lawyers, youth advocates and civil libertarians say legislation aimed at stopping unruly events will make it a legal risk to hold almost any gathering.
        The Queensland Association of Independent Legal Centres describes the proposal as a startling incursion on the rights of ordinary Queenslanders to have fun.
        "There's a real danger that Queenslanders will be punished for just spending time with family or engaging in other normal social activities," director James Farrell said.
        "Stopping people from having fun isn't going to prevent anti-social or violent things from happening."
        Queensland Law Society president Annette Bradfield has also urged a rethink on the bill.
        "The definitions used are very broad, and it can cover the normal mum and dad holding an 18th birthday party for their child," she said.
        "Organisers [of events] could be really quite innocent - parents organising a party for their child and other things happen that cause it to get out-of-control."
        Brisbane's Youth Advocacy Centre, the Caxton Legal Centre and the Queensland Council for Civil Liberties have also criticised the proposal in submissions to a parliamentary committee.
        "Twelve people, I think some of us would feel is a decent dinner-party size," the Youth Advocacy Centre's Janet Wight said.
        The majority have nothing to fear, Police Minister saysPolice and Community Safety Minister Jack Dempsey says the bill addresses community calls for action to curb alcohol-fuelled violence.
        "This legislation ... sends a clear message to those people who want to do the wrong thing, that want to take no responsibility, that want to bring alcoholic violence and property damage into our suburbs that their time is up," he said.
        Mr Dempsey says party organisers who take reasonable steps to prevent events getting out of control will not be punished.
        The majority of people who do the right thing have nothing to fear.
        Police Minister Jack Dempsey
        The bill provides examples of "reasonable steps". They include hiring security guards and shutting down the event if uninvited guests show up.
        "The majority of people who do the right thing have nothing to fear," Mr Dempsey said.
        "We want more Queenslanders out there celebrating and enjoying this great state.
        "They're the people that we actually want to protect by this bill."
        Committee endorses bill, dismisses fears of narrow definitionIn a report tabled this week, Parliament's legal affairs and community safety committee endorsed the bill.
        "The committee supports the Government's commitment to revitalising front line services [of the Queensland Police Service] and providing the QPS with an appropriate scheme to curb the increasing occurrences of out-of-control events," the report said.
        It dismisses concerns about the definition of an out-of-control event.
        "Narrowing the definition would ultimately exclude behaviour which is typically associated with out-of-control events," the committee concluded.
        However, it has recommended a review of the legislation within two years of its introduction.
        It has also recommended the legislation be amended to clarify the "reasonable steps" that could be taken to prevent events getting out of control.
        Parliament is expected to vote on the bill early next year.
        Parents could be liable for hefty fines or jailAnyone who organises an event that becomes out-of-control could be fined $12,100 or jailed for a year.
        If the event is held at a place the organiser does not have the right to use, the penalties increase to a maximum fine of $18,150 or three years' imprisonment.
        If a child organises an event with a parent's permission and the event becomes out of control, parents could be liable for the penalties.
        Organisers of out-of-control events could also be forced to pay the costs of the police response.
        An event cannot be deemed out of control if it is at a licensed venue, a protest or strike action, an authorised public assembly under the Peaceful Assembly Act, at a major sports facility under the Major Sports Facilities Act, or prescribed by regulation.
        Topics:laws, states-and-territories, programs-and-initiatives, activism-and-lobbying, law-crime-and-justice, judges-and-legal-profession, qld, brisbane-4000, australia
        First posted November 15, 2013 18:07:20
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      UBL-OBL-Email shows effort to shield bin Laden photos - Yahoo News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 17:50
        HomeMailNewsSportsFinanceWeatherGamesGroupsAnswersScreenFlickrMobileMoreCelebrityShineMoviesMusicTVHealthShoppingTravelAutosHomesYahoo NewsSearch NewsSearch WebSign InMailHelpAccount InfoHelpSuggestionsYahoo
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    F-Russia
      Evryone's taking advantage of the Gay angle for commercials and promos
      Openly Gay Olympic Gold Medalist Says She 'Got a Cuddle' from Putin | Mediaite
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 01:47
        Does Vladimir Putin look like a cuddler to you?
        Now, I'm sure you're wondering why in God's name anyone would ever ask that question. Well, apparently, after openly gay Dutch speedskater Ireen Wust won the gold in the 3000 meter women's speedskate at the Sochi Olympics, she was on the receiving end of a Putin cuddle.
        Gay issues have played a big part in coverage of the Sochi games, given Russia's anti-gay propaganda laws, so this was bound to catch the media's attention once Wust said it aloud.
        Wust told Dutch national broadcaster NOS, ''I got a cuddle from him,'' at a party held in her honor. ''He congratulated me and asked if everything was OK in Russia and I congratulated him on (Russian speedskater) Olga Graf, of course, for her third place (in the 3,000 meters). He was happy to see me, but then he had to leave again. But I cuddled him.''
        Now, whether the newsworthiness here comes from Putin embracing an openly gay athlete or that Putin is capable of expressing human emotions, but rest assured, a spokesperson for the Netherlands' Olympic Committee did confirm the embrace.
        No word yet on whether Putin had his shirt on for the cuddle or not.
        [h/t E! Online]
        [photo via Remy Steinegger, screengrab]
        '' ''
        Follow Josh Feldman on Twitter: @feldmaniac
      RAINBOW IN THE EYES - "Why the Olympics should not be held in Russia?"
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:25
        From:
        To:
      SF Mayor Flies Rainbow Flag for Sochi; Ignores Russia's Anti-Gay LawOn the surface, it's minimally laudable that Mayor Ed Lee has raised the rainbow flag on the pole off his balcony at San Francisco's City Hall, b
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Petrelis Files
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:55
        SF Mayor Flies Rainbow Flag for Sochi; Ignores Russia's Anti-Gay LawOn the surface, it's minimally laudable that Mayor Ed Lee has raised the rainbow flag on the pole off his balcony at San Francisco's City Hall, but we need to dig deep and ask pointed questions about this LGBT pride display. A tip o' the hat to Jose Ricardo G. Bondoc and the SF NewsFeed Facebook page.
        Since August, when Russia's draconian anti-gay propaganda law went into effect and members of Gays Without Borders and Boycott4Russia staged a Stoli vodka dump under the mayor's office and called on him to denounce the law and rise in violence against queer Russians, our mayor has steadfastly refused to come out and plainly deplore the law and suffering.
        Raised LGBT flag over #SF City Hall as #Olympics are set to begin to support equal rights for all athletes. pic.twitter.com/dr4A82aLQa'-- Edwin Lee (@mayoredlee) February 7, 2014
        Mayor Lee oh-so-quietly on Friday, without a single gay elected official or leader of Gay Inc or member of the blogosphere or traditional media or grassroots activist, forget about a presser or release, started flying the rainbow stripes on his official flagpole. If you're going to do a damn thing as the mayor America's Gayest City as the Olympics begin in a homo-hating country, as dozens of LGBT people are arrested, be sure to organize and publicize it properly or please don't bother.I must ask again why San Francisco's mayor, of all the mayor's in the United States, failed to also raise an Olympics flag with the rainbow flag and issue a press release stating support for gay athletes _and_ showing solidarity with LGBT Russians. You can be sure that if he did the right thing and staged a simple ceremony on his balcony and invited the gay-stocracy, asked those pesky people known as the general public to also attend, it would have generated news and web attention that would be of tremendous benefit to our Russian brothers and sisters.
        Too much trouble for our Mayor Lee. However, let's look to our neighbors to the North, specifically to Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre and what he did on Friday. This a retweet on his official Twitter account:
        Mayor @DenisCoderre adds color to #MTL City Hall during #WinterOlympics#LGBT#polMTL#rainbowsforSochipic.twitter.com/lZMkd5LJCW'-- Sabrina Williams (@sabri_wi) February 7, 2014
        Merci et bravo, mon ami Denis Coderre, pour l'gay solidarite! Please note that the first tweet shows no actual living and breathing gay people, the second photo is full of LGBTs and allies! Says much about what is wrong with SF's approach compared to Montreal's genuine engagement.Sure would have been great if the mayor of this podunk town had been in touch with his counterpart in Montreal and see how to do a rainbow flag raising at City Hall related to the Olympics can be done including standing with gay jocks _and_ criticizing Russia's homo-hate. It's not too late for Mayor Lee to do the right thing in San Francisco, but that would require him to also be ready to answer questions about why gay activists can't raise an Olympic flag under the rainbow flag at Harvey Milk Plaza.
        My gut says that because of the three-year controversy over the rainbow flag and pole on City property at that homo-historic public space, our mayor is too chicken to do anything with a rainbow flag on City grounds with great fanfare because the plaza flag issues would come up.
        What other reason could San Francisco's mayor have for so meekly displaying the rainbow stripes off the People's Building?
        I'd like to see Mayor Lee learn from Mayor Coderra and before the Olympics are over, stage a much more worthy and appropriate event and deplore Russia's homo-hatred. Check out this video the Montreal Global news service. This is how a straight mayor who cares about LGBT Russians behaves:
    CYBER
      Background Briefing on the Launch of the Cybersecurity Framework
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:09
        The White House
        Office of the Press Secretary
        For Immediate Release
        February 12, 2014
        Via Conference Call
        11:06 A.M. EST
        MS. LUCAS MAGNUSON: Hi, good morning, everyone. We're just delighted today to launch the Cybersecurity Framework in an event at 1:00 p.m. This call will be to preview that event and the framework itself. Just as a reminder, the information in this call is embargoed until that event begins at 1:00 p.m. All information is attributable to senior administration officials.
        With that, I will go ahead and turn it over for opening comments to senior administration official number one.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thank you. Good morning, everyone. Thank you for joining us on this call. We're very excited to be here today. This is a major milestone achievement for us.
        Just to set the context for the discussion, last year the President issued Executive Order 13636 on improving critical infrastructure cybersecurity. Some of you were probably on this press call a year ago when we launched the framework. But if you recall, that EO directed the administration to take three broad steps in partnership with critical infrastructure stakeholders in industry and in government. One was to improve information sharing with the private sector; two was to raise the level of cybersecurity across U.S. critical infrastructure by encouraging the adoption of cybersecurity standards and best practices; and three, to enhance privacy and civil liberties while undertaking these actions. The cybersecurity standards and best practices were to also be supported by the development of a voluntary program to encourage the use of the framework.
        So working with and in partnership across government and industry, we have made significant progress in each of these areas. So today, exactly one year later, we are pleased to announce the release of the framework and the launch of the voluntary program. And from our perspective, this is really a very major turning point in cybersecurity discussions. We believe that from today on we'll have a new shared vocabulary about cybersecurity that will allow CEOs, boards of directors and policymakers -- not just here in the U.S., but around the world -- to set baselines and chart the course for improvement and actually make those improvements.
        Both NIST and DHS have played incredibly pivotal roles in the development of these products and they've worked very diligently to deliver these efforts with quality and substance, and I should say, and on time -- which is a major achievement as well -- and in a manner that is responsive to industry's needs as well.
        So with that, I'm going to turn it over to senior administration official number two to discuss the Cybersecurity Framework.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thank you, everybody, and I want to thank everybody who's joining today's call. So my role is to discuss version 1.0 of the NIST framework for improving critical infrastructure cybersecurity. A year ago today, the President issued the executive order calling on NIST to convene with the private sector to identify a set of industry standards and practices that could help organizations that are managing cybersecurity risks. That executive order was an important step to raise consciousness among the broader business community and initiate a public-private partnership on a national scale to protect our critical infrastructure and supporting structures.
        The 39-page Cybersecurity Framework document and its accompanying road map represents the beginning of what I hope will be a continuing, common-sense conversation about how to protect these critical assets. One of the biggest cybersecurity issues facing critical infrastructure companies in all of these sectors -- transportation, financial, health care, communications, energy -- is simply this: When are you doing enough? When do you know you've done the best you can to protect your company, your suppliers, your customers from the adverse effects of cybersecurity threats?
        As technology and innovation drive increase complexity in our daily lives, coupled with a collection of threats that are increasingly varied and changing -- that includes criminal gangs in foreign countries to disgruntled insiders -- doing your best in cybersecurity can, frankly, be quite overwhelmingly for many organizations. So NIST's approach to our charge in the executive order was to adopt a partnership and collaboration approach. So working with industry we've developed a structure that any company, large or small, and any one of the very critical infrastructure sectors can voluntarily use to make improvements in their current cybersecurity systems or to create a credible cybersecurity approach if they don't already have one.
        The key message is that cybersecurity is not something you just put in place and walk away. There's no prescription or magic bullet for cybersecurity. There are only well conceived, proven ways of continuously managing the risk. The other key message today is that we wanted this framework to be voluntary. And that was important because it encourages the widest possible set of stakeholders to come to the table and work with us. It also ensures that the muscle in this approach comes from the companies themselves. Voluntary standards are a tradition in the United States because they work. When industries get together and determine for themselves what standards describe a quality of a product, these standards are much more likely to be adopted quickly and implemented fully.
        The heart of this process was to listen to industry to be sure we knew what industry needed from this framework. So we held five workshops around the country with thousands of participants. We provided draft versions of the framework and supporting material multiple times at our website. We encouraged comments on the draft, and we carefully considered all of the feedback we received.
        The result is a flexible tool that allows diverse industries and stakeholders to talk about and describe how they would take actions to improve cybersecurity. It lays out the critical elements of any cybersecurity program and then links those elements to proven standards and protections for companies to consider using. The framework describes the key functions of cybersecurity as identify, protect, detect, respond and recover. And then it further describes categories and sub-categories of actions a company can take to carry out those functions.
        And finally, it offers a list of known publicly vetted standards and practices that address these categories. By relying on those practices already proven and used throughout industry we can focus on the more pressing problems instead of driving apart an already fractured system of standards, regulations, policy and law.
        We can also say definitively, based on the large number of companies both in critical infrastructure and in the broader economy that have suffered losses in revenue and business productivity in the last year, it is time to try something new.
        So what we've done, what's really new, is we've integrated many complement pieces that organizations need to address cybersecurity risk management in a way that makes it easier to implement a strong approach. And we've done it in a way that it's accessible to a broad audience of stakeholders -- because it's really critical that all levels of an organization, all the way from the top in the C suite down to the construction supervisor, they need to understand how and why they protect their company from cyber threats.
        The new framework does three important things. First, it jumpstarts a vital conversation between critical infrastructure sectors with the various regulatory authorities related to them about what cybersecurity issues they have in common and how these issues can be addressed cost-effectively and voluntarily without reinventing the wheel.
        Secondly, it provides a consensus description of what's needed for a comprehensive cybersecurity program, and in the process provides a powerful tool for companies to seek competitive advantage by improving cybersecurity and lowering risk. And finally, it helps companies prove to themselves and to their stakeholders that good cybersecurity can be the same thing as good business. By mapping their individual cybersecurity programs against the full list of functions, categories and specific standards a company can identify gaps and tailor improvement plans to their specific needs. And we hope they will create metrics that document those improvements.
        Some smaller companies may discover in the process that their entire cybersecurity effort consists only of passwords and anti-virus software with no real-time detection capability, even though automated tools are widely available and affordable. Another example could be a larger company may find that the framework is a useful tool for holding their cybersecurity contractors accountable, or for purchasing these services in a more systematic way in the marketplace. The bottom line is that we all need an agreed upon way to talk clearly to one another about cybersecurity issues and solutions and to hold each other accountable. And this is really the start of that conversation. I'm looking forward -- all of us at NIST are looking forward to continuing to work collaboratively with industry and government to lower cybersecurity risks so we can better protect our economy and our national security.
        Let me turn it over to senior official number three.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thank you. And let me add my thanks to all of you on this call for your interest in this. As you know, our nation's critical infrastructure, both physical and cyber, is the backbone of America's national security and economic prosperity. But that infrastructure faces a variety of risks to its functionality, including acts of terror, natural disasters and cyber attacks. And because the majority of our national critical infrastructure is owned and operated by private companies, both the government and the private sector have a shared responsibility to reduce the risks to that critical infrastructure.
        To address these challenges, the President issued not only the executive order on improving cybersecurity critical infrastructure a year ago today, but also Presidential Policy Directive 21 on Critical Infrastructure, Security and Resilience. Today, the Department of Homeland Security and its colleagues at the Departments of Commerce and Energy will talk about the very real and tangible steps that we have taken to implement the executive order and the PPD.
        The executive order directed the Department of Homeland Security to establish a voluntary program for critical infrastructure cybersecurity, to serve as a federal coordination point for cybersecurity resources, and support increased cyber resilience by promoting the use of the framework that was developed under the leadership of NIST.
        DHS is announcing this afternoon the creation of that program, which we call Critical Infrastructure Cyber Community -- or C-Cubed -- Voluntary Program. The C-Cubed Voluntary Program stands for Critical Infrastructure Cyber Community, but it also emphasizes another three c's: convergence, converging resources to support cybersecurity risk management and resilience through the use of the framework; connecting critical infrastructure stakeholders to the national resilience effort through cybersecurity resilience advocacy, engagement and awareness; and, finally, coordinating critical infrastructure cross-sector effort to maximize national cybersecurity resilience. The C-Cubed Voluntary Program represents a long-term goal for cybersecurity, encouraging organizations of all sizes to establish or improve their cyber risk management processes, and to take advantage of available resources made available by the United States government.
        For example, the program supports the use of the Cybersecurity Framework through the Cyber Resilience Review, CRR. The CRR is an assessment to evaluate an organization's information technology resilience. The CRR may be conducted as a self-assessment or as an in-person, facilitated assessment. The goal of the CRR is to develop an understanding and measurement of key capabilities to provide meaningful indicators of an organization's operational resilience and their ability to manage cyber risk to their critical services during normal operations and at times of operational stress and crisis.
        To date, DHS has conducted more than 330 CRRs at the request of critical infrastructure entities nationwide. The inherent principles and recommended practices within the CRR align closely with the central tenants of the Cybersecurity Framework. Organizations can use the CRR to conduct an analysis of their current practices and how they compare to the principles of the Cybersecurity Framework.
        DHS also currently offers a range of other cybersecurity resources to public and private sector organizations, including information on cyber threats and vulnerability; cybersecurity incident resources such as through the National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center, or the NCCIC; or the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team, the US-CERT; or the Industrial Control Systems Computer Emergency Response Team, the ICS-CERT.
        We also have software assurance programs and other technical resources, such as cybersecurity strategy development, cybersecurity assessment tools, cyber exercise planning, cybersecurity risk management training, cybersecurity resilience review, a national vulnerability database, and road maps to enhance cybersecurity in certain specific sectors.
        Speaking of our sectors, DHS will work with sector-specific agencies and other federal agencies to identify the suggested offerings and provide assistance best suited to address a particular sector's industry capability gaps. For example, the NIST Cybersecurity Center of Excellence plans to work with owners and operators to develop sector-specific use cases that build out security platforms based on the framework and existing standards and best practices. And the Energy Department is offering guidance and assistance through their program that supports the energy sector cybersecurity capability maturity models, or C2M2.
        The C-Cubed Voluntary Program is an innovative public-private partnership led by DHS to help align critical infrastructure owners and operators with existing resources that will assist their efforts to use the Cybersecurity Framework to manage their cyber risks.
        We've already seen strong interest from the private sector in partnering with us on this effort, and it aligns closely with the partnership effort reflected in the National Infrastructure Partnership plan 2013 -- 2013 Partnering for Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience.
        It boils down to this. In cybersecurity, the more systems we secure, the more secure we all are.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Thank you. And I just wanted to hit on two other topics as we move forward. One is what's happening with the regulatory environment and then what's happening with the incentives that we've been working on developing.
        With respect to the regulatory environment, I just want to be clear that for the administration, the goal is not to expand regulation. Rather our goal is to streamline existing regulations wherever possible and to bring those regulations into alignment with the framework. So, to that end, executive branch agencies are reviewing their existing regulatory or voluntary programs in this area. And then in May of this year, consistent with the executive order, these agencies will also propose prioritized risk-based efficient and coordinated actions to mitigate cyber risk.
        We're encouraging those agencies to focus on voluntary efforts and programs to support adoption of the framework. For those sectors where regulations already do exist, agencies could engage in existing rulemaking processes to support efforts to harmonize and align current regulations with the framework. And we have invited our independent regulatory agencies to follow the same process.
        And then we are continuing to work and develop incentives to encourage the use of the framework in coordination with both NIST and DHS. We do believe that developing incentives around a framework is a key endeavor and we intend to keep moving forward with this process, and it's going to be done in partnership and engagement with industry.
        Back in 2013, we released a potential set of incentives that we intended -- that we said at the time that we'd review further, and that's what we've been working on. The relevant agencies have further defined the scope and path forward for some of those incentives, including technical assistance and process preference, cyber insurance, grants, cost recovery, public recognition, regulatory streamlining and government procurement.
        As these plans develop, they'll be shared publicly over the next few months and will include details on how to get engaged in the process.
        However, I do want to say that we believe that the best drivers for adoption or use of the framework will ultimately be market based. Don't get me wrong, I think the government-based incentives are really important for us to pursue. But at the end of the day, it's the market that's got to drive the business case for the Cybersecurity Framework. The federal government is going to do its best to make the costs of using the framework lower, and the benefits of the framework higher, but it's the market that's going to ultimately make this work.
        So, with that, I will close.
        Q My question is, first of all, can you point to a couple specific things that would encourage companies to adopt these voluntary guidelines or best practices aside from that specific regulatory agency synchronizing their regulations with the framework? And then, secondly, some experts have told me that they felt that this set of standards embraces the status quo to a large extent. Is there flexibility for these things to be updated as new threats or industry best practices change?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I'm happy to answer that question. I think the question on why an organization looks to adopt and use the framework stems from, in many respects, enlightened self-interest. There's a couple of key things. One is the framework explicitly makes the tie to risk management. And so protecting the information in these organizations, protecting how that information is used to provide critical infrastructure services, is something all of these companies want to do. It's very much in their interest to know how to adopt what's considered best practice and to put it in a framework where it can be effectively used.
        The other benefit actually comes from the fact that since this is a shared infrastructure, it gives them great advantages of scale where there are dependencies. The contractors that they depend on -- there's a common way of defining how they support the overall cybersecurity effort. It means that they can turn to services and vendors to provide security services and security products. And those are very powerful reasons why companies are looking at this and I think you'll be seeing that in the days ahead.
        With regard to the continuous improvement, I would say it's twofold. It's actually in the process itself. The framework defines ultimately the risk management and continuous improvement cycle within companies. In fact, the tiers describe increasing levels of maturity in that approach, where you become more self-aware and more self-improving all the time as you adjust your profile to changes in technology. But also the framework is designed to be continuous.
        We do not consider this to be done. One of the road map documents that's being released today describes the steps we are going to continue to take to support the framework. We think the bringing together of all of these industries to work and update and address gaps and improvements is essential to this overall approach. This is a living framework.
        Q Thank you very much for taking my question. Regarding the metrics, is there going to be any effort to place any consistency in the metrics by which private sector adopters measure their conformance to the framework? If there is consistency, then how can you assure the adopters that they won't be held liable for adoption of the framework?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: It's a great question. And as you know, it's been a very active area of discussion throughout the entire framework process. The way the framework is laid out has each individual organization developing a profile and using that profile to identify next steps. So the metrics are really internal and unique to the organization that's adopting.
        As this gets used and you start looking at dependency, there clearly will have to be some shared understanding of how to approach the issue of metrics. And that's already been identified by the companies working with us as something that they would like to continue to work on in the next version of this framework as well.
        So I would consider that the metric discussion is one that's going to mature over time. Remember, this is explicitly a voluntary program, and so it's really about companies setting their own level of care, not having some one-size-fits-all approach from the outside.
        Q Hey, everybody. Thanks so much for doing this. I just want to look at the congressional picture here. It's always been the case that the administration has said it has to go back to Congress to fill in quite a good number of holes, whether it's on information sharing, or on the issue of incentives, or so forth. So what should we expect from the administration going forward when it comes to these very unresolved issues that remain with the framework?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I think a couple of things, one of which is I think we believe that the framework stands on its own and can be an incredibly powerful tool for enabling the kind of conversations that need to happen between CEOs and boards, and between the government and industry. So we think that regardless of what happens between the administration and the Hill and up on the Hill, the Cybersecurity Framework is an incredibly powerful tool that we can leverage to make real improvements across our critical infrastructure regardless of what happens from there.
        Of course, we do believe that we continue to need to engage with the Hill, and, in fact, we have. We've briefed congressional staff on the framework and have gotten a lot of really good support from both sides of the aisle. And you'll see some of that in some of the quotes that come out later today from some of our congressional engagements as well. But I do think that the administration will continue to engage Congress on improving our ability to do information sharing, on updating the statutes that govern how we actually do cybersecurity within the federal government, DHS's authority in this space. All of our legislative agenda will continue. But none of that I think detracts from the fact that the framework is going to be a really significant advance in critical infrastructure cybersecurity.
        Q Sure, can I just quick follow? I just wanted to clarify something. This is a very different approach than what the administration had thought in legislation as far back as 2011 and 2012, when there was what seemed to be a greater belief that regulation was the way to do this, or a more regulatory-minded approach was the way to bring about these changes in cybersecurity. And that led to a huge debate between businesses who just didn't like that, but the administration seemed to feel very strongly about it. So when you compare where you guys were in 2011, 2012 versus now, what has you more confident that this approach is going to produce the right changes in cybersecurity?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I think what gives me a lot of the confidence is the degree of engagement with industry that has happened over the development of the Cybersecurity Framework. We have had just an unbelievable level of participation that NIST can speak to in greater detail, and an enormous participation from across a huge range of companies both in terms of the sectors that have been involved as well as the size of the companies that have been involved.
        And because of the result of such a participatory effort, that really points at what is the acknowledged set of best practices and standards in this space I think it really does become kind of the gold standard for how to approach and talk about cybersecurity -- not just for our critical infrastructure, but for any organization that wanted to use the framework as a way to tackle its cybersecurity problems. And so that's what gives me great confidence that this document will be both usable and relevant to the organizations actually trying to do cybersecurity. Q I have two quick questions. Do you have a cost estimate of what the current cybersecurity threat is here in the United States? And also, how can we get a copy of the framework?
        MS. LUCAS MAGNUSON: I'll answer the second question first just quickly. The framework will be online a little bit before the 1:00 p.m. event, and we'll have links to that in a press release that we plan to send around that time. So everyone will get access at the same time.
        And on question number two --
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think that getting a cost estimate on exactly what the cyber threat actually costs the United States on an annual basis is incredibly difficult, especially because a lot of people never report that they've been hacked. Companies don't report that; individuals don't report that. And then, even a lot of times assessing what the value of the damage that's been done or the information that has been stolen is incredibly difficult to do.
        For example, it's often very difficult to put a price tag on intellectual property that you've never even brought to market yet that's been siphoned off and taken to a competitor, for example.
        So I think it's very difficult to provide cost estimates with any sort of fidelity in there. But we know from the scope of activity that is reported, from the scope of activity that we can see, that the numbers are very large and that this is a very real and significant problem to a lot of businesses and individuals, as well as the government across the country.
        Q Is there a range of numbers then? And also, does the framework include any sort of suggestion or incentive for companies to report to the government when they have a loss?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I think that even getting into ranges is just a very -- it's such a squishy territory and art that I just don't even think that that's a viable conversation to have.
        In terms of encouraging the reporting, I don't think that's really -- the framework is not really aimed at that. What the framework does point to is it says that you need to think about not just the protection part of cybersecurity but also the response and recovery part, meaning that you will face incidents as a company, no matter how good your protection and detection capabilities are, so you need to be prepared to be able to respond when you detect an incident, and you need to be able to recover from that. Now, in the process of figuring out that you need to be able to respond and recover, that encourages more companies to be more proactive, that would be a side benefit, but it's not really the driver behind the framework.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: We think that voluntary programs also may help encourage companies to come forward simply by giving them information about who to call and how to come forward. And so putting up resources about the NCCIC and the US-CERT and ICS-CERT, for example, may help facilitate some of that interaction and sharing of information.
        Q Just getting back to incentives, so what can the administration or the executive branch do on its own without going to Congress for legislative proposals? And then, what specifically would you want to see from Congress in the area of legislation related to incentives? I realize you said that you expect the market to be the driver here for the most part, but still, I think people are looking to see what can the federal government do both from the executive branch standpoint and the congressional point of view.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I think that in multiple areas, there's actually a fair amount the executive branch can do on its own. For example, we've been engaged in very serious discussions with the various insurance companies to talk about what's needed to actually get a cyber insurance market really thriving. Public recognition efforts, even talking in the field of cost recovery, that's often done at the state level, and that involves a lot of discussion with regulators both at the federal and state level, not even necessarily going back to Congress. So there's actually a broad array of what we want to pursue in that space.
        In terms of what we actually want from Congress, I think that's actually something that we're still working on. I think that's actually something that, particularly as we work on the incentives and as companies begin to use the framework, that we actually want to get a better sense of what incentives would really matter and then what of those incentives are really, in fact, actually held back by some sort of statutory limitation, that congressional action would actually be beneficial in changing or enabling something to happen.
        So it's no surprise that legislation doesn't move very fast through Congress right now, so I don't think that we are hinging our strategy in this space on congressional action, but we'll get back there when we think it's necessary. Q Just one quick follow-up on what you guys can do on your own -- and maybe this will come out in the coming months -- but just, again, when it comes to federal procurement policy, sort of embedding some of these best practices and standards in what is being supplied to you, somehow requiring that in your acquisition processes. I don't know if you can speak to that.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, I think that if you take a look at what was in that report, the joint report produced between the Defense Department and GSA, it really outlines how we can start to bring cybersecurity requirements more into our acquisition process across the board. And I think you will see us continue to do that. Just as the private sector is, the federal government is under enormous pressure from cybersecurity threats in all sorts of directions, and so I think we're going to be exploring how to do that and how to put that report into practice.
        But, of course, there are other things that we can do in the technical assistance side and in other areas that you'll see even starting today with the voluntary program launch.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: As was noted earlier, there's an enlightened self-interest here that we're counting on with regard to businesses' interest in improving their cybersecurity. And part of making that business case is providing information to inform their risk assessment. And so there's been a great deal of work done to reach out to the various critical infrastructure sectors to make sure they understand the nature of the threat, vulnerabilities and consequences.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: A lot of these steps are going to be outlined in the road map itself, how we're going to look at the government side of this in the context of the framework.
        Q I wanted to ask how you plan to track the success of the program or how widely adopted these standards are, or how widely adopted the framework is going be? And also, one of the experts, or a couple of the experts I spoke with mentioned a concern that the framework was over-focused on privacy and data security, not as focused on sort of the industrial interest, particularly safety and kind of resilience of the physical infrastructure. Can you address that as well, please?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: On the tracking of successof adoption, we may not ever know how widely the framework has been adopted, because obviously there's no requirement for companies to tell the government that they're using the framework to improve their cybersecurity.
        But we are hoping through the C-Cubed Voluntary Program to be able to have some interaction with companies that are looking for assistance in adopting the program. We also are designing a way for companies to provide us with feedback on how helpful the C-Cubed Voluntary Program is for them so that we can continue to improve that program. And we'll be working closely with NIST to make sure that they're getting the feedback on the framework itself. So that will hopefully give us a sense of -- certainly of how useful it is, if not how widespread the adoption is.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Yes, I think that's right. I think a lot of the adoption that you're going to see is going to be evident as these companies push this into the market, into their practices. I think you're going to hear a lot of companies talking about this. You're going to see it in business-to-business relationships in a whole host of other ways. And so there will be a lot of indicators about activity -- and also, in the participation of these companies as they come back and work to improve the framework process, because, remember, a key part of that is looking at what are the things we're learning as we're using this. And so we're expecting these active participants to be working with us as the framework improves. With regard to the balance, this is something that the framework process has dealt with all along. We've been very careful to reflect comments like that in the public and to react to those. We think we've really taken that seriously, and we hope that the overall consensus is that this is a very balanced document. Remember, a lot of these issues -- whether it's data privacy and security, whether it's industrial controls -- are designed to be integrated into the framework approach. There are things that come out as an organization looks at their own structure through the profile and defines this.
        And so you have to be a little bit careful that you're not looking at the top-line framework and the language that is there as the overall barometer of how committed we are to this or to that. It really does come out as you apply the framework. And we think the balance is pretty good. Q This is on federal procurement. You said that vendors who adopt the framework might stand a better chance of winning contracts. The earlier version seemed to encourage incident reporting as part of an effective response. That's new for a lot of contractors who are outside of the defense industry. So I'm wondering how the government might help them implement that part of the framework. SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So I think that really that's kind of -- part of the reason that we're creating a voluntary program is because one of the themes that has clearly emerged is oftentimes a confusion about if you do have a cybersecurity incident, who do you reach out to? Who can you call? And in fact, we're trying to make sure that there is no wrong door for coming into the federal government, and that wherever you come in we can get you to the right place, to the right people that should be able to help a company deal with a particular incident, whether it turns out to be one that they want to deal primarily as a mitigation exercise and work with DHS, whether it's a criminal activity and it's in the lane of FBI or Secret Service. But really what we want to do is encourage companies to be able to get to the right information so they can figure out who they can call on that.
        Q I understand that the Appendix B on privacy has been removed, it won't be in this first version. Can you talk a little bit about how the privacy issue is addressed throughout the document?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Sure. In response to a comment we received through the process, the section on privacy has not been removed as much as integrated into the framework. And so stakeholders have always and consistently identified privacy needs as essential to this framework. There was not support, or there was certainly not sufficient support for a standalone Appendix B. We received comments that it needed to be integrated and so, in response, that has been integrated into the main body of the framework and into its core.
        Q I'm wondering what's next in terms of how does a company actually join the program and when? And then, to follow up on the measuring success piece, how many companies are you expecting to or hoping will join the program? And you talk about raising the level of security. How do you measure that, and will this program make critical infrastructure more secure?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: On your question of how to join the program, really it's as simple as visiting the website. And we're going to have a very easy entry point at dhs.gov, and then more detail at a link through that to us-cert.gov.
        And there's no magic ''- you don't have to sign up, you don't ever have to let us know even that you've been to the website. But if you would like to avail yourself of some of those resources, again, we're going to make it very easy for you to know how to do that and how to interact with the folks in the government who might be able to provide varying degrees of assistance in this option of the framework.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Let me just also point that there's ''- just for clarification, there's the voluntary program, which is I assume what you're referring to in the program. But the framework itself can be used by organizations, independent of whether or not they're participating in that program. Those are decisions being made. Internal to these organizations, based on feedback, we're expecting rather widespread use of this right away. We know that organizations are looking at this seriously.
        So I didn't want you to be confused about using the framework within an organization and participating in the C-Cubed Voluntary Program.
        Q Sorry, the part about the measuring success piece?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: So, again, I think the success of -- well, again on the program side, the program is designed to support use. So I think the real test of that is going to be are we doing things that -- are we providing tools and resources and things that support organizations of all sizes, of all different backgrounds, to put this framework into use.
        On the framework itself, we're going to measure success by is it being put into practice; is it driving these improved cybersecurity behaviors that lead to better outcomes. And that's something we're going to see and continue to work on extensively as the framework process continues.
        Q Thanks very much. I wanted to tag back to something that bachelor number one -- I mean, administration official number one said at the very end there about the regulatory environment. Can you talk a little bit about what agencies are doing as they're reviewing the current regulations and how they're going to update them? Can you give me a sense of the process behind that?
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Well, of course, it varies depending on which executive agency you're talking about. But I think really -- they're engaging in their normal processes they have to engage with their stakeholders and with how they do their oversight process in their various sectors. And they're taking a look at whether or not they have cybersecurity regulations or requirements, guidance -- there's all sorts of names for it -- how that currently stacks up, how that stacks up against the framework, and then how to move forward from there.
        So I think it really -- it varies a lot depending on the particular sector and agency that's involved. That work is going on right now across the different regulatory agencies.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: Also they've worked with us throughout the entire process.
        Q So DNI James Clapper was on the Hill yesterday to discuss major threats facing the nation, and one of them that he pointed out was vulnerabilities to the supervisory control and data acquisition programs. These are programs that run a lot of areas of critical infrastructure. And I'm wondering if you can address how the framework handles some of those vulnerabilities.
        SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL: I'd be happy to. So the framework includes standards and approaches for SCADA and other industrial control systems. This has been a key part of the process from the very beginning. And so we agree. This is obviously something that many critical infrastructure sectors deal with. And it was important that it integrate both what you would consider traditional IT-type infrastructure in the organizations, but also dedicated industrial control-type systems.
        So, again, it's most clear when you get right into the profiles and look at the underlying categories, sub-categories and references, but it's quite integrated in the approach. And again these organizations have worked with us all the way through. In fact, standards organizations were immediately responsive in aligning what they've been doing as part of the framework process.
        So I'll end there.
        MS. LUCAS MAGNUSON: All right. Well, thanks, everyone, for joining. Just a couple of reminders here before we close. The event will begin here -- the launch event -- it will be live-streamed on whitehouse.gov starting at 1:00 p.m. This call and the information is embargoed until that time. Again, all of the information is attributable to senior administration officials.
        Right before the event begins at 1:00 p.m., we'll have a press release from here. And some of you have also asked about what others are saying about the framework, and we'll be distributing some of the comments that we've received from the private sector and others for your information.
        And with that, I'll just thank you all for joining and we appreciate your time this morning.
        END11:57 P.M. EST
      Launch of the Cybersecurity Framework
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 22:47
        The White House
        Office of the Press Secretary
        For Immediate Release
        February 12, 2014
        Today the Obama Administration is announcing the launch of the Cybersecurity Framework, which is the result of a year-long private-sector led effort to develop a voluntary how-to guide for organizations in the critical infrastructure community to enhance their cybersecurity. The Framework is a key deliverable from the Executive Order on ''Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity'' that President Obama announced in the 2013 State of the Union.
        Through the development of this Framework, industry and government are strengthening the security and resiliency of critical infrastructure in a model of public-private cooperation. Over the past year, individuals and organizations throughout the country and across the globe have provided their thoughts on the kinds of standards, best practices, and guidelines that would meaningfully improve critical infrastructure cybersecurity. The Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) consolidated that input into the voluntary Cybersecurity Framework that we are releasing today.
        The Framework gathers existing global standards and practices to help organizations understand, communicate, and manage their cyber risks. For organizations that don't know where to start, the Framework provides a road map. For organizations with more advanced cybersecurity, the Framework offers a way to better communicate with their CEOs and with suppliers about management of cyber risks. Organizations outside the United States may also wish use the Framework to support their own cybersecurity efforts.
        Each of the Framework components (the Framework Core, Profiles, and Tiers) reinforces the connection between business drivers and cybersecurity activities. The Framework also offers guidance regarding privacy and civil liberties considerations that may result from cybersecurity activities.
        The Framework Core is a set of cybersecurity activities and informative references that are common across critical infrastructure sectors. The cybersecurity activities are grouped by five functions -- Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, Recover -- that provide a high-level view of an organization's management of cyber risks.The Profiles can help organizations align their cybersecurity activities with business requirements, risk tolerances, and resources. Companies can use the Profiles to understand their current cybersecurity state, support prioritization, and to measure progress towards a target state.The Tiers provide a mechanism for organizations to view their approach and processes for managing cyber risk. The Tiers range from Partial (Tier 1) to Adaptive (Tier 4) and describe an increasing degree of rigor in risk management practices, the extent to which cybersecurity risk management is informed by business needs, and its integration into an organization's overall risk management practices.Though the adoption of the Framework is voluntary, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has established the Critical Infrastructure Cyber Community (C3) Voluntary Program as a public-private partnership to increase awareness and use of the Cybersecurity Framework. The C3 Voluntary Program will connect companies, as well as federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial partners, to DHS and other federal government programs and resources that will assist their efforts in managing their cyber risks. Participants will be able to share lessons learned, get assistance, and learn about free tools and resources that can help them.
        Federal executive branch civilian agencies are evaluating how they will use the Framework to enhance the protection of their systems, and State and local governments are also looking at how they can leverage capabilities found in the Framework to assist managing their cybersecurity risk. DHS is developing the Voluntary Program to respond to state and local government needs, and it is examining incentives tailored to these stakeholders.
      Statement by the President on the Cybersecurity Framework
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 22:46
        The White House
        Office of the Press Secretary
        For Immediate Release
        February 12, 2014
        Cyber threats pose one the gravest national security dangers that the United States faces. To better defend our nation against this systemic challenge, one year ago I signed an Executive Order directing the Administration to take steps to improve information sharing with the private sector, raise the level of cybersecurity across our critical infrastructure, and enhance privacy and civil liberties.
        Since then, the National Institute of Standards and Technology has worked with the private sector to develop a Cybersecurity Framework that highlights best practices and globally recognized standards so that companies across our economy can better manage cyber risk to our critical infrastructure. Today I was pleased to receive the Cybersecurity Framework, which reflects the good work of hundreds of companies, multiple federal agencies, and contributors from around the world. This voluntary Framework is a great example of how the private sector and government can, and should, work together to meet this shared challenge.
        While I believe today's Framework marks a turning point, it's clear that much more work needs to be done to enhance our cybersecurity. America's economic prosperity, national security, and our individual liberties depend on our commitment to securing cyberspace and maintaining an open, interoperable, secure, and reliable Internet. Our critical infrastructure continues to be at risk from threats in cyberspace, and our economy is harmed by the theft of our intellectual property. Although the threats are serious and they constantly evolve, I believe that if we address them effectively, we can ensure that the Internet remains an engine for economic growth and a platform for the free exchange of ideas.
        I again urge Congress to move forward on cybersecurity legislation that both protects our nation and our privacy and civil liberties. Meanwhile, my Administration will continue to take action, under existing authorities, to protect our nation from this threat.
    Syria
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Syria: Rush to evacuate civilians from besieged Homs before ceasefire ends
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: euronews
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:14
        Aid agencies are scrambling to evacuate hundreds of civilians from the besieged Syrian city of Homs before the temporary ceasefire expires later today.
        Appeals have gone out to both sides to extend the pause in fighting as the operation to bring the young and elderly out had to be suspended on Tuesday.
        More than 1,100 of an estimated 2,500 people have so far fled the city since Friday under a truce.
        Concern is also growing about the safety of dozens of men and boys held by the authorities for screening after leaving Homs.
        On the diplomatic front at the United Nations the Security Council has failed to agree on a draft resolution to demand humanitarian aid access to besieged areas across Syria.
        Russia has refused to back it calling it one sided.
        Meanwhile in Geneva there's been no progress to speak of in the second round of peace talks.
      UN restarts aid mission in Homs
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: BBC News - Home
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:29
        12 February 2014Last updated at 09:20 ET Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
        More than 1,000 civilians have been evacuated from Homs so far, as Lyse Doucet reports
        More aid has been sent into the besieged rebel-held Old City of Homs by the UN after hours of talks aimed at saving a truce between warring parties.
        UN vehicles towed trailers of food into the city, and aid agencies prepared buses to transport fleeing civilians.
        More civilians are set to join the hundreds evacuated out of the Old City since the truce was agreed last Friday.
        The current ceasefire deal is due to end late on Wednesday, but the regime has said it will allow an extension.
        The BBC's Lyse Doucet, in Homs, says every precaution is being taken with the latest food delivery.
        Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
        An abandoned ballroom on the edge of Homs is being used to care for evacuees, Lyse Doucet says
        Red Crescent vehicles were attacked on their way to the Old City at the weekend, and their workers were briefly trapped.
        In other developments:
        Syrian government forces have stepped up an assault on the opposition-held town of Yabroud, near the Lebanese border, with at least 13 air strikes reported. Lebanese officials told the BBC dozens of families are streaming over the border in anticipation of a major assault Syrian government and opposition delegations are holding a third day of talks in Geneva, after the UN declared the talks "laborious" on Tuesday Russia has again rejected the idea of a UN Security Council resolution that would call on all sides to allow aid workers access across Syria A man thought to be the first Briton to have carried out a suicide bombing in Syria is named as Abdul Waheed Majid 'Weeding out terrorists'Government troops have besieged Homs for 18 months.
        Continue reading the main storyThe "humanitarian pause" in the Old City of Homs is a rare glimmer of light in a dark and devastating war. The UN says the mission has already helped a "significant" number of people to leave the besieged area and a "limited" amount of aid is getting through.
        The UN's resident humanitarian co-ordinator, Yacoub El Hillo, told me they were "baby steps" that, he hoped, could lead to the "giant steps" that were needed.
        But a rare truce also meant to build trust is exposing deep enmities. The longer the mission goes on, the more sensitive it becomes.
        Some pro-government forces are vehemently opposed to an operation that is allowing fighters to escape an area that has been the focus of heavy fighting for nearly two years. And the opposition is angry that young men who leave are being taken in for questioning.
        More than 100 have been released, but more than 200 are still being held. In Syria's brutal conflict, even humanitarian pauses cannot escape the cruel logic of war.
        Evacuations over the weekend were facilitated by a three-day truce, which was then extended until Wednesday.
        But the operation was suspended on Tuesday because of what UN and Syrian officials said were logistical reasons. More than 1,000 civilians are believed to remain.
        Homs governor Talal Barazi said the temporary truce could be extended further if necessary.
        The UN's local aid chief Yacoub El Hillo, who is overseeing the operation, told the BBC it was "crucial" that the evacuations continued.
        Convoys came under fire at the weekend, and Mr Hillo described his visit to Homs as like a "day in hell".
        UN agencies have also expressed concern over the fate of dozens of men who were taken in by Syrian security personnel after they fled Homs.
        UN rights spokesman Rupert Colville said it was "essential that they do not come to any harm".
        The detainees were being held at an abandoned school, the UN said.
        Mr Barazi said 111 men had been questioned and released, while 190 others were still being held.
        "I just want to say I hope that that the bigger percentage will all be released," he told the BBC.
        "They are living in a shelter in very good conditions. They have all the services, health, medical services and they are all secure."
        The Syrian authorities said the screening was necessary to weed out "terrorists".
        In Geneva, Syrian government and opposition negotiators met face-to-face again on Wednesday.
        But earlier UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi said there had not been much progress.
        He has brought forward a meeting with Russian and US officials by one day to Thursday in an apparent attempt to get them to apply pressure to the opposed Syrian sides.
        The first round of talks ended last month with no firm agreements and both sides trading insults.
        The opposition wants the government to commit in writing to the 2012 Geneva Communique, which called for the formation of a transitional administration with full executive authority.
        President Bashar al-Assad's government has ruled out any transfer of power.
        The civil conflict has claimed more than 100,000 lives since 2011 and has driven 9.5 million people from their homes.
      HOME PIPELINE-National News Agency - Explosion of oil pipeline extending from Homs to Tartous in Talkalakh's Zara
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:21
        Fri 03 Jan 2014 at 19:58NNA - The blast, which occurred in al- Zara area in the Syrian interior near the Lebanese borders and which was also heard in Wadi Khaled, was caused by the bombing of the oil pipeline extending from Homs to Tartous in the town of al-Zara in Talkalakh neighbourhood, NNA correspondent in Akkar reported Friday.Explosion flames were seen from Wadi Khaled.
        --------------------- L.Y
      HOMS PIPELINE-VIDEOLBCI | [VIDEO+PHOTOS] Homs-Tartous oil pipeline explodes in Syrias al-Zara region
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:21
        The Homs - Tartous oil pipeline exploded on Friday in the region of al-Zara in Syria's Talkalakh's countryside, as flames and smoke can be clearly seen from the Lebanese border towns.This comes as Syrian Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources Sleiman al-Abbas said that "terrorists" targeted the gas pipeline in Damascus, adding that gas was cut off in the power plants in the southern region.
        To watch the full video, please click on the image above.
      HOMS PIPELINE BLOWN UPIn the Shadow of the Krak des Chevaliers >> CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:18
        The battle lines of the Syrian civil war are edging closer to Krak des Chevaliers, the most famous Crusader castle ever built. The massive walls and towers of the great fortress on its hilltop glistened white in the sunshine yesterday, as the Syrian Army fought rebels in the valleys below.
        The rebels hold the castle and the two nearby villages of al-Zara and al-Hosn while much of the rest of this area, 25 miles west of Homs city and just north of the Lebanese border, is inhabited by Christians who support the government. The 13th century castle was damaged by a Syrian air force attack and mortars last year and the Syrian government says it is eager to prevent further damage.
        ''We launched an operation to retake this area last week,'' said the governor of Homs, Talal al Barazi. He said that so far the army had taken 50 per cent of al-Zara ''and we think the rest of it will be in our hands within a week.'' Syrian army officers on the spot were more cautious on how long the fighting was going to last, saying it might be a week or two.
        The reason why the Syrian army is attacking has less to do with Krak des Chevaliers' strength as a defensive position and more to do with strategic importance of the area in which it stands. This commands the main road between Homs and Tartous on the coast, just as it did in the 13th century when the castle was rebuilt in its present form by the Knights Hospitaller (its original and less romantic name was Crac de l'Ospital).
        But Mr Barazi says of more immediate importance is the gas and oil pipelines and electric power lines that run through al-Zara which the rebels can sever at any time. They blew up the Homs-Tartous oil pipeline at al-Zara on 3 January and recently cut the power line leaving Homs city without electricity for 24 hours.
        The fighting has led to losses on both sides. Mr Barazi said he had just come back from a hospital in Tal Kalakh, a town just south of Krak, after a day's fighting in which the army ''had lost 10 dead and 27 wounded, while we killed 65 terrorists and captured five of them.'' The battle had eased off yesterday, a day of intense cold for Syria which saw part of the country under snow.
        A further reason for the army's push towards Krak and the land around it has to do with the sectarian geography of this part of Syria. The two centres held by the rebels, al Zara-and al-Hosn, the latter just below the castle, are Sunni Muslim and sympathetic to the rebels, but the other villages are Christian and support the Syrian government, often joining the National Defence Force militia.
        This part of Syria is much like Lebanon when it comes to sectarian diversity and long-held animosities exacerbated by the civil war.
        Syrian army officers said that these worsened recently when two Christians, a man and a women, had a late dinner at a hotel called the Alwadi and were stopped by armed men as they drove home. ''As soon as they said they came from a nearby Christian village called Marmarita they were killed,'' said an officer. In another sectarian killing a Muslim from al-Hosn village was reportedly killed by Christian militiamen.
        These stories of sectarian atrocities by all sides may be exaggerated in the telling, but there is no doubt about the extent to which they produce an atmosphere of hatred. An officer in Tal Kalakh produced a picture on his phone of the severed heads of two men being held by what he says were two young rebels inside al-Zara.
        The army is getting closer to Krak des Chevalliers but will they try to take it? And, given the way in which the Syrian army relies on its artillery and aerial bombing, might it be destroyed?
        Mr Barazi says they are conscious of Krak's historic significance and will do everything to avoid damaging it. But the castle used to hold a garrison of 2,000 men at the height of its power before it was captured by the Mamluk Sultan Baibars in 1271. It could probably give a good account of itself still. On the other hand, the Syrian army strategy has been to blockade places held by the rebels but only to launch ground attacks against those that are strategically important. This is true of the town of al-Zara with its proximity to gas pipelines and electric power lines. Krak might well be spared for the moment but no monument '' however famous '' is safe in Syria as was shown by the destruction of the medieval market and Ummayad Mosque in Aleppo.
        Fighting in Syria has an on-and-off quality because the Syrian army does not have the numbers to sustain heavy losses from ground attacks.
        In the battle for Qusayr it was Hezbollah who fought house-to-house and suffered serious casualties. The rebels are fragmented in organisation, lack heavy weapons and are too short of ammunition to launch big offensives. But though the fighting is intermittent, it very seldom stops. On our way back to Homs from Tal Kalakh a tank briefly blocked the road as it took up position and fired a shot from its gun into the al-Wa'ar district of Homs city, whose 400,000 people are Sunni and where government and rebels dispute control.
        Army officers based in Tal-Kalakh in charge of the operation were not saying much yesterday. A burly colonel in his command said ''the attack is a military secret.'' But he did explain the reason for launching it was that ''this area is strategically important because it is so close to Lebanon.''
        Last June the government and its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah, had one of its few clear cut victories when they captured the rebel town of al-Qusayr a few miles east of Tal-Kalakh.
        PATRICK COCKBURN is the author of Muqtada: Muqtada Al-Sadr, the Shia Revival, and the Struggle for Iraq.
      Turkey negotiating Iran-Turkey-EU pipeline
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:17
        TEHRAN (FNA)- Ankara has started talks with Iran for the construction of Iran''Turkey''Europe Natural Gas Pipeline Project (ITE) to convey the gas supplies to Europe through Turkey, media reports said.
        The pipeline project is being considered by Turkey as international sanctions against Iran's energy sector are shrinking following the implementation of Iran's nuclear deal with world powers, the Turkish paper Today Zaman reported on Sunday.
        For transit passage of natural gas sourced in Iran through Turkey, the Iranian Oil Ministry and the Energy and Natural Sources Ministry of the Republic of Turkey signed an "Agreement Protocol" on November 17, 2008.
        The protocol also provides for Turkey to be able to procure its natural gas requirement from the pipeline under the project, if required.
        The total length of the pipeline under the project is about 5,000 km. The length of the pipeline within the East and Western borders of Turkey is about 1,750 km. The target annual amount of gas to be conveyed to Europe under this project is determined as 35 billion m3.
        Turkey's part of the ITE Natural Gas Pipeline Project will be from the Turkey'' Iran border to the Ipsala/Edirne Greece border, passing through Agri, Erzurum, Erzincan, Gumushane, Sivas, Yozgat, Kirsehir, Kirikkale, Ankara, Eskisehir, Bilecik, Kutahya, Bursa, Balikesir, Canakkale and Tekirdag.
        The pipe diameter under the project is 56 inches and its operating pressure is 92 bars. Its proposed service life is 40 years.
        Iran owns the world's largest natural gas reserves after Russia, and is also Turkey's second biggest gas supplier after Russia.
        Iran's natural gas is of crucial importance to Turkey as the energy-hungry country uses a significant portion of imported Iranian gas to generate electricity.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Syria crisis 'threatens free media'
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: BBC News - Home
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:26
        11 February 2014Last updated at 20:54 ET By Mike WooldridgeWorld affairs correspondentThe Syrian crisis has had dramatic repercussions for press freedom across the region, a study by Reporters Without Borders (RWB) reports.
        Journalists have become targets for groups attempting to control news in Syria and its neighbours, it says.
        The only nations faring worse than Syria in RWB's annual report on press freedom are Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea.
        Finland tops the World Press Freedom Index for the fourth consecutive year.
        It is closely followed by the Netherlands and Norway.
        This year the index highlights the negative impact of conflicts on freedom of information.
        Spiral of violence"In an unstable environment, the media become strategic goals and targets for groups or individuals whose attempts to control news and information violate the guarantees enshrined in international law," RWB says.
        It notes that Syria has become an extreme example of this since the uprising started in early 2011.
        "Now one of the countries where freedom of information and its actors are most in danger, it rubs shoulders with the bottom three [on the index]," RWB states.
        And in the region surrounding Syria, the organisation says, the crisis has reinforced media polarisation in Lebanon, encouraged the Jordanian authorities to tighten their grip, and accelerated the spiral of violence in Iraq where tension between Shias and Sunnis is growing.
        RWB adds that in Iran there has so far been no implementation of the promises to improve freedom of information made by the new President, Hassan Rouhani.
        In Egypt, meanwhile, the formation of a government led by Mohamed Morsi in 2012 was accompanied by an increase in abuses against journalists and all-out efforts to bring the media under the Muslim Brotherhood's control, it says.
        Continue reading the main storyThe pursuit of Edward Snowden were warnings to all those thinking of assisting in the disclosure of sensitive information that would clearly be in the public interest''
        End QuoteReporters Without BordersThat was brought to a complete halt by the army's return to power a year later. RWB says the new authorities have systematically targeted foreign and Egyptian media affiliated to the Muslim Brotherhood or regarded as sympathetic to it.
        The pan-Arab TV station al-Jazeera has been particularly targeted.
        'Fearsome predator'But RWB also notes that some of this year's rankings are influenced by "a tendency to interpret national security needs in an overly broad and abusive manner to the detriment of the right to inform and be informed".
        "This trend constitutes a growing threat worldwide and is even endangering freedom of information in countries regarded as democracies," according to RWB.
        The organisation says investigative journalism often suffers as a result.
        It argues that this has particularly been the case in the United States - which fell 13 places in the index - amid increased efforts to track down whistleblowers and the sources of leaks.
        "The trial and conviction of Private [Chelsea] Manning and the pursuit of the National Security Agency analyst Edward Snowden were warnings to all those thinking of assisting in the disclosure of sensitive information that would clearly be in the public interest," RWB says.
        Both American and British authorities "seem obsessed with hunting down whistleblowers instead of adopting legislation to rein in abusive surveillance practices that negate privacy, a democratic value cherished in both countries", it adds.
        RWB describes organised crime as "a fearsome predator" for journalists in many parts of the world - particularly in Honduras, Guatemala, Brazil and Paraguay, but also Pakistan, China, Kyrgyzstan and the Balkans.
        In November the UN General Assembly adopted its first resolution on the safety of journalists by consensus.
        "It was unquestionably a step in the right direction," says RWB.
        It now wants the UN to create a group of independent experts to monitor how member states meet their obligations to protect journalists, investigate cases of violence against them and bring those responsible to justice.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Rubblization - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:09
        Rubblization is a construction and engineering technique that involves saving time and transportation costs by reducing existing concrete into rubble at its current location rather than hauling it to another location. Rubblization has two primary applications: creating a base for new roadways and decommissioning nuclear power plants.
        Road Construction[edit]In road construction, a worn-out Portland cement concrete can be rubblized and then overlaid with a new surface, usually asphalt concrete. Specialized equipment breaks up the old roadway into small pieces to make a base for new pavement. This saves the expense of transporting the old pavement to a disposal site, and purchasing/transporting new base materials for the replacement paving.[1] The result is a smoother pavement surface than would be obtained if a layer of asphalt were to be applied to the unbroken concrete surface.[2] The technique has been used on roads since the late 1990s, and is also being used for concrete airport runways.[3]
        The rubblizing process provides many benefits versus other methods of road rehabilitation, such as crack and seat or removal and replacement of a concrete surface including: rubblizing a concrete surface is 52% less expensive than remove and replacing concrete; rubblizing reduces road reconstruction time, from days of lane closures to hours, providing large savings to contractors and reduced impact on travelling public; and rubblization is an environmentally friendly "green" process.,[4][5]
        Nuclear Power Plants[edit]In nuclear energy regulation, "Rubblization" refers to a method for decommissioning a nuclear power plant. As with other decommissioning techniques, all equipment from buildings is removed and the surfaces are decontaminated. The difference with rubblization is that above-grade structures, including the concrete containment building, are demolished into rubble and buried in the structure's foundation below ground. The site surface is then covered, regraded and, landscaped for unrestricted use. This saves the expense of removing and transporting the building pieces to a different site.[6]
        External links[edit]References[edit]^"Largest Ever Rubblization & Asphalt Overlay Project a Great Success". December 21, 2005. Retrieved 2010-01-02. ^"Rubblization and Perpetual Pavement Save Money and Resources" (PDF), National Symposium on HMA Energy and Recycling, Austin, Texas, 22-23 Oct 2007, retrieved 2012-09-05 ^Buncher, Mark and Jones, H Wayne (January 2006). "Rubblization of Airfield Pavements: State of the Practice". Retrieved 2010-01-02. ^"RMI Worldwide LLC is a Provider of Concrete Rubblizing and Concrete Breaking Services and Equipment". January 22, 2008. Retrieved 2012-06-29. ^Newcomb, Dave (July/August 2008). "Rubblization: A Way to Save Time, Money, and Resources" (Flash). Hot Mix Asphalt Technology13 (4): 12''16. Retrieved 2012-09-05. ^Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Glossary". Retrieved 2010-01-02.
    Turkey
      Etyen Mah§upyan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:03
        Etyen Mah§upyan (born 1950 in Istanbul) is a Turkish-Armenianjournalist and writer. From 2007 to 2010 he was the editor-in-chief of Agos, the Armenian community's weekly newspaper. He also contributes to the Turkish national dailies Taraf and Zaman.
        Mah§upyan first studied chemistry at university. Realizing that earning a living would entail working under a manager, he studied business management, and finance'--to get ahead, professionally and intellectually. He learned the Armenian language in primary school.[1] He is a graduate of American Robert College of Istanbul.
        Personal life[edit]Mah§upyan is a Turkish citizen of Armenian descent who comes from a Catholic family. His surname derives from his great-grandfather's nickname, "Mah§up", meaning shy, embarrassed, or reticent.[1]
        Publications[edit]Bir Zamanlar Ermeniler VardÄ± (2008)BatÄ±'yÄ± Anlamak (2008)T¼rkiye'yi Anlamak (2008)Liberallik DemokratlÄ±k TartÄ±ÅŸmasÄ± (2008)Bir DemokratÄ±n G¼ndemi (2007)Ä°§imizdeki –teki (2005)Bir Z¼mre, Bir Parti - T¼rkiye'de Ordu (2004)Ä°kinci Tanzimat (2003)BatÄ±'dan DoÄŸu'ya, D¼nden Bug¼ne Zihniyet YapÄ±larÄ± ve DeÄŸiÅŸim (2000)Radikal YazÄ±lar 4 - B¼y¼k TravmanÄ±n EÅŸiÄŸinde (2000)Radikal YazÄ±lar 3 - Y¶netemeyen Cumhuriyet (2000)Radikal YazÄ±lar 2 (2000)Radikal YazÄ±lar 1 (1998)T¼rkiye'de Merkeziyet§ilik: Devlet ve Din (1998)Ä°deolojiler ve Modernite (1997)OsmanlÄ±'dan Postmoderniteye (1996)Beyin FÄ±rtÄ±nasÄ± - Demokrasi, BatÄ±lÄ±laÅŸma, Laiklik, Devlet, Yeni D¼nya D¼zeniReferences[edit]^ abAkman, Nuriye (2002-09-15). "EÅŸim hl evin her tarafÄ±nda...". Zaman (in Turkish). Retrieved 2008-10-07. PersondataNameMahcupyan, EtyenAlternative namesShort descriptionDate of birth1950Place of birthDate of deathPlace of death
      Hizmet Movement writer confesses to anti-government plot | General | Worldbulletin News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:02
        World Bulletin / News Desk A columnist for Turkey's Zaman newspaper, which is owned by congregation leader Fethullah Gulen's Hizmet Movement, described the series of 'anti-graft' operation since December 17 as a coup attempt in an interview, which was published on Monday. Zaman columnist Etyen Mahcupyan told the pro-government Yenisafak daily that the operation was carried out to bring down the government. Defending the Gulen movement in the prep-school debate, many of which belongs to Gulen's movement, Mahcupyan said that the December 17 operation was a coup attempt against the government. Meanwhile, Mahcupyan criticized Fethullah Gulen because of his politcal behaviour, saying his messages move him away from his religious identity. "If Gulen could remain as a religious leader, he will be more prestigious than today," Mahcupyan said.
        Last week, Mahcupyan implied that 25% of Hizmet Movement members, who were previously AK Party supporters, were planning to give their votes to the opposition CHP in March's local elections, admitting that an alliance was slowly being formed between CHP and the group.
        The Hizmet Movement was accused of forming a 'state within a state' which has infiltrated and sough to control whole state departments including the police force and judiciary.
        Legal Notice: Copyright, trade marks and other intellectual property rights in this website can not be reproduced without the prior permission.
        Middle East tourists in Turkey on rise
        Tourists from Middle East and north Africa steadily increase every year.
        Turkish MP resigns from main opposition party
        Turgut Dibek announces his resignation from the main opposition Republican People's Party (CHP) on Monday.
        Turkey organizes pilgrimage for Alevi and Bektashi minority
        Alevis and Bektashis belong to a mystical sect of Shiite Islam and have many followers in Turkey. Not to be confused with the Alawites of Syria, Alevism is named after the companion Ali, who Shiites refer to as being the 'first imam'. Bektashism is named after the 13th century mystic scholar Haji Bektash Veli.
        Millions of Turkish students to receive free milk
        Milk has been distributed free of charge to nearly seven million school children who attend official state schools.
        Turkish court rejects new Gezi Park indictment
        A criminal court has refused the indictment against 26 Gezi Park suspects, with the case being sent back to the Prosecution Office
        Hizmet Movement writer confesses to anti-government plot
        A columnist from pro-Fethullah Gulen newspaper Zaman admitted that ongoing corruption investigations were a plot against the Turkish government.
        TURKISH PRESS REVIEW on FEB. 10
        Turkish dailies on Monday cover the hostage negotiation between the police and a Ukrainian citizen who attempted to hijack a Turkish passenger jet on Friday en route from Ukraine to Turkey, with the aim of diverting it to the Russian city of Sochi, where the Winter Olympic Games are under way; and Prime Minister Erdogan's comments on protests against the new Internet law.
        Turkey replaces controversial prosecutor Akkas in top cases
        Muammer Akkas has been removed as the prosecutor in the Ergenekon and Hrant Dink cases.
        Turkey's Central Bank pumps $902 mln into market
        After the historic peak of the US dollar in January, Turkey's Central Bank pumps another $902 million into the market.
        Overfishing, pollution threaten Turkish fishery
        A researcher with the University of British Columbia's Sea Around Us Project conducted more than 150 interviews with Turkish fishermen from May through July to determine how Turkey's fisheries have changed.
        Turkey's Industrial Production Index up in December 2013
        Calendar adjusted industrial production index of Turkey increases 7.1 percent in December 2013 compared to December 2012.
        Turkey and Israel edge closer to agreeing compensation deal
        The two states are nearing a deal on compensation for the victims of the 2010 raid on a Gaza-bound aid flotilla, Turkish Foreign Minister Davutoglu said.
        Istanbul's rail system to reach 420 km in 2019
        Turkey's PM Erdogan expresses goal of Istanbul becoming city with second longest rail system
        Turkey: Bulgaria must grant transit permits
        Over a hundred trucks are waiting to cross Turkey's border gate with Bulgaria
        One Turkish citizen injured in Saudi hotel fire
        There is no Turkish citizen among Medina fire victims, says Turkey's directorate of religious affairs.
        Turkish, Japanese universities sign agreement
        Ankara's '‹'‹Hacettepe University and Tokyo Women's Medical University sign five-year protocol
      Turkish PM challenges Fethullah Gulen to return home and to form a political party.
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: bertb news feed
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 23:25
        ANKARA
        'The Dec 17 offensive is merely a project of destruction. They just want to destroy, they have no objective to build,' says ErdoÄŸan over the recent corruption probe. DHA Photo
        Prime Minister Recep Tayyip ErdoÄŸan has challenged Fethullah G¼len, the self-exiled leader of the influential Hizmet Movement, to establish a political party to compete with his government in the political sphere, vowing to fight against what he calls a ''parallel state'' led by the Islamic scholar.''Turkey is no longer a country whose rule can be imposed from abroad. This became history. They should better come to Turkey and deal with this issue through politics,'' ErdoÄŸan said during his Justice and Development Party's (AKP) weekly parliamentary group meeting on Feb 11.
        G¼len has been residing in the United States since the late 1990s after he was prosecuted for his alleged attempts to break the constitutional order in Turkey but refused to return even though he was acquitted of all charges under the AKP's rule. G¼len leads the massive Hizmet Movement which has a global and local reach, running hundreds of schools and other educational institutions. The alliance between ErdoÄŸan and G¼len was recently ruptured after a massive corruption and graft probe was launched by what ErdoÄŸan believes to be ''the parallel state'' under G¼len's direction.
        ErdoÄŸan reiterated his government's determination to destroy this ''parallel state,'' describing G¼len as its leader, alleging that he had been trying to infiltrate the state for the past 40 years and announcing that the government would take all necessary steps in this ''independence war'' against traitors and the enemies of the ''New Turkey.''
        ''The Dec. 17 [2013] offensive is merely a project of destruction. They just want to destroy; they have no objective to build. They say the 'AK Party must go, the government must go.' What they suggest instead of the AK Party government is [an order of] chaos, instability, uncertainty, poverty and corruption. Bring it on. Let them do their best; let them use any sort of dirty means,'' ErdoÄŸan told his lawmakers.
        ''It's enough! Since they are the ones who are eavesdropping, talking and trying to rule the country through CDs, we will also speak about it and take our steps. We are courageously advancing on this issue,'' he said.
        ErdoÄŸan said the judiciary was preparing for legal action against what he called an ''illegal gang within the state'' while reiterating that his government was determined to clear the state of members of this so-called parallel structure. Describing the posting of phone conversations between government officials and business leaders or other media personalities that proved alleged corruption and graft business or direct intervention on the media as ''cyber mobbing,'' ErdoÄŸan said they would not allow what he calls ''tape politics'' to shape the country's politics.
        ''If we surrender to this, then it would mean a betrayal of the people's will. If we surrender to this, then we would blacken Turkey's future,'' he said.
        Defending the much-criticized Internet bill that will increase the government's control over the web, ErdoÄŸan said the move aimed to protect individuals' private lives and society from menaces. The prime minister said the move would prevent future attempts of ''dignity assassinations,'' recalling that all developed countries had similar regulations on the use of the Internet. Critics say the bill could be used by the government to stifle reporting on massive alleged corruption in government circles. Pro-AKP media groups, meanwhile, have castigated the bill's opponents as the ''Porno Lobby.''
        Criticizing the opposition parties for not backing this bill even though they had suffered from illegal eavesdropping and other violations of privacy, ErdoÄŸan accused the Republican People's Party (CHP) and the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) of ''surrendering'' to the Hizmet Movement after they had been threatened by the ''illegal gang.''
        ''They wiretapped everybody; not just me and the president, businessmen or journalists. I'm saying it from here: they have listened to everybody, all parties and journalists in Mersin to blackmail them,'' ErdoÄŸan said.
        ''This is the struggle of 77 million [people in Turkey]. March 30 will be date of the victory of Turkey and the failure of the enemies of Turkey and their local contractors,'' he said in reference to the date of local elections.
        February/11/2014
      Fethullah Gulen: Turkey's powerbroker in Pennsylvania | GlobalPost
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Turkish Digest
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:31
        Fethullah Gulen: Turkey's powerbroker in PennsylvaniaIt's a long way from Saylorsburg in rural Pennsylvania to practically anywhere. And it's a very long way to Turkey.
        More:Fethullah Gulen: Turkey's powerbroker in Pennsylvania | GlobalPost
      Turkish editor hits out at media coercion under Erdogan | Reuters
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Turkish Digest
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:30
        Turkish editor hits out at media coercion under ErdoganBy Nick Tattersall and Ece Toksabay
        (Reuters) - A prominent Turkish newspaper editor has openly decried government pressure on the media, saying journalists live in fear, in unusually blunt criticism of Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's leadership months ahead of elections.
        More:Turkish editor hits out at media coercion under Erdogan | Reuters
      Turkish PM challenges Fethullah G¼len to form a political party
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Turkish Digest
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 13:30
        Turkish PM challenges Fethullah G¼len to form a political partyANKARAPrime Minister ErdoÄŸan lays down the gauntlet against Fethullah G¼len in the latest skirmish in their increasingly open war, challenging the Islamic scholar to return to Turkey and engage in parliamentary politics
        More:POLITICS - Turkish PM challenges Fethullah G¼len to form a political party
      I was smeared, persecuted and deported in Erdogan's Turkey - Al Arabiya News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Turkish Digest
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:58
        I was smeared, persecuted and deported in Erdogan's TurkeySunday, 9 February 2014Mahir Zeynalov
        ''You're deported,'' one of my colleagues told me, citing his police sources. ''And the police are after you.'' Within hours, the police phoned my editor-in-chief, asking him to hand me over.
        More:I was smeared, persecuted and deported in Erdogan's Turkey - Al Arabiya News
      Ottoman Empire
        Influence Operation | Washington Free Beacon
          Link to Article
          Archived Version
          Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:41
          Former national security leaders voice concerns over Islamist infiltration of conservative movement
          Frank Gaffney / AP
          BY:Bill GertzFebruary 11, 2014 6:20 pm
          Islamists linked to the Muslim Brotherhood are seeking to influence the U.S. conservative movement as part of non-violent jihad against the United States, according to a group of retired national security leaders.
          The 10 former officials'--including a retired attorney general, former CIA director, a retired general and an admiral, and a former counterterrorism prosecutor'--challenged an assessment made several years ago of the political outreach activities by anti-tax activist Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan, a former George W. Bush administration official, and their purported links to Islamist subversive groups.
          The 2011 assessment in question was conducted for the American Conservative Union (ACU) by Cleta Mitchell, a lawyer and ACU board member who concluded there was no factual basis for charges linking the two activists to Islamists.
          In a cover letter accompanying a 45-page dossier made public Tuesday, the former officials supported charges made by Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan administration defense official, who has said both activists are tied to and have engaged in activities ''in support of Islamists inside the United States, including the Muslim Brotherhood, its operatives, front groups, and agendas.''
          The letter and ''statement of facts'' were produced in response to Mitchell's review for the ACU that stated she found ''no factual basis'' to Gaffney's charges. The rebuttal letter and dossier also was sent to ACU Chairman Alberto R. Cardenas.
          The dossier, titled ''The Islamists''--and their Enablers''--Assault on the Right: The case against Grover Norquist and Suhail Khan,'' presents a detailed rebuttal of the Mitchell memorandum.
          ''The statement of facts demonstrates that Suhail Khan and Grover Norquist have extensive ties to 'various Muslim extremist organizations,' individuals associated with them and their activities,'' the report said.
          ''These include: organizations established in federal court as prominent Muslim Brotherhood front organizations with ties to the designated terrorist organization, Hamas; two convicted terrorists, Abdurahman Alamoudi and Sami al-Arian; and efforts to deny prosecutors an important counterterrorism tool vilified by such groups and individuals as 'secret evidence,''' the report said.
          The former officials stated in the cover letter that Mitchell should address the compiled statement of facts that they asserted support Gaffney's charges and contradict her 2011 assessment.
          Additionally, the former officials said the Mitchell memorandum prompted the ACU board to endorse the conduct of two of its members that ''is at odds with the stated mission of the American Conservative Union'--namely, 'harnessing the collective strength of conservative organizations fighting for Americans who are concerned with liberty, personal responsibility, traditional values, and strong national defense.'''
          Mitchell said in an email she had no plan to read the report and thus would have no comment.
          A spokeswoman for Norquist had no immediate comment, and a spokesman did not return an email seeking comment.
          Reached via Facebook, Khan had no immediate comment.
          The dossier concludes that Muslim Brotherhood front groups are engaged in ''civilization jihad'' aimed at destroying Western civilization from within. It also says ''Muslim Brotherhood front groups and operatives have targeted, among others, the Republican Party and conservative movement.''
          The cover letter was signed by former Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey; former CIA Director R. James Woolsey; former Rep. Allen B. West; retired Army Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, a former undersecretary of defense for intelligence; former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy; Former FBI Agent John Guandolo; retired Adm. James A. Lyons, former commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet; former Pentagon Inspector General Joseph E. Schmitz; Amb. Henry F. Cooper, former director of the Pentagon's Strategic Defense Initiative Organization; and former CIA officer Clare Lopez.
    Chiners
      Panama-Nicaragua Canals and Costa Rica From Producer Patrick
        Hi Adam,
        I hear you talking more about the proposed Nicaraguan Canal lately. I have
        followed things regarding the canal for a while now and thought you might
        enjoy some additional background. Please do not credit me with any of this
        information if you use any of it. I apologize for what may seem to be a
        circuitous path to get to the point in this email, but I think it all plays
        a part in understanding the history of the idea.
        The first time I heard about the canal was a few years ago while I was
        living in Costa Rica, which borders Nicaragua to the south. At first the
        stories were all about how it was Daniel Ortega's pipe dream. You might
        remember Ortega from the 80s when he was el Presidente in Nicaragua during
        the whole Iran Contra scandal (I have plenty of side stories about that if
        you are interested as it has strong parallels to what is currently
        happening with the heroin from Afghanistan). He was recently elected
        President again (in 06 and re-elected in 11) and seems to be pretty
        comfortable in his position.
        You may have heard about the "invasion" of Costa Rica in 2010. During this
        time, Nicaragua was dredging the San Juan River which borders Costa Rica
        and defines part of the border. Although the river is in Nicaragua, Costa
        Rica retains shared navigation rights to the river and further complained
        about the environmental impact of the dredging (forget the fact that the
        government, with the help of the Chinese, have been doing their own amount
        of damage in the area while building a highway of their own). The
        "invasion" consisted of a bunch of Nicaraguan troops hanging out on an
        island in the river. This part of the story is a little dry so I'll skip
        over it and give you a link to the wiki article (
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costa_Rica%E2%80%93Nicaragua_San_Juan_River_border_dispute).
        I'd be happy to clarify or give you my insights if you have any questions,
        though I'm sure you will find everything to be fairly straightforward.
        More recently, Nicaragua has threatened to take Costa Rica to the
        Internation Court of Justice to dispute Costa Rica's claim to Guanacaste
        which is a Province that shares a border with Nicaragua. How it came to be
        a part of Costa Rica is actually kind of funny. In the 1800s William
        Walker, a good ol' American, became the President of Nicaragua and was
        looking out for American interests in the region (but also pissed a lot of
        them off as he tried to solidify and expand his power). People finally got
        sick enough of him that they fought to get him out (leading to him being
        kicked out back to the US and then to his eventual return to the region and
        execution in Honduras). Playing a chief role in ousting Walker was the
        Costa Rican army, which has since been abolished. After victory, the army
        was just sitting around in Nicaragua and basically gave them a, "well now
        that we helped you out, what do you say about giving us a thank you
        present?" It was agreed at this time that Guanacaste, which was until then
        part of Nicaragua, would become part of Costa Rica.
        Meanwhile, in the last few years, Costa Rica has become increasingly allied
        with China and a little more divorced from the US. Although there are a lot
        of US companies located there, such as Intel, HP, Microsoft, and others,
        they are given sweetheart deals to stay. Meanwhile, China has built a new
        National Stadium, roadways, and even donated a bunch of police vehicles
        among other things (the police cars are the funniest in my opinion because
        they all have a Chinese flag on them). Basically, the US is taking while
        China is giving as is the case with much of Central and South America (and
        Africa as you know). The President of Costa Rica, coincidentally, became
        increasingly mired in scandals as the propaganda war between the US and
        China in the region continued. Recently there was a Presidential election
        in the country and it is currently in a runoff because of how things work
        there, but I can give you some good phoney corruption stories from the
        current administration which were likely created by the US if you'd like to
        hear them.
        Now to get back to the point. A few years ago, after talking about it for a
        long time and things seeming like a grandiose scheme by Ortega, the canal
        has started getting some backing. There was talk of Japanese backers for a
        while but then out of nowhere a sizable backing from the Chinese was
        announced. It seems like it would be a similar concession idea that
        occurred between the US and Panama when creating that canal, which is to
        say it would be under Chinese control for about 100 years before being
        turned over, or at least that was my most recent understanding of the deal.
        It has been stated that the route would not run through the San Juan River,
        but that would clearly be an easier way to do things. Hence all of the
        hullabaloo in recent history there. Clearly it would be in Chinese
        interests to have a canal of their own in the region so they would not be
        subject to US threats. What's more it would actually save a decent amount
        of time for transit to the US because of its position further north than
        Panama. Although Nicaragua and Costa Rica are far from best friends, they
        do have somewhat of a US-Mexico type relationship in a lot of ways (cheap
        labor from Nicaragua is common in Costa Rica with much debate about
        illegals). And again, let's not forget Nicaragua's longtime friendship with
        Russia who supplied them during the 80s while the US tried to oust the
        government.
        If China is able to further pull Costa Rica out of the US sphere of
        influence and into their own, the canal becomes that much easier to pull
        off as it could potentially alleviate some of the competing claims in the
        area. The US, meanwhile, is loathe to lose any influence it has in the
        region and I believe has resorted to its old tricks to try to destabilize
        the Costa Rican government and bring it back on their side. Again, I can
        give you more stories on this if you are interested.
        In any case, the canal is still in more of a limbo than even the Panama
        Canal's widening, but those stories only serve to bolster the need for
        another water bridge.
        I hope you found some of this information useful. If you'd like any
        additional information regarding any of the points or some articles to back
        up some of what I've said, just let me know. I could also give you more
        background on who I am if it would be useful on determining if I'm a
        crackpot or not. Keep up the good work.
      Panama Canal chief reports progress in dispute | CNS News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 18:01
        FILE - In this Jan. 2, 2014 file photo, Panama Canal's administrator Jorge Quijano gives a press conference in Panama City. Since the crisis erupted regarding the cost of finishing the Panama Canal's expansion, the nation has rallied almost unanimously behind the engineer, thrusting him into the media spotlight to defend the canal, which is almost synonymous with the nation's identity. They applaud him for standing up to public attacks by contractors that he likens to ''extortion'' and ''terrorism.'' (AP Photo/Arnulfo Franco, File)
        PANAMA CITY (AP) '-- Panama Canal Administrator Jorge Quijano said Wednesday the agency has reached tentative agreement with contractors on some of the issues that have stalled work on the biggest expansion of the waterway in a century.
        But Quijano also told a meeting of Panama's Chamber of Commerce and Industry that the Panama Canal Authority might take over the project if no final agreement is reached this week.
        The canal chief said he spoke by telephone Tuesday with executives from Grupos Unidos por el Canal, the consortium led by Spain's Sacyr SA and Italy's Salini Impreglio SpA. It has been seeking to have the canal authority pay for $1.6 billion in cost overruns on what had been planned as a $3.1 billion chunk of the canal project.
        "We had agreements in principle on several of the topics," he said, without giving details. "We still have some topics to resolve and we are working in that direction."
        "That is not to say that we have abandoned the other alternative, which is that we take over the work ourselves," said Quijano. "We are preparing more each day in case that is necessary."
        Sacyr declined Wednesday to comment on the report of agreements in principle.
        Quijano said that one question to be resolved is if insurer Zurich American, which holds a guarantee bond of at least $450 million, will play a role in financing renewed work.
        "Zurich has not yet expressed itself in a conclusive way. We know that they have the willingness to do so," he said.
        The dispute threatens to delay a project that has led ports and shipping companies around the globe to make costly new investments to take advantage of the ability to move larger ships through a waterway that already handles 5 to 6 percent of world commerce.
        The canal authority and the construction consortium blame each other for the overruns. They were negotiating how to pay for the unplanned extra costs when talks broke down.
        Other foreign contractors and project managers have expressed an interest in completing the 30 percent of work that remains on the third canal lock, according to canal officials.
        (Copyright 2014 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
    99 vs 1
      Nerds Are Taking Your Lunch Money
      Wealthy more worried about being seen as wealthy - CNBC
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 13:56
        Is success being vilified in America? The successful seem to think so.
        A new poll from American Express Publishing and Harrison Group finds that 1 percenters no longer like to be seen as such.
        Getty Images
        An Occupy Los Angeles protest in 2011.
        One-third of members of the group said they "like it when others recognize me as wealthy." Though that number (taken in the fourth quarter of 2013) may sound high, it's down from 40 percent a year earlier. And it's far below the 53 percent who agreed with the statement in 2010.
        (Read more:The poor should stop whining, says luxury CEO )
        Fully 28 percent say they worry about "being scorned for being in the top part of the economy," versus 24 percent who were concerned about that in the first quarter of 2013.
        (Read more: How to become a millionaire? The answer's changed )
        The recent and sudden move toward stealth wealth could have an impact on the elite economy. Thirty-eight percent of respondents agree that they "feel guilty purchasing luxury goods and services"'--double the percentage who said the same thing a year ago.
        Nicole Miller's CEO comments on wealth 'nonsensical'
        CNBC's Robert Frank and Jon Fortt react to Bud Konheim's comments on wealth in America.
        It's easy to make too much of these numbers.
        As venture capitalist Tom Perkins has discovered, the idea that the wealthy are being persecuted is exaggerated'--among the general population and the wealthy themselves.
        (Read more:The top three myths about income inequality)
        As we see from recent millionaire-outlook studies and luxury sales, some may be sensitive to the political climate and talk of inequality. But others keep living and spending as they always have.
        One thing is clear, however. People who have worked hard to achieve a higher level of financial success are realizing that it is a double-edged sword: It is rewarding but also makes them a public target.
        '--By CNBC's Robert Frank.Follow him on Twitter@robtfrank.
        Is success being vilified in America? The successful seem to think so. A poll finds that 1 percenters no longer like to be seen as such.
      Shuttle bus protest hits Microsoft in Seattle
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: CNET News
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:31
        Following similar protests in San Francisco and Oakland, demonstrators blocked tech shuttle buses in the Great Northwest.
        Tech bus protests: They're not just for the Bay Area anymore.Demonstrations against corporate commuter shuttles, which ferry tech workers to and from Silicon Valley, have become more commonplace in recent months in San Francisco and Oakland. The buses have become a potent symbol of the culture clash between the technology industry and non-tech community, as rents go up and old neighborhoods become gentrified.
        Looks like some of that animosity has traveled up to the Great Northwest, though the protest in Seattle was significantly smaller than those in the Bay Area. On Monday, two masked protestors held up a banner that read, "Gentrification Stops Here," blocking Microsoft corporate shuttles in Seattle's Capitol Hill neighborhood, according to the Capitol Hill Seattle Blog, via GeekWire.Tensions have been heightened recently in high-tech hubs. Later this week, Seattle is holding a housing forum in City Hall, according to the Capitol Hill Seattle Blog. In San Francisco, the average rental price has risen to three times the national average. To help curb some of the tensions in San Francisco, the city last month approved a pilot program that would require the shuttle buses to pay a $1 fee stop at certain areas designated for the city's official public transit.
        Microsoft declined to comment on the protest.
    Bank$ters
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Jamie Dimon's Bird in the Hand
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Latest from Crooks and Liars
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:41
        Last week, Elizabeth Warren had another one of those moments that reminds all of us who want justice and accountability for Wall Street, and unrigged financial markets for the rest of us, why she is our hero. She was once again asking pesky questions of regulators about the $13 billion settlement with JP Morgan Chase that resulted in an ecstatic JPM board giving CEO Jamie Dimon a 75% raise- asking the questions all the rest of us were pondering... like how, if this was such a good settlement for the Department of Justice, why were the JPM kingpins dancing in the streets about it.
        And yesterday, Wall Street watchdog Better Markets announced its lawsuit against DOJ and Attorney General Eric Holder for that same settlement. Dennis Kelleher, the group's president and CEO, decried the government's secretive dealings with Dimon as "violations of the Constitution, the separation of powers, the failure of checks and balances."
        The Undercurrent has a new video out covering the Better Markets presser, and adding in a clip from Sen. Warren's discussion of the very serious questions raised by the settlement. If you care about why DOJ and other government agencies never bring the Too Big To Fail bankers to trial, why they are never brought to justice or have their power reined in, it is worth spending the time to look at Kelleher and Sen. Warren talking about these issues:
        Let me just note that I have a number of friends and allies who don't think the settlement was as bad as Kelleher or Warren, including NY AG Eric Schneiderman, who was involved in the settlement. They argue that $13 billion was far more than we have ever gotten in a banking settlement, that an amount that large will make the big bank execs think twice before committing bank fraud again, and that the money will really help people who have been hurt economically over the last several years. I respect their point of view, and am glad that DOJ got more out of JPM than anyone has ever gotten out of a bank- a result that I am firmly convinced happened only because progressive activists and leaders like Warren made the lack of Wall Street accountability such a huge issue. But this settlement on balance has some seriously troubling issues. The secrecy is fundamentally wrong; the lack of judicial review is outrageous and frankly un-American; the idea that neither the company nor any of its senior executives has been forced to go to trial remains a travesty; and the fact that JPM is celebrating by giving Dimon a 75% raise is the ultimate sign that this deal was inadequate in every way.
        '†' Story continues below '†'
        If Abraham Lincoln were around today, I think he would be saying that this nation's democracy will not long endure an economy and a government run so completely on behalf of Wall Street that the rule of law no longer applies. When you break laws- hugely significant laws- over and over again, and those crimes result in harm to millions of people, there should be some justice applied. The fact that the justice has been so inadequate to the crime is a deep and fundamental failure. This settlement should not be allowed to stand. We need a big change moment at this point in American history, and we need it now.
        Eric Holder has been Jamie Dimon's (and other Wall Street CEOs') bird in the hand for too long. DOJ needs to stop cutting secretive, inadequate deals with Wall Street moguls, and start doing some perp walks of CEOs. It is long past time to prosecute the high flying criminals who live on Wall Street.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Scary 1929 market chart gains traction - Mark Hulbert - MarketWatch
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:39
        By Mark Hulbert, MarketWatch
        CHAPEL HILL, N.C. (MarketWatch) '-- There are eerie parallels between the stock market's recent behavior and how it behaved right before the 1929 crash.
        That at least is the conclusion reached by a frightening chart that has been making the rounds on Wall Street. The chart superimposes the market's recent performance on top of a plot of its gyrations in 1928 and 1929.
        The picture isn't pretty. And it's not as easy as you might think to wriggle out from underneath the bearish significance of this chart.
        I should know, because I quoted a number of this chart's skeptics in a column I wrote in early December. Yet the market over the last two months has continued to more or less closely follow the 1928-29 pattern outlined in that two-months-ago chart. If this correlation continues, the market faces a particularly rough period later this month and in early March. (See chart, courtesy of Tom McClellan of the McClellan Market Report; he in turn gives credit to Tom DeMark, a noted technical analyst who is the founder and CEO of DeMark Analytics.)
        How to tangle-proof your earbud cablesAre your earbuds always knotting and kinking? Try winding them using this super-geeky cord wrapping technique.
        One of the biggest objections I heard two months ago was that the chart is a shameless exercise in after-the-fact retrofitting of the recent data to some past price pattern. But that objection has lost much of its force. The chart was first publicized in late November of last year, and the correlation since then certainly appears to be just as close as it was before.
        To be sure, as McClellan acknowledged: ''Every pattern analog I have ever studied breaks correlation eventually, and often at the point when I am most counting on it to continue working. So there is no guarantee that the market has to continue following through with every step of the 1929 pattern. But between now and May 2014, there is plenty of reason for caution.''
        Tom Demark added in interview that he first drew parallels with the 1928-1929 period well before last November. ''Originally, I drew it for entertainment purposes only,'' he said'--but no longer: ''Now it's evolved into something more serious.''
        Another objection I heard two months ago was that there are entirely different scales on the left and right axes of the chart. The scale on the right, corresponding to the Dow's /quotes/zigman/627449/realtimeDJIA-0.35% movement in 1928 and 1929, extends from below 200 to more than 400'--an increase of more than 100%. The left axis, in contrast, represents a percentage increase of less than 50%.
        But there's less to this objection than you might think. You can still have a high correlation coefficient between two data series even when their gyrations are of different magnitudes.
        However, what is important, McClellan said, is that the time scales of the two data series need to be the same. And, he stresses, there has been no stretching of the time dimension to make them fit.
        One of the market gurus responsible for widely publicizing this chart is hedge-fund manager Doug Kass, of Seabreeze Partners and CNBC fame. In an email earlier this week, Kass wrote of the parallels with 1928-29: ''While investment history doesn't necessarily repeat itself, it does rhyme.'' And, based on a number of indicators rather than just this chart drawing the 1928-29 parallel, he believes that ''the correction might have just started.''
        DeMark is even more outspokenly bearish. If the S&P 500 /quotes/zigman/3870025/realtimeSPX-0.13% decisively breaks the 1762 level, he told me, then a major bear market will have only just begun.
        You may still be inclined to dismiss this. But there were many more were laughing last November when this scary chart began circulating. Not as many are laughing now.
        Click here to inquire about subscriptions to the Hulbert Sentiment Indexes .
        More from MarketWatch:
        Is S&P headed to 1600...or 1900?
        5 momentum stocks to watch out for
        How to invest like a cockroach
        /quotes/zigman/627449/realtimeUS : DJ-Index
        Volume: 26.89M
        Feb. 12, 2014 11:39a
        /quotes/zigman/3870025/realtimeUS : S&P Base CME
        Volume: 167.12M
        Feb. 12, 2014 11:39a
        Mark Hulbert is the founder of Hulbert Financial Digest in Chapel Hill, N.C. He has been tracking the advice of more than 160 financial newsletters since 1980. Follow him on Twitter @MktwHulbert.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Things That Make You Go Hmmm... Like The End Of Central Bank Innocence
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Zero Hedge
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:14
        Take a long, hard look, Janet," warns Grant Williams, "the landscape over which you cast your eyes when you accepted the poisoned chalice prestigious role of Fed Chair changed last week." Just two days before you were confirmed in a rather lovely ceremony, in an interview in Mumbai, Raghuram Rajan (one-time Chief Economist at the IMF and current Governor of the Reserve Bank of India) rather UNceremoniously dropped something of a bombshell that went largely unreported (perish the thought, in this era of dogged journalism) but that most definitely queers your pitch in a major way:
        (Bloomberg): India central bank Governor Raghuram Rajan warned of a breakdown in global policy coordination after the Federal Reserve further cut stimulus, weakening emerging-market currencies from the rupee to the Turkish lira.
        Rajan, a former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund, called for greater cooperation among policy makers weeks before finance chiefs from the world's top developed and emerging markets gather in Sydney. The Fed's Jan. 29 statement made no mention of developing economies. "International monetary cooperation has broken down," Rajan, 50, said yesterday in an interview in Mumbai with Bloomberg TV India, noting how emerging markets helped pull the global economy out of crisis starting in late 2008. "Industrial countries have to play a part in restoring that, and they can't at this point wash their hands off and say we'll do what we need to and you do the adjustment."
        Now this is going to be a problem, Janet.
        Potentially, a BIG one.
        The standout feature of central bank policy over the last five years has been the spirit of cooperation amongst the men ("And women!" '-- Sorry, Janet, "and women") in charge of the world's central banks.
        Whilst this spirit of cooperation has been somewhat unwilling in a few cases (yes, Glenn, I'm talking about you), it has been vital to establish a unified message that would give investors the sense that these guys ("And girls!" '-- Sorry, Janet, "and girls") were talking (a) to each other and (b) to us from a common perspective, that perspective being low rates and free money forever.
        Then came The Taper.
        ...
        The emerging-market countries that have seen strong inflows as the Fed's QE program sent billions of dollars their way in search of returns, are now in a bit of a fix, as the chart below demonstrates:
        ...
        Yes, folks, central bankers lie. The job demands it. That means that they join politicians in the category marked "cannot be trusted," and yet investors the world over are not only relying on the promises made by these individuals but also trusting them to be both transparent and honest when the job demands they be neither.
        Given that they lie to us, and given that they are making two key representations to us, should we not perhaps take a moment to think about the two inputs to this particular equation?
        Politicians across the globe are assuring us that (amongst other lies things):
        1) The "recovery" is either here or right around the corner.In fact, it is neither.
        2) Remaining in the EU is the best option for Greece, Spain, Italy (and France).It is not.
        3) Soaking the rich is the answer to a multitude of problems.It isn't.
        4) Raising taxes will generate the necessary revenue without having a negative effect on the economy.It won't.
        5) Future promises of entitlement payments are solid.They aren't. Defaults are inevitable.
        Meanwhile, the central bankers of the world are promising us that:
        1) Interest rates will remain low for a very long time.In the end, it's not central bankers' choice to make.
        2) Quantitative easing has no ill effects and can be withdrawn at will without causing any problems.It can't be.
        3) Printing money will not translate into higher inflation.It will. It just hasn't yet.
        4) They will do "whatever it takes," and that will be enough.There is a limit to what they can do, and it will ultimately not be enough.
        5) They are all in this together.They're not. It is every man for himself now, and the Fed will screw them all.
        So here we are.
        Having established that, like politicians, central bankers are required to lie to us in order to be able to do their jobs, we are left facing a couple of crucial questions. First, IS tapering tightening, or not? Secondly, what does all this chaos in emerging markets in the wake of The Tighten Taper mean, and where does it take us from here?
        Fortunately, the great Albert Edwards of Soc Gen fame took the words right out of my mouth this week:
        (Albert Edwards): Tapering is tightening, which inevitably ends in recession, bailout and tears.
        Our warnings throughout last year that an unraveling of emerging markets (EM) was the final tweet of the canary in the coal mine have still not been taken on board. The ongoing EM debacle will be less contained than sub-prime ultimately proved to be.
        The simple fact is that US and global profits growth has now reached a tipping point and the unfolding EM crisis will push global profits and thereafter the global economy back into deep recession. Our thesis on how EM would be pushed to crisis was simple, especially as we saw close parallels with the 1997 Emerging Asia currency crisis.
        We saw yen weakness further undermining an already weak balance of payments situation in the emerging world as a direct replay of 1997. A strong dollar/weak yen environment is typically an incendiary combination for EM, and so it has proved once again. Having reached tipping point the yen will often rally strongly as it has now and as it did in May 1997. This may or may not delay the impending EM implosion for a few weeks. Indeed the Thai Baht, the first domino to fall in the Asian crisis, briefly rallied strongly (vs the US$) in early June 1997, reassuring investors just ahead of its ultimate collapse.
        There has never been any shadow of doubt in my mind that tapering = tightening, and I marvel that the Fed convinced anyone otherwise. A Fed tightening cycle inevitably plays a key role in triggering the next crisis (see below). Plus §a change, hey?
        1970 Recession/Penn Central Railroad1974 Recession/Franklin National Bank1980 Recession/First Penn/Latin America1984 Continental Illinois Bank1987 Black Monday1990 Recession/S&L and banking crisis1997 Asian currency collapse/Russian default/LTCM2007 The Great Recession/Collapse of almost the entire global financial system2014 Emerging Market collapse/deflation/recession/another banking collapse etc.
        Albert is right, of course.
        Not only is tapering most definitely tightening (don't listen to what they say, watch the results), but we have likely seen just the beginning of the fallout from the Fed's new course.
        Will they stick to it? No. They won't be able to. They MAY taper another $10 bn in March when Janet Yellen's first rate decision is announced, but I suspect that by then markets will be in such a state of disrepair that excuses will be made as to why the taper has been suspended. You can bet your bottom dollar that there will be some frantic calls put in to Ms. Yellen's office by her peers around the world between now and March 20, all of which will be begging calling for an end to The Taper.
        Ultimately, QE will continue to be expanded until it implodes in a fireball the like of which has never been seen before. There's no choice, I am afraid, because the alternative would involve the telling of some very harsh truths by politicians and central bankers and the bestowing of some serious pain on an electorate that already holds them in contempt.
        Think those truths are going to be volunteered?
        Me neither.
        The splintering of central bank policy is just the beginning.
        This is the end of the innocence.
        Full must-read Grant Williams letter below:
        TTMYGH_10_Feb_2014
        Average:Your rating: NoneAverage: 5(13 votes)
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Ryan Henry Crane, 37, Of Stamford, Worked For J.P. Morgan | The Stamford Daily Voice
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 23:33
        STAMFORD, Conn. - Ryan Henry Crane of Stamford died Monday, Feb. 3. He was 37.
        Crane was born Jan. 8, 1977, and grew up in Long Valley, N.J. He graduated from The Delbarton School in Morristown in 1995. He graduated from Harvard University in 1999, after which he spent the next 14 years at J.P. Morgan in New York. He was an executive director in the Global Equities Group.
        Crane is survived by his wife, Lauren (nee Pizzotti); son, Harry; parents Mary Jo and Lex of Long Valley, N.J.; brother, Lex of Denver, Colo.; sister, Allison; brother-in-law, John Archard of Arvada, Colo.; parents-in-law, Steve and Carol Pizzotti of Reading, Mass.; brothers- and sisters-in-law, David and Heather Pizzotti of Upper Arlington, Ohio, Stephen and Kristin Pizzotti and Chris and Felicia Pizzotti of Reading, Mass.; five nephews, three nieces; aunts, uncles; and cousins.
        Calling hours are Sunday, Feb. 9 from 3 to 7 p.m. at the Leo P. Gallagher Funeral Home, 31 Arch St., Greenwich. A Mass of Christian Burial will be held at 11 a.m. Monday, Feb. 10 at St. Catherine of Siena Church, Riverside. Interment will be held at 1 p.m. Tuesday, Feb. 11 at Puritan Lawn Memorial Park in Peabody, Mass.
        In lieu of flowers, donations may be made to The Delbarton School (www.delbarton.org/donate), in memory of Ryan Crane.
        For more information, please visit: http://www.leopgallaghergreenwich.com
      Another JP Morgan Banker Dies: Ryan Henry Crane, Executive Director Global Program Trading SGTreport '' The Corporate Propaganda Antidote '' Silver, Gold, Truth, Liberty, & Freedom
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 23:33
        [Ed. Note: Given the recent rash of mysterious deaths of bankers, we share this information regarding Ryan Crane's passing. We have found no details about the circumstances of Ryan's death other than that he passed on Feb. 3rd. We offer our sincere condolences to his grieving family, he was only 37-years old. According to his LinkedIn page, he was the Executive Director Global Program Trading at J.P. Morgan.]
        from Stamford Daily Voice:
        STAMFORD, Conn. '' Ryan Henry Crane of Stamford died Monday, Feb. 3. He was 37.
        Crane was born Jan. 8, 1977, and grew up in Long Valley, N.J. He graduated from The Delbarton School in Morristown in 1995. He graduated from Harvard University in 1999, after which he spent the next 14 years at J.P. Morgan in New York. He was an executive director in the Global Equities Group.
        Read More @ Stamford.DailyVoice.com
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      'Klassieke bankoverval zo goed als uitgestorven' - Nederlands Dagblad
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 07:21
        De klassieke bankoverval is in Nederland op sterven na dood. In 2010 werden nog dertien banken overvallen, vorig jaar was dat er nog maar een. Dat blijkt volgens de Volkskrant uit jaarcijfers van de politie die de krant kreeg na een beroep op de Wet openbaarheid van bestuur.
        De daling komt volgens de politie doordat banken geen geld meer in hun kluis hebben. ''Het geld zit in de pinautomaten en die hebben de banken in de afgelopen jaren beter beveiligd'', legt een woordvoerder in de krant uit. Door de verschuiving van het geld van de kluis naar de pinautomaat is er ook een verschuiving geweest van bankovervallen naar ram- en plofkraken. Die worden volgens de politie gepleegd door professionele overvallers, van wie er een aantal al zijn aangehouden.
        Het aantal overvallen op geldtransporten is volgens de krant ook flink gedaald. Hetzelfde geldt voor het aantal overvallen op winkels, bedrijven en burgers. In 2011 waren dat er nog bijna 2300, vorig jaar was dat al gedaald naar ruim 1600.
        De daling geldt voor bijna het hele land, met uitzondering van Amsterdam. Daar steeg het aantal overvallen vorig jaar naar 232, negentien procent meer dan een jaar eerder. Dat aantal is overigens wel lager dan in 2010, toen er bijna vierhonderd overvallen waren.
        Indien u geregistreerd bent, kunt u hieronder reageren op het artikel. Hiertoe dient u in te loggen.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Swipe And Sign Cards May Not Work After October 2015
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Ubergizmo
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:52
        Anyone who has any experience with swipe and sign cards knows exactly how they're charged by a merchant. Your card is taken, swiped and then a receipt is printed, which you sign and then collect your card and receipt before going on your way again. That's the way it has been in the U.S. for a long, long time, even though many countries in the world have now transitioned to using chip-based cards, which don't require signatures, users just have to enter their PINs to authorize transactions. Its highly likely that swipe and sign cards may not work after October 2015, since that's the deadline both Visa and MasterCard have chosen to complete the switch to chip-based cards.
        The news comes at a time when questions are being raised about the security of user data, stemming from the recent major security breach Target faced over the holiday season. Luxury retailer Neiman Marcus also announced that it too had been a victim of a similar data breach, with credit and debit card information of millions of customers being compromised. A Senate Judiciary Committee was told that such attacks will be difficult to pull off once the current system is transitioned out in favor of chip-based cards, because even if card information is gathered, its essentially useless without the chip.
        .
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Elite$
      BBC News - Ex-New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin guilty of taking bribes
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:34
        12 February 2014Last updated at 15:17 ET Former New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, who was in office during Hurricane Katrina, has been found guilty of corruption.
        He helped contractors secure millions of dollars of work in exchange for bribes, free trips and other gifts.
        Nagin, 56, was charged in January 2013. He was found guilty of 20 of the 21 charges against him.
        Mayor of the city from 2002-10, he was criticised for failing to implement his evacuation plan when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in 2005.
        Before the verdict was read, Nagin said outside the New Orleans federal court that he had been "at peace with this for a long time".
        Prosecutors argued during his trial Nagin took at least $500,000 (£302,000) in bribes, beginning before Hurricane Katrina but continuing during the city's recovery.
        The graft included money, free vacations and tonnes of free granite for the stone company Nagin and his sons owned.
        In exchange, the local businesses were awarded consulting and construction contracts with the city.
        Nagin, a Democrat who served two terms, was his defence lawyers' chief witness.
        During testimony he vehemently denied taking bribes, saying he was bound to approve contracts awarded to the lowest bidder or through a panel recommendation process.
        At least four Nagin associates have already pleaded guilty in the case. Defence lawyers also argued the prosecution's case was built on the testimony of business owners who pleaded guilty in hopes of getting lighter sentences.
        Among more than two dozen prosecution witnesses were five people who said they were involved in bribing the former mayor.
        Each charge carries a sentence of three to 20 years, but how long he will serve is unclear.
        The New Orleans Times-Picayune newspaper reports the former mayor will remain free on bond, but will be monitored, before his sentencing hearing.
    Religion
      Knight-Christian Values
        In The Morning Adam and John,
        Adam, you have said that you will let a Knight say anything so here goes
        (and sorry, yeah, it's long).
        I was going to write back in October, 2013 after Adam said that following
        Lucifer was good for a payoff. Joking or not, I was not pleased with the
        remark and the comments for the two or three shows that followed. Last
        Sunday, 02-09-14, a born-again Christian wrote in voicing his honest concerns
        conflicting with his faith. John's response was to quote Bible verses, from a
        book which is obviously not respected by John or perhaps both of you,
        regarding the writer's judgmental views. Your show is judgmental in every way
        and rightfully so. How can you dissect and assassinate media news without
        your judgment?
        I'm Christian. I don't expect you to be Christian or to espouse Christian
        values. Neither do I expect you to ridicule or minimize Christians or our
        beliefs. In October, someone writes about Lucifer, Adam says if it will help
        the show he's in and John says nothing. Now, one guy writes expressing his
        concern about homosexuality and John is compelled to respond about his
        bigotry. Who's intolerant?
        I was Knighted in December, 2012,
        and have been working toward a second Knighting or perhaps
        giving one to my son. I have also donated to the $69.69
        club, a $123.45, $88.88 for John's anniversary and a $77.77 for your future
        7th year. The show is great. I'm not bothered by your language or style
        and have truly enjoyed most of the last two years since I began listening.
        I'm not threatening to boycott or stop listening or supporting the show
        (although I lost a load of money on a failed business venture). I am simply
        stating that the anti-Christian and anti-God attitude is noticeable; perhaps by
        more people than you think. I believe that you have many Christian
        listeners and supporters because of the news and entertainment value of the show
        and some are more zealous than others. Voters sometimes change elections by
        their lack of voting and listeners can do the same with their donations.
        Maybe that's why Sunday donations are down; maybe not.
        The last item on this religious point is the missing aspect of some of
        your observations. By not incorporating God (I mean in general, not
        specifically Christian) into any world view, it's harder to understand and accurately
        dissect some events. People opposed to abortion do so for moral reasons,
        although some are in it for the money. Global warming elevates the power of
        man in the absence of God as well as being an economic vehicle for jokers
        like Al Gore. Muslims do kill for Allah and Christians have done so for the
        wrong view of God also. Even Buddhists have radicals. People throughout
        history have been motivated by religious as well as economic reasons for their
        actions and those motivations should be considered in analyzing certain
        events.
        I hope that you will consider my thoughts and views. I look forward to the
        future shows and, as I have ended every note to you in the past:
        God's blessings to you and your families,
    Agenda 21
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Defra calls it 'Making Space for Water': others call it flooding - Telegraph
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 13:45
        The subject of their evasions is the interests of the people whose lives and property are involved in "managed retreat", and the wider but less definable public interests, which include heritage, recreation and ecology. I shall lump them together into a single category - the defence of the realm.
        The flooding of land, these days, is seldom an act of God. It is the consequence of the decision not to reinforce existing sea walls. It is the consequence, too, of decisions made by authorities up and down the coastline - a bit of dredging for aggregates there or the full-time dredging for the port of Felixstowe. This is why, now that Cnut mode has become default mode for all ministerial and official statements about coastal flooding, many people (including officials themselves, off the record) feel something is wrong.
        No one disputes that we should defend London from flooding - indeed billions of pounds worth of property would flood every year if we did not spend millions preventing it. It is a much harder decision deciding which parts of the remote rural coastline we should abandon, because so many factors are involved, many of which are hard to quantify in strict financial terms.
        The suspicion is that the system that Defra has invented in the past year for "scoring" proposed schemes for defending the coast is not a system for coastal defence at all, just a Treasury-inspired excuse for doing nothing where something has been done before.
        The story of the Martello tower at Bawdsey on the Suffolk coast poses all the right questions. Here we have a Napoleonic fort, a scheduled ancient monument, on a famously moveable shingle coast that also happens to be an area of outstanding natural beauty and of great wildlife interest (when dry). One can sympathise hugely with its owner, John Fell-Clark, who woke up one morning in 1997 and found that 50 yards of beach had washed away. But sympathy is not enough reason why public money should be deployed saving his retirement home from the sea.
        But his Martello tower sits on the key strategic point of the whole coast (as it was in the Napoleonic and in both world wars). If the crumbling concrete walls and rock armour dumped by the local authority is breached this winter, as officials believe highly probable, the tides will roll inland immediately for miles. They will wash away at Shingle Street, eroding it completely in 20 years, and at Orford Ness; they could make Aldeburgh an island and will clog up the port of Felixstowe 10 miles to the south.
        The Environment Agency concedes that the need to reinforce East Lane Point is "immediate" and "urgent" and that the policy for the coastline is to hold the line - not actually to retreat. And yet, because of Defra's newly invented scoring system, designed to divert funds from the coast to protect John Prescott's new, unsustainable, non-communities in the flood plains, there is no money to fund even urgent work. Yet there is no fall-back line, no plan, nothing. The actual policy is unmanaged retreat.
        If you talk privately to the agency's own flood defence experts, they will tell you that Defra's new scoring system has almost no way of properly valuing things such as history, heritage, local feeling or an attractive, protected coastline. In short, it is a Treasury fix and inadequate for defending the realm. Once that is understood, I suspect it may not last as long as the crumbling defences at Bawdsey.
        In his day, King Cnut, who was called Great, knew a thing or two about the defence of the realm. He successfully invaded it and then defended it against all-comers, with such success that he could frequently leave it to pursue interests overseas.
        This Government spends fortunes pursuing its interests overseas, but would appear to have forgotten that this sceptred isle is beautiful, loved and worth defending.
      EU policy: deliberately flooding the Somerset Levels
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 08:48
        Richard North, 03/02/2014 1689It is all very well for Chris Smith, Chairman of the Environment Agency, to prattle on about "difficult choices", and to tell us that "more must be done to protect the Somerset Levels". But the flooding crisis over which he is presiding is one which he, at the behest of the EU, has deliberately allowed to happen.Allowing the flooding of the Levels was a matter of EU policy, introduced by a 2007 Directive and consciously adopted by the Environment Agency in 2008, which then sought to increase the frequency of flooding in the area.
        What then makes it impossible for the people on the spot, like Owen Paterson, is that they are having to deal with those decisions, which were made years ago. Only now are the consequences becoming evident, while the people (or agencies) who contributed to the disaster are entirely invisible.In the "invisible" class is that classic elephant in the room, the European Union, which was behind the last great change in British strategy, heralded by a Defra consultation document in July 2004 called "making space for water". It introduced "a new Government strategy for flood and coastal erosion risk management in England".
        The clue as to its provenance came on page 23, under the heading "European Dimension", which told us that flood risk management was being discussed at the EU level, and the themes under discussion were "all consistent with this consultation and the current approach in England".
        The outline of the EU approach had in fact been published in a COM final, (2004)472, the very same month as the Defra document, signalling the "European" interest and warning of further activity to come.
        At the time, Charles Clover, writing in the Telegraph, was very far from being impressed. He complained that, while Defra calls it "Making Space for Water", others called it "flooding". And, in those few words, the future government policy was revealed. Flood defence was to give way to "management". In EU terms, that meant more flooding.
        Government consultation continued into 2005, making it very clear that a "new strategic direction" was involved, one which involved changing the emphasis from flood protection to allowing certain areas to flood. For Somerset, this had already been spelled out in an EU-funded conference in Warsaw in 2003, outlining the results of the Ecoflood projects at a cost of '‚¬350,000, finalised in 2005.
        Flood defence for farm land, along with high levels of subsidies, had been for many years an important element of Britain's production-orientated agricultural policy, wrote the authors. Many floodplain areas benefited from publicly-funded flood defence and land drainage schemes which reduced crop damage and facilitated a change to more intensive farming systems.
        Recently, however, they continued, policy emphasis has been placed on environmental enhancement, on greater diversity of economic activity as a basis for sustainable rural livelihoods, and on public enjoyment of the countryside. Funds previously committed to support farm output are increasingly diverted to encourage land managers to deliver environmental benefits.
        In this context, we were told, there is reduced justification for high standards of flood defence for agriculture. Indeed, there may be substantial benefits if some floodplain land is returned to its previous unprotected, un-drained condition.
        Therein lay the death knell for the Somerset Levels, as a new term was to dominate policy: "Washland". This was an area of the floodplain that was to be allowed to flood or was deliberately flooded by a watercourse for flood management purposes.
        Unacknowledged by either government, the media or even Chris Smith in his current diatribe, this policy was given legislative force, not by the Westminster parliament but by an EU directive 2007/60/EC of 23 October 2007 on the assessment and management of flood risks, the so-called "Floods Directive".In recital 14, we saw spelled out the requirement that flood risk management plans should focus on prevention, protection and preparedness. But, "with a view to giving rivers more space, they should consider where possible the maintenance and/or restoration of floodplains, as well as measures to prevent and reduce damage to human health, the environment, cultural heritage and economic activity".
        Implemented as the Flood Risk Regulations 2009, there, writ large, was Defra's "making space for water" policy. It was all that was needed, by way of legislative authority, for an already Green-dominated Environment Agency to abandon the Somerset Levels and to allow them to flood.
        To reinforce the change, Defra commissioned a research project costing £105,032, carried out by Nottingham University, which noted that "EU legislation is really driving change". The authors promoted an "ecosystem approach", an idea at the core of EU policy, driving the move away from traditional flood control into the "sustainability" camp.
        The shift in policy can be seen with brutal clarity on the Commission website which gives priority to the "environment", citing a raft of EU measures, including the Water Framework Directive, the Habitats Directive, the Environmental Impact Assessment and the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive. The Floods Directive is part of the package and this, we are sternly warned, has to be implemented by 2015.
        Just so that there should be no doubts as to where the policy thrust lay, DG Environment in 2011 issued a note, stressing that flood risk management "should work with nature, rather than against it", building up the "green infrastructure" and thus offering a "triple-win" which included restoration (i.e., flooding) of the floodplain.
        By then, the Environment Agency needed no encouragement. In its March 2008 plan it had decided that, "providing a robust economic case for maintenance works on the Somerset Levels and Moors remains a challenge" (p.131).
        We believe, the Agency said, that "it is appropriate to look again at the benefits derived from our work, particularly focusing more on the infrastructure and the environmental benefits, which previous studies have probably underestimated".
        We have, they added, "international obligations to maintain and enhance the habitats and species in the Somerset Levels and Moors, and it is within this context that all decisions have to be made".
        And, with that, they were "doubtful that all the pumping stations on the Somerset Levels and Moors are required for flood risk management purposes. Many pumping stations are relatively old and in some cases difficult to maintain. It is necessary to decide which ones are necessary particularly in the context of redistributing water".Of six policy options, the Agency thus adopted the sixth, to: "Take action to increase the frequency of flooding to deliver benefits locally or elsewhere, which may constitute an overall flood risk reduction". This policy option, they said, "involves a strategic increase in flooding in allocated areas" (p.142). The Levels were to be allowed to flood, as a matter of deliberate policy.
        Thus, when the BBC reported that the government had been "slow to act", it could not have been more wrong. Our true government, the EU, had been there years before, planning to make the disaster that has overtaken the people of that part of Somerset a routine occurrence. The flooding was not so much man-made as made by government.
        By the time Owen Peterson arrived to try to deal with the situation, he was years too late. Between the EU, the previous Labour government and the Environment Agency, the damage had already been done.
        COMMENT THREAD
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Freezing Out the Bigger Picture
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Geo-warfare in the form of floods and cloudbursts '' now in England '' Rothschilds trial retributive punishment in case the slaves revolt
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Moral Volcano Daily Press
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:25
        All over the world, government authorities are being asked to deliberately create floods. Weather stations give no warning. Flood prevention measures are deliberately weakened. Dredging have been stopped. Water storage areas are kept full so that flooding is guaranteed. Dams are closed. Levees are being lowered.
        Artificial cloudbursts have been perfected by several countries. In nature, these cloudbursts cannot happen. Or, can happen only in case of a cyclone. In Russia, the government has figured out a way to make it stop snowing. In China, they have an entire artillery division that shoots rain-seeding chemicals into the clouds. The US has studied hurricanes for several decades. As early as World War II, they had triggered tsunamis off the coast of New Zealand.
        People are being driven away from their lands and forced to move into urban concentration camps known as SMART CITIES. The Rothschilds invented the concentration camps in Boer lands in what is now South Africa.
        Flooding in Britain.
        Like this:LikeLoading...
        Related
        CAUTION: Moral Volcano is unsafe for children and pregnant women. Adults may experience discomfort when reading Moral Volcano. Symptomatic treatment is recommended. Moral Volcano has nothing to do with morals or volcanoes.
        BEWARE: All assertions and statements on this site are in the nature of bets. These bets may be proven to be way off the mark. Do your own research and reach appropriate conclusions. Consult experts in the relevant field to be sure. Moral Volcano (represented by V. Subhash) and his partners, agents, assassins and others accept no responsibility whatsoever for anything on this web log or other content linked by this blog.
        Moral Volcano is inspired by Mark Twain's Journalism in Tennesse.
      Britain braced for further flood misery with more severe weather forecast
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: euronews
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:16
        Widespread flooding across southern Britain is expected to spread with more bad weather predicted.
        Many parts of the country have been under water for several weeks after a month of unusually heavy rainfall and storms caused rivers to burst their banks.
        The government is coming under increasing pressure over its response to the crisis with critics blaming the problem on years of underinvestment in flood defences.
        The military have been brought in to help build flood defences and evacuate properties.
        But with no end in sight to the wet weather, the rising Thames river also increases the chances of suburban town centres being inundated.
      ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Report: 95 Percent of Global Warming Models Are Wrong'...
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Weasel Zippers
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:25
        Yes, the science is still settled.
        Via Daily Caller:
        Environmentalists and Democrats often cite a ''97 percent'' consensus among climate scientists about global warming. But they never cite estimates that 95 percent of climate models predicting global temperature rises have been wrong.
        Former NASA scientist Dr. Roy Spencer says that climate models used by government agencies to create policies ''have failed miserably.'' Spencer analyzed 90 climate models against surface temperature and satellite temperature data, and found that more than 95 percent of the models ''have over-forecast the warming trend since 1979, whether we use their own surface temperature dataset (HadCRUT4), or our satellite dataset of lower tropospheric temperatures (UAH).''
        ''I am growing weary of the variety of emotional, misleading, and policy-useless statements like 'most warming since the 1950s is human caused' or '97% of climate scientists agree humans are contributing to warming', neither of which leads to the conclusion we need to substantially increase energy prices and freeze and starve more poor people to death for the greater good. Yet, that is the direction we are heading,'' Spencer wrote on his blog.
        Keep reading'...
      Righteous: Energy Department approves another natural-gas export terminal Hot Air
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 03:00
        posted at 9:01 pm on February 11, 2014 by Erika Johnsen
        In terms of truly bright-and-shiny economic news, there hasn't been a whole lot to get too excited about for what seems like an age now '-- but the administration's apparent recognition that they owe a lot of the United States' recently increased exports (a stated goal of Obama's economic agenda) to the oil and gas industry might be one of them. The federal government has been sittin' pretty on more than twenty pending export-terminal applications, but with any luck, they're finally advancing on unleashing our domestic production boom to the fuller economic benefits of global competition, via Reuters:
        The U.S. Energy Department on Tuesday approved exports from Sempra Energy's Cameron liquefied natural gas (LNG) project in Louisiana as the Obama administration moves forward with its goal of expanding the global market for the fuel.
        The conditional approval of exports from the terminal to countries with which the United States does not have free trade agreements, such as India and Japan, was the sixth approval by the department since 2011, and the first since mid-November. '...
        The latest export approval confirms that the review process is becoming ''largely depoliticized,'' said Leslie Palti-Guzman, a gas analyst for the Eurasia Group. The consulting firm predicted that permitting would ''continue unabated through 2014.''
        Well, I'd certainly hope so, but I won't be taking it as a given, either:
        But some analysts cautioned that a pause in approvals could still be near as licensed export volumes near the threshold of 12 bcf a day considered in DOE-commissioned studies by the Energy Information Administration and NERA Economic Consulting.
        ''We think a cautious agency may be unlikely to exceed the upper-bound of the range of studied outcomes,'' ClearView Energy Partners said in a research note.
        Which would be a damn shame, 'cause there are plenty more where that came from, also with their own job- and wealth-creating (not to mention geopolitical!) inducements. Even as the trade gap widened in December amid falling net exports, petroleum products' role in the trade mix only continued to grow '-- which is a great reason to not only approve more natural-gas projects, but to make short work of finally ending the crude-oil export ban, too.
        Related Posts:
      Weblog Londen >> Blog Archief >> Bring in the Dutch
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 17:42
        ''Aha, you're from Holland? Please, can you send us some help.''
        Toen ik afgelopen week het overstromingsgebied in Somerset Levels bezocht, kwam het in elk gesprek met getroffen bewoners ter sprake. Of Nederland niet even de boel kan opruimen. ''Because our government is useless'', was het bondige commentaar. Dit was de reportage die we daarover maakten:
        Somerset Levels lijkt op het eerste gezicht een prachtig en wild natuurgebied, met vele rivieren en beken en ontelbare vogels die worden aangetrokken door de voedselrijke en drassige gronden in het westen van Engeland.
        Het platteland in het Verenigd Koninkrijk lijkt altijd wat wilder en natuurlijk dan het gemaakte en aangeharkte Nederland (ik vrees dat ik nu de toorn van veel Nederlandse natuurliefhebbers oproep). Maar schijn in Somerset Levels bedriegt. In veel opzichten lijkt het op de Nederlandse polder.
        Sterker nog, het waren de Nederlanders die vier eeuwen geleden de waterhuishouding in dit gebied op orde kwamen stellen. Koning Karel I huurde begin 17e eeuw de Nederlandse wateringenieur Cornelius Vermuyden in om delen van het gebied in te polderen. Voor zijn verdiensten werd hij tot Sir geridderd. Voor de inwoners van de Britse poldergebieden is hij nog steeds een bekende naam. Er zijn zelfs scholen naar hem vernoemd.
        Somerset Levels ligt anders dan grote delen van Nederland boven het zeeniveau, maar het gebied heeft andere eigenschappen die sterk op het Nederlandse landschap lijken. Zo is het vrij vlak en liggen de rivieren hoger dan het omliggende platteland. Om het overtollige water van de weilanden weg te krijgen, moet je het altijd omhoog pompen naar de rivieren, die het vervolgens afvoeren naar zee.
        Waterbeheer is dus cruciaal voor dit gebied. Of beter gezegd: was cruciaal. De afgelopen 25 jaar heeft de overheid het aantal pomphuizen verminderd en is ze opgehouden met het draineren en uitbaggeren van de rivieren. Volgens Andrew Lee, een inwoner van het overstroomde dorpje Langport, is dit de ware oorzaak van de overstromingen die nu al meer dan anderhalve maand duren. Hij leidt nu de campagne Stop the Floods. ''Het heeft de afgelopen weken even hard geregend in Nederland, maar zover ik begrijp, hebben jullie geen overstromingen gehad.''
        Neil Craddock is een van de vele ondernemers die getroffen is door de overstromingen. Zijn onderneming, die houten vloeren produceert, staat onder anderhalve meter water en is nu al meer dan een maand buiten bedrijf. We konden zijn fabriek alleen bereiken per boot. ''Zouden jullie dit zover laten komen in Nederland? Ik dacht het niet.''
        Plaatselijke politici roepen dan ook de hulp in van Nederland. Ian Liddell-Granger is het Lagerhuislid dat dit gebied vertegenwoordigt. Hij reist volgende week naar Nederland voor een ontmoeting met leden van de Deltacommissie. De Britse regering heeft nu 120 miljoen vrijgemaakt om de watersnood aan te pakken. Liddell-Grainger wil met dat geld vooral Nederlandse expertise inkopen.
        Zijn gebeden lijken overigens verhoord. Komende zondag komt een Nederlandse delegatie van waterexperts naar Londen om met de Britse regering te praten over eventuele hulp.
    Heroin
      Prescription Painkillers Seen as a Gateway to Heroin
      Tramadol - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:06
        TramadolSystematic (IUPAC) name(1R,2R)-rel-2-[(Dimethylamino)methyl]-1-(3-methoxyphenyl)cyclohexanolClinical dataTrade namesRyzolt, Tramal, UltramAHFS/Drugs.commonographMedlinePlusa695011Licence dataUS FDA:linkPregnancy cat.C (AU) C (US)Legal statusPrescription Only (S4)(AU)'ž-only(CA)POM(UK)'ž-only(US) Schedule IV (In some US states)Dependence liabilityLowRoutesOral, IV, IM, rectal, sublingual, buccal, intranasalPharmacokinetic dataBioavailability75% (IR), 90% (repeated dosing; IR); 64''68% (SR)[1]Protein binding20%[1]MetabolismHepaticdemethylation and glucuronidation via CYP2D6 & CYP3A4[1]Half-life6.3 ± 1.4 hr[1]ExcretionRenal (90%)[1]IdentifiersCAS number27203-92-5 YATC codeN02AX02PubChemCID 33741DrugBankDB00193ChemSpider31105 YUNII39J1LGJ30J YKEGGD08623 YChEMBLCHEMBL1066 YChemical dataFormulaC16H25NO2 Mol. mass263.4 g/molO[C@@]1(CCCC[C@@H]1CN(C)C)C2=CC=CC(OC)=C2InChI=1S/C16H25NO2/c1-17(2)12-14-7-4-5-10-16(14,18)13-8-6-9-15(11-13)19-3/h6,8-9,11,14,18H,4-5,7,10,12H2,1-3H3/t14-,16+/m1/s1 YKey:TVYLLZQTGLZFBW-ZBFHGGJFSA-N Y
        Y (what is this?) (verify)Tramadol (marketed as the hydrochloride salt by Janssen Pharmaceutica as Ultram in the United States, Ralivia by Biovail in Canada and many other companies throughout the world) is a centrally acting opioidanalgesic used to treat moderate to moderately severe pain. The drug has a wide range of applications, including treatment of rheumatoid arthritis, restless legs syndrome, motor neurone disease and fibromyalgia.[citation needed] It was launched and marketed as Tramal by the German pharmaceutical companyGr¼nenthal GmbH in 1977.[2][3]
        Tramadol is a serotonin releaser, reuptake inhibitor of norepinephrine and a weak Î¼-opioid receptoragonist.[4][5] Tramadol is metabolized to O-desmethyltramadol, a significantly more potent Î¼-opioid agonist. Tramadol and its major metabolite(s) are distinguished from other more potent opioid agonists by relative selectivity for Î¼-opioid receptors.
        Medical uses[edit]Tramadol is used similarly to codeine, to treat moderate to severe nerve pain.[6] Pharmacologically, tramadol is similar to levorphanol (albeit with much lower Î¼-agonism), both agents have SNRI activity. Dextropropoxyphene (Darvon) & M1-like molecule tapentadol (Nucynta, a new synthetic atypical opioid made to mimic the agonistic properties of tramadol's metabolite, M1(O-Desmethyltramadol)) also have similar activities. Tramadol is also molecularly similar to venlafaxine (Effexor) and has similar SNRI effects, with antinociceptive effects. It has been suggested that tramadol could be effective for alleviating symptoms of depression, anxiety, and phobias[7] because of its action on the noradrenergic and serotonergic systems, such as its "atypical" opioid activity.[8] However, health professionals have not endorsed its use for these disorders,[9][10] claiming it may be used as a unique treatment (only when other treatments failed), and must be used under the control of a psychiatrist.[11][12]
        In May 2009, the United States Food and Drug Administration issued a Warning Letter to Johnson & Johnson, alleging that a promotional website commissioned by the manufacturer had "overstated the efficacy" of the drug and "minimized the serious risks."[13] The company which produced it, the German pharmaceutical company Gr¼nenthal GmbH, were alleged to be guilty of "minimizing" the habituating nature of the drug, although it showed little abuse liability in preliminary tests.[citation needed] The 2010 Physicians' Desk Reference contains several warnings from the manufacturer which were not present in prior years. The warnings include stronger language regarding the habit-forming potential of tramadol, the possibility of difficulty breathing while on the medication, a new list of more serious side effects, and a notice that tramadol is not to be used in place of opiate medications for addicts. Tramadol is also not to be used in efforts to wean addict patients from opiate drugs, nor to be used to manage long-term opiate addiction.
        Adverse effects[edit]Adverse effects by incidence[1][15][16][17][18][19][20]Note: Serious adverse effects are in bold.Very common (>10% incidence) adverse effects include:
        DizzinessNauseaConstipationVertigoHeadacheVomitingSomnolenceCommon (1''10% incidence) adverse effects include:
        AgitationAnxietyEmotional labilityEuphoriaNervousnessSpasticityDyspepsia (indigestion)Asthenia (weakness)Pruritus (itchiness)Dry mouthDiarrhoeaFatigueSweatingMalaiseVasodilation (dilation (widening) of blood vessels)ConfusionCoordination disturbanceMiosisSleep disorderRashHypertoniaAbdominal painAnorexia (weight loss)Visual disturbanceFlatulenceMenopausal symptomsUrinary frequencyUrinary retention (being unable to urinate)Uncommon (0.1-1% incidence) adverse effects include:
        Cardiovascular regulation (palpitation, tachycardia, postural hypotension or cardiovascular collapse)RetchingGastrointestinal irritation (a feeling of pressure in the stomach, bloating)Urticaria (hives)TremblingFlushingRare (0.01''0.1% incidence) adverse effects include:
        BradycardiaHypertension (high blood pressure)Allergic reactions (e.g. dyspnoea (shortness of breath), bronchospasm, wheezing, angioneurotic oedema)AnaphylaxisChanges in appetiteParaesthesiaHallucinationsTremorRespiratory depressionEpileptiform convulsionsInvoluntary muscle contractionsAbnormal coordinationSyncope (fainting)Blurred visionDyspnoea (shortness of breath)Tinnitus (ringing in the ears)MigraineStevens-Johnson syndrome/Toxic epidermal necrolysis (potentially fatal skin reactions)Motorial weaknessCreatinine increaseElevated liver enzymesHepatitis (liver swelling)Stomatitis (mouth swelling)Liver failurePulmonary oedema (fluid in the lungs)Gastrointestinal bleedingPulmonary embolismMyocardial ischaemia (lack of blood supply to the heart muscles)Speech disordersHaemoglobin decreaseProteinuria (protein in the urine; usually indicative of kidney damage)There are suggestions that chronic opioid administration may induce a state of immune tolerance,[21] although tramadol, in contrast to typical opioids may enhance immune function.[22][23][24] Some have also stressed the negative effects of opioids on cognitive functioning and personality.[25]
        Physical dependence and withdrawal[edit]Long-term use of high doses of tramadol may be associated with physical dependence and a withdrawal syndrome.[26] Tramadol causes typical opiate-like withdrawal symptoms as well as atypical withdrawal symptoms including seizures.[citation needed] The atypical withdrawal symptoms are probably related to tramadol's effect on serotonin and norepinephrine re-uptake. Symptoms may include those of SSRI discontinuation syndrome, such as anxiety, depression, anguish, severe mood swings, aggressiveness, brain "zaps", electric-shock-like sensations throughout the body, paresthesias, sweating, palpitations, restless legs syndrome, sneezing, insomnia, vivid dreams or nightmares, micropsia and/or macropsia, tremors, and headache among others. In most cases, tramadol withdrawal will set in 12''20 hours after the last dose, but this can vary. Tramadol withdrawal lasts longer than that of other opioids; seven days or more of acute withdrawal symptoms can occur as opposed to typically three or four days for other codeine analogues. It is recommended that patients physically dependent on pain killers take their medication regularly to prevent onset of withdrawal symptoms and this is particularly relevant to tramadol because of its SSRI and SNRI properties, and, when the time comes to discontinue their tramadol, to do so gradually over a period of time that will vary according to the individual patient and dose and length of time on the drug.[27][28][29][30]
        Psychological dependence and recreational use[edit]Some controversy regarding the abuse potential of tramadol exists. Gr¼nenthal has promoted it as having a lower risk of opioid dependence than traditional opioids, claiming little evidence of such dependence in clinical trials (which is true; Gr¼nenthal never claimed it to be non-addictive). They offer the theory that, since the M1 metabolite is the principal agonist at Î¼-opioid receptors, the delayed agonist activity reduces abuse liability. The norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor effects may also play a role in reducing dependence.
        Rarely, dependence may occur after as little as three months of use at the maximum dose'--generally depicted at 400 mg per day. However, both physicians and health authorities generally consider dependence liability relatively low. Thus, tramadol is classified as a Schedule 4 in the US, Schedule 5 in Australia and been rescheduled in Sweden rather than as a Schedule 8 Controlled Drug like opioids.[31] Similarly, unlike opioid analgesics, tramadol is not currently scheduled as a controlled substance by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration. However, it is controlled in certain states.[32] Nevertheless, the prescribing information for Ultram warns that tramadol "may induce psychological and physical dependence of the morphine-type".
        Because of the possibility of convulsions at high doses for some users, recreational use can be very dangerous.[33] Tramadol can cause a higher incidence of nausea, dizziness, loss of appetite compared with opiates, which could deter abuse.[34] Compared to hydrocodone, fewer patients choose to abuse tramadol.[35] It may also have a large effect on sleeping patterns and high doses may cause insomnia. (Especially for those on methadone, both for maintenance and recreation. Though there is no scientific proof tramadol lessens effects of opiates or is a mixed agonist-antagonist, some people get the impression it is, while someone else might benefit being prescribed both for pain and breakthrough pain.)[36]
        Detection in biological fluids[edit]Tramadol and O-desmethyltramadol may be quantified in blood, plasma or serum to monitor for abuse, confirm a diagnosis of poisoning or assist in the forensic investigation of a traffic or other criminal violation or a sudden death. Most commercial opiate immunoassay screening tests do not cross-react significantly with tramadol or its major metabolites, so chromatographic techniques must be used to detect and quantitate these substances. The concentrations of O-desmethyltramadol in the blood or plasma of a person who has taken tramadol are generally 10''20% those of the parent drug.[37][38][39]
        Mechanism of action[edit]Tramadol acts as a Î¼-opioid receptoragonist,[40][41]serotonin releasing agent,[4][5][42][43]norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor,[41]NMDA receptorantagonist (IC50=16.5 Î¼M),[44]5-HT2C receptor antagonist (EC50=26 nM),[45](Î±7)5nicotinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist,[46]TRPV1 receptor agonist,[47] and M1 and M3muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist.[48][49]
        The analgesic action of tramadol is not fully understood, but it is believed to work through modulation of serotonin and norepinephrine in addition to its relatively weak Î¼-opioid receptor agonism. The contribution of non-opioid activity is demonstrated by the fact that the analgesic effect of tramadol is not fully antagonised by the Î¼-opioid receptor antagonist naloxone.
        Tramadol is marketed as a racemic mixture of the (1R,2R)- and (1S,2S)-enantiomers with a weak affinity for the Î¼-opioid receptor (approximately 1/6000th that of morphine; Gutstein & Akil, 2006). The (1R,2R)-(+)-enantiomer is approximately four times more potent than the (1S,2S)-('')-enantiomer in terms of Î¼-opioid receptor affinity and 5-HT reuptake, whereas the (1S,2S)-('')-enantiomer is responsible for noradrenaline reuptake effects (Shipton, 2000). These actions appear to produce a synergistic analgesic effect, with (1R,2R)-(+)-tramadol exhibiting 10-fold higher analgesic activity than (1S,2S)-('')-tramadol (Goeringer et al., 1997).
        The serotonergic-modulating properties of tramadol give it the potential to interact with other serotonergic agents. There is an increased risk of serotonin toxicity when tramadol is taken in combination with serotonin reuptake inhibitors (e.g., SSRIs), since these agents not only potentiate the effect of 5-HT but also inhibit tramadol metabolism.[citation needed] Tramadol is also thought to have some NMDA antagonistic effects, which has given it a potential application in neuropathic pain states.
        Tramadol has inhibitory actions on the 5-HT2C receptor. Antagonism of 5-HT2C could be partially responsible for tramadol's reducing effect on depressive and obsessive-compulsive symptoms in patients with pain and co-morbid neurological illnesses.[50] 5-HT2C blockade may also account for its lowering of the seizure threshold, as 5-HT2C knockout mice display significantly increased vulnerability to epileptic seizures, sometimes resulting in spontaneous death. However, the reduction of seizure threshold could be attributed to tramadol's putative inhibition of GABA-A receptors at high doses.[44]
        The overall analgesic profile of tramadol supports use in the treatment of intermediate pain, especially chronic pain. It is slightly less effective for acute pain than hydrocodone, but more effective than codeine. It has a dosage ceiling similar to codeine, a risk of seizures when overdosed, and a relatively long half-life making its potential for misuse relatively low amongst intermediate strength analgesics.
        Tramadol's primary active metabolite, O-desmethyltramadol, is a considerably more potent Î¼-opioid receptor agonist than tramadol itself. Thus, tramadol is in part a prodrug to O-desmethyltramadol. Similarly to tramadol, O-desmethyltramadol has also been shown to be a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, 5-HT2C receptor antagonist, and M1 and M3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor antagonist.[citation needed]
        Chemistry[edit]Characteristics[edit]Structurally, tramadol closely resembles a stripped down version of codeine. Both codeine and tramadol share the 3-methyl ether group, and both compounds are metabolized along the same hepatic pathway (which one? needs citation) and mechanism to the stronger opioid, phenol agonist analogs. For codeine, this is morphine, and for tramadol, it is the O-desmethyltramadol.
        When administered through IV, patients notice very little clinical difference in subjective potency compared to morphine.
        Comparison with related substances[edit]Structurally, tapentadol is the closest chemical relative of tramadol in clinical use. Tapentadol is also an opioid, but unlike both tramadol and venlafaxine, tapentadol represents only one stereoisomer and is the weaker of the two, in terms of opioid effect. Both tramadol and venlafaxine are racemic mixtures. Structurally, tapentadol also differs from tramadol in being a phenol, and not an ether. Also, both tramadol and venlafaxine incorporate a cyclohexyl moiety, attached directly to the aromatic, while tapentadol lacks this feature.
        Synthesis and stereoisomerism[edit] (1R,2R)-Tramadol (1S,2S)-Tramadol (1R,2S)-Tramadol (1S,2R)-Tramadol
        The chemical synthesis of tramadol is described in the literature.[51] Tramadol [2-(dimethylaminomethyl)-1-(3-methoxyphenyl)cyclohexanol] has two stereogenic centers at the cyclohexane ring. Thus, 2-(dimethylaminomethyl)-1-(3-methoxyphenyl)cyclohexanol may exist in four different configurational forms:
        (1R,2R)-isomer(1S,2S)-isomer(1R,2S)-isomer(1S,2R)-isomerThe synthetic pathway leads to the racemate (1:1 mixture) of (1R,2R)-isomer and the (1S,2S)-isomer as the main products. Minor amounts of the racemic mixture of the (1R,2S)-isomer and the (1S,2R)-isomer are formed as well. The isolation of the (1R,2R)-isomer and the (1S,2S)-isomer from the diastereomeric minor racemate [(1R,2S)-isomer and (1S,2R)-isomer] is realized by the recrystallization of the hydrochlorides. The drug tramadol is a racemate of the hydrochlorides of the (1R,2R)-(+)- and the (1S,2S)-('')-enantiomers. The resolution of the racemate [(1R,2R)-(+)-isomer / (1S,2S)-('')-isomer] was described[52] employing (R)-('')- or (S)-(+)-mandelic acid. This process does not find industrial application, since tramadol is used as a racemate, despite known different physiological effects[53] of the (1R,2R)- and (1S,2S)-isomers, because the racemate showed higher analgesic activity than either enantiomer in animals[54] and in humans.[55]
        Metabolism[edit]Tramadol undergoes hepatic metabolism via the cytochrome P450isozymeCYP2B6, CYP2D6 and CYP3A4, being O- and N-demethylated to five different metabolites. Of these, O-desmethyltramadol is the most significant since it has 200 times the Î¼-affinity of (+)-tramadol, and furthermore has an elimination half-life of nine hours, compared with six hours for tramadol itself. As with codeine, in the 6% of the population that have increased CYP2D6 activity (increased metabolism), there is therefore an increased analgesic effect. Those with decreased CYP2D6 activity will experience less analgesia. Phase II hepatic metabolism renders the metabolites water-soluble, which are excreted by the kidneys. Thus, reduced doses may be used in renal and hepatic impairment.[56]
        O-Desmethyltramadol, as well as tramadol's inactive metabolite, N-desmethyltramadol, both metabolize into the pharmacologically active N,O-didesmethyltramadol via CYP2D6.[57]
        Legal status[edit]Tramadol (as the racemic, cis-hydrochloride salt), is available as a generic in the U.S. from any number of different manufacturers, including Amneal, Caraco, Mylan, Cor Pharma, Mallinckrodt, Pur-Pak, APO, Teva, and many more. Typically, the generic tablets are sold in 50 mg tablets. Brand name formulations include Ultram ER, and the original Ultram from Ortho-McNeil, (cross-licensed from Gr¼nenthal GmbH) which is now produced by Janssen.
        The extended-release formulation of tramadol'--which, among other factors, was intended to be more abuse-deterrent than the instant release'--allegedly possesses more abuse liability than the instant release formulation.[citation needed] The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved tramadol in March 1995 and an extended-release (ER) formulation in September 2005.[58] It is covered by U.S. patents nos. 6,254,887[59] and 7,074,430.[60][61] The FDA lists the patents as scheduled for expiration on 10 May 2014.[60] However, in August 2009, U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware ruled the patents invalid, which, if it survives appeal, would permit manufacture and distribution of generic equivalents of Ultram ER in the United States.[62]
        Tramadol is not a federally controlled substance in the United States; however, Arkansas, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wyoming and the U.S. military have classified Tramadol as a schedule IV controlled substance under state law.[63][64] Other states have legislation pending concerning scheduling tramadol.
        Sweden, as of May 2008, has chosen to classify tramadol as a controlled substance in the same way as codeine and dextropropoxyphene. This means that the substance is a scheduled drug. But unlike codeine and dextropropoxyphene, a normal prescription can be used at this time.[65] In Mexico, combined with paracetamol and sold under the brand name Tramacet, it is widely available without a prescription, but this is currently under re-evaluation. In most Asian countries such as the Philippines, it is sold as a capsule under the brand name Tramal, where it is mostly used to treat labor pains.
        Proprietary preparations[edit]Gr¼nenthal GmbH, which still owns the patent on tramadol, has cross-licensed the drug to pharmaceutical companies internationally. Thus, tramadol is marketed under many trade names around the world, including:
        Acugesic (Malaysia, Singapore)Adolonta (Spain)Algifeno (Bolivia)Algesia (Philippines)Anadol (Bangladesh, Thailand)Boldol (Bosnia, Herzegovina)Calmador (Argentina)Campex (Pakistan)Citra 50 (Mexico)Contramal (Belgium, France, India, Italy, Turkey, Sudan, Hungary)CrispinCramol (Nepal)Dolcet (combined with paracetamol)(Philippines)Dolol (Denmark)Dolzam (Belgium, Luxembourg)Dromadol (United Kingdom)Durela (Canada)Exopen (South Korea)Hovid (Malaysia)Ixprim (combined with paracetamol) (France, Ireland)Lumidol (Bosnia, Herzegovina, Croatia)Mabron (Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Iraq, Jordan, Latvia, Lithuania, Malaysia, Oman, Romania, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Yemen)Mandolgin (Denmark)MandolgineMosepanMatrix (combined with paracetamol) (Honduras, Guatemala)Nobligan (Argentina, Denmark, Iceland, Mexico, Norway, Portugal, Sweden)Nomal (Oman)Osteodol (India)Oxxalgan PR (Greece)Palitex (India)Poltram (Poland)Pyredol (combined with paracetamol) (Vietnam, Bolivia)Ralivia (Canada)Ryzolt (United States)Sinergix (combined with ketorolac) (Mexico)Sintradon (Serbia)Siverol (Philippines)Tandol (South Korea)Tiparol (Sweden)Tonoflex (Pakistan)Topalgic (France)Tradol (Bangladesh, Ireland, Mexico, Singapore, Venezuela)Tradolan (Austria, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Romania, Sweden)Tradolgesic (Thailand)Tradonal (Belgium, Indonesia, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Philippines, Spain, Switzerland)Tralgit (Czech Republic, Georgia, Romania, Slovakia)Tralodie (Italy)Tramacet (combined with paracetamol) (Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, South Africa)Tramacip (India)Tramadex (Israel)Tramadin (Finland)Tramadol HEXAL (Denmark, Finland, Germany, Hungary)Tram Proxyvon (INDIA)Tranophen (combined with paracetamol) (South Korea)Trexol (Mexico)TRIMIF (India)Trumen (Bangladesh)Tramadol (Australia, Belgium, Canada, Chile, Egypt, Estonia, France, Netherlands, Romania, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, United Kingdom, United States)Tramadol Stada (Sweden)Tramadol-Sandoz (Hungary)Tramadol-Ratiopharm (Hungary, many European countries)Tramadolor (Austria, Estonia, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Romania)Tramadolor ID (Hungary)Tramalgic (Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia)Tramagit (Romania)Tramahexal (Australia)Tramake (United Kingdom)Trama-Klosidol (Argentina)Tramal (Slovakia, Costa Rica, Bulgaria, Colombia, Ecuador, Pakistan, Netherlands, Estonia, Finland, Croatia, Morocco, Slovenia, Austria, Poland, Brazil, Chile, Romania, Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Switzerland, Lebanon, Israel, Philippines, Egypt, Thailand, Portugal)Tramalgic (Hungary)Tramal Gotas (Ecuador)Tramazac (India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka)TramedTramedo (Australia)Tramoda (Thailand)Trasic (Thailand)Tram"l (Iceland)Tramundal (Austria)Tridol (South Korea)Tridural (Canada)Trodon (Serbia)Ultracet (combined with paracetamol) (Brazil, United States)Ultradol (Bangladesh)Ultram and Ultram ER (United States)Ultramed (combined with paracetamol) (India)Veldrol (Mexico)VAMADOL PLUS (India)Volcidol (Thailand)Zafin (combined with paracetamol) (Chile)Zaldiar (combined with paracetamol) (Belgium, Chile, Croatia, the Czech Republic, France, Mexico, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland, Russia)Zaledor (combined with paracetamol) (Chile)Zamadol (United Kingdom)Zamudol (France)Zodol (Chile, Ecuador, Peru)Zoftadol (India)Zydol (United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia)Zytram (Canada, Iceland, New Zealand, Spain)Zytrim (Spain)Formulations[edit]Tramadol is classified as a central nervous system drug usually marketed as the hydrochloride salt (tramadol hydrochloride); the tartrate is seen on rare occasions, and rarely (in the US at least) tramadol is available for both injection (intravenous and/or intramuscular) and oral administration. The most well known dosing unit is the 50 mg generic tablet made by several manufacturers. It is also commonly available in conjunction with APAP (paracetamol, acetaminophen) as Ultracet or Tramacet, in the form of a smaller dose of 37.5 mg tramadol and 325 mg of APAP.
        Tramadol comes in many forms, including:
        50 mg immediate-release tablets.50 mg orally disintegrating tablets.100 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg extended-release tablets.100 mg, 150 mg, 200 mg, and 300 mg extended-release capsules.[67]suppositorieseffervescent tablets and powdersampules of sterile solution for SC, IM, and IV injectionpreservative-free solutions for injection by the various spinal routes (epidural, intrathecal, caudal, and others)powders for compoundingliquids both with and without alcohol for oral and sub-lingual administration, available in regular phials and bottles, dropper bottles, bottles with a pump similar to those used with liquid soap and phials with droppers built into the captablets and capsules containing (acetaminophen/APAP), aspirin and other agents.Tramadol is regularly used in the form of an ingredient in multi-agent topical gels, creams, and solutions for nerve pain, rectal foam, concentrated retention enema, and a skin plaster (transdermal patch) quite similar to those used with lidocaine.
        Tramadol has a characteristic and unpleasant taste which is mildly bitter but much less so than morphine and codeine. Oral and sublingual drops and liquid preparations come with and without added flavoring. This different flavouring is considered to be a standard. Its relative effectiveness via transmucosal routes (i.e. sublingual, buccal, rectal) is similar to that of codeine, and, like codeine, it is also metabolized in the liver to stronger metabolites (see below).
        Patients taking SSRIs (Prozac, Zoloft, etc.), SNRIs (Effexor, etc.), TCAs, MAOIs or other strong opioids (oxycodone, methadone, fentanyl, morphine), as well as the elderly (> 75 years old), pediatric (< >Research[edit]Veterinary medicine[edit]Tramadol may be used to treat post-operative, injury-related, and chronic (e.g., cancer-related) pain in dogs and cats[77] as well as rabbits, coatis, many small mammals including rats and flying squirrels, guinea pigs, ferrets, and raccoons.
        Tramadol comes in ampules in addition to the tablets, capsules, powder for reconstitution, and oral syrups and liquids; the fact that its characteristic taste is distasteful to dogs, but can be masked in food, makes for a means of administration.
        No data that would lead to a definitive determination of the efficacy and safety of tramadol in reptiles or amphibians are available, and, following the pattern of all other drugs, it appears that tramadol can be used to relieve pain in marsupials, such as North American opossums, short-tailed opossums, sugar gliders, wallabies, and kangaroos among others.
        Tramadol for animals is one of the most reliable and useful active principles available to veterinarians for treating animals in pain. It has a dual mode of action: weak mu agonism and mono-amine reuptake inhibition, which produces mild anti-anxiety results. This is an advantage because the use of some non-steroidal anti-inflammatory substances in these animals may be dangerous.[citation needed]
        When animals are administered tramadol, adverse reactions can occur. The most common are constipation, upset stomach, decreased heart rate.[citation needed] In case of overdose, mental alteration, pinpoint pupils and seizures may appear. In such cases, veterinarians should evaluate the correct treatment for these events. Some contraindications have been noted in treated animals taking certain other drugs.
        Tramadol should not be co-administered with selegiline or any other psychoactive class of medication such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), tricyclic antidepressants, or monoamine oxidase inhibitors.[citation needed]
        In animals, tramadol is removed from the body via liver and kidney excretion. Animals suffering from diseases in these systems should be monitored by a veterinarian, as it may be necessary to adjust the dose.
        Pin cushion tree[edit]In 2013, researchers discovered that tramadol is also produced naturally in relatively high concentrations (1%+) in the roots of the African pin cushion tree (Nauclea latifolia).[78]
        See also[edit]References[edit]^ abcdef"Ultram, Ultram ER (tramadol) dosing, indications, interactions, adverse effects, and more". Medscape Reference. WebMD. Retrieved 28 November 2013. ^US patent 3652589, Flick, Kurt; Frankus, Ernst, "1-(m-Substituted Phenyl)-2-Aminomethyl Cyclohexanols", issued 28 March 1972 ^Tramal, What is Tramal? About its Science, Chemistry and Structure[unreliable source?]^ abReimann W, Schneider F (1998). "Induction of 5-hydroxytryptamine release by tramadol, fenfluramine and reserpine". European Journal of Pharmacology349 (2''3): 199''203. doi:10.1016/S0014-2999(98)00195-2. PMID 9671098. ^ abGobbi M, Moia M, Pirona L, et al. (September 2002). "p-Methylthioamphetamine and 1-(m-chlorophenyl)piperazine, two non-neurotoxic 5-HT releasers in vivo, differ from neurotoxic amphetamine derivatives in their mode of action at 5-HT nerve endings in vitro". Journal of Neurochemistry82 (6): 1435''43. doi:10.1046/j.1471-4159.2002.01073.x. PMID 12354291. ^"Tramadol Hydrochloride". The American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. Retrieved 27 April 2011. ^Rojas-Corrales, MO; Berrocoso, E; Gibert-Rahola, J; Mic", JA (2004). "Antidepressant-like effect of tramadol and its enantiomers in reserpinized mice: comparative study with desipramine, fluvoxamine, venlafaxine and opiates". Journal of psycho-pharmacology18 (3): 404''11. doi:10.1177/026988110401800305. PMID 15358985. ^Mic", JA; Ardid, D; Berrocoso, E; Eschalier, A (2006). "Antidepressants and pain". Trends in pharmacological sciences27 (7): 348''54. doi:10.1016/j.tips.2006.05.004. PMID 16762426. ^Rojas-Corrales, MO; Gibert-Rahola, J; Mic", JA (1998). "Tramadol induces antidepressant-type effects in mice". Life Sciences63 (12): PL175''80. doi:10.1016/S0024-3205(98)00369-5. PMID 9749830. ^Hopwood, SE; Owesson, CA; Callado, LF; McLaughlin, DP; Stamford, JA (2001). "Effects of chronic tramadol on pre- and post-synaptic measures of mono-amine function". Journal of psycho-pharmacology15 (3): 147''53. doi:10.1177/026988110101500301. PMID 11565620. ^Rojas-Corrales MO, Gibert-Rahola J, Mic" JA (1998). "Tramadol induces antidepressant-type effects in mice". Life Sciences63 (12): PL175''80. doi:10.1016/S0024-3205(98)00369-5. PMID 9749830. ^Hopwood SE, Owesson CA, Callado LF, McLaughlin DP, Stamford JA (2001). "Effects of chronic tramadol on pre- and post-synaptic measures of monoamine function". Journal of Psychopharmacology15 (3): 147''53. doi:10.1177/026988110101500301. PMID 11565620. ^Thomas W. Abrams Warning Letter to William C. Weldon, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, Johnson & Johnson. 5/12/2009^"Tramadol". MedlinePlus. American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. 1 September 2008. Retrieved 29 September 2009. ^"Tramadol Hydrochloride 50mg Capsules '' Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC)". electronic Medicines Compendium. Actavis UK Ltd. 12 June 2013. Retrieved 28 November 2013. ^"Tilodol SR 100 mg Prolonged-Release Tablets '' Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC)". electronic Medicines Compendium. Sandoz Limited. 6 March 2013. Retrieved 28 November 2013. ^"PRODUCT INFORMATION Tramadol SANDOZ 50 mg capsules" (PDF). TGA eBusiness Services. Sandoz Pty Ltd. 4 November 2011. Retrieved 28 November 2013. ^"PRODUCT INFORMATION TRAMADOL SANDOZ® SR 100MG, 150MG and 200MG SUSTAINED RELEASE TABLETS" (PDF). TGA eBusiness Services. Sandoz Pty Ltd. 21 November 2013. Retrieved 28 November 2013. ^"ULTRAM (TRAMADOL HYDROCHLORIDE) TABLET, COATED [LAKE ERIE MEDICAL DBA QUALITY CARE PRODUCTS LLC]". DailyMed. LAKE ERIE MEDICAL DBA QUALITY CARE PRODUCTS LLC. November 2012. Retrieved 28 November 2013. ^"ULTRAM ER (TRAMADOL HYDROCHLORIDE) TABLET, EXTENDED RELEASE [REBEL DISTRIBUTORS CORP]". DailyMed. Rebel Distributors Corp. December 2010. Retrieved 28 November 2013. ^Bryant et al. 1988 and Rouveix 1992 cited by Collett, BJ (2001). "Chronic opioid therapy for non-cancer pain". British journal of anaesthesia87 (1): 133''43. doi:10.1093/bja/87.1.133. PMID 11460802. ^Sacerdote, Paola; Bianchi, Mauro; Gaspani, Leda; Manfredi, Barbara; Maucione, Antonio; Terno, Giovanni; Ammatuna, Mario; Panerai, Alberto E (2000). "The Effects of Tramadol and Morphine on Immune Responses and Pain After Surgery in Cancer Patients". Anesthesia & Analgesia90 (6): 1411''4. doi:10.1097/00000539-200006000-00028. PMID 10825330. ^Liu, Z; Gao, F; Tian, Y (2006). "Effects of morphine, fentanyl and tramadol on human immune response". Journal of Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Medical sciences = Hua zhong ke ji da xue xue bao. Yi xue Ying De wen ban = Huazhong keji daxue xuebao. Yixue Yingdewen ban26 (4): 478''81. doi:10.1007/s11596-006-0427-5. PMID 17120754. ^Sacerdote, P; Bianchi, M; Manfredi, B; Panerai, AE (1997). "Effects of tramadol on immune responses and nociceptive thresholds in mice". Pain72 (3): 325''30. doi:10.1016/S0304-3959(97)00055-9. PMID 9313273. ^Maruta 1978 and McNairy et al. 1984 cited by Collett, BJ (2001). "Chronic opioid therapy for non-cancer pain". British journal of anaesthesia87 (1): 133''43. doi:10.1093/bja/87.1.133. PMID 11460802. ^Barsotti, CE; Mycyk, MB; Reyes, J (2003). "Withdrawal syndrome from tramadol hydrochloride". The American journal of emergency medicine21 (1): 87''8. doi:10.1053/ajem.2003.50039. PMID 12563592. ^Choong, K; Ghiculescu, RA (2008). "Iatrogenic neuropsychiatric syndromes". Australian family physician37 (8): 627''9. PMID 18704211. ^Ripamonti, C; Fagnoni, E; De Conno, F (2004). "Withdrawal syndrome after delayed tramadol intake". The American Journal of Psychiatry161 (12): 2326''7. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.161.12.2326. PMID 15569913. ^"Withdrawal syndrome and dependence: tramadol too". Prescrire international12 (65): 99''100. 2003. PMID 12825576. ^Senay, EC; Adams, EH; Geller, A; Inciardi, JA; Mu±oz, A; Schnoll, SH; Woody, GE; Cicero, TJ (2003). "Physical dependence on Ultram (tramadol hydrochloride): both opioid-like and atypical withdrawal symptoms occur". Drug and alcohol dependence69 (3): 233''41. doi:10.1016/S0376-8716(02)00321-6. PMID 12633909. ^Rossi, 2004[verification needed]^"Tramadol Listed as Schedule IV Substance in Kentucky" (Press release). Kentucky Board of Pharmacy. 8 December 2008. Retrieved 8 February 2009. ^JovanoviÄ‡-CupiÄ‡, V; MartinoviÄ‡, Z; NesiÄ‡, N (2006). "Seizures associated with intoxication and abuse of tramadol". Clinical toxicology44 (2): 143''6. doi:10.1080/1556365050014418. PMID 16615669. ^Rodriguez RF, Bravo LE, Castro F, Montoya O, Castillo JM, Castillo MP, Daza P, Restrepo JM, Rodriguez MF (2007). "Incidence of weak opioids adverse events in the management of cancer pain: a double-blind comparative trial". Journal of Palliative Medicine10 (1): 56''60. doi:10.1089/jpm.2006.0117. PMID 17298254. ^Adams, EH; Breiner, S; Cicero, TJ; Geller, A; Inciardi, JA; Schnoll, SH; Senay, EC; Woody, GE (2006). "A Comparison of the Abuse Liability of Tramadol, NSAIDs, and Hydrocodone in Patients with Chronic Pain". Journal of pain and symptom management31 (5): 465''76. doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2005.10.006. PMID 16716877. ^Vorsanger, GJ; Xiang, J; Gana, TJ; Pascual, ML; Fleming, RR (2008). "Extended-release tramadol (tramadol ER) in the treatment of chronic low back pain". Journal of opioid management4 (2): 87''97. PMID 18557165. ^Karhu, D; El-Jammal, A; Dupain, T; Gaulin, D; Bouchard, S (2007). "Pharmacokinetics and dose proportionality of three Tramadol Contramid OAD tablet strengths". Biopharmaceutics & drug disposition28 (6): 323''30. doi:10.1002/bdd.561. PMID 17575561. ^Tj¤derborn, M; J¶nsson, AK; H¤gg, S; Ahlner, J (2007). "Fatal unintentional intoxications with tramadol during 1995''2005". Forensic Science International173 (2''3): 107''11. doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2007.02.007. PMID 17350197. ^Baselt, R. (2011) Disposition of Toxic Drugs and Chemicals in Man, 9th edition, Biomedical Publications, Seal Beach, CA, pp. 1712''1715, ISBN 0-9626523-8-7.^Hennies HH, Friderichs E, Schneider J (July 1988). "Receptor binding, analgesic and antitussive potency of tramadol and other selected opioids". Arzneimittel-Forschung38 (7): 877''80. PMID 2849950. ^ abFrink MC, Hennies HH, Englberger W, Haurand M, Wilffert B (November 1996). "Influence of tramadol on neurotransmitter systems of the rat brain". Arzneimittel-Forschung46 (11): 1029''36. PMID 8955860. ^Driessen B, Reimann W (January 1992). "Interaction of the central analgesic, tramadol, with the uptake and release of 5-hydroxytryptamine in the rat brain in vitro". British Journal of Pharmacology105 (1): 147''51. doi:10.1111/j.1476-5381.1992.tb14226.x. PMC 1908625. PMID 1596676. ^Bamigbade TA, Davidson C, Langford RM, Stamford JA (September 1997). "Actions of tramadol, its enantiomers and principal metabolite, O-desmethyltramadol, on serotonin (5-HT) efflux and uptake in the rat dorsal raphe nucleus". British Journal of Anaesthesia79 (3): 352''6. doi:10.1093/bja/79.3.352. PMID 9389855. ^ abHara K, Minami K, Sata T (May 2005). "The effects of tramadol and its metabolite on glycine, gamma-aminobutyric acidA, and N-methyl-D-aspartate receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes". Anesthesia and Analgesia100 (5): 1400''5, table of contents. doi:10.1213/01.ANE.0000150961.24747.98. PMID 15845694. ^Ogata J, Minami K, Uezono Y, et al. (2004). "The inhibitory effects of tramadol on 5-hydroxytryptamine type 2C receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes". Anesthesia and Analgesia98 (5): 1401''6, table of contents. doi:10.1213/01.ANE.0000108963.77623.A4. PMID 15105221. ^Shiraishi M, Minami K, Uezono Y, Yanagihara N, Shigematsu A, Shibuya I (May 2002). "Inhibitory effects of tramadol on nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in adrenal chromaffin cells and in Xenopus oocytes expressing alpha 7 receptors". British Journal of Pharmacology136 (2): 207''16. doi:10.1038/sj.bjp.0704703. PMC 1573343. PMID 12010769. ^Marincsk R, T"th BI, Czifra G, Szab" T, Kovcs L, B­r" T (June 2008). "The analgesic drug, tramadol, acts as an agonist of the transient receptor potential vanilloid-1". Anesth Analg.106 (6): 1890''6. doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e318172fefc. PMID 18499628. ^Shiraishi M, Minami K, Uezono Y, Yanagihara N, Shigematsu A (2001). "Inhibition by tramadol of muscarinic receptor-induced responses in cultured adrenal medullary cells and in Xenopus laevis oocytes expressing cloned M1 receptors". The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics299 (1): 255''60. PMID 11561087. ^Shiga Y, Minami K, Shiraishi M, et al. (2002). "The inhibitory effects of tramadol on muscarinic receptor-induced responses in Xenopus oocytes expressing cloned M(3) receptors". Anesthesia and Analgesia95 (5): 1269''73, table of contents. doi:10.1097/00000539-200211000-00031. PMID 12401609. ^Ogata, J; Minami, K; Uezono, Y; Okamoto, T; Shiraishi, M; Shigematsu, A; Ueta, Y (2004). "The inhibitory effects of tramadol on 5-hydroxytryptamine type 2C receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes". Anesthesia and Analgesia98 (5): 1401''6, table of contents. doi:10.1213/01.ANE.0000108963.77623.A4. PMID 15105221. ^Pharmaceutical Substances, Axel Kleemann, J¼rgen Engel, Bernd Kutscher and Dieter Reichert, 4. ed. (2000) 2 volumes, Thieme-Verlag Stuttgart (Germany), p. 2085 bis 2086, ISBN 978-1-58890-031-9; since 2003 online with biannual actualizations.^Zynovy, Zinovy; Meckler, Harold (2000). "A Practical Procedure for the Resolution of (+)- and ('')-Tramadol". Organic Process Research & Development4 (4): 291''294. doi:10.1021/op000281v. ^Burke D, Henderson DJ (April 2002). "Chirality: a blueprint for the future". British Journal of Anaesthesia88 (4): 563''76. doi:10.1093/bja/88.4.563. PMID 12066734. ^Raffa, R. B.; Friderichs, E.; Reimann, W.; Shank, R. P.; Codd, E. E.; Vaught, J. L.; Jacoby, H. I.; Selve, N. (1993). "Complementary and synergistic antinociceptive interaction between the enantiomers of tramadol". The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics267 (1): 331''340. PMID 8229760. edit^Grond, S.; Meuser, T.; Zech, D.; Hennig, U.; Lehmann, K. A. (1995). "Analgesic efficacy and safety of tramadol enantiomers in comparison with the racemate: a randomised, double-blind study with gynaecological patients using intravenous patient-controlled analgesia". Pain62 (3): 313''320. doi:10.1016/0304-3959(94)00274-I. PMID 8657431. edit^Grond S, Sablotzki A (2004). "Clinical pharmacology of tramadol. La de la de da". Clinical Pharmacokinetics43 (13): 879''923. doi:10.2165/00003088-200443130-00004. PMID 15509185. ^Tramadol Pharmacokinetics, PharmGKB^"Tramadol extended-release in the management of chronic pain". Therapeutics and clinical risk management3 (3): 401''10. 2007. PMC 2386353. PMID 18488071. ^US patent 6254887, Miller, Ronald Brown, et al., "Controlled Release Tramadol", issued 3 July 2001 ^ abFDA AccessData entry for Tramadol Hydrochloride. Retrieved 17 August 2009.^US patent 7074430, Miller, Ronald Brown, et al., "Controlled Release Tramadol Tramadol Formulation", issued 11 July 2006 ^"Par Pharmaceutical Wins on Invalidity in Ultram(R) ER Litigation" (Press release). Par Pharmaceutical. 17 August 2009. ^TRAMADOL (Trade Names: Ultram®, Ultracet®). Drug Enforcement Administration (February 2011)^Tennessee News: Tramadol and Carisoprodol Now Classified Schedule IV '' News '' National Association of Boards of Pharmacy® (NABP®). Nabp.net (8 June 2011). Retrieved on 2012-12-26.^"Substansen tramadol nu narkotikaklassad p¥ samma s¤tt som kodein och dextropropoxifen '' L¤kemedelsverket". Lakemedelsverket.se. 14 May 2008. Retrieved 18 April 2010. ^ULTRAM®ER. ultram-er.com^Tramadol Information and Uses. rxwiki.com (15 October 2013). Retrieved on 2013-10-21.^Harati Y, Gooch C, Swenson M, Edelman S, Greene D, Raskin P, Donofrio P, Cornblath D, Sachdeo R, Siu CO, Kamin M (1998). "Double-blind randomized trial of tramadol for the treatment of the pain of diabetic neuropathy". Neurology50 (6): 1842''6. doi:10.1212/WNL.50.6.1842. PMID 9633738. ^Harati Y, Gooch C, Swenson M, Edelman SV, Greene D, Raskin P, Donofrio P, Cornblath D, Olson WH, Kamin M (2000). "Maintenance of the long-term effectiveness of tramadol in treatment of the pain of diabetic neuropathy". Journal of diabetes and its complications14 (2): 65''70. doi:10.1016/S1056-8727(00)00060-X. PMID 10959067. ^Barber, J (2011). "examining the use of tramadol hydrochloride as an antidepressant". Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology19 (=2): 123''130. doi:10.1037/a0022721. ^G¶bel, H; Stadler, T (1997). "Treatment of post-herpes zoster pain with tramadol. Results of an open pilot study versus clomipramine with or without levomepromazine". Drugs. 53 Suppl 2: 34''9. doi:10.2165/00003495-199700532-00008. PMID 9190323. ^Boureau, F; Legallicier, P; Kabir-Ahmadi, M (2003). "Tramadol in post-herpetic neuralgia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial". Pain104 (1''2): 323''31. doi:10.1016/S0304-3959(03)00020-4. PMID 12855342. ^Sobey, PW; Parran Jr, TV; Grey, SF; Adelman, CL; Yu, J (2003). "The use of tramadol for acute heroin withdrawal: a comparison to clonidine". Journal of addictive diseases22 (4): 13''25. doi:10.1300/J069v22n04_03. PMID 14723475. ^Threlkeld, M; Parran, TV; Adelman, CA; Grey, SF; Yu, J; Yu, Jaehak (2006). "Tramadol versus buprenorphine for the management of acute heroin withdrawal: a retrospective matched cohort controlled study". The American journal on addictions15 (2): 186''91. doi:10.1080/10550490500528712. PMID 16595358. ^Goldsmith, Toby D; Shapira, Nathan A; Keck, Paul E (1999). "Rapid Remission of OCD with Tramadol Hydrochloride". American Journal of Psychiatry156 (4): 660''1. PMID 10200754. ^"Tramadol Extended-Release (ER) for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD)". 23 January 2012. Retrieved 23 January 2012. ^Brooks, Wendy C. (11 April 2008). "Tramadol". The Pet Health Library. Veterinary Information Network. Retrieved 29 September 2009. ^Boumendjel, A; Sotoing Ta¯we, G; Ngo Bum, E; Chabrol, T; Beney, C; Sinniger, V; Haudecoeur, R; Marcourt, L; Challal, S; Ferreira'…Queiroz, E; Souard, F; Le'…Borgne, M; Lomberget, T; Depaulis, A; Lavaud, C; Robins, R; Wolfender, JL; Bonaz, B; De'…Waard, M (November 2013). "Occurrence of the Synthetic Analgesic Tramadol in an African Medicinal Plant". Angewandte Chemie International Edition52 (45): 11780''11784. doi:10.1002/anie.201305697. External links[edit] Agonists: Azapirones: AlnespironeBinospironeBuspironeEnilospironeEptapironeGepironeIpsapironePerospironeRevospironeTandospironeTiospironeUmespironeZalospirone; Antidepressants: EtoperidoneNefazodoneTrazodoneVortioxetine; Antipsychotics: AripiprazoleAsenapineClozapineQuetiapineZiprasidone; Ergolines: DihydroergotamineBromocriptineErgotamineLisurideMethysergideLSD; Tryptamines: 5-CT5-MeO-DMT5-MTBufoteninDMTIndorenatePsilocinPsilocybin; Others: 8-OH-DPATAdatanserinBay R 1531BefiradolBMY-14802CannabidiolDimemebfeEbalzotanEltoprazineF-11,461F-12,826F-13,714F-14,679F-15,063F-15,599FlesinoxanFlibanserinLesopitronLY-293,284LY-301,317MKC-242NaluzotanNBUMPOsemozotanOxaflozanePardoprunoxPiclozotanRauwolscineRepinotanRoxindoleRU-24,969S 14,506S-14,671S-15,535SarizotanSSR-181,507SunepitronU-92,016-AUrapidilVilazodoneXaliprodenYohimbineAntagonists: Antipsychotics: IloperidoneRisperidoneSertindole; Beta blockers: AlprenololCyanopindololIodocyanopindololOxprenololPindobindPindololPropranololTertatolol; Others: AV965BMY-7,378CSP-2503DotarizineFlopropioneGR-46611IsamoltaneLecozotanMefwayMetitepine/MethiothepinMPPFNAN-190RobalzotanS-15535SB-649,915SDZ 216-525SpiperoneSpiramideSpiroxatrineUH-301WAY-100,135WAY-100,635XylamidineAgonists: Lysergamides: DihydroergotamineMethysergide; Triptans: AlmotriptanAvitriptanEletriptanFrovatriptanNaratriptanRizatriptanSumatriptanZolmitriptan; Tryptamines: 5-CT5-Ethyl-DMT5-MT5-(Nonyloxy)tryptamine; Others: CP-135,807BromocriptineCP-286,601GR-46611L-694,247L-772,405PNU-109,291PNU-142633Antagonists: Lysergamides: Metergoline; Others: AlniditanBRL-15,572ElzasonanGR-127,935KetanserinLY-310,762LY-367,642LY-456,219LY-456,220Metitepine/MethiothepinRitanserinYohimbineZiprasidone Agonists: Phenethylamines: 2C-B2C-E2C-I2C-T-22C-T-72C-T-21DOBDOCDOIDOMMDAMDMAMescaline; Piperazines: AripiprazolemCPPTFMPP; Tryptamines: 5-CT5-MeO-Î±-ET5-MeO-Î±-MT5-MeO-DET5-MeO-DiPT5-MeO-DMT5-MeO-DPT5-MTÎ±-ETÎ±-Methyl-5-HTÎ±-MTBufoteninDETDiPTDMTDPTPsilocinPsilocybin; Others: A-372,159AL-38022AAlstonineBromocriptineCP-809,101DimemebfeLorcaserinMedifoxamineMK-212Org 12,962ORG-37,684OxaflozanePHA-57378PNU-22394PNU-181731Ro60-0175Ro60-0213VabicaserinWAY-629WAY-161,503YM-348Antagonists: Atypical antipsychotics: ClorotepineClozapineIloperidoneMelperoneOlanzapinePaliperidoneQuetiapineRisperidoneSertindoleZiprasidoneZotepine; Typical antipsychotics: ChlorpromazineLoxapinePimozidePipamperone; Antidepressants: AgomelatineAmitriptylineAmoxapineAptazapineEtoperidoneFluoxetineMianserinMirtazapineNefazodoneNortriptylineTedatioxetineTrazodone; Others: AdatanserinCEPCCinanserinCyproheptadineDeramciclaneDotarizineEltoprazineEsmirtazapineFR-260,010KetanserinKetotifenLatrepirdineMetitepine/MethiothepinMethysergidePizotifenRitanserinRS-102,221S-14,671SB-200,646SB-206,553SB-221,284SB-228,357SB-242,084SB-243,213SDZ SER-082Xylamidine Agonists: Lysergamides: DihydroergotamineErgotamineLisurideLSDMesulergineMetergolineMethysergide; Tryptamines: 2-Methyl-5-HT5-BT5-CT5-MTBufoteninE-6801E-6837EMD-386,088EMDTLY-586,713N-Methyl-5-HTTryptamine; Others: WAY-181,187WAY-208,466Antagonists: Antidepressants: AmitriptylineAmoxapineClomipramineDoxepinMianserinNortriptyline; Atypical antipsychotics: AripiprazoleAsenapineClorotepineClozapineFluperlapineIloperidoneOlanzapineTiospirone; Typical antipsychotics: ChlorpromazineLoxapine; Others: BGC20-760BVT-5182BVT-74316CerlapirdineEGIS-12,233GW-742,457KetanserinLatrepirdineLu AE58054Metitepine/MethiothepinMS-245PRX-07034RitanserinRo04-6790Ro 63-0563SB-258,585SB-271,046SB-357,134SB-399,885SB-742,457Agonists: Lysergamides: LSD; Tryptamines: 5-CT5-MTBufotenin; Others: 8-OH-DPATAS-19BifeprunoxE-55888LP-12LP-44RU-24,969SarizotanAntagonists: Lysergamides: 2-Bromo-LSDBromocriptineDihydroergotamineErgotamineMesulergineMetergolineMethysergide; Antidepressants: AmitriptylineAmoxapineClomipramineImipramineMaprotilineMianserin; Atypical antipsychotics: AmisulprideAripiprazoleAsenapineClorotepineClozapineOlanzapineRisperidoneSertindoleTiospironeZiprasidoneZotepine; Typical antipsychotics: ChlorpromazineLoxapine;Pimozide; Others: ButaclamolEGIS-12,233KetanserinLY-215,840Metitepine/MethiothepinRitanserinSB-258,719SB-258,741SB-269,970SB-656,104SB-656,104-ASB-691,673SLV-313SLV-314SpiperoneSSR-181,507Vortioxetine
      Tramadol: When the 'safe option' painkiller turns out to be lethal | Mail Online
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Mon, 10 Feb 2014 22:06
        By Jo Waters
        PUBLISHED: 19:17 EST, 8 April 2013 | UPDATED: 19:17 EST, 8 April 2013
        Accidental overdose: Lizz Bowker died after taking just two extra pills
        John Bowker gasped in horror as he realised his wife Lizz had stopped breathing.
        'I'd been out of our bedroom for only six minutes.
        'When I came back Lizz was lying there lifeless,' recalls John, 67, a retired engineer from Eastbourne, Sussex.
        He tried in vain to resuscitate his wife, as did the paramedics, who arrived within minutes, but it was too late.
        'I was devastated '-- I'd been laughing and joking with her 20 minutes before and she'd showed no sign of being unwell,' says John.
        Lizz, 57, a mother of three, died from an accidental overdose of the opioid painkiller tramadol, which she'd been taking for the previous year for back pain and leg ulcers.
        She had taken just two more tablets than her usual daily dose of eight 50mg tablets.
        'She'd been sorting out her weekly pill box and I think she just got confused and took two doses,' says John, who was married to Lizz for 38 years.
        Tragically, her death is by no means an isolated case and highlights the dangers associated with a drug too often regarded as the 'safer' option.
        Tramadol is an increasingly commonly prescribed painkiller '-- prescriptions have almost doubled in the past seven years, from 5.9'‰million in 2006 to 11.1'‰million in September 2012.
        Its popularity has soared partly because it's cheap '-- now available as a non-branded generic drug, it costs the NHS £1.99 for 100 tablets.
        Fears about other painkillers have also made tramadol an attractive option.
        Lizz's death is by no means an isolated case and highlights the dangers associated with a drug (Tramadol) too often regarded as the 'safer' option
        The non-steroidal anti-inflammatories (NSAIDs) are linked to side-effects such as indigestion, stomach ulcers, a perforated gut.
        One of these drugs, Vioxx, was withdrawn in 2005 because of a link to heart attack and stroke.
        Meanwhile, another painkiller, co-proxamol, was withdrawn after concerns about it being used in suicides.
        Tramadol '-- which also comes under brand names including Zydol and Zamadol '-- is a synthetic opioid drug, similar to natural opioids derived from poppy seeds, such as morphine.
        It's prescribed to prevent or treat moderate to severe pain after surgery, toothache or long-term pain conditions including back pain, fibromyalgia and osteoarthritis.
        Tramadol is regarded by many doctors as a weaker opioid. But in fact it has the same risks of overdose as with morphine.
        As with all opioids, tramadol acts directly on the central nervous system, blocking pain signals from the nerves to the brain; but it also enhances the effects of two brain messengers, serotonin and noradrenaline.
        This dual action makes interactions with other drugs more likely '-- the risk is if the patient is taking medications or other substances with a sedative effect on the central nervous system, because this can affect breathing and, in some cases, lead to death.
        So tramadol should not strictly be used if you're taking sleeping tablets, tranquilisers, and antidepressants, other painkillers that act on the brain, or are under the influence of alcohol.
        But despite these well-known interactions, some patients end up being prescribed tramadol as well as sleeping pills and antidepressants, as often pain, mood and sleep problems go together.
        Deaths from tramadol overdose have soared from just one in 1996 to 154 in 2011.
        More than 500 people died from tramadol overdoses between 2006 and 2011.
        While it's not clear how many of these were accidental, the figures are beginning to ring alarm bells with clinicians and policy makers, says Dr Cathy Stannard, consultant in pain medicine at North Bristol NHS Trust, author of Opioids in Chronic Pain.
        Tramadol is an increasingly commonly prescribed painkiller - prescriptions have almost doubled in the past seven years
        'Apart from the whole issue of tramadol's dual mechanism for acting on pain and the increased risk of drug interactions, prescribers still regard tramadol as a safer opioid than morphine '-- a sort of ''opioid-lite'',' she says.
        'But it's a strong opioid drug.'
        Three years ago, it was moved to the strong opioids section of the British National Formulary '-- a doctors' reference guide produced by the British Medical Association and the Royal Pharmaceutical Society.
        But tramadol is seen as 'somehow safer and softer than stronger opioids, in a similar way that codeine is', even though it's actually twice as strong as codeine, says Roger Knaggs, associate professor of pharmacy at Nottingham University.
        'This may well be why this problem of accidental overdose is beginning to emerge. 'Patients prescribed opioids such as tramadol need close monitoring '-- and should be seen at least once a month to see if they are getting any benefit from them.'
        And Dr Stannard says: 'Probably less than a third of patients will get pain relief from tramadol in the long term.
        'Although there's evidence to show tramadol works well in the short term for conditions such as post-operative pain, the evidence for long- term benefit is disappointing.'
        And patients on antidepressants, sleeping pills and benzodia-zepines should not be prescribed tramadol because of the risks of respiratory depression.
        Dr Knaggs suggests seeing your GP for a review of your prescription '-- but do not stop taking tramadol suddenly as there is a risk of withdrawal symptoms.
        The difficulty is that GPs have fewer and fewer options when it comes to prescribing painkillers, says Dr Martin Johnson, a pain expert for the Royal College of General Practitioners.
        'Taken as prescribed, tramadol is a highly effective drug '-- the problems seem to arise where the dosage is exceeded or it is taken with alcohol and/or other drugs that have a sedative effect.
        'The other problem is patients sometimes top up their prescribed painkillers with other painkillers they can buy over the counter.'
        Although tramadol can be taken with paracetamol or NSAIDs, with any other opioids such as codeine, it increases the opioid load and also the sedating effect.
        'But I do think GPs need to come out with consistent messages to patients about all opioids from codeine upwards,' says Dr Johnson.
        'Those should be: never take them with alcohol, and stick to the prescribed dose. They should also be specific in the prescription dosages they write.'
        The Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs, an independent body that advises the government on drug-related issues, has recommended tighter controls; this would involve putting tramadol under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, which would make possession of unprescribed tramadol illegal.
        Although the report focused on the non-medical misuse of tramadol, it also recommended prescribers should be given training and support concerning its misuse and adverse effects '-- especially the drug's dual action.
        Dr Johnson said the main advantage of rescheduling tramadol would be that it made practitioners think more before prescribing it.
        In the meantime, there may be more families such as John Bowker's having to come to terms with the needless heartbreak of an accidental overdose.
        John suffered a breakdown shortly after Lizz's death.
        'I kept going over and over what happened that night,' he says.
        While it is not clear what of her other medications might have interacted with her tramadol (Lizz was on a number of medications for diabetes, high blood pressure and leg ulcers), when she died Lizz had two-and-a-half times the normal dose in her bloodstream.
        Says John: 'The evening before she died, Lizz had been sitting at the computer doing her internet supermarket shop.
        'The next day was Father's Day and she had all her clothes laid out ready for a day with our son and grandchildren.
        'One of her favourite phrases was one from the TV sitcom Only Fools And Horses '-- the one where Del Boy says: ''The world is our lobster.'''‰'
        John wants other people to know of the dangers of tramadol.
        'I've never blamed the GP for prescribing the drug '-- like lots of people Lizz was in pain and she needed it,' he says.
        'The post-mortem did reveal Lizz also had undiagnosed heart disease '-- which the coroner said was a contributory factor '-- but I feel very strongly that more needs to be done to warn patients about how strong a drug tramadol is and how it appears to be quite easy to accidentally overdose.
        'I don't think Lizz realised what she was dealing with '-- and that just a few extra pills could kill her.'
        Share or comment on this article
    Cultural Marxism
      Marius the giraffe: second healthy animal in Denmark named Marius could soon be dead
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: bertb news feed
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:19
        Since 'the original' Marius was dissected and fed to lions as visitors watched at the zoo in the Danish capital, zoo staff have received death threats by phone and email.
        Undeterred, Jyllands Park Zoo in Western Denmark announced that it may have to make a similar decision with its own Marius.
        The decision follows Jyllands Park Zoo being approved to take part in the European breeding programme, the Guardian reported.
        The zoo claims that Marius - one of its two male giraffes - will have to be culled if it can acquire a female.
        As was the case with Copenhagen Zoo's Marius, it is unlikely the giraffe can be re-homed because of its genetic makeup.
        Both giraffes are victim to a practice familiar to geneticists where healthy animals are killed if they do not fit into conservation practices in zoos.
        Problems arise when experts worry animals are too similar, or too different, to others in breeding programmes to allow them to mate.
        Janni L¸jtved Poulsen, zookeeper at Jyllands Park, told the Guardian it was not clear when the park would acquire a female giraffe and that the decision on Marius's future would be taken by the breeding programme co-ordinator.
        ''If we are told we have to euthanise [Marius] we would of course do that,'' said Poulsen.
        She added the park managers would not to be swayed by the wave of protests, including a 27,000 signature strong petition, that followed the killing of 18-month-old Marius at Copenhagen zoo.
        ''It doesn't affect us in any way. We are completely behind Copenhagen and would have done the same,'' said Poulsen, adding the zoo had not decided if it would also stage a public dissection.
        ''We thought it was amusing that there was another Marius among the giraffes when there aren't that many giraffes in Denmark overall,'' she said of the animal named after a former Jyllands Park vet.
        Copenhagen zoo's scientific director, Bengt Holst, stressed on Denmark's Radio that to avoid personification, their animals were not officially named.
        "The zoo keepers sometimes call the animals names, and then our guests have heard the name Marius," Holst told Denmark's Radio, adding: "But in no way is it an official name it has been given."
        The death of the first Marius comes after two leopard cubs were culled at Copenhagen Zoo in 2012, while four years before that, three Siberian tigers were put to sleep in Germany.
        Read more: Copenhagen Zoo kills 'surplus' young giraffe
        If you're really saddened by the death of Marius, stop visiting zoos
        Don't put sentimentality before good sense
      Cannibal restaurant 'with roasted human heads on the menu' shut down by police
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: bertb news feed
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:18
        A tip-off led police to the macabre discovery in Anambra, Nigeria, with 11 people being arrested and AK-47 guns and other weapons being seized.
        Human flesh was apparently being sold as an expensive treat at the restaurant, with authorities saying that roasted human head was even on the menu.
        "I went to the hotel early this year, after eating, I was told that a lump of meat was being sold at N700, I was surprised," a pastor who had visited the eatery said.
        "So I did not know it was human meat that I ate at such expensive price.
        "What is this country turning into? Can you imagine people selling human flesh as meat," he added. "Seriously I'm beginning to fear people in this part of the world. "
        Another local added to the Osun Defender newspaper: "I always noticed funny movements in and out of the hotel; dirty people with dirty characters always come into the hotel.
        "So, I was not surprised when the police made this discovery in the early hours of yesterday."
        The tabloid reported that two army caps, 40 rounds of live ammunition and 'so many cell phones' were also discovered by authorities.
    Israel
      New US bill to punish academic boycott inspired by Israeli ambassador | The Electronic Intifada
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:35
        Weeks after Ambassador Michael Oren, Israel's former envoy to the United States, suggested it, members of the United States Congress have introduced a bill to punish American universities if their members support the academic boycott of Israeli institutions.
        The so-called ''Protect Academic Freedom Act'' would deny federal funding to any institution that participates in a boycott of Israeli universities or scholars or even whose departments issue statements in support of a boycott.
        Punishing statementsThe proposed law defines ''an institution of higher education to be participating in a boycott'' if ''the institution, any significant part of the institution, or any organization significantly funded by the institution adopts a policy or resolution, issues a statement, or otherwise formally establishes the restriction of discourse, cooperation, exchange, or any other involvement with academic institutions or scholars on the basis of the connection of such institutions or such scholars to the state of Israel.''
        UnconstitutionalThe restrictions even on speech '' issuing statements '' prompted the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee to issue an action alert warning that the bill is unconstitutional and violates First Amendment rights.
        The bill was introduced in the US House of Representatives yesterday by Representative Peter Roskam, the Republican member for the sixth district of Illinois, and co-sponsored by Representative Dan Lipinski, an Illinois Democrat.
        In his speech to Congress introducing the ''bipartisan'' bill (video above) and in a press release, Roskam specifically cites as motivation the December vote by the American Studies Association (ASA) to support the academic boycott of Israeli institutions.
        Pushed by Michael OrenBut the law itself was directly inspired by Michael Oren, the former American who renounced his citizenship to serve as Israeli ambassador to the United States until last year.
        In December, Oren demanded repressive laws against those seeking to use boycott tactics to pressure Israel to end its abuses of Palestinians.
        ''What's needed is a way to fight back, and Congress can do it,'' Oren wrote in Politico.
        Oren specifically cited as a desirable precedent a 1977 US law ''making it illegal for US companies to cooperate with any boycott of Israel and imposing stiff penalties on those that did.''
        Now Roskam and Lipinski have obliged. Indeed, Roskam says on his Facebook page that ''I'm thankful for the wisdom and leadership of Ambassador Michael Oren, who has helped raise awareness for this important effort.''
        Wave of repressive billsThe Roskam bill follows similar initiatives introduced in the state legislatures of New York and Maryland recently.
        As Steven Salaita writes for The Electronic Intifada, these bills demonstrate that ''For some, commitment to Israel overrides the maintenance of traditional American legal protections.''
        You can add Roskam, Lipinski and anyone else who supports such repressive laws to the roster of those for whom free speech is subordinate to maintaining Israeli apartheid and occupation.
    LNG GAS
      National Corvette Museum director describes sinkhole that swallowed 8 cars
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:25
        Add Videos or PhotosBe first to contribute
        Sign in now to share your story.
        Sign in with FacebookSign in with Google+
        Be first to contributeVerifying your credentials...Please wait.
        Uh oh!We're experiencing a few technical issues.
        Try again
      Is Fracking the Cause of the National Corvette Museum Sinkhole?
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:25
        UPDATE 02/12/2014: A representative from the National Corvette Museum describes what he believes actually happened. See his tweet below.
        The National Corvette Museum in Bowling Green, Kentucky closed after a large sinkhole developed inside the museum. The museum is where Corvette owners can pick up their new cars as soon as they roll off the assembly line, and it is also a place for enthusiasts around the world can visit to see classic models. There are even plans to build a racetrack on the museum property. However, a sinkhole may have put a damper on those plans as four classic Corvettes were heavily damaged due to the sinkhole. Thankfully, no one was injured. One of the questions is; was fracking to blame?
        Eight vehicles were damaged, including a 1993 ZR-1 Spyder and a 2009 ZR1 ''Blue Devil'' that were on loan from General Motors. The other six vehicles were owned by the museum, and one was the 1 millionth Corvette ever sold. Safety teams allowed the museum to rescue the ultra-rare vehicle, but they have not been allowed to touch any of the other vehicles yet.
        The process of fracking is relatively simple. Lots of water is injected into the ground at extremely high pressure. That high pressure causes rocks to fracture, providing access to the resources inside and in the area. The waste water is kept underground in pockets, and is generally safe to the water table of the area, according to both government officials and the companies involved in fracking.
        Basic diagram from the EPA on the process of fracking.
        According to the United States Geological Survey (USGS), Kentucky suffered from a 4.3 magnitude earthquake back in 2012. Considering they are not on a major faultline like California, people wondered what caused it. NPR wrote a great piece on how fracking can cause earthquakes and other geological side effects. Water is used in fracking, and the waste water stays underground in pockets, especially along faults. The water provides lubrication to the faults, which allows them to slip. A slipping fault line then can result in an earthquake. It should be noted this is an extremely rare occurrence, according to the NPR piece, but still seemingly a possibility.
        Pictures provided by the National Corvette Museum show the extent of the sinkhole.
        We were unable to find a source for a direct link between fracking and sinkholes, but it does seem probable considering what facking does to the ground. Cracking rocks with high pressure water could just as conceivable cause weakened pockets under the ground as easily as it can cause shifts in faults.
        Another possibility is that the midwest is having one of the hardest winters it has ever had, with more snow, freezing rain, and cold temperatures than typically are witnessed. Potholes are caused by water that expands when it freezes, and then contracts when it thaws. If the land underneath the museum was unusually cold, the moisture could have caused the same type of effect, creating the sinkhole.
        Eight Corvettes were damaged overall in the sinkhole incident.
        A full investigation is likely to occur, especially considering the insurance claim that will be made on these classic automobiles. We will definitely know more when that happens. Hopefully, some knowledge is gained from this incident, preventing it from happening again at the Corvette museum, or in other locations around the globe that are suffering from sinkhole issues.
    EUROLand
      BBC News - 'Give UK voters facts' - EU Commissioner Viviane Reding
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 17:44
        11 February 2014Last updated at 10:44 ET The EU Justice Commissioner, Viviane Reding, says it is important for British voters to see accurate "facts and figures on the table" about the EU before May's European elections.
        "Very often I see a completely distorted truth being presented," she told a public gathering in London, and urged more British debate about Europe.
        She was speaking to voters at a "citizens' dialogue" - part of an official EU information campaign.
        The debates are being held EU-wide.
        There is a general expectation that the Eurosceptic UK Independence Party (UKIP) will poll strongly in May, possibly coming top overall.
        Currently UKIP has nine of the UK's 73 seats in the European Parliament. The party sees the EU as a waste of taxpayers' money and wants Britain to pull out of the 28-member bloc.
        Ms Reding, a veteran conservative politician from Luxembourg, said there was a need for more information about the EU, not only in the UK but in other member states too.
        She said Brussels had even been blamed for Britain's floods. "I didn't know I'm so powerful that I can make the rain fall," she quipped.
        She said there was little awareness that "the most powerful parliament in Europe is the European Parliament - because it is co-decider with the member states on EU laws.
        "Seventy per cent of the laws in this country are co-decided with the European Parliament."
        A pro-EU lobby group, British Influence, later said Ms Reding's 70% figure was "simply not true".
        "A non-partisan, rigorously independent analysis of UK laws by the House of Commons Library found that between 8 and 14% of Britain's laws are made in the EU," said the group's director Peter Wilding.
        Plea for more scrutinySince the Lisbon Treaty was adopted in 2009, MEPs have become directly involved in nearly all EU policy areas. But only the Commission can initiate legislation.
        Tax, defence and foreign policy are largely outside the MEPs' remit, and they have little influence over national spending on public services such as health and education.
        Speaking at the same forum, UK Europe Minister David Lidington said increasing the European Parliament's powers was not the way to get more public engagement in EU affairs.
        He called for UK politicians and civil servants to do more detailed scrutiny of EU laws, including assessing the impact of certain EU measures retrospectively.
        Europe's "democratic deficit" was exacerbated by "talk about institutions, jargon", he said. Instead, the EU should focus on issues that really matter to voters, such as mobile roaming charges, budget flights, creating much-needed jobs, he said.
        Immigration tensionsA questioner in the debate pointed out that the big influx of East Europeans to the UK in recent years had created tensions over jobs. Opinion polls suggest that immigration is high on the list of UK voters' concerns.
        Ms Reding said statistics showed that the majority of EU migrants in the UK "came to work, they're net contributors". "A small minority creates real difficulties, and very often they are sitting in one spot," she added.
        She quoted new official UK figures which show that about 2.2 million Britons live in continental Europe and about 2.3 million citizens of other EU countries live in the UK.
        In the UK, 77% of the EU migrants work, while the comparable figure for Britons is 72% and for non-EU migrants it is 60%, Ms Reding said.
        EU migrants make up just 2.1% of welfare recipients in the UK, she added.
      Britons 'too ignorant' for EU referendum says Viviane Reding, VP of European Commission | Mail Online
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 17:44
        Viviane Reding, vice-president of European Commission, made commentsSpeaking in London, she said British people must know 'the facts' on EUShe boasted about how 70 per cent of UK's laws are now made in BrusselsHer comments were attacked by critics for 'dangerous' assumptionsBy Jason Groves
        PUBLISHED: 20:25 EST, 10 February 2014 | UPDATED: 05:31 EST, 11 February 2014
        2,365shares
        1877
        Viewcomments
        Britons are too ignorant about Europe to vote in a referendum on the subject, a top Brussels official claimed last night.
        Viviane Reding, vice-president of the European Commission, said the British debate about Europe was so 'distorted' that people could not make an 'informed decision' about whether or not to stay in the EU.
        Mrs Reding - who boasted that 70 per cent of the UK's laws are now made in Brussels - also rubbished David Cameron's bid to curb immigration from Europe, saying it was incompatible with membership of the EU.
        'Dangerous': Viviane Reding was criticised for making assumptions about what qualifies Britons to cast a vote on EU membership
        Speaking at an EU-sponsored 'Citizen's Dialogue' event in London, Mrs Reding accused British politicians and media of so misrepresenting the EU that it is now impossible to hold a fair referendum on Britain's membership of the EU.
        'You are on the verge of having (to take) maybe a national decision?' she said.'Do the people who are asked to vote know what they are going to vote about?'
        'The fact is that very often, I see a completely distorted truth being presented and then how do you want people to take an informed decision? They simply cannot.'
        Europe Minister David Lidington criticised her comments, saying that pro-EU points of view received a wide airing in the UK, including on the BBC.
        'Legitimate concerns': Mrs Reading was attacked for dismissing people's concerns, which could lead them to support anti-EU parties such as UKIP, led by Nigel Farage (pictured)
        He added: 'It is very dangerous to start making assumptions about what makes someone qualified to cast a vote.'
        Pawel Sidlicki, of the think tank Open Europe, said: 'Mrs Reding epitomises the EU elites' approach to dealing with the public -superficially embracing debate with citizens while dismissing any substantive criticism.
        'Having their legitimate concerns dismissed in such a high-handed manner only drives people towards populist, anti-EU parties. Sadly, EU politicians like Reding often do a better job at driving voters towards these parties than they do themselves.'
        But Mrs Reding said the British public needed to be made more aware of the 'facts' about Europe.
        She said the European Parliament was now 'the most powerful parliament in Europe', because of its role in signing off new EU laws proposed by the European Commission.
        'Seventy per cent of the laws in this country are co-decided by the European Parliament,' she said. 'So it's not neutral who you sent to the European Parliament.'
        Mrs Reding also suggested Britain would have to leave the EU if Mr Cameron pursues his bid to cap immigration from Europe.
        She said it was 'not possible' to curb free movement of people while retaining free movement of goods, services and capital.
        Share or comment on this article
    Drone Nation
      Europa investeert half miljard in droneprojecten - nrc.nl
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 13:52
        Foto AFP / Robert MacPherson
        BinnenlandSinds 2001 stak de EU zo'n 500 miljoen euro in onbemande vliegtuigen die illegale immigranten op zee moeten opsporen en allerlei taken boven land verrichten, blijkt uit een gezamenlijk onderzoek (pdf) dat de burgerrechtenorganisaties Statewatch en Transnational Institute vandaag presenteren.
        De Europese Commissie, het dagelijks bestuur van de EU, mag officieel niet investeren in militaire technologie. Dat wordt gezien als een nationale taak, van de lidstaten dus. Toch gingen er via tientallen onderzoeksprojecten honderden miljoenen euro's naar defensiebedrijven, schrijft NRC-redacteur Wilmer Heck vandaag in de krant:
        ''Het geld voor de eerste 'civiele' droneprojecten kwam vooral uit subsidies voor 'research and development'. De defensiebedrijven deden daarvoor onderzoek naar de ontwikkeling van drones voor transport, communicatie en toezicht op de naleving van milieuwetgeving. De defensie-industrie kreeg nog makkelijker toegang tot het geld nadat er er in 2007 een subsidiepot kwam voor 'veiligheid'. De meeste subsidie, meer dan 100 miljoen euro, is sindsdien naar de ontwikkeling van surveillancedrones gegaan die bootjes met illegale immigranten in de Middellandse Zee moeten opsporen. De verwachting is dat het agentschap voor grensbewaking, Frontex, die ergens in de komende jaren gaat gebruiken.''
        De burgerrechtenorganisaties hebben meer dan 90 door de EU gefinancierde drone-projecten gevonden. Burgers zijn daar niet van op de hoogte en er wordt onvoldoende toezicht op de besluitvorming gehouden, aldus de opstellers van het rapport.
        De meeste projecten richten zich op grensbewaking en surveillance, maar soms gaat het iets verder. Heck:
        ''Zo moet de Aeroceptor de politie in staat stellen ''niet-meewerkende voertuigen op afstand tot stoppen te brengen''. Daarvoor wordt het toestel uitgerust met luidsprekers, maar ook met apparatuur die de motor kan storen, netten die de wielen doen vastlopen en apparatuur om banden door te prikken. Andere droneprojecten richten zich op toezicht op landouwgronden en de naleving van milieuregels, zoals drones voor de opsporing van olielozingen op de Noordzee. Er werd ook een Some-ufo ontwikkeld om actieve vulkanen van dichtbij te bekijken, een Firerob om brand te bestrijden en Guardians die in zwermen door stedelijk gebied kunnen vliegen om giftige chemische stoffen te detecteren.''
        Op zijn vroegst in 2016 zal de EU drones toestaan in het luchtruim voor burgerlijk vliegverkeer. Tot die tijd is voor beroepsmatig gebruik van drones een ontheffing nodig.De ontwikkeling van drones was tot nu toe vooral een Amerikaanse bezigheid, maar de Europese Unie is aan een flinke inhaalrace bezig. Lees er vandaag in NRC.next (digitale editie | artikel) meer over.
        Lees meer over:dronesStatewatchTransnational Institute
    War on Men
      LeanIn.org and Getty Aim to Change Women’s Portrayal in Stock Photos
    'Hate' Crimes
      Amazon show
        Adam,
        Here is a clip from the Amazon original TV show “The After” by Chris Carter (creator of The X-Files). I will
        spare you the complete waste of time this show is and get to the point - In this clip, the “gay clown”
        character (played by Jamie Kennedy) confronts the “drunk Irish guy” with the line, “you know hate speech in
        itself is a crime.” The line was obviously inserted in post, but for what point? Further infringement on
        the 1st Amendment? This exchange makes no sense in context. Then again, the entire show is so badly written
        that the whole thing makes little sense and is filled with cliches, stereotypes, and distracting
        performances. Enjoy…
        FNW
    AFRIKA
      Archbishop condemns Christian attacks in C.Africa
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: The Daily Star >> Live News
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:24
        VATICAN CITY: A Central African Republic archbishop on Thursday condemned the attacks on Muslim civilians being carried out by Christian militia groups in his country, saying that violence was not coherent with faith.
        "You cannot say you are Christian and kill, burn, destroy your brother," Dieudonne Nzapalainga, the archbishop of Bangui, said on Vatican Radio.
        He said members of the anti-balaka militias "cannot believe that they are being coherent with their faith" and defined their attacks as a "struggle for power".
        "Imams, pastors and myself, we speak the same language... We ask that those who use, who manipulate young people, be held responsible on a national and an international level," the Catholic cleric said.
        Amnesty International on Wednesday denounced "ethnic cleansing" in the country, saying it had documented at least 200 killings of Muslim civilians by the Christian militia groups set up in the wake of the March 2013 coup by the mainly-Muslim Seleka rebellion.
        The impoverished Christian-majority country descended into chaos last March after the rebellion overthrew the government, sparking deadly violence that has uprooted a million people out of a population of 4.6 million.
        Atrocities, the fear of attacks and a lack of food have displaced a quarter of the country's population, while the United Nations and relief agencies estimate that at least two million people need humanitarian assistance.
      Emergency and Other Messages for U.S. Citizens | Embassy of the United States
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:15
        February 10, 2014The U.S. Embassy has received information regarding a specific terrorist threat to Kampala. The threat information indicates that a group of attackers is possibly in place and ready to strike targets inside Kampala in February or March. There are indications that the Ugandan National Museum is one of the potential targets. As potential targets can change, the Embassy cautions U.S. citizens to avoid this site and other crowded public places and/or events that are potential targets to terrorists.
        Should you find yourself near the site of an attack, attempt to leave the area immediately, away from the sounds of gunfire and explosions, if safe to do so. If unable to leave, go to the safest location you can find, stay hidden, and avoid attracting attention to yourself.
        We strongly recommend that U.S. citizens traveling to or residing in Uganda enroll in the Department of State's Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP) at www.Travel.State.Gov. STEP enrollment gives you the latest security updates, and makes it easier for the U.S. embassy or nearest U.S. consulate to contact you in an emergency. If you don't have internet access, enroll directly with the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate.
        You can stay in touch and get updates by checking the U.S. Embassy Kampala website. You can also get global updates at the U.S. Department of State's Bureau of Consular Affairs website, where you can find the current Worldwide Caution, Travel Warnings, Travel Alerts, and Country Specific Information. Follow us on Twitter and the Bureau of Consular Affairs page on Facebook as well, or you can download our free Smart Traveler App, available through iTunes and the Google play store, to have travel information at your fingertips. Current information on safety and security can also be obtained by calling 1-888-407-4747 toll-free in the United States or a regular toll line at-1-202-501-4444 for callers from other countries. These numbers are available from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time, Monday through Friday (except U.S. federal holidays).
        The U.S. Embassy is located at Plot 1577 Ggaba Road. Contact information for the U.S. Embassy in Kampala is: phone number +256 (0) (414) 306 001 or +256 (0) (414) 259 791, fax +256 (0) (414) 258 451, and email KampalaUSCitizen@state.gov.
    Vaccine$
      Pakistan: ''Jews Invented Vaccines To Weaken Muslims'''...
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Weasel Zippers
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 06:24
        Hence the reason Polio workers are constantly killed by Islamists in Pakistan.
        Via MEMRI:
        An article published by Mahnama Banat-e-Aisha, an Urdu-language magazine for Pakistani women, called the polio eradication campaign a Jewish conspiracy furthered by international organizations. The article was titled ''Polio: Disease, Or Dangerous Jewish Conspiracy?'' It alleged that several international organizations, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, the WHO, Rotary International, the World Bank, and UNICEF, which were providing massive funding for international polio eradication campaigns, are serving Zionist interests.
        Claiming that the eradication campaigns are a Jewish conspiracy, the article quoted reports from Urdu, Hindi, and English-language newspapers on various incidents in India of children contracting polio despite being vaccinated. It also referred to several such cases in Yemen and Indonesia, adding that Islamic scholars in Nigeria issued a fatwa against polio vaccination. The article also noted that Dr. Ibrahim Datti, a physician and president of Nigeria's Religious Law Supreme Council, accused the U.S. of including anti-fertility components in the polio vaccines.
        The following are excerpts from the article:
        ''The Jews, who dream of ruling the world, have invented different types of vaccines, drugs, and injections in an organized way to weaken Muslims in their beliefs on spiritual, practical, and moral levels, and make their bodies contaminated. The oral polio vaccine campaign is being run under a worldwide conspiracy '' except in the Zionist countries. Its total focus is now on South Asian countries '' India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. The U.S. has already marked this area as an extremely strategic region.''
        ''Have we ever thought why these greedy Jews and Christians are spending millions of dollars on this campaign?
        HT: EoZ
    NA-Tech
      Gmail tells senders when a recipient opens an email
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: bertb news feed
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:21
        The plugin was created by San Francisco-based firm StreakIt's aimed at marketing professionals, but can be used by any Gmail usersStreak tracks details each time an email is sent, and subsequently openedIt reveals the name and device details of the person who opened the emailThe system can also reveal the reader's name and location detailsStreak can even tell senders how many times a person has read an emailBy Victoria Woollaston
        PUBLISHED: 07:40 EST, 12 February 2014 | UPDATED: 07:42 EST, 12 February 2014
        472shares
        50
        Viewcomments
        The plugin, from San Francisco-based firm Streak, lets senders see when their emails have been opened and the reader's location, pictured
        If 'read receipts' on emails weren't annoying enough, a San Francisco-based firm has taken the art of tracking emails to the next level.
        The Streak plugin lets Gmail account holders monitor which of their sent items have been opened, who opened them, the exact time they were opened and how many times those emails have been viewed since.
        It also reveals details about the device used to read the email, and even the reader's approximate location.
        Streak is aimed at sales and marketing professionals, and the company calls it a 'Customer Relationship Manager (CRM) in your inbox.'
        However, the plugin can be installed by anyone using Gmail on Google Chrome and Safari.
        Aside from tracking emails, the plugin can also track stories and keywords, and keep track of bookings made as part of a wedding or other event.
        Once installed, users can set Streak's Email Tracking function to be enabled by default and each time they send an email, Streak will automatically track it.
        The feature can also be disabled at any time.
        When an email is read, a popup notification appears in the corner of the sender's inbox to tell them which email has been read, by whom, and on what device.
        An eye icon on the right-hand side of the email in the inbox will also turn green and hovering over it will reveal how many times the email has been read.
        Clicking this icon then opens a sidebar, and under 'more details', senders can see the exact time it was opened and the location plotted on an interactive Google map.
        At no point is the reader of the email informed that they have been tracked.
        When an email is read, a popup notification appears in the corner of the sender's inbox to tell them which email has been read, by whom, and on what device, pictured in this promotional image. An eye icon on the right-hand side of the email in the inbox will also turn green
        Once installed, users can set Streak's Email Tracking function to be enabled by default. Users know the email is being tracked when the eye icon is orange, highlighted. The feature can also be disabled. However, at no point is the reader of the email informed that they have been tracked
        During tests by the MailOnline, the service was not able to pinpoint a precise location, but it was able to identify the general area within London, pictured
        Streak doesn't explain exactly how it is able to track a reader's location and device details and has not yet responded to a request for comment.
        However, similar services work by attaching images to emails that are stored on an external server.
        When an email is opened, a request is made to the server to download the image and in the process of this request, the IP address is revealed. This address can then be used to locate the user.
        In tests carried out by MailOnline, the service was not able to pinpoint a precise location, but it was able to identify the general area within London.
        Meanwhile, tests carried out by PJ Vogt from OnTheMedia located the reader of his email to within about five minutes of their exact location in New York.
        Vogt advises that to avoid being tracked, users would need to stop images being automatically loaded in an email client. He also claims different clients offer different levels of protection.
        Streak only lets users track 200 emails a month for free before charging a premium for extra emails.
        HOW CAN EMAIL PROVIDERS TRACK THE DETAILS OF READERS?Streak doesn't explain exactly how it is able to track a reader's location and device details and has not yet responded to a request for comment.
        However, similar services work by attaching images to emails that are stored on an external server.
        When an email is opened, a request is made to the server to download the image and in the process of this request, the IP address is revealed. This address can then be used to locate the user.
        During tests by the MailOnline, the service was not able to pinpoint a precise location, but it was able to identify the general area within London.
        Share or comment on this article
      City Manager Ott names first Chief Innovation Officer | AustinTexas.gov - The Official Website of the City of Austin
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 17:25
        Kerry O'Connor to become the first Chief Innovation Officer
        City Manager Marc Ott announced today, Dec. 17, that he was appointing Kerry O'Connor to become the first Chief Innovation Officer to the City of Austin.
        O'Connor is an Innovation Catalyst with the Research & Design Center for the U.S. Department of State, Office of the Secretary where she established innovation methodologies such as open innovation, human-centered design and agile software development.
        O'Connor previously worked for the U.S. Department of State, Office of the Secretary as Program Manager where she managed technical and programmatic components of an employee idea generation program. She also participated in White House sponsored interagency working groups, incorporating innovation in government so that employees think differently, take risks and redesign approaches to solving problems. Other positions held include Management Analyst for the Office of Management Policy Rightsizing and Innovation and several overseas assignments for various U.S. Embassies.
        O'Connor holds a Master of Arts in International Affairs from George Washington University and a Bachelor of Arts in International Affairs from James Madison University.
        ''I expect the Innovation Office to work across City departments, as well as forge relationships between the City, university, community, businesses, and the technology community and to serve as a gateway for proactively engaging diverse constituencies in creating unique and creative solutions to civic challenges,'' said Austin City Manager Marc Ott.
        O'Connor will begin employment with the City on March 24, 2014. Her starting salary will be $130,000 annually. She was the top finalist from an extensive national search process that included interview panels and public engagement through a community forum.
    BTC
      Bitcoin exchanges suspend conversions as hacker attack intensifies.
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: bertb news feed
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 14:19
        Bitcoin's value has plunged as the attack has intensified. Photograph: Ted Soqui/ Ted Soqui/Corbis
        Three online exchanges for the bitcoin virtual currency have suspended conversions into state-backed currencies, saying they are under attack from hackers suspected of trying to create fraudulent transactions.
        The value of the currency has plunged as the attack has intensified, from $926 on 5 February to $530 on 12 February on MtGox, one of the affected exchanges. Bitstamp, based in Slovenia, and BTC-e, in Bulgaria, also halted withdrawals indefinitely on Wednesday as they came under attack.
        The moves follow crackdowns by China in December and Russia last week on use of the cybercurrency, which some authorities fear could be used for money laundering, funding terrorism or tax evasion.
        "This is a denial-of-service [DoS] attack," said Jinyoung Lee Englund, a spokeswoman for the Bitcoin Foundation, a trade organisation for exchanges. "Whoever is doing this is not stealing coins, but is succeeding in preventing some transactions from confirming. It's important to note that DoS attacks do not affect people's bitcoin wallets or funds."
        In a statement, MtGox said: "A bug in the bitcoin software makes it possible for someone to use the bitcoin network to alter transaction details to make it seem like a sending of bitcoins to a bitcoin wallet did not occur when in fact it did occur. Since the transaction appears as if it has not proceeded correctly, the bitcoins may be re-sent." Such "double spending" could destroy trust in the system.
      You're Stupid (Bitcon Believers) in [Market-Ticker]
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 04:19
        You're Stupid (Bitcon Believers)
        C'mon guys, take a gander at this and tell me what it means.
        You want to know why I know this "phenomenon" is a scam?
        The answer is found right there in that chart. Ignore MtGox as it's offline.
        Look at the others. What do you notice among those with recent quotes? (That is, everything down to CampBX. roughly.)
        One of the things I used to do is write code for people that did arbitrage between exchanges. These are risk-free profit opportunities, provided you can identify price disparities and execute the trades knowing they'll clear and are good.
        There's a reason that only a tiny fraction of a cent different exists in the price of a Euro or a Yen between New York and London, for example. You see, if there ever is a difference -- any difference -- someone comes in and buys in one place and sells in the other at the same time, pocketing that difference. It's free money, if you're fast enough, and it forces the two prices together.
        So why hasn't it happened here?
        There are thousands if not tens of thousands of institutions and individuals with enough resource in the form of computing and communications power to do it. There's only one reason not to pick up the free money -- you don't think you're going to get paid -- that is, the trade won't be any good either initially or you'll never get your cash back out.
        So long as this sort of spread exists -- nearly 1% between contemporary "exchanges" and even more as soon as you move a bit further off on time (and no, those others didn't move anywhere near that much on price during that time) there is no market and there is no actual exchange because nobody with real money believes they'll get paid.
        If they did they'd arb these exchanges instantly and the quotes would immediately converge to within a fraction of a cent or the exchange(s) on the wrong end (that aren't actually acting as exchanges!) would be driven to instant bankruptcy.
        There can be a legitimate difference in the price of Brent and Light Sweet crude, for example, because it costs money to deliver it from one place to another and there's a quality difference. Neither of these apply to Bitcoin.
        Get back to me about this being something other than an all-on scam when someone with some money believes that they'll get paid. You'll know when that happens because the spread between these so-called "exchanges" will instantly disappear in a puff of smoke as the arb guys come in and immediately force the different exchanges to converge.
      Bitcoin Hit By 'Massive' DDoS Attack As Tensions Rise - Forbes
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:03
        Log in with your social account:Or, you can log in or sign up using Forbes.New PostsMost PopularWhy Companies Lose TalentListsMost Promising CompaniesVideoOlympic Gold: In Numbers12 Stocks to BUY for 2014Help|Connect
        |Sign up|Log in
      Press Release-MtGox - Bitcoin Exchange
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 18:09
        Dear MtGox Customers and Bitcoiners,As you are aware, the MtGox team has been working hard to address an issue with the way that bitcoin withdrawals are processed. By "bitcoin withdrawal" we are referring to transactions from a MtGox bitcoin wallet to an external bitcoin address. Bitcoin transactions to any MtGox bitcoin address, and currency withdrawals (Yen, Euro, etc) are not affected by this issue.
        The problem we have identified is not limited to MtGox, and affects all transactions where Bitcoins are being sent to a third party. We believe that the changes required for addressing this issue will be positive over the long term for the whole community. As a result we took the necessary action of suspending bitcoin withdrawals until this technical issue has been resolved.
        Addressing Transaction MalleabilityMtGox has detected unusual activity on its Bitcoin wallets and performed investigations during the past weeks. This confirmed the presence of transactions which need to be examined more closely.
        Non-technical Explanation: A bug in the bitcoin software makes it possible for someone to use the Bitcoin network to alter transaction details to make it seem like a sending of bitcoins to a bitcoin wallet did not occur when in fact it did occur. Since the transaction appears as if it has not proceeded correctly, the bitcoins may be resent. MtGox is working with the Bitcoin core development team and others to mitigate this issue.
        Technical Explanation:Bitcoin transactions are subject to a design issue that has been largely ignored, while known to at least a part of the Bitcoin core developers and mentioned on the BitcoinTalk forums. This defect, known as "transaction malleability" makes it possible for a third party to alter the hash of any freshly issued transaction without invalidating the signature, hence resulting in a similar transaction under a different hash. Of course only one of the two transactions can be validated. However, if the party who altered the transaction is fast enough, for example with a direct connection to different mining pools, or has even a small amount of mining power, it can easily cause the transaction hash alteration to be committed to the blockchain.
        The bitcoin api "sendtoaddress" broadly used to send bitcoins to a given bitcoin address will return a transaction hash as a way to track the transaction's insertion in the blockchain.Most wallet and exchange services will keep a record of this said hash in order to be able to respond to users should they inquire about their transaction. It is likely that these services will assume the transaction was not sent if it doesn't appear in the blockchain with the original hash and have currently no means to recognize the alternative transactions as theirs in an efficient way.
        This means that an individual could request bitcoins from an exchange or wallet service, alter the resulting transaction's hash before inclusion in the blockchain, then contact the issuing service while claiming the transaction did not proceed. If the alteration fails, the user can simply send the bitcoins back and try again until successful.
        We believe this can be addressed by using a different hash for transaction tracking purposes. While the network will continue to use the current hash for the purpose of inclusion in each block's Merkle Tree, the new hash's purpose will be to track a given transaction and can be computed and indexed by hashing the exact signed string via SHA256 (in the same way transactions are currently hashed).
        This new transaction hash will allow signing parties to keep track of any transaction they have signed and can easily be computed, even for past transactions.
        We have discussed this solution with the Bitcoin core developers and will allow Bitcoin withdrawals again once it has been approved and standardized.
        In the meantime, exchanges and wallet services - and any service sending coins directly to third parties - should be extremely careful with anyone claiming their transaction did not go through.
        Note that this will also affect any other crypto-currency using the same transaction scheme as Bitcoin.
        ConclusionTo put things in perspective, it's important to remember that Bitcoin is a very new technology and still very much in its early stages. What MtGox and the Bitcoin community have experienced in the past year has been an incredible and exciting challenge, and there is still much to do to further improve.
        MtGox will resume bitcoin withdrawals to outside wallets once the issue outlined above has been properly addressed in a manner that will best serve our customers.
        More information on the status of this issue will be released as soon as possible.
        We thank you for taking the time to read this, and especially for your patience.
        Best Regards,MtGox Team
    Out There
      Strange 'S'-shaped radar phenomenon appears off WA coast - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:53
        Updated February 13, 2014 11:05:37
        A strange S-shaped formation which appeared on weather bureau radar off the West Australian coast was not caused by cloud, the bureau says.
        The shape was spotted on the weather bureau's radar map on Wednesday about 30 kilometres west of Rottnest.
        After checking the satellite, the bureau's Neil Bennett ruled out the phenomenon being caused by cloud.
        "There's no cloud, there's nothing to produce a rain echo, ... which we do see a lot, but not this particular shape," he said.
        "They don't take on S shapes and things like that.
        "The radar that we use are there for the detection of precipitation, it's basically just a beam going out and hitting the rain droplets or ice particles from hail.
        "Sometimes the beam itself rather than going straight it gets bent back to earth and you start to pick up reflections from the ocean, rather than rain droplets."
        The ABC has asked the Department of Defence whether there are military operations off the coast which may interfere with radar activity.
        The department is yet to comment.
        The WA Weather Group has seized on the photo and retweeted it to their followers.
        "Nice that our pet #RottNessMonster has avoided the shark baits. Her name is Susan & she likes to eat plankton," the group tweeted.
        "And I, for one, welcome our new giant sea serpent overlords," Perth Sunrise Prints tweeted.
        Topics:weather, rottnest-island-6161
        First posted February 12, 2014 18:16:23
      America Forgot How to Talk to Its Zombie Spaceship - NationalJournal.com
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 19:00
        A long-lost, pioneering spaceship'--still functional thanks only to chance and human error'--is coming home for the first time in three decades. It wants to explore new worlds. But we've forgotten how to talk to it.
        ISEE-3'--short for International Sun-Earth Explorer'--was launched in 1978, executing a pair of scientific missions and a groundbreaking in-space maneuver that's still used to this day. "It's definitely a special spacecraft in the history of planetary exploration," the Planetary Society's Emily Lakdawalla said. The satellite comes in at just over 850 pounds, but its contributions to science have been significant.
        As it nears Earth'--it will arrive in August'--we'll have our best opportunity in 31 years to redirect it on another mission. But that won't happen. The spacecraft was long ago given up for dead, and as a result, the '70s-era technology we used to talk to it was scrapped. The Deep Space Network lost the proper transmitters in 1999.
        That should have been the end of the story. When we stopped talking to the ISEE-3, it was supposed to stop talking to us. But in 2008, someone remembered they'd neglected to tell the ship to turn off its transmitters. A quick signal search revealed the craft was still in its precise orbit with 12 of 13 scientific instruments still operational.
        "Ordinarily when NASA is done with a mission, they send a command to turn off the transmitter," Lakdawalla said. "This was kind of a mistake, the fact that this transmitter is still operating." More impressive is the fact that its 30-plus-year-old instruments still seem to be in working order. "As far as we know, this thing is working extremely well given its age'--and it has a lot of useful scientific instruments." The problem is that we can't tell ISEE-3 to give us a complete picture of its health "because we can't currently speak its language."
        If we could talk to ISEE-3, we could use its Earth approach this summer as a jumping-off point to send it comet-hunting (it became the first spacecraft to fly past a comet in 1985). It's equipped to measure plasmas, energetic particles, waves, and fields.
        Some want to crack the history books and figure out how to rebuild the transmitter necessary to once again talk to our lonely spaceship. Why waste a resource that we've already put in space? But NASA says that would prove too expensive. "They thought it would [cost] so much that it wasn't worth spending the staff time to get the estimate," Lakdawalla said. "NASA has limited resources, and they have to focus on the ones that are producing the best science right now."
        So ISEE-3's contributions will be limited to its past. They're not insignificant.
        The ship's most notable breakthrough was using a Lagrangian point to change its trajectory, a move that had never been done before. What's a Lagrangian point? Lakdawalla compares it to the midpoint of a dumbbell, a spot in which gravitational pull is nearly balanced in both directions. Five such locations exist in the Earth and sun's orbital configuration, allowing spacecraft to "park" and conserve energy. ISEE-3 was the first to use L1, orbiting continuously between Earth and the sun to monitor solar wind.
        In 1982, when ISEE-3 was reassigned to comet-hunting duty, it was able to use L1 to easily reposition itself into orbit around the sun. "If you navigate a spacecraft to one of those [Lagrangian] points, you get an opportunity to change the spacecraft's path a great deal with very little energy," Lakdawalla said. "This particular technique was pioneered by ISEE-3."
        It studied Comet Giacobini-Zinner's plasma tail in 1985, then joined the "Comet Halley Armada" in 1986 when earthbound scientists became fixated on the approaching comet. It's remained in heliocentric orbit since then, gradually getting closer to Earth as it maintains a slightly faster orbit. It's completed 31 orbits of the sun during the same time Earth has completed 30.
        Come August, ISEE-3 will finally near its terrestrial origins again, causing its orbit to change'--but we won't be able to tell it where to go next.
    2TTH
      AP News : Former Dutch health minister Els Borst found dead
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 12:24
        TOBY STERLINGPublished: YesterdayIn this photo taken Saturday, Feb. 8, 2014, Els Borst, front right, applauds after a speech from Alexander Pechtold, front left, during a D66 party congress in Amsterdam. Els Borst, a former health minister who drafted the Netherlands' 2002 law permitting euthanasia, has been found dead in her garage on Monday night, police said Tuesday, Feb. 11, 2014. She was 81. Utrecht police spokesman Thomas Aling told state broadcaster NOS that police had not ruled out a natural cause of death, an accident or a crime, but had no reason to suspect a crime. She is survived by three children. (AP Photo/Jiri Buller)AMSTERDAM (AP) - Dutch police say the country's former health minister - a woman who drafted the nation's landmark 2002 law permitting euthanasia - has been found dead in her garage. They have ruled out natural causes.
        In a statement, Utrecht police said Tuesday that Els Borst, 81, was found by a friend early Monday evening.
        After an inquest was inconclusive, police sent her body for a full autopsy to determine the cause of death. Police say they expect that she died either as the result of "an accident or possibly a crime."
        Her house in Bilthoven, a suburb of Utrecht, was cordoned off Tuesday and investigators could be seen searching inside it.
        Borst was seen in good spirits as recently as Saturday, at a function for her centrist D66 political party.
        She was among the foremost women in Dutch politics in recent decades, a medical academic who served as health minister from 1994 to 2002. One of the first Dutchwomen to reach high political office, she held the title of "minister of state" - one of a handful given diplomatic passports who are allowed to represent the country internationally.
        The Netherland's euthanasia law, which codified longstanding practice, allows euthanasia when a terminally ill person requests it, is suffering unbearably and has no chance of recovery. Two doctors must agree.
        Borst defended the policy at home and abroad as humane, despite protests and fierce criticism from religious groups.
        "I hope that other governments will find the courage to follow suit," she said in 2001 after the lower house of Parliament approved the law.
        In the past decade, the majority of Dutch voters who support euthanasia has grown.
        Prime Minister Mark Rutte praised Borst on Tuesday as "a wise professional, with clear and considered standpoints, who stood her ground."
        "She won people over with her openness, mildness and honesty," he said.
        Last year, while trying to prevent a measles epidemic in the Dutch Calvinist bible belt, she wrote an opinion piece in newspaper Algemeen Dagblad asking pastors and churchgoers to get vaccinated.
        "If everything is God's will, then so is the invention of the vaccine, just like the seatbelt," she said.
        In an interview with the NRC newspaper in 2001, Borst acknowledged that she was not opposed in principle to a suicide pill for "very aged people who are finished with life."
        "(But) we have to have a thorough societal discussion of this subject," she told the paper.
        She is survived by three children.
    Movie PR
      Go see Momuments Men right now!!! More Nazi-looted art discovered
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: AL JAZEERA ENGLISH (AJE)
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 17:43
        The art hoard of an elderly German recluse suspected to contain Nazi-looted paintings and drawings is bigger thanfirst thought.
        More than 60 additional works have been discovered in the Austrian home of Cornelius Gurlitt, among them works by masters Picasso, Renoir and Monet, said his spokesman Stephan Holzinger on Tuesday.
        "At the request of Cornelius Gurlitt, the works are being examined by experts on whether they include possibly stolen art. A preliminary assessment based on an initial screening did not substantiate such a suspicion," he added.
        The Gurlitt case first made headlines late last year when it emerged that investigators had found 1,400 artworks in his Munich flat, including long-lost works by masters also including Matisse and Chagall.
        The paintings, drawings and sculptures have a total estimated value of 1 billion euros, according to Reuters news agency.
        Nazi connections
        Gurlitt, 81, is the son of Nazi-era art dealer Hildebrand Gurlitt, who acquired the paintings in the 1930s and 1940s and had been tasked by the Nazis with selling stolen works and art that the Hitler regime deemed "degenerate".
        Germany earned criticism for dragging its feet on the case. Although the works were discovered in early 2012, the spectacular find only became known to the public late last year through a news magazine report.
        Gurlitt's spokesman said in a statement that "more works were located in Cornelius Gurlitt's house in Salzburg". "They are more than 60 works, including by Monet, Renoir and Picasso," the statement said, according to AP news agency.
        Berlin said last month that it would boost funding for efforts to return Nazi-looted art to their rightful owners and may invite Jewish representatives to join a mediation body.
        279
      Topless photos and video of Lebanon Olympic skier Jacky Chamoun lead to investigation
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:51
        Lebanon's Sports and Youth Minister has ordered an investigation into revealing photographs and a video in which the country's Olympic skier is seen topless.
        Faisal Karameh's order was carried by Lebanon's National News Agency on Tuesday, a day after a video appeared on the Internet showing Jacky Chamoun and another female Lebanese skier topless and posing for a photographer on the slopes of Lebanon's mountain resort of Faraya.
        Chamoun is one of two athletes competing for the Arab country in Sochi.
        The 22-year-old skier acknowledged on her Facebook page that she posed for a photographer three years ago. She said the video and photos circulating were taken at a photo shoot for an Austria ski calendar.
        Copyright 2014 Scripps Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
      More Nazi loot found at second home of German recluse
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: euronews
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:15
        A further 60 art works have been found hidden away by an elderly German recluse '' this time at his Austrian home in Salzburg
        Cornelius Gurlitt's father dealt in art some of which had probably been confiscated by the Nazis.
        Over 1400 works which include Picassos and Monets have already been found at Gurlitt's home in Munich.
        The original haul has been valued at over 1 billion euros. The second treasure trove has yet to be assessed.
    Chemtrails
      BREAKING: Is the Government Spraying the Entire City of Portland with Crystaline DHMO? | The Portland Intelligencer
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:06
        Home 'º Local|Satire|Science 'º BREAKING: Is the Government Spraying the Entire City of Portland with Crystaline DHMO?By Jess E. Hadden - Published: 02/06/2014 - Section: Local, Satire, SciencePORTLAND, OR '-- It's like a scene from some post-apocalyptic atomic nightmare, from some dystopian science fiction film. But this is no cautionary tale of potentially-avoidable future foibles '-- this is present-day reality, unfolding right this very afternoon, right here in Portland, OR. And it's coming down on us just days after people in southern states were themselves sprayeden masse from the sky, with a similar [though plasticine] compound.
        Posted today from Portland, OR. What is this stuff??
        Massive quantities of pure, frozen crystaline DHMO are literally raining down from the heavens above Portland. So much crystal DHMO is being sprayed onto the northwestern city that the sky has reportedly been blotted out '-- the sun and clouds rendered invisible by the relentless white spray, presumably being projected from unseen drone aircraft at a wifi-enabled altitude.
        A blanketing of crystal DHMO is already beginning to accumulate on the ground, literally coating the streets and roadways at the time of this article's publication. Even as city government puppets and corporate weather channel news-actors proclaim soothing nothings about the normalcy of these events, they nevertheless advise the consumers of Portland to remain indoors and to avoid all travel on obstructed streets '-- as the unknown substance continues to accumulate, to a projected 5 inches in depth. Surely, normal advice for an every-day occurrence in the City of Roses?
        Anonymous sources within a small research division of the United States Environmental Assessment Center have analyzed a sample of the crystal DHMO, obtained by The Portland Intelligencer. The whistle-blowers are responsible for the original identification of the substance as crystal DHMO, and they report that the chemical has the following alarming characteristics:
        Can immobilize vehicles, render roadways to be dangerous, and cause drivers to forget how to operate their own motor vehicles. [1]Prolonged exposure to solid or crystal DHMO can cause severe tissue damage. [2]Lethal when brought to room temperature and inhaled, even in small quantities. [3]Is likely to contribute to erosion of soil from our Cascadian ecosystem. [4]Reacts bizarrely to many metals, often in a corrosive or oxidizing manner. [5]Can be used by terrorists to attack and short-circuit electrical power grids. [6]Was deliberately fed, in liquid form, to dogs bred for fighting by Michael Vick. [7]Is identified as the primary chemical in rainfall in the hellish Shanghai factory wastelands of China. [8]Is directly associated with the formation of killer tsunamis, such as the one that struck the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear facility. [9]Is virtually undetectable and untraceable in dehydrated (weaponized) form. [10]Skeptical CubefarmIs this blatant geoengineering of the Pacific northwest just a part of U.N. Agenda 21? Is this the first step in terraforming our planet to suit the needs of a colonizing alien life force that has taken control of the United States government? Shockingly, we can't think of any evidence to disprove this theory.
        Corporate-owned mainstream science dismisses the reality of crystal DHMO spraying '-- by silencing the victims, with derision and deflection. Rather than investigating the government drones that are spraying us, they instead provide garbage 'data' on the environmental impact of 'airplane contrails.' Rather than listening to the truth about shapeshifting reptilian overlords controlling the world's governments to force them to deliberately spray us with poison, they instead listen to the nostalgic musings of sky-watchers who ramble on about childhood memories of a horizon where planes didn't poop-out billowing clouds. And so we, as free-thinking lifestyle alternativists, must do all that we can to drown out a national conversation about the increasingly noticeable climate-altering effects of fossil fuel pollution the most effective way that we can '-- by saturating the national conversation with wild un-checked speculation on what the bad people might be 'doing' to us.
        UPDATE 2014-02-08: PORTLANDER CONFIRMS CRYSTAL DHMO SPRAY 'DOES NOT MELT'
        WARNING: Graphic video depiction.
        Local Portlandian Kip Silverman verifies, in two confirmed clinical-style trials, that the crystaline DHMO substance currently being sprayed on the city simply does not melt.
        Like this post? Then give us money.$1 TipTAKE A STAND.Give us money.Do it. Now.
        Like this:LikeLoading...
        Tags: Al Chemie, Satire Viral 'Fake Snow' Videos Reveal that Majority of Americans Have Never Smoked Pot from a Snowball - The First Station: Dorner Mails the Coin >>
      CHEMTRAILS '' Geo-Engineering fiends in Amerika pour crystalline DHMO chemical over Portland
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: Moral Volcano Daily Press
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 12:03
        CAUTION: Moral Volcano is unsafe for children and pregnant women. Adults may experience discomfort when reading Moral Volcano. Symptomatic treatment is recommended. Moral Volcano has nothing to do with morals or volcanoes.
        BEWARE: All assertions and statements on this site are in the nature of bets. These bets may be proven to be way off the mark. Do your own research and reach appropriate conclusions. Consult experts in the relevant field to be sure. Moral Volcano (represented by V. Subhash) and his partners, agents, assassins and others accept no responsibility whatsoever for anything on this web log or other content linked by this blog.
    VIDEO
      VIDEO-BBC Democracy Live - Grants for flood victims announced
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 03:40
        Businesses and homes affected by floods will be eligible for grants of up to £5,000 to protect their properties as they repair the damage caused, David Cameron has announced.
        The prime minister repeated his pledge that "money is no object" in the relief effort and told MPs there would be a £10m fund to help farmers with waterlogged land.
        "I can also announce today that we will be deferring the tax payments that businesses have to pay and all of the businesses that have been affected by floods will get 100% business rate relief," he told MPs on 12 February 2014.
        Labour leader Ed Miliband welcomed the measures but challenged the prime minister over whether he would reverse 550 proposed redundancies at the Environment Agency.
        "Given yesterday's promise to make sure we have a resilient country for the future and spend whatever it takes is he committing now to reconsider these redundancies and to reconsider the amount of money we invest in flood defences?" he asked.
        Mr Cameron said the government was spending £2.4bn on flood defences between 2010 and 2014 which he said compared to £2.2bn in the previous four-year period.
        He told the Commons the Environment Agency and all local authorities will have to look again at their flood preparations once the crisis is over.
        But Mr Miliband said there were "real doubts" about making people who deal with flood defences redundant and urged him once again to reconsider.
        Mr Cameron accused him of trying to divide the House "when we should be coming together for the nation".
      VIDEO-Gay Mountain | Channel 4 - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 02:39
      VIDEO-Obama Officials Weigh Drone Attack on US Suspect - ABC News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 02:33
        ABC Entertainment News|ABC Business NewsCopyThe case of an American citizen and suspected member of al-Qaida who is allegedly planning attacks on U.S. targets overseas underscores the complexities of President Barack Obama's new stricter targeting guidelines for the use of deadly drones.
        The CIA drones watching him cannot strike because he's a U.S. citizen. The Pentagon drones that could are barred from the country where he's hiding, and the Justice Department has not yet finished building a case against him.
        Four U.S. officials said the American suspected terrorist is in a country that refuses U.S. military action on its soil and that has proved unable to go after him. And Obama's new policy says American suspected terrorists overseas can only be killed by the military, not the CIA, creating a policy conundrum for the White House.
        Two of the officials described the man as an al-Qaida facilitator who has been directly responsible for deadly attacks against U.S. citizens overseas and who continues to plan attacks against them that would use improvised explosive devices.
        The officials said the suspected terrorist is well-guarded and in a fairly remote location, so any unilateral attempt by U.S. troops to capture him would be risky and even more politically explosive than a U.S. missile strike.
        White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday he would not comment on specific operations and pointed to Obama's comments in the major counterterrorism speech last May about drone policy.
        "When a U.S. citizen goes abroad to wage war against America and is actively plotting to kill U.S. citizens, and when neither the United States, nor our partners are in a position to capture him before he carries out a plot, his citizenship should no more serve as a shield than a sniper shooting down on an innocent crowd should be protected from a SWAT team," Carney said, quoting from Obama's speech last year.
        Under new guidelines Obama addressed in the speech made to calm anger overseas at the extent of the U.S. drone campaign, lethal force must only be used "to prevent or stop attacks against U.S. persons, and even then, only when capture is not feasible and no other reasonable alternatives exist to address the threat effectively." The target must also pose "a continuing, imminent threat to U.S. persons" '-- the legal definition of catching someone in the act of plotting a lethal attack.
        The Associated Press has agreed to the government's request to withhold the name of the country where the suspected terrorist is believed to be because officials said publishing it could interrupt ongoing counterterror operations.
        The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the classified drone targeting program publicly.
        House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Mich., complained last week that a number of terrorist suspects were all but out of reach under the administration's new rules that limit drone strikes based on the target's nationality or location. Two of the U.S. officials said the Justice Department review of the American suspected terrorist started last fall.
        The senior administration official confirmed that the Justice Department was working to build a case against the suspected terrorist. The official said, however, the legal procedure being followed is the same as when the U.S. killed militant cleric and former Virginia resident Anwar al-Awlaki by drone in Yemen in 2011, long before the new targeted killing policy took effect.
      VIDEO-Russia's Largest Gay Nightclub Strives to Be a Haven Despite Horrific Attacks - ABC News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Thu, 13 Feb 2014 00:08
        ABC Entertainment News|ABC Business NewsCopyAs Russia enjoys the spotlight that shines from the multibillion-dollar splendor of the Sochi Winter Olympics, over in Moscow, dismay runs through Central Station, Russia's largest gay nightclub.
        With its bullet-sprayed doors and protective razor-wire fencing, Central Station management says it has been subjected to shootings, water and gas attacks, and vandalism. Considered by many patrons as "the cultural center" for gays in Russia, the lively venue is known for its colorful, irreverent drag shows and modern house music. But the staff says a recent spate of homophobic attacks has terrified the gay community there.
        Watch ABC News' Terry Moran's special report on "Nightline" tonight at 12:35 a.m. ET
        They say it's all part of an intensifying anti-gay sentiment in Russia, a country that's never been widely accepting of homosexuality, but recently has been inflamed by a controversial anti-gay propaganda law.
        The law, signed by President Putin last June, bans the "propaganda of non-traditional relationships" to minors, and has received international condemnation. It claims to protect children from information about homosexuality, but human rights activists say it's really a crackdown on gay rights, a form of institutionalized homophobia meant to suppress gay-rights activists from holding public events and gay people from living their lives openly.
        "More than 90 percent of people support this law," said Vitaly Milonov, a St. Petersburg lawmaker who helped craft the law. "That means that the other 10 percent, it's whatever, maybe one tiny part is against this legislation, so it's not a problem. "
        Citizens who have protested the law before and after its passage have been violently accosted and attacked by anti-gay activists who claim to favor "traditional" Russian values. People unfurling rainbow flags and other pro-gay displays have been aggressively detained. The law arguably has emboldened a new wave of discrimination and violence, including vigilante groups that lure gay teens online, then torture and humiliate them.
        "Nightline" spoke to several members of the gay community in Moscow and Central Station patrons. Their names have been changed to protect their identities.
        "They just have a legal right to hate us," said 20-year-old "Alexei." "Now they think that gay people can harm children."
        "Alexei" says he is "100 percent gay," but acts straight in public to survive.
        "I'm trying to be one of the crowd, black and white," he said. "I'm trying to be invisible."
        Alexei and many of his friends find refuge at Central Station, one of the few places they say they can be open about their identities.
        "For gay society, this club is very important," said club manager Andrew Lishchinsky. "It's a symbol of freedom. It's a symbol that the rights of gays are not discriminated."
        Alexei works at the club as a drag queen. With make-up and costumes, he literally transforms. And yet, he said, it makes him feel more "himself."
        "This mask makes me be real," he said, applying his make-up. "Strange, but it always works that way. On the outside world, I wear [the] mask of straight guy, to be one of them, to hide."
        ABC News
        "Vicky Jam" entertaining the crowd in between performances.
        Here, Alexei and his drag queen friends step out of the shadows and into the spotlight, onto a bright stage where they are applauded and respected. In a society where gays are hated and reviled, Alexei said, drag is empowering.
        "It's the only place we can do everything we want," Alexei said. "We dress like we want, we do everything we want, we kiss everybody we want. We are free here."
        But, Lishchinsky said, things have changed for the worse and he is worried about the survival of the club.
        "I cannot say that old times, the situation was very good," he said, "but not very bad as now."
      VIDEO-Jeh Johnson: Al Qaeda 'On the Path to Defeat,' Clapper: 'No it is Morphing and Franchising Itself' | MRCTV
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 22:14
        MRC TV is an online platform for people to share and view videos, articles and opinions on topics that are important to them '-- from news to political issues and rip-roaring humor.
        MRC TV is brought to you by the Media Research Center, a 501(c) 3 nonprofit research and education organization. The MRC is located at: 1900 Campus Commons Drive, Reston, VA 20194. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.
        Copyright (C) 2014, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.
      VIDEO- Obama Signs Executive Order Raising The Minimum Wage To $10.10 An Hour For Federal Employees - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 21:55
      VIDEO- Turkish Police Use Water Cannon & Tear Gas To Disperse People Protesting New Internet Censorship Law - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 21:42
      VIDEO-"What We Have Here Is A Group Bureaucrats Meeting To Decide Who Should Live And Who Should Die!" - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:52
      VIDEO- General Marks Says Drone Strike Inside The U.S. Might Have Been Able To Stop Timothy McVeigh! - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:48
      VIDEO-"Obama Admin Trying To Decide If The Can Legally Execute An American Citizen Without A Trial" - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:33
      VIDEO- Jeremy Scahill: The NSA's Secret Role In The U.S. ASSASSINATION PROGRAM - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:29
      VIDEO- WILL THERE BE A WORLDWIDE BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL? - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:21
      VIDEO- CNN:OBAMA SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL AMERICANS KILLED BY DRONE STRIKE - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:04
      VIDEO-North And South Korea Hold High Level Talks - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 20:00
      VIDEO-C-SPAN | Global National Security Threats
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 19:13
        February 11, 2014National Intelligence Director James Clapper and Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lieutenant'‚Michael Flynn testified about current and future threats to national security.
        Javascript must be enabled in order to access C-SPAN videos.
        *The transcript for this program was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.
        Related VideoApril 18, 2013Global Threats to National SecurityJames Clapper and Lieutenant General Michael T. Flynn testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on current and future threats to the'...
        February 4, 2014Global Threats to the U.S.Intelligence officials testified on global threats to the U.S. Topics included the operation of al-Qaida training camps in Syria and Iraq, the impact of'...
        January 29, 2014Global Security ThreatsDirectors from four intelligence agencies gave their annual assessment of global threats to the United States.'‚James Clapper in his testimony'...
        July 26, 2013National Intelligence University Commencement AddressJames Clapper, Director of National Intelligence, deliverd a commencement address at the National Intelligence University.*In his remarks he'...
        Clips from This Video
      VIDEO- CNN: DID THE PENTAGON DESTROY OSAMA BIN LADEN DEATH PHOTOS? - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 18:46
      VIDEO- Fox News House report on Benghazi faults WH for security lapses - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:37
      VIDEO- Apocalypse, Man: World's End According to Michael C. Ruppert (Part 4) - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:29
      VIDEO-Wall Street Watchdog Sues Dept. of Justice - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:14
      Stronger Pacific winds explain global warming hiatus: study - Yahoo News
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:05
        HomeMailNewsSportsFinanceWeatherGamesGroupsAnswersScreenFlickrMobileMoreCelebrityShineMoviesMusicTVHealthShoppingTravelAutosHomesYahoo NewsSearch NewsSearch WebSign InMailHelpAccount InfoHelpSuggestionsYahoo
      VIDEO- Facebook Is A Gateway Drug. No Agenda Show #590. 02.09.2014. - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 16:00
      VIDEO: The app which helps drivers fix cars
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: BBC News - Home
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:28
        Augmented reality - technology which takes virtual objects and layers them on top of live camera images - is being used by the car industry to help design the next generation of cars.
        Click's Dan Simmons visits Audi's research headquarters in Germany to find out how the company is using the technology and looks at some of the augmented reality apps which could help drivers fix problems without needing to consult a manual.
        Watch more clips on the Click website. If you are in the UK you can watch the whole programme on BBC iPlayer.
      VIDEO: Clooney tackles stolen Nazi art
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: BBC News - Home
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:26
        During World War Two a small group of men managed to get behind enemy lines and retrieve artwork which had been stolen by the Nazis.
        George Clooney was so inspired by the story that he decided to make a film about it.
        He spoke to the BBC's Will Gompertz about writing, producing, directing and starring in The Monuments Men - and how he copes with bad reviews.
      VIDEO: UN concern for people in Homs
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Source: BBC News - Home
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 14:23
        The United Nations says it is "deeply concerned" about the fate of hundreds of men and boys who have been detained by the Syrian authorities after trying to escape from the besieged city of Homs.
        A temporary ceasefire has enabled some to leave the city but there is concern about what will happen when the current humanitarian operation ends.
        More than 1,000 civilians, mostly women, children and the elderly have been evacuated since an agreement was reached last week.
        Before the humanitarian operation began, the UN estimated there were more than 2,500 people trapped in Homs.
        Around 190 other men were still being questioned.
        Lyse Doucet reports.
      VIDEO- Schumer Advertises for Subway - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:54
      VIDEO-Arirang News :: U.S. disappointed over North Korea's withdrawal of invitation for envoy
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:01
        The United States has expressed its deep regret over North Korea's decision to withdraw its invitation to U.S. human rights envoy Robert King to discuss the release of Korean-American Kenneth Bae.
        "We are deeply disappointed by the DPRK decision for a second time to rescind its invitation for Ambassador King to travel to Pyongyang to discuss Kenneth Bae's release."
        While the reason for the withdrawal is not yet clear, a State Department official said it could be related to the upcoming joint military drill between South Korea and the U.S.The White House drew a clear line between the two issues.
        "We remind the DPRK that the U.S.-ROK military exercises are transparent, regularly scheduled, and defense-oriented. These exercises are in no way linked to Mr. Bae's case, and we believe they know that."
        The White House says it will continue to push North Korea to agree to let King visit.But hopes for Bae's quick release haven't completely faded.On Monday, North Korea received a delegation led by former U.S. Ambassador to South Korea, Donald Gregg, who experts believe will aim to win Bae his freedom.Without offering details on his unannounced visit to Pyongyang, Gregg merely stated he was glad to be back.
        "I'm very happy to be back in Pyongyang, my first time in about eight years. So we're looking forward to having talks and happy to see you. Thank-you."
        Gregg served as Washington's envoy to Seoul from 1989 to 1993 and has since called for greater engagement with North Korea, and his surprise visit is raising hopes for Bae's swift release.Bae was arrested by North Korean authorities after entering the country in November 2012 and was later sentenced to 15 years of hard labor for alleged crimes against the state.Yoo Li-an, Arirang News.
        Reporter : Lian.yoo@arirang.co.kr
      Video- Alberto Gonzales Attempts To Justify The Targeted Assassination Of American Citizens With NO Trial - YouTube
        Link to Article
        Archived Version
        Wed, 12 Feb 2014 19:43
  Clips and Stuff
    AFRIKA
      BBC-US CT in Djabouti.mp3
    DPRK
      DPRK Ski Resort.mp3
      N+S Korea Unification.mp3
    F-Russia
      ABC drag queens.mp3
    Greenwald-Shitizen-Cappture
      1-Brolf confirms NSA.mp3
      10-Brolf not CIA-2-reaffirm.mp3
      2-Schahill droning.mp3
      3-Brolf-kill-kill.mp3
      4-David Martin CBS.mp3
      5-Brolf-Starr-Capture.mp3
      8-Alberto Gonzales.mp3
      9-Burnett-Spider Marks.mp3
    Israel
      Israeli boycott in Munich.mp3
      JF Kerry - Robert Wexler.mp3
    JCD Clips
      african hipsters.mp3
      Burgers in France.mp3
      comparison clip scahill.mp3
      French sides issue.mp3
      Greenwald USA.mp3
      kill a thrid american.mp3
      mipsters.mp3
      obama holland 2.mp3
      rogers vs greenwald.mp3
      scahill track whack.mp3
      syria barrel bomb.mp3
      US in Africa with French.mp3
      US with French Part 2.mp3
      yellen really.mp3
    Ministry of Truth
      pentagon UBL photos.mp3
    NA-591-Art-BIG.jpg
    NA-591-Art-SM.jpg
    Obama Nation
      Obama-Costco.mp3
    Shut Up Slave!
      Amazon-hate crime.mp3
    SnowJob
      AQ morphing.mp3
      Clapper-115 thousand.mp3
      Jeh Johnson DHS-AQ.mp3
    Turkey
      Turkey protests internet.mp3