Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 19:27

(Newser) '' As investigators try to piece together the lead-up to Friday's shooting rampage at Los Angeles International Airport, the alleged shooter is still too injured to talk. Paul Ciancia, 23, was shot in the leg and took a bullet in the mouth that split his tongue and knocked out his teeth, reports the New York Daily News. Officials say he is listed in fair condition and will require surgery and extensive physical therapy. The unemployed motorcycle mechanic has been charged with first-degree murder in the death of TSA agent Gerardo Hernandez and could face the death penalty. Four others, including two TSA agents, were injured.

A note made it clear Ciancia hated TSA agents, but his background doesn't provide many clues to his motive. At the Catholic boys' school he attended in Delaware, near his family's home in southern New Jersey, he is remembered as a quiet loner. He was mostly silent in class apart from the occasional sarcastic comment, but "I've seen him smile and laugh before," a classmate tells the Philadelphia Inquirer.Ciancia and his younger brother, Taylor, were both badly affected by the death of their mother in 2009, a classmate of Taylor Ciancia's says, describing the pair as awkward. "They had some depression issues, and they both got obsessive," she says.CIancia had lived in LA for about a year before the shooting, acquiring at least three weapons, but seemed normal when a former roommate met him for lunch just a week before the shooting. "He would always talk about documentaries he would watch about whatever, but there was never any kind of hatred, or any hatred group, or anything like that," the roommate tells ABC 7. "He said he was going back to New Jersey, going to work for his dad, making amends with family problems, and spending the holidays with his family. That's all I know." The FBI says it has found no evidence he associated with radical groups and he told police at the scene that he acted alone.At LAX, meanwhile, 100-foot pylons leading to the airport have been lit up in memory of Hernandez, the first TSA agent to be killed in the line of duty, the New York Times reports. The father of two, who would have turned 40 next week, had worked for the TSA since 2010 and "was always excited to go to work," his widow says. "He was a joyful person who took pride in his duty for the American public."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 10:01

''Paul Ciancia, the alleged gunman who paralyzed much of Los Angeles International Airport [LAX] in a Friday shooting spree, could have turned the nation's third-busiest airport into a massive killing zone had it not been for the quick response by airport police,'' officials told USA Today on Saturday.

Using an assault rifle, Ciancia allegedly shot and killed Gerardo I. Hernandez, 39, a Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officer, and injured two more TSA officers and two civilians before he was stopped.

Ciancia was shot and injured by police and taken into custody. He has been charged, among other offenses, with killing a federal officer.

Based on available information, Ciancia's alleged actions amount to a textbook case of ''terrorism'' according to the US government's own definitions. But for some reason neither media nor officials are describing it that way.

It is instructive to look at how the US defines ''terrorism'' and compare the reaction to the LAX shooting to the aftermath of last April's Boston Marathon bombing.

US definition of ''terrorism''As I've noted previously, the US government has no single definition of ''terrorism'' but the National Institute of Justice at the US Department of Justice points to two influential standards that are in use, one enshrined in law and the other provided by the FBI:

Title 22 of the US Code, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as ''premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.''

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines terrorism as ''the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.''

Both definitions of terrorism share a common theme: the use of force intended to influence or instigate a course of action that furthers a political or social goal. In most cases, NIJ researchers adopt the FBI definition, which stresses methods over motivations and is generally accepted by law enforcement communities.

These definitions, it should also be noted, are carefully crafted to avoid including state violence as ''terrorism'' even when in every other respect, except the identity of its perpetrator, it fits the descriptions.

Ciancia's alleged motiveBased on information released by officials, Ciancia's intent was not in doubt. USA Today reports:

Investigators recovered a rambling note from the bag the shooter allegedly was carrying, which detailed an intent to ''kill'' TSA officers, said two federal law enforcement officials familiar with the message's contents.

[FBI Special Agent David] Bowdich said the handwritten note made it clear that the suspect intended to kill ''multiple'' TSA employees and to ''instill fear into their traitorous minds.''

The officials, who are not authorized to comment publicly, told USA TODAY that the note was written in a way that suggested the author expected to lose his life.

One of the officials described the incident as a suicide mission.

The Associated Press described the materials that were allegedly in Ciancia's possession as ''Patriot movement propaganda.''

There is no doubt Ciancia's alleged actions clearly meet the government definition of ''terrorism'': there is evidence of premeditation, a clear anti-government motivation and an intent to ''instill fear.''

If any example of violence deserves to be treated as ''terrorism'' then it is hard to think of a more clear-cut example.

Is it ''terrorism'' yet?And yet, neither major media nor public officials have, as far as I can determine, applied the terms ''terrorism'' or ''terrorist'' to what happened at LAX.

While the incident received major news coverage, there has been no national panic on the scale that followed the 15 April Boston Marathon bombing.

Recall that after that attack, media and officials all rushed to declare the incident a ''terrorist'' attack.

President Barack Obama, after initially hesitating, described the Boston bombing as an ''act of terrorism'' the very next day even before the identities of the suspects were known.

With the ''terrorism'' panic in full force, the city of Boston was placed under an unprecedented curfew '' effectively martial law '' with thousands of police scouring the streets and invading people's homes as the search for the suspects went on.

After 19-year-old suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev was captured by police, Obama made a statement declaring: ''We will investigate any associations that these terrorists may have had. And we'll continue to do whatever we have to do to keep our people safe.''

He followed up with a video address to the nation, declaring that ''an act of terror wounded dozens and killed three people at the Boston Marathon.''

Members of Congress demanded publicly that the surviving Boston bombing suspect, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, be treated as an ''enemy combatant.''

In fact officials of Obama's Justice Department deprived Tsarnaev of his basic civil rights by questioning him for an extended period after he was taken into custody without reading him his Miranda rights. This violation met with broad public and elite approval.

After all, weren't we dealing with ''terrorism?''

ContrastContrast this with Obama's silence after the LAX shooting. There's no statement about it on the White House website as of today.

Obama has kept a low profile, speaking to officials by telephone, but saying nothing publicly to reassure an alarmed nation of his resolve against ''terrorism.''

What's important to remember is that in the Boston case, unlike the LAX shooting, there was and is no clear evidence of a political motivation that would meet the government's definitions of terrorism.

The only ''evidence'' was that Dzhokar and his older brother Tamerlan, killed during the manhunt, were of Chechen ancestry and Muslim background.

Despite massive efforts, the government has found no credible evidence that the Tsarnaevs were acting on behalf of any group.

(More than a month after the bombing an anonymous official source claimed '' rather incredibly '' that the heavily bleeding Dzhokar had scrawled a note on the side of the boat he was hiding in when he was captured, stating the attack had something to do with US occupation in Iraq and Afghanistan).

Meanwhile, police have uncovered evidence that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was involved in a triple homicide in 2011, suggesting a hardened criminal who did not kill from a political motivation.

Not if it's a white guy'...By now it should be clear that there is a pattern: acts of spectacular violence, predominantly by white men, are rarely termed ''terrorist'' even when all the evidence points in that direction according to the government's own standards.

The LAX shooting is not an isolated case. Recall that on 18 February 2010, Andrew Joseph Stack flew an aircraft into an Internal Revenue Service building in Austin, Texas, in an apparent suicide mission.

Stack killed himself and an IRS worker, Vernon Hunter. And just like Ciancia allegedly did, Stack also left a note explaining his anti-government motivations.

Yet even as information about Stack emerged, the Obama White House and various public officials refused to label his suicide mission a ''terrorist'' attack.

Similarly, Obama refused to term the August 2012 massacre of six persons at the Sikh Temple of Wisconsin a ''terrorist'' attack.

The shooter, Wade Michael Page, was a US army veteran and white supremacist.

Blaming ''mental illness''Instead of the ''terrorism'' label, the media immediately begin to pursue a line of thought suggesting that the suspect (if white) is ''mentally ill'' or a ''disturbed'' loner.

This is already happening with Ciancia, whom The New York Times described today as ''a troubled 23-year-old, with an assault rifle and an apparent grudge against the government.''

Ciancia, we are informed, attended a Catholic school, but there's no speculation about what role religious education might have played in his alleged actions.

''Several family friends, neighbors and classmates described him as having been a reserved, quiet boy who, along with his younger brother, Taylor, seemed to be scarred by his mother's long battle with multiple sclerosis and her death in 2009,'' the Times reports.

It quotes a 21-year-old server in a local diner in the family's New Jersey hometown claiming that the Ciancia brothers ''had some depression issues, and they both got obsessive.'' The Times does not explain what qualifications the server had to make such a clinical diagnosis.

Aside from stigmatizing mental illness, the absence of this knee-jerk reaction when Muslims are accused reflects a bizarre belief that only white people can be ''disturbed'' or ''mentally ill.''

''Terrorist'' as a racial termDespite the government having fairly clear definitions of what constitutes an act of ''terrorism,'' the terms ''terrorist'' or ''terrorism'' are used not to describe actions but to label people.

It is clear these are racialized terms, applied in a discriminatory way to people perceived as Muslim, Arab or nonwhite. And as such they are terms that stigmatize entire groups of people and to justify the government's increasingly unaccountable power.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 21:38

by Scott Creighton

UPDATE:Witness claims Shoop was with 4 other guys who were armed and was only interested in shooting the security cameras mounted near the ceiling. Sounds to me like those guys whacked Richard and left him behind to take the fall.

UPDATE: Bergen County OEM deputy administrator on News12 ''...at this time we have deci_ _ _, uh we have determined that it is not an active shooting incident.''

UPDATE: Now they are saying his body was found ''behind a construction storage area behind the mall''

'--'--''

'.... and 6 hours later, the 20 year old actor is dead in the basement'....

Was this a drill someone took live after the fact? They thought the shooter had left and didn't find his body for 5 hours after the mall closed. Did someone take an unannounced active shooter drill in a mall in Jersey live by planting the dead body of the guy playing the ''shooter'' role in the basement?

Late last night another active shooter incident took place, this time in a Paramus New Jersey mall. It occurred around closing time so the lock-down didn't effect business too badly. Some guy, Richard Shoop, an aspiring actor, ran around in the mall wearing a motorcycle helmet so no one could see his face and people reported hearing multiple gunshots during the rampage in which no one was hurt. Hours later they found in the utility area of the mall, deep in the basement somewhere, dead of an apparent self-inflicted gunshot wound. Odd thing is, only one bullet casing was found. Would that be the one that killed the ''shooter''?

Curiously, it's reported that Richard Shoop confronted a customer in the mall and just walked away from her while another witness said he heard him say he didn't want to shoot anyone.

A 20-year-old man suspected of firing multiple shots and causing a lockdown at New Jersey's largest shopping mall has been found dead of a self-inflicted wound, authorities said Tuesday.

Bergen County Prosecutor John Molinelli said the body of Richard Shoop, 20, of Teaneck was found in a back area of the Garden State Plaza mall in Paramus. He said Shoop killed himself with the same weapon he used at the mall and that a note was found.

There were no other injuries.

Paramus Police Kenneth Ehrenberg said Shoop's body was discovered around 3:20 a.m. Tuesday deep within a lower level of the mall that is not a public area. Shoop did not work at the mall, he said, and police are still seeking a motive for the shooting.

Chaos erupted shortly before the mall's 9:30 p.m. closing time on Monday when authorities said a man dressed in black and wearing what is believed to be a motorcycle helmet fired shots. There were no injuries.

Witnesses said the sound of gunfire sent customers and employees rushing hysterically for the exits and hiding places at the mall, which will be closed on Tuesday.

Jessica Stigliano, 21, of Ridgefield, who'd been in the food court, told The Associated Press that she had thought, ''Not many people run for their life, but that's what I'm doing right now.''

Bergen County spokeswoman Jeanne Baratta told the AP that SWAT teams concentrated their search in the northeast corner of the 2.2 million-square-foot mall, near a Nordstrom store, believing the suspect might still be in the mall.

She said authorities found one bullet casing.'' AP

''One witness said he heard the shooter say that he ''didn't want to shoot anyone.'' Another woman who works in the mall, Anthea Brown, 26, saw the shooter and said: I just froze, I didn't know what to think. He just look at me and kept on moving.'' Heavy.com

According to witnesses, the shooter was firing his ''long gun'' into the ceiling while moving through the mall.

''Clarice Forbes, of Paterson, who also works at Talbots, said the man walked by the store while shooting a rifle into air...

'... Alaa Hegazi, a contractor working in the mall, said the shooter told him, ''I don't want to shoot anyone here, just let me go.'' Paramus Patch

So here we have an active shooter incident in which the shooter seemed angry at the ceiling and told folks in the mall who were scared that he wasn't going to hurt anyone. He runs his little routine right at closing time so as not to effect mall business to adversely. Apparently he left the building and was later found in the basement, 6 hours later, shot once in the head, victim of his own weapon. The ONLY victim.

Did someone get this guy off Explore Talent (dot) com website and hire him for what he thought was a PR stunt for the release of the new Call of Duty Ghosts which came out at midnight last night? Did he figure out something was up and try to leave?

He damn sure didn't want to hurt anyone while he was there and it seems like he had a bit of a future planned out being a ''big star'' in New York and Hollywood. So why would he just flip out and decide to scare people for no reason in Jersey and then kill himself?

Check out this comment someone left on a NJ (dot) com story:

He ''wasn't that active'' and he had ''already gone home'''... how exactly did the cops know that?

The story is simply ridiculous.

Like this:LikeLoading...

Filed under: American Gladio, Paramus mall shooting, Scott Creighton

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 04:14

The president of the union representing more than 45,000 Transportation Security Administration agents urged Congress and the agency on Monday to create a new class of officers that would be armed with weapons.

J. David Cox Sr., president of the American Federation of Government Employees, which represents 45,000 Transportation Security Administration agents, said that the "sad truth is that our TSA officers are subject to daily verbal assaults and far too frequent physical attacks while performing their security duties."

"At this time, we feel a larger and more consistent armed presence in screening areas would be a positive step in improving security for both TSOs and the flying public," Cox said in a statement. "The development of a new class of TSA officers with law enforcement status would be a logical approach to accomplishing this goal."

The statement comes in the aftermath of Friday's shooting at LAX that left one TSA agent killed and two others injured. The suspect in the shooting, 23-year-old Paul Ciancia, was targeting federal security officers, authorities said.

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder told reporters Monday that the investigation into the shooting will also look at security at LAX -- and other airports.

"The function of TSA is to ensure that people can board planes safely and take flights safely," Holder said. "The responsibility for protecting airport security is not a TSA function, but something I think we need to certainly examine."

At a news conference over the weekend, TSA Administrator John Pistole said his agency's review will include the question of whether its agents should be armed (they are not presently). ''We will look at what our policies and procedures are and what provides the best possible security," he said.

The idea of arming TSA agents has been raised before, according to aviation security consultant Stewart Verdery, a former Department of Homeland Security official who was involved with the creation of the airport screening agency.

''It's always been raised as an issue,'' Verdery said. ''We know that there are people that don't like the government, and TSA is a whipping boy for people angry about the overreach of the government. And we also know that terrorists are fascinated with aviation. It puts them on the front lines.''

He said the decision not to arm airport security agents was made because protecting the airport is not their primary mission.

''You want to spend your time training TSA officers to look for dangerous weapons and dangerous people,'' he said. ''Arming tens of thousands of agents who are largely dealing with average travelers is not necessary.''

He noted that arming the agents would come at a high cost. The average annual cost of a TSA agent is less than half the cost of an armed law enforcement officer, he said.

ALSO:

LAX shooting: Condition of wounded teacher upgraded to 'good'

Family of LAX shooting suspect 'shocked and numbed' by rampage

LAX shooting: Gunman's rifle may have been ready to fire in his bag

Twitter: @katemather | @katelinthicum

kate.mather@latimes.com

kate.linthicum@latimes.com

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 04:12

Section 37 of Title 18, United States Code, implements the Protocol to the Montreal Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation. The international Protocol was developed in response to the Rome and Vienna airport massacres by terrorists in 1985. Section 37, which became effective on November 18, 1994, makes it a Federal crime, using any device, substance or weapon, to intentionally perform an act of violence against any person at an airport serving international aviation or to destroy or seriously damage the facilities of such an airport. Initially, § 37 was applicable only when the prohibited activity occurred within the United States or the perpetrator of the prohibited activity overseas was subsequently found in the United States. On April 24, 1996, the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 expanded its extraterritorial jurisdiction to also cover the prohibited activity occurring overseas when either a national of the United States is a victim or a perpetrator of the offense. See Pub. L. 104-132, § 721(g), 110 Stat. 1214, 1299.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 04:10

A Stripper clip is a device that is used to store multiple rounds of ammunition together as a unit, ready for insertion into the magazine or cylinder of a firearm. This speeds up the process of loading and reloading the firearm as several rounds can be loaded at once, rather than one round being loaded at a time. Several different types of clips exist, most of which are made of inexpensive metal stampings that are designed to be disposable, though they are often re-used.

The defining difference between clips and magazines is the presence of a feed mechanism in a magazine, typically a spring-loaded follower, which a clip lacks.[1][2][3]

Stripper[edit]Main article: Stripper clipA stripper clip or charger is a speed-loader that holds several cartridges together in a single unit for easier loading of a firearm's magazine. A stripper clip is used only for loading the magazine and is not necessary for the firearm to function. It is called a 'stripper' clip because, after the bolt is opened and the stripper clip is placed in position (generally by placing it in a slot on either the receiver or bolt), the cartridges are pressed down, thereby 'stripping' them off of the stripper clip and into the magazine.

En bloc[edit]Several rifle designs utilize an en bloc clip to load the firearm. With this design, both the cartridges and the clip are inserted as a unit into a fixed magazine within the rifle, and the clip is usually ejected or falls from the rifle upon firing or chambering of the last round. The en bloc clip was invented by two firearms inventors working on parallel lines, James Paris Lee for his Lee rifle of 1890, and Ferdinand Mannlicher for use in his M1885 rifle.

Other rifles utilizing a frequently improved en-bloc clip include the German 1888 Commission Rifle, the French 1890 Berthier Cavalry Carbine and later models (upgraded to 5 rounds in 1916), the Italian M1870/87 Vetterli-Vitali and M91 Carcano, the various (Romanian, Dutch, Portuguese) turnbolt Mannlichers, the Austro-Hungarian straight-pull Steyr-Mannlicher M1895, the M1895 Lee Navy, the Hungarian 35M Mannlicher, and the US M1 Garand. Original Austrian Mannlicher clips were often uni-directional, but already the German 1888 Commission Rifle and subsequently the M 91 Carcano employed symmetrical clips, and much later John Pedersen developed an invertible, double-stacked clip for his rifle. This design was also utilized for the competing design by John Garand.[4]

Moon and half-moon[edit]A moon clip is a ring-shaped or stellate piece of metal designed to hold a full cylinder of ammunition for a revolver (generally six rounds) together as a unit. Therefore, instead of loading or extracting one round at a time, a full cylinder of ammunition or spent cases can be loaded or extracted at once, speeding the loading process. A similar device known as the half-moon clip is semi-circular and designed to hold a half cylinder of ammunition (generally three rounds)'--in which case two clips are necessary to fully load the cylinder. Such devices have most often been used to chamber rimless semi-automatic pistol cartridges in a revolver.

See also[edit]References[edit]^"Gun Zone clips vs. magazines". The Gun Zone. Retrieved 2008-06-26. ^"Magazine". SAAMI. Retrieved 2008-06-26. ^"Cartridge Clip". SAAMI. Retrieved 2008-06-26. ^Hogg, Ian V.; Weeks, John S.: (2000) Military Small Arms of the 20th Century, 7th Edition; Krause Publications, ISBN 0-87341-824-7

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 04:10

A magazine is an ammunition storage and feeding device within or attached to a repeating firearm. Magazines can be removable (detachable) or integral to the firearm. The magazine functions by moving the cartridges stored in the magazine into a position where they may be loaded into the chamber by the action of the firearm. The detachable magazine is often referred to as a clip, although this is technically inaccurate.[1][2][3]

Magazines come in many shapes and sizes, from those of bolt actionexpress rifles that hold only a few rounds to those for machine guns that hold hundreds of rounds. Since the magazine is an essential part of most repeating firearms, they are sometimes subject to regulation by gun control laws seeking to limit the number of cartridges they hold.

History[edit]The earliest firearms were loaded with loose powder and a lead ball, and to fire more than a single shot without reloading required multiple barrels, such as pepper-box guns and double-barreled shotguns, or multiple chambers, such as in revolvers. Both of these add bulk and weight over a single barrel and a single chamber, however, and many attempts were made to get multiple shots from a single loading of a single barrel through the use of superposed loads.[4]Breech loading designs such as the needle gun, and paper cartridges sped the loading process, but successful repeating mechanisms did not appear until self-contained cartridges were developed.

The earliest magazines appeared not on firearms, but rather on air guns. Without the need for powder, the magazine contained only the balls, the power was provided by high pressure air supplied by an air reservoir in the butt of the gun. The Girandoni Air Rifle, dating to around 1780, was fairly typical of the repeating air rifles of the time. The Girandoni held 22 balls in a gravity fed tubular magazine, located beside and parallel to the barrel. Due to the use of a large air reservoir, the rifle could fire all the shots in its magazine before the reservoir was depleted enough to require recharging. Firing was accomplished by raising the muzzle of the gun to allow the balls to fall to the rear of the magazine, sliding a ball from the magazine into the barrel with a sliding breech-block, then cocking the hammer (which was connected to a valve) and firing.[5]

Lever action[edit]The first successful repeater to appear was the Volcanic Rifle, which used a hollow bullet with the base filled with powder and primer (an early form of caseless ammunition) fed into the chamber from a spring-loaded tube called a magazine, named after a building or room used to store ammunition. While the anemic power of the Rocket Ball ammunition used in the Volcanic doomed it to limited popularity, the basic design of the tubular magazine and lever action survive to this day.[6]

The first magazine fed firearm to achieve widespread success was the Spencer repeating rifle, which saw service in the American Civil War. The Spencer used a tubular magazine located in the butt of the gun, rather than under the barrel, and used new rimfire metallic cartridges. The Spencer was successful, but the rimfire ammunition did occasionally ignite in the magazine tube, which would destroy the rifle and potentially injure the user. The lever action Henry and Winchester rifles, evolved from the earlier Volcanic, saw service with a number of militaries, such as Turkey, while Switzerland and Italy adopted similar designs.[6]

Lever-action rifles pioneered detachable magazines: the Winchester 88, the Ruger 96/44 and the Savage 99. The first completely modern removable box magazine was patented in 1908 by Arthur Savage for the Savage Model 99.[7] Other guns did not adopt all of its features until his patent expired in 1942: It has shoulders to retain cartridges when it is removed from the rifle. It operates reliably with cartridges of different lengths. It is insertable and removable at any time with any number of cartridges. These features allow the operator to reload the gun infrequently, carry magazines rather than loose cartridges, and to easily change the types of cartridges in the field. The magazine is assembled from inexpensive stamped sheet metal. It also includes a crucial safety feature for hunting dangerous game: when empty the follower[8] stops the bolt from engaging the chamber, informing the operator that the gun is empty before any attempt to fire.

Semiautomatic pistol[edit]The first successful semiautomatic pistol, the Borchardt C-93 (1893), incorporated detachable box magazines. Nearly all subsequent semiautomatic pistol designs adopted detachable box magazines.

Bolt action magazine rifle[edit]Beginning in the 1880s, the new bolt action rifle began to gain favor with militaries, and these were often equipped with tubular magazines. The Mauser Model 1871, originally a single shot action, added a tubular magazine in its 1884 update, and the Jarmann M1884, adopted the same year, also used one. James Paris Lee patented a box magazine, which held rounds stacked vertically, in 1879 and 1882, which was first adopted by Austria in the form of an 11mm, straight-pull bolt action rifle of Mannlicher design in 1886; along with this rifle came the cartridge clip, which held 5 rounds ready to load into the magazine.[9][10]

Along with the evolution of the magazine rifle, the military cartridge was evolving too, from large bore cartridges (.40 caliber/10 mm and larger) to much smaller bores, firing lighter, high velocity bullets, along with new propellants. The Lebel Model 1886 rifle, the first rifle and cartridge to be designed for use with smokeless powder, used an 8 mm wadcutter-shaped bullet, loaded from a tubular magazine. This later became a problem as the Lebel's ammunition was updated to use a more aerodynamic pointed bullet, as modifications had to be made to the centerfire case to prevent the point of a bullet from igniting the round in front of it in the magazine.[9]

The bolt action Krag-J¸rgensen rifle, designed in Norway in 1886, used a unique rotary magazine that was built into the receiver. Like Lee's box magazine, the rotary magazine held the rounds side-by-side, rather than end-to-end. Like most rotary magazines, it was loaded through a loading gate, this one located on the side of the receiver. The rotary magazine could be loaded with one round at a time, or with a clip of ammunition. While reliable, the Krag-J¸rgensen's magazine was expensive to produce, and was adopted by only three countries, Denmark in 1889, the United States in 1892,[11] and Norway in 1894.

The Lee-Metford rifle, developed in 1888, used an eight- or ten-round detachable box magazine. In 1890 the French adopted a new rifle, firing the same 8mm Lebel cartridge, that fed from en-bloc clips; the clips were required for feeding from the internal magazine, and empty clips were pushed from the bottom of the action by the insertion of a loaded clip from the top. Mauser was also developing box magazine-fed (including detachable) variants of his Model 1871 during this time, many of which used en-bloc clips, with models from 1889 through 1893 in various calibers were adopted by various militaries at this time.[9][12]

In the arms race that preceded the start of World War I there were many short lived designs, such as the M1895 Lee Navy and Gewehr 1888, eventually replaced by the M1903 Springfield rifle and Gewehr 98 respectively. The RussianMosin-Nagant, adopted in 1891, was a good example. It was not revolutionary; it was a bolt-action rifle, used a small bore smokeless powder cartridge, and a fixed box magazine loaded from the top with stripper clips (called chargers by the British), all of which were features that were used in earlier military rifles. What made the Nagant stand out was that it combined all the earlier features in a form that was to last virtually unchanged from its issue by Russia in 1894 through its use by the Soviet Union in World War II. Of the major combatants, only France retained the outdated tubular magazine; all other combatants used rifles that were overall very similar to each other.[13]

An interesting feature of many late 19th and early 20th century bolt action rifles was the magazine cut-off, sometimes called a feed interrupter. This was a mechanical device that prevented the rifle from loading a round from the magazine, requiring the shooter to manually load each individual round as he fired, saving the rounds in the magazine for short periods of rapid fire when ordered to use them. Most military authorities that specified them assumed that their riflemen would waste ammunition indiscriminately if allowed to load from the magazine all the time.[14] By the middle of World War I, most manufacturers deleted this feature to save costs and manufacturing time; it is also likely that battlefield experience had proven the futility of this philosophy.

World War II and later[edit]One of the last new clip-fed, fixed magazine rifles widely adopted that wasn't a modification of an earlier rifle was the M1 Garand rifle. The first semi-automatic rifle that was issued in large numbers to the infantry, the Garand was fed by a special eight round en-bloc clip. The clip itself was inserted into the rifle's magazine during loading, where it was locked in place. The rounds were fed directly from the clip, with a spring-loaded follower in the rifle pushing the rounds up into feeding position. When empty, the bolt would lock open, and a spring would automatically eject the empty clip, leaving the rifle ready to be reloaded. The M14 rifle, which was based on incremental changes to the Garand action, switched to a detachable box magazine.[15]

The Soviet SKS carbine, which entered service in 1945, was something of a stopgap between the semi-automatic service rifles being developed in the period leading up to World War II, and the new assault rifle developed by the Germans. The SKS used a fixed magazine, holding ten rounds and fed by a conventional stripper clip. It was a modification of the earlier AVS-36 rifle, shortened and chambered for the new reduced power 7.62x39mm cartridge. It was rendered obsolete for military use almost immediately by the 1947 introduction of the magazine-fed AK-47 assault rifle, though it remained in service for many years in Soviet bloc nations alongside the AK-47. The detachable magazine quickly came to dominate post-war military rifle designs.[16]

The M1911 semi-automatic pistol set the standard for most modern handguns and likewise the mechanics of the handgun magazine. In most handguns the magazine follower engages a slide-stop to hold the slide back and keep the firearm out of battery when the magazine is empty and all rounds fired. Upon inserting a loaded magazine the user depresses the slide stop, throwing the slide forward, stripping a round from the top of the magazine stack and chambering it. In single-action pistols this action keeps the hammer cocked back as the new round is chambered, keeping the gun ready to begin firing again.

Nomenclature[edit]With the increased use of semi-automatic and automatic firearms, the detachable box magazine became increasingly common. Soon after the adoption of the M1911 pistol, the term "magazine" was settled on by the military and firearms experts, though the term "clip" is often used in its place (though only for detachable magazines, never fixed).[17][18][19] The defining difference between clips and magazines is the presence of a feed mechanism in a magazine, typically a spring-loaded follower, which a clip lacks. Use of the term "clip" to refer to detachable magazines is a point of strong disagreement.[2][20][21][22]

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a clip as "a device to hold cartridges for charging the magazines of some rifles; also :a magazine from which ammunition is fed into the chamber of a firearm".[23]

Function and types[edit]All cartridge based single barrel firearms designed to fire more than a single shot without reloading require some form of magazine designed to store and feed cartridges to the firearm's action. Magazines come in many shapes and sizes, with the most common type in modern firearms being the detachable box type. Most magazines designed for use with a reciprocating bolt firearm (tube fed firearms being the exception) make use of a set of feed lips which stop the vertical motion of the cartridges out of the magazine but allow one cartridge at a time to be pushed forward (stripped) out of the feed lips by the firearm's bolt into the chamber. Some form of spring and follower combination is almost always used to feed cartridges to the lips which can be located either in the magazine (most removable box magazines) or built into the firearm (fixed box magazines). There are also two distinct styles to feed lips. In a single feed design the top cartridge touches both lips and is commonly used in single column box magazines. A dual or alternating feed magazine consists of a wider set of lips so that the second cartridge in line forces the top cartridge against one lip. This design has proven more resistant to jamming in use with dual column magazines.[24] Some magazine types are strongly associated with certain firearm types, such as the fixed "tubular" magazine found on most lever-action rifles and pump actionshotguns. A firearm using detachable magazines may accept a variety of types of magazine, such as the Thompson submachine gun, which would accept box or drum magazines. Some types of firearm, such as the M249 and other squad automatic weapons, can feed from both magazines and belts.

Box[edit]single column and staggered (aka double-stack) column detachable box magazines.

The most popular type of magazine in modern rifles and handguns, a box magazine stores cartridges in a column, either one above the other or staggered zigzag fashion. This zigzag stack is often identified as a double-column or double-stack since a single staggered column is actually two side-by-side vertical columns offset by half of the diameter of a round. As the firearm cycles, cartridges are moved to the top of the magazine by a follower driven by spring compression to either a single feed position or side-by-side feed positions. Box magazines may be integral to the firearm or removable.

Box magazines may be metal or plastic. Plastic magazines are sometimes partially transparent so the operator can easily check the remaining ammunition.

An internal box or fixed magazine (also known as a blind box magazine when lacking a floorplate) is built into the firearm and is not easily removable. This type of magazine is found most often on bolt-action rifles. An internal box magazine is usually charged through the action, one round at a time. Military rifles often use stripper clips or chargers permitting multiple rounds, commonly 5 or 10 at a time, to be loaded at once. Some internal box magazines use en-bloc clips that are loaded into the magazine with the ammunition and that are ejected from the firearm when empty.A detachable box magazine is a self-contained mechanism capable of being loaded or unloaded while detached from the host firearm. They are attached via a slot in the firearm receiver usually below the action but occasionally to the side (Sten, FG42, Johnson LMG) or on top (Madsen machine gun, Bren gun, FN P90). When the magazine is empty, it can be detached from the firearm and replaced by another full magazine. This significantly speeds the process of reloading, allowing the operator quick access to ammunition. This type of magazine may be straight or curved, the curve being necessary if the rifle uses rimmed ammunition or ammunition with a tapered case. Box magazines are often affixed to each other with clips, tape, straps, or built-in studs to facilitate faster reloading: aka jungle style.There are, however, exceptions to these rules. The Lee-Enfield rifle had a detachable box magazine only to facilitate cleaning. The Lee-Enfield magazine did open, permitting rapid unloading of the magazine without having to operate the bolt-action repeatedly to unload the magazine. Others, like the Breda Modello 30, had a fixed protruding magazine that resembled a conventional detachable box but was non-detachable.

STANAG[edit]The STANAG box magazine came about shortly after NATO's acceptance of the 5.56x45mm NATO rifle cartridge in October 1980,[25] draft Standardization Agreement 4179 (STANAG 4179) was proposed in order to allow the military services of member nations easily to share rifle ammunition and magazines in the interest of easing logistical concerns. The magazine chosen to become the STANAG magazine was originally designed for the U.S. M16 rifle. Many NATO member nations subsequently developed or purchased rifles with the ability to accept this type of magazine; however the standard was never ratified and remains a 'Draft STANAG'.[26]

Casket[edit]Another form of box magazine, sometimes referred to as a quad-column, can hold a great amount of ammunition. It is wider than a standard magazine, but retains the same length. Casket magazines can be found on the Suomi KP/-31, Hafdasa C-4, Spectre M4, QCW-05 and on 5.45x39mm AK rifle derivatives. Magpul has been granted a patent[27] for a STANAG compatible casket magazine,[28] and such a magazine was also debuted by SureFire in December 2010, and is now sold as the High Capacity Magazine (HCM) in 60 and 100 round capacities in 5.56mm for AR-15 compatible with M4/M16/AR-15 variants and other firearms that accept STANAG 4179 magazines.[29]Izhmash has also developed a casket magazine for the AK-12.[28]

Drum[edit]Main article: Drum magazineToday, drum magazines are used primarily for light machine guns. In one type, a moving partition within a cylindrical chamber forces loose rounds into an exit slot, with the cartridges being stored parallel to the axis of rotation. After loading of the magazine, a wound spring or other mechanism forces the partition against the rounds. In all models a single staggered column is pushed by a follower through a curved path. From there the rounds enter the vertical riser either from a single or dual drums. Cylindrical designs such as rotary and drum magazines allow for larger capacity than box magazines, without growing to excessive length. The downside of a drum magazine's extra capacity is its added weight. Many drum-fed firearms can also load from conventional box magazines, such as the Soviet PPSh-41 submachine gun, RPK light machine gun and the American Thompson submachine gun. Another notable design is the 100 round Beta C-Mag for multiple calibres, rifles, pistols and PDWs.

Hopper[edit]The hopper magazine, used in the Japanese Type 11 LMG, and a few prototype designs of the interwar period, had a fixed 'hopper' in which standard infantry rifle clips were stacked. In theory, this allowed the ammunition of riflemen and machinegunners to be interchangeable, however problems with the reliability of the system, and the compatibility of more powerful rifle loadings with the operation of the machine gun, made this an impractical solution.[30]

Pan[edit]Often referred to as a drum magazine, the pan magazine differs from other drum magazines in that the cartridges are stored perpendicular to the axis of rotation, rather than parallel, and are usually mounted on top of the firearm. This type is used on the Lewis Gun, Bren Gun,[31]Degtyarev light machine gun, American-180 submachine gun and the 2B-A-40 assault rifle. A prototype polymer pan magazine was also developed and tested for use with the RPK-74 light machine gun.

Tubular[edit]Many of the first repeating rifles, particularly lever-action and pump-action types, used a single or multiple tubular magazines that store cartridges end-to-end inside of a spring-loaded tube typically running parallel to the barrel, or in the buttstock. This type of magazine is usually fixed to the firearm, meaning that it is not removed in use. Tubular magazines can still be found today, commonly in shotguns, rimfire rifles, or firearms designed to use round-nose, flat-nose, or otherwise soft-pointed bullets. The tubular magazine was made obsolete for most military purposes with the introduction of pointed "Spitzer" bullets due to the risk of ignition when the bullets tip impacts the primer of the cartridge ahead of it during recoil. Tubular magazines remain common in shotguns, as all shotgun shells are flat tipped.

Rotary[edit]The rotary or spool magazine consists of a star-shaped rotor, or sprocket, actuated by a torsion spring. The magazine may be fixed or detachable. Cartridges fit between the teeth of the sprocket, which is mounted on a spindle parallel to the bore axis, with a torsion spring providing the pressure necessary to rotate the rounds into the feeding position. Rotary magazines are usually of low capacity of ten rounds or less, depending on the cartridge used. The rotary magazine was first used by the Savage Model 1895 & 1899[32] rifles and is still used in a few modern firearm designs, most notably the Ruger American, the Ruger 10/22 and the Steyr SSG 69.

Horizontal[edit]The P90's unique magazine has a capacity of 50 rounds, and it fits flush with the weapon's frame.[33]In the horizontally-mounted feeding system, the magazine sits parallel to the barrel, fitting flush with the top of the receiver and the ammunition is rotated 90 degrees before being chambered. This feeding system is unique to the FN P90personal defense weapon.[33] It is also being experimented with by Marshal Arms in their pistol and carbine.[34]

Helical[edit]Helical magazines extend the drum magazine design so that rounds follow a spiral path, allowing for a very large ammunition capacity in a compact package. However, this requires a complex mechanism and thus increases the likelihood of a firearm malfunction. This type of magazine can be used by the Calico M960, Danuvia VD-01, PP-19 Bizon, PP-90M1, and CF-05 submachine guns.

Magazine capacity[edit]Magazine capacity varies by firearm and is often limited by the design of the firearm in such cases as internal, tubular, or rotary magazines. In the case of detachable box magazines, capacity is limited only by its design. The term "high capacity" magazine is sometimes used to describe magazines that exceed an arbitrary "normal capacity." In many jurisdictions, magazine capacity of certain firearms is restricted by statute, such as it was under the United States' Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which defined a magazine capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition as a large capacity ammunition feeding device. This law expired in 2004 and there have since been multiple attempts to renew it[35] with no bill reaching the House floor for a vote. An attempt to only renew the limitations on large capacity magazines also failed.[36] Currently, in the United States, six states limit magazine capacities. The limits range from 7 rounds to 20 rounds. Many pistol and rifle magazines classified by gun control laws as "high capacity" are actually the factory standard magazines originally designed for use with their respective firearms and reduced capacity magazines were later created in response to enactment of the bans.[37]

See also[edit]References[edit]^"NRA Firearms Glossary". National Rifle Association. Archived from the original on 2011-07-18. Retrieved 2008-06-26. ^ ab"Gun Zone clips vs. magazines". The Gun Zone. Retrieved 2008-06-26. ^"Handgunner's Glossary". Handguns Annual Magazine, 1994. Retrieved 2013-03-21. ^Charles Winthrop Sawyer (1920). Firearms in American History, volume III. Cornhill Company, Boston. [page needed]^Robert D. Beeman, Ph.D. "Girandoni style air rifles and pistols - preliminary research presentation.". ^ abA Naval Encyclop...dia. L. R. Hamersly & Co. 1880. ^U.S. Patent 885,868, April 28, 1908, Improved Magazine, Inventor: Arthur W. Savage^The "follower" is the sheet metal part between the last cartridge and the spring.^ abcHugh Chisholm (1911). The Encyclopaedia Britannica: A Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, Literature and General Information. Encyclopaedia Britannica. , entry for Rifle^Chamber's Encyclopaedia: A Dictionary of Universal Knowledge. W. & R. Chambers. 1891. pp. 720''721. ^United States Army Ordnance Department (1898). Description and Rules for the Management of the U.S. Magazine Rifle and Carbine. p. 36. ^Chuck Hawks. "The 8x50R Lebel (8mm Lebel)". ^Two Thousand Questions and Answers about the War. The Review of Reviews Co. 1918. p. 88. ^"Firearms Technical Trivia: Magazine cut-offs". Cruffler.com. February 2000. ^"Modern Firearms - M14 Rifle". Retrieved 2008-06-26. ^"Simonov SKS carbine (USSR - Russia)". ^United States Army, American Expeditionary Force (1917). Provisional Instruction on the Automatic Rifle, Model 1915 (Chauchat). , translated from the French edition, 1916^United States Ordanace Dept. (1917). Description of the Automatic Pistol, Caliber .45, Model of 1911. ^United States War Dept (1907). Annual Reports of the Secretary of War. ^"Magazine". SAAMI. Retrieved 2008-06-26. ^"Cartridge Clip". SAAMI. Retrieved 2008-06-26. ^"Firearms Glossary". National Rifle Association. ^Dictionary. "Clip". Merriam Webster. Retrieved 23 July 2012. ^Weeks, John, World War II Small Arms, London: Orbis Publishing Ltd. (1979), p. 33.^Watters,Daniel: "The 5.56 X 45mm Timeline: A Chronology of Development", The Gun Zone, 2000-2007.^"NATO Infantry Weapons Standardization", NDIA Conference 2008^http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.htm&r=1&p=1&f=G&l=50&d=PTXT&S1=505419.AP.&OS=APN/505419&RS=APN/505419^ abhttp://bulletin.accurateshooter.com/2010/06/magpul-invents-new-quad-stack-magazine-for-ars/^http://www.defensereview.com/dr-exclusive-surefire-60-shot-and-100-shot-ar-ar-15m16-5-56mm-nato-box-magazines-for-infantry-combat-and-tactical-engagements-meet-the-surefire-mag5-60-and-mag5-100-high-capacity-magazines-hcms/^James H. Willbanks. Machine Guns: An Illustrated History of Their Impact. p. 104. ^http://www.cairdpublications.com/scrap/armbitguns/images/Bren%20Guns.jpg^U.S. Patent 502,018, Magazine-Gun, Filing date: Apr 10, 1889, Issue date: July 25, 1893, Inventor: Arthur W. Savage^ abKevin, Dockery (2007). Future Weapons. New York: Berkley Trade. ISBN 978-0-425-21750-4. ^Marshal Arms Inc, "Marshal Arms Pistol"^H.R. 2038, H.R. 3831, H.R. 5099, H.R. 1312, H.R. 1022, H.R. 6257^H.R. 5099^Boston's Gun Bible, Boston T. Party ISBN 978-1-888766-06-6, Javelin Press, Durango, CO, April 2002External links[edit]

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 12:49

Here in the United States, we're united by a fundamental principle: we're all created equal and every single American deserves to be treated equally in the eyes of the law. We believe that no matter who you are, if you work hard and play by the rules, you deserve the chance to follow your dreams and pursue your happiness. That's America's promise.

That's why, for instance, Americans can't be fired from their jobs just because of the color of their skin or for being Christian or Jewish or a woman or an individual with a disability. That kind of discrimination has no place in our nation. And yet, right now, in 2013, in many states a person can be fired simply for being lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender.

As a result, millions of LGBT Americans go to work every day fearing that, without any warning, they could lose their jobs -- not because of anything they've done, but simply because of who they are.

It's offensive. It's wrong. And it needs to stop, because in the United States of America, who you are and who you love should never be a fireable offense.

That's why Congress needs to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, also known as ENDA, which would provide strong federal protections against discrimination, making it explicitly illegal to fire someone because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. This bill has strong bipartisan support and the support of a vast majority of Americans. It ought to be the law of the land.

Americans ought to be judged by one thing only in their workplaces: their ability to get their jobs done. Does it make a difference if the firefighter who rescues you is gay -- or the accountant who does your taxes, or the mechanic who fixes your car? If someone works hard every day, does everything he or she is asked, is responsible and trustworthy and a good colleague, that's all that should matter.

Business agrees. The majority of Fortune 500 companies and small businesses already have nondiscrimination policies that protect LGBT employees. These companies know that it's both the right thing to do and makes good economic sense. They want to attract and retain the best workers, and discrimination makes it harder to do that.

So too with our nation. If we want to create more jobs and economic growth and keep our country competitive in the global economy, we need everyone working hard, contributing their ideas, and putting their abilities to use doing what they do best. We need to harness the creativity and talents of every American.

So I urge the Senate to vote yes on ENDA and the House of Representatives to do the same. Several Republican Senators have already voiced their support, as have a number of Republicans in the House. If more members of Congress step up, we can put an end to this form of discrimination once and for all.

Passing ENDA would build on the progress we've made in recent years. We stood up against hate crimes with the Matthew Shepard Act and lifted the entry ban for travelers with HIV. We ended "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" so our brave servicemen and women can serve openly the country they love, no matter who they love. We prohibited discrimination in housing and hospitals that receive federal funding, and we passed the Violence Against Women Act, which includes protections for LGBT Americans.

My Administration had stopped defending the so-called Defense of Marriage Act, and earlier this year the U.S. Supreme Court struck down that discriminatory law. Now we're implementing that ruling, giving married couples access to the federal benefits they were long denied. And across the nation, as more and more states recognize marriage equality, we're seeing loving couples -- some who have been together for decades -- finally join their hands in marriage.

America is at a turning point. We're not only becoming more accepting and loving as a people, we're becoming more just as a nation. But we still have a way to go before our laws are equal to our Founding ideals. As I said in my second inaugural address, our nation's journey toward equality isn't complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law, for if we are truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well.

In America of all places, people should be judged on the merits: on the contributions they make in their workplaces and communities, and on what Martin Luther King Jr. called "the content of their character." That's what ENDA helps us do. When Congress passes it, I will sign it into law, and our nation will be fairer and stronger for generations to come.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 13:13

The Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is legislation proposed in the United States Congress that would prohibit discrimination in hiring and employment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity by civilian, nonreligious employers with at least 15 employees.

ENDA has been introduced in every Congress since 1994 except the 109th. Similar legislation has been introduced without passage since 1974.[1] The bill gained its best chance at passing after the Democratic Party broke twelve years of Republican Congressional rule in the 2006 midterm elections. In 2007, gender identity protections were added to the legislation for the first time. Some sponsors believed that even with a Democratic majority, ENDA did not have enough votes to pass the House of Representatives with transgender inclusion and dropped it from the bill, which passed the House and then died in the Senate. President George W. Bush threatened to veto the measure. LGBT advocacy organizations and the LGBT community were divided over support of the modified bill.

In 2009, following Democratic gains in the 2008 elections, and after the divisiveness of the 2007 debate, Rep. Barney Frank introduced a transgender-inclusive version of ENDA. He introduced it again in 2011, and Sen. Jeff Merkley introduced it in the Senate. President Barack Obama supports the bill's passage.

Evidence of employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identityEditIn states that have anti-discrimination policies in place, LGB complaints are equivalent to the number of complaints filed based on sex and fewer than the number of complaints filed based on race.[2][3][4]

The Williams Institute estimates the number of LGBT employees as follows: 7 million private sector employees, 1 million state and local employees, and 200,000 employees of the federal government. Thirty percent of state and local LGBT employees live in California and New York. In comparison, LGB people make up only one half of one percent of state and local employees in Montana, North Dakota and Wyoming combined.[5] This suggests that the need for policies to address discrimination may vary markedly from state to state. Surveys that seek to document discrimination on the basis of perceived sexual orientation and/or gender identity are often conducted with a pool of self identified LGBT people, making it difficult to ascertain the impact of this type of discrimination on non-LGBT individuals.

One source of evidence for hiring discrimination against openly gay men comes from a field experiment that sent two fictitious but realistic resumes to roughly 1,700 entry-level job openings. The two resumes were very similar in terms of the applicant's qualifications, but one resume for each opening mentioned that the applicant had been part of a gay organization in college. The results showed that applicants without the gay signal had an 11.5 percent chance of being called for an interview; openly gay applicants had only a 7.2 percent chance. The callback gap varied widely according to the location of the job. Most of the overall gap detected in the study was driven by the Southern and Midwestern states in the sample '-- Texas, Florida, and Ohio. The Western and Northeastern states in the sample (California, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and New York) had only small and statistically insignificant callback gaps.[6]

Transgender people may experience higher rates of discrimination than the LGB population. A survey of transgender and gender non-conforming people conducted by the National Center for Transgender Equality found 90 percent of respondents experienced harassment, mistreatment, or discrimination on the job or took actions like hiding who they are to avoid it.[7] In comparison, a review of studies conducted by the Williams Institute in 2007 found that transgender people experienced employment discrimination at a rate 15 to 57 percent.[8]

It is unclear whether LGBT individuals earn more or less than the general population. In a survey conducted by Harris Interactive, 38 percent of LGBT people report incomes less than $35,000, compared to 33 percent of all U.S. adults over age 18.[9] Some organizations believe that no such gap exists, and that LGBT people may in fact have higher incomes than non-LGBT families. The American Family Association (AFA) argues that homosexuals as a class enjoy privileged, rather than disadvantaged, economic and cultural positions in society and that their household income is above average.[10]

ProvisionsEditThe current version of the bill under consideration in Congress prohibits private employers with more than 15 employees from discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. Religious organizations are provided an exception from this protection, similar to that found in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Non-profit membership-only clubs, except labor unions, are similarly exempt.

All versions of the bill, irrespective of the military's changing policies with respect to service by open gays and lesbians, have provided an exclusion for the military as an employer of members of the armed forces, though not as an employer of civilians.[11]

Since the 111th Congress, the legislation has included language to prevent any reading of the law as a modification of the federal definition of marriage established in the Defense of Marriage Act (1995).[12] Since the 110th Congress, a related provision aimed at non-marital legal relations like civil unions and domestic partnerships prevents requiring an employer to treat unmarried and married couples similarly.[13]

Legislative activityEditOn May 14, 1974, the fifth anniversary of the Stonewall Rebellion, Reps. Bella Abzug (D-NY) and Ed Koch (D-NY) introduced H.R. 14752, the "Equality Act", which would have added sexual orientation to the protected classes specified in the Civil Rights Act of 1964, prohibited discrimination in employment and access to public accommodations and facilities.[14]

Senate vote on Employment Nondiscrimination Act of 1996.[15] Both yes

One yes, one didn't vote

One yes, one no

Both no

In the early 1990s, supporters of the legislation decided to focus on employment. Rep. Gerry Studds introduced the Employment Non-Discrimination Act on June 23, 1994.[16] The legislation failed in 1994 and 1995.[17] In 1996, the bill failed on a 49-50 vote in the Senate and was not voted on in the House.[18][19] Its level of support in the Senate may have represented an attempt by some to compensate for their recent support of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which prohibited the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages.[citation needed] These early versions of ENDA did not include provisions to protect transgender people from discrimination[20] and ENDA was not introduced in the 109th Congress.

110th CongressEditIn the 110th United States Congress there were two versions of the bill, both of which provided employment protections similar to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.[21] Reps. Barney Frank, Chris Shays, Tammy Baldwin, and Deborah Pryce introduced H.R. 2015 on April 24, 2007. It included gender identity within its protections. It defined gender identity as "gender-related identity, appearance, or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth." It allowed employers to require adherence "to the same dress or grooming standards for the gender to which the employee has transitioned or is transitioning."[22]

House vote on Sexual Orientation Employment Nondiscrimination Act of 2007 by congressional district.[23] Democratic aye

Republican aye

Abstention or no representative seated

Democratic no

Republican no

When that bill died in committee, Frank introduced H.R. 3685 on September 27, 2007, which did not include gender identity and contained exemptions concerning employer dress codes. It was endorsed by the Education and Labor Committee on October 18 and the House of Representatives passed it on November 7, 2007, by a vote of 235 to 184, with 14 members not voting.[24] Frank introduced a separate piece of legislation to prohibit discrimination in employment on the basis of gender identity.[25]

Some LGBT activist organizations refused to support H.R. 3685 because of its failure to cover gender identity.[26][27] An exception was the Human Rights Campaign, which received wide criticism from the LGBT community for supporting a non-inclusive ENDA.[28] The LGBT activist organizations that refused to support H.R. 3685 argued that not including transgender people undermined the underlying principle of ENDA.[29] They claimed that failure to include gender identity/expression weakened the protection for the portion of the LGBT population that most needed its protections: gender non-conforming people, who they claimed are discriminated against in greater numbers than their gender-conforming compatriots[citation needed]. Others argued that this was ENDA's best chance of passing Congress in thirty years, that civil rights victories have historically been incremental, that concerns about the legislation's protections were unfounded, and that forgoing a chance to provide immediate workplace protections to millions of lesbians, gays and bisexuals was politically and morally wrong.[30]

111th CongressEditOn June 24, 2009, Frank introduced H.R. 3017 to ban workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity,[31] with 114 original cosponsors, up from 62 cosponsors for the trans-inclusive bill of 2007."[31] The lead Republican cosponsor was Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL).[32]Republican Main Street Partnership members Mark Kirk (R-IL), Mike Castle (R-DE), Todd Russell Platts (R-PA), Judy Biggert (R-IL), and Leonard Lance (R-NJ) were among the original cosponsors.[33] The bill was referred to the House Education and Labor Committee, which held a hearing on the legislation on September 23, 2009.[34] At the end of the 111th Congress, H.R. 3017 had 203 cosponsors in the House.[35]

On August 5, 2009, Sen. Jeff Merkley introduced ENDA legislation (S. 1584) that included gender identity,[36] with 38 original cosponsors including Sens. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Susan Collins (R-ME), Olympia Snowe (R-ME) and Chris Dodd (D-CT).[37] Sen. Merkley said "It's certainly possible that this could be passed by year's end, though the [congressional] schedule is very crowded."[38] As of March 13, 2010, S. 1584 had 45 co-sponsors and was pending before the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee,[36] which held a hearing on the legislation on November 5, 2009.[39]

112th CongressEditOn April 6, 2011, Frank introduced an ENDA bill (H.R. 1397) in the House to ban workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.[40]

On April 14, 2011, Sen. Jeff Merkley introduced an ENDA bill (S. 811) in the Senate.[41] The bill had 39 original cosponsors. On June 19, 2012, the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions held a hearing on the bill, the first such hearing to include testimony by a transgender witness.[42]

113th CongressEditOn April 25, 2013, Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) introduced an ENDA bill in the House (H.R. 1755) and Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) introduced an ENDA bill in the Senate (S. 815).[43]

On July 10, 2013, the Senate Health, Education, Labor & Pensions Committee approved ENDA by a 15-7 vote. Senator Lamar Alexander announced he would offer 3 amendments when the Senate takes up the measure.[44]

A cloture vote in the Senate was held on November 4, 2013, with 61 voting in favor and 30 against, allowing the Senate to avoid a filibuster and to hold a vote in the following days.[45][46] Republican Senators Kelly Ayotte, Sen. Susan Collins, Sen. Orrin Hatch, Sen. Dean Heller, Sen. Mark Kirk, Sen. Rob Portman, and Sen. Pat Toomey voted for cloture.[47]

ArgumentsEditIn favor of ENDAEditMost proponents of the law[who?] intend it to address cases where gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender employees have been discriminated against by their employers because of their sexual orientation or gender identity. Currently, these employees are unable to find protection in the courts because sexual orientation is not considered to be a suspect class by the federal courts and by many U.S. states. Proponents argue that such a law is appropriate in light of the United States Constitution's guarantees of equal protection and due process to all. Advocates argue that homosexuality is not a "choice" but a personal identity, a claim supported by the American Psychology Association (APA), and that all working people have a right to be judged by the quality of their work performance and not by completely unrelated factors.[48] According to a study published in 2001 by the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law, reports of discrimination based on sexual orientation are roughly equal to those on race or gender.[49] The APA also states that there is significant discrimination against homosexuals in the workforce.[48]

The Congressional Budget Office in 2002 estimated that the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission's complaint caseload would rise by 5 to 7% as a result of the proposed law.[50] Assessments of the impact of comparable state policies also show a minimal impact on caseload.[51] Regarding constitutionality, the act incorporates language similar to that of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,[21] which has consistently been upheld by the courts.

In 1994, Barry Goldwater, a hero among the conservative and libertarian movements, became honorary chairman of a drive to pass a federal law preventing job discrimination on the bias of sexual orientation.[52]

In opposition to ENDAEditEd Vitagliano, director of research for the American Family Association (AFA), a conservative Christian organization, wrote in 2007 that there was "no real problem of discrimination against homosexuals."[53] He expressed concern about the impact of anti-discrimination laws on religious organizations. He cited a lack of clarity around whether the narrow exemption would apply to support staff and lay employees in addition to churches and clergy.[10] Consumer surveys show that self-identified gay individuals likely have higher incomes than the average US household,[54] and ENDA opponents argue that many gay people hold positions of cultural influence as well.[53]

Another conservative Christian group, the Traditional Values Coalition (TVC), claims that the legislation would have a negative impact on school children by eliminating schools' ability to avoid hiring transgender teachers. The group claims that parents are not being adequately informed of the presence of transgender teachers in their children's classrooms. It argues that children should not be "subjected to [a transgender] man's bizarre sexual transformation", claiming that transgender individuals are "seriously mentally disturbed". The TVC argues that individuals cannot change their sex, even with surgery, and that it is impossible to transition from one sex to another.[55]

Libertarians argue that laws against private sector discrimination are acts of coercion that infringe on employers' property rights and freedom of association.[56]

The Catholic Church said ENDA goes beyond prohibiting unjust discrimination and poses several problems. It notes, for example, that the bill: (1) lacks an exception for a "bona fide occupational qualification," which exists for every other category of discrimination under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, except for race; (2) lacks a distinction between homosexual inclination and conduct, thus affirming and protecting extramarital sexual conduct; (3) supports the redefinition of marriage, as state-level laws like ENDA have been invoked in state court decisions finding marriage discriminatory or irrational; (4) rejects the biological basis of gender by defining "gender identity" as something people may choose at variance with their biological sex; and (5) threatens religious liberty by punishing as discrimination the religious or moral disapproval of same-sex sexual conduct, while protecting only some religious employers.[57]

Legislative historyEditCongressShort titleBill number(s)Gender identity included?Date introducedSponsor(s)# of cosponsorsLatest status103rd CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 1994H.R. 4636NoJune 23, 1994Gerry Studds(D-MA)137Died in the House Subcommittee on Select Education and Civil RightsS. 2238NoJuly 29, 1994Ted Kennedy(D-MA)30Died in the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources104th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 1995H.R. 1863NoJune 15, 1995Gerry Studds(D-MA)142Died in the House Subcommittee on the ConstitutionS. 932NoJune 15, 1995Jim Jeffords(R-VT)30Died in the Senate Committee on Labor and Human ResourcesS. 2056NoSeptember 5, 1996Ted Kennedy(D-MA)3Failed in Senate (49-50)105th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 1997H.R. 1858NoJune 10, 1997Christopher Shays(R-CT)140Died in the House Subcommittee on Employer-Employee RelationsS. 869NoJune 10, 1997Jim Jeffords(R-VT)34Died in the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources106th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 1999H.R. 2355NoJune 24, 1999Christopher Shays(R-CT)173Died in the House Subcommittee on Employer-Employee RelationsS. 1276NoJune 24, 1999Jim Jeffords(R-VT)36Died in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions107th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 2001H.R. 2692NoJuly 31, 2001Christopher Shays(R-CT)193Died in the House Subcommittee on Employer-Employee RelationsEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 2002S. 1284NoJuly 31, 2001Ted Kennedy(D-MA)44Died in the Senate108th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 2003H.R. 3285NoOctober 8, 2003Christopher Shays(R-CT)180Died in the House Subcommittee on Employer-Employee RelationsS. 1705NoOctober 2, 2003Ted Kennedy(D-MA)43Died in the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions110th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007H.R. 2015YesApril 24, 2007Barney Frank(D-MA)184Died in the House Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights and Civil LibertiesH.R. 3685NoSeptember 27, 2007Barney Frank(D-MA)9Passed the House (235''184), died in the Senate111th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009H.R. 3017YesJune 24, 2009Barney Frank(D-MA)203Died in the Judiciary, House Administration, Education and Labor, and Oversight and Government Reform committees. Hearings held September 23, 2009 in Education and Labor committee.H.R. 2981YesJune 19, 2009Barney Frank(D-MA)12Died in the House Judiciary CommitteeS. 1584YesAugust 5, 2009Jeff Merkley(D-OR)45Died in the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee Hearings held November 5, 2009.112th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 2011H.R. 1397YesApril 6, 2011Barney Frank(D-MA)171Referred to the Education and the Workforce, House Administration, Oversight and Government Reform, and Judiciary committees.S. 811YesApril 14, 2011Jeff Merkley(D-OR)43Referred to the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee.113th CongressEmployment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013H.R. 1755YesApril 25, 2013Jared Polis(D-CO)193Referred to the Education and the Workforce, House Administration, Oversight and Government Reform, and Judiciary committees.S. 815YesApril 25, 2013Jeff Merkley(D-OR)55Passed the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions committee (15-7), referred to the Senate floor.ReferencesEdit^"Nondiscrimination legislation historical timeline". National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. Retrieved November 1, 2011. ^"The State of the Workplace: for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Americans". Human Rights Campaign. ^Evidence Discrimination based on sexual orientation occurs at a similar rate as sex and race at 4.7 per 10,000, as compared to discrimination based on sex at 5.4 and race at 6.5.^Ramos, Christopher. "Evidence of Employment Discrimination on the Basis of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity: Complaints Filed with State Enforcement Agencies, 1999-2007". The Williams Institute. Retrieved April 30, 2011. ^"Estimates of LGBT Public Employees". The Williams Institute. Retrieved Accessed April 30, 2011. ^Tilcsik, A. (2011). Pride and prejudice: Employment discrimination against openly gay men in the United States. American Journal of Sociology, 117, 586''626.^Grant, Jamie M. "Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.". National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. ^Badgette, M.V. Lee. "Bias in the Workplace: Consistent Evidence of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity Discrimination". The Williams Institute. ^Witeck, Bob. "Ending Employment Discrimination in America: Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics About America's LGBT Families". ^ abVitagliano, Ed. "How ENDA Could Begin an Uncivil War". American Family Association Journal. Retrieved April 30, 2011. ^103rd Congress: "For purposes of this Act, the term 'employment or employment opportunities' does not apply to the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces."; 112th Congress: "In this Act, the term 'employment' does not apply to the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces."^111th and 112th Congresses: "In this Act, the term 'married' refers to marriage as such term is defined in section 7 of title 1, United States Code (commonly known as the 'Defense of Marriage Act')."^112th Congress: "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require a covered entity to treat an unmarried couple in the same manner as the covered entity treats a married couple for purposes of employee benefits."^(October 13, 2007) U.S. Congressmember Bella S. Abzug Stonewall.org. Accessed October 20, 2007.^S 2056 - Employment Nondiscrimination Act of 1996 - Voting Record^[Congressional Record, 103rd Congress, 2d Session, 140 Cong. Rec. E 1311; Vol. 140 No. 81 (June 23, 1994).]^Wendland, Joel. (April 9, 2007) A New Beginning for ENDA The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. Accessed October 20, 2007.^Bull, Chris. (May 13, 1997) No ENDA in sight - Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 1996 The Advocate. Accessed October 20, 2007.^Manley, Roslyn. (June 17, 2003) New "Unified" Bill to Replace ENDA: A Left Coast Perspective TG Crossroads. Accessed October 20, 2007; MetroWeekly: Chris Geidner, "Double Defeat," September 15, 2011, accessed February 10, 2012^H.R. 3685^ abCivil Rights Act of 1964^Weiss, Jillian Todd. (April 26, 2007) The text of ENDA Transgender Workplace Diversity Blog. Accessed October 20, 2007.^H.R. 3685 (110th): Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2007 (On Passage of the Bill)^Final Vote Results For HR 3685^Eleveld, Kerry. (September 29, 2007) ENDA to Be Separated Into Two Bills: Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity The Advocate. Accessed October 20, 2007.^http://www.thetaskforce.org/activist_center/ENDA_oct1_letter^http://nosubstitutes.org^Schindler, Paul. (October 4, 2007) HRC Alone in Eschewing No-Compromise Stand Gay City News. Accessed October 8, 2007.^Smith, Nadine (September 29, 2007). "A Moment of Truth". The Bilerico Project. Retrieved March 22, 2012. ^Aravosis, John (October 8, 2007). "How did the T get in LGBT?". Salon.com. Retrieved March 22, 2012. ^ abFrank Introduces Trans-Inclusive ENDA|News|Advocate.com:^Johnson, Chris (November 30, 2011). "Pro-LGBT Republican endorses Romney". Washington Blade. Retrieved June 25, 2009. ^Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress)^"Congressional hearing on ENDA: great success!". Bilerico.com. ^Search Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress):^ abSearch Results - THOMAS (Library of Congress):^"Merkley, Collins, Kennedy, Snowe Introduce Legislation To End Workplace Discrimination, August 5, 2009". U.S. Senate. Retrieved October 6, 2012. ^Harmon, Andrew (August 5, 2009). "ENDA Possible by Year's End". The Advocate. Retrieved August 5, 2009. As Speaker of the Oregon House of Representatives, Merkley successfully managed the enactment of Oregon's state version of ENDA, the Oregon Equality Act. Teigen, Kristin (August 5, 2009). "Senator Jeff Merkley Introduces the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA)". BlueOregon (Mandate Media). Retrieved March 22, 2012. ^"Employment Non-Discrimination Act: Ensuring Opportunity for All Americans". Washington Blade. June 12, 2012. ^Geidner, Chris. "ENDA Introduced -- With 92 Fewer Co-Sponsors Than at the End of the 111th Congress". MetroWeekly. Retrieved April 7, 2011. ^"Merkley, Kirk, Harkin, Collins Introduce Legislation to End Workplace Discrimination". Office of Senator Jeff Merkley. Retrieved April 14, 2011. ^Johnson, Chris. "Trans advocate testifies before Senate on ENDA". Retrieved October 6, 2012. ^Benen, Steve. "ENDA introduced with bipartisan backing". Retrieved April 25, 2013. ^"Senate panel advances trans-inclusive ENDA". Washington Blade. ^"Reid sets up Senate vote Monday for ENDA". Washington Blade. October 31, 2013. ^"Gay rights advances in Senate". Politico. November 4, 2013. ^"ENDA Prevails in the Senate, 61-30". Sate. November 4, 2013. ^ abExamining the Employment Nondiscrimination Act (ENDA): The Scientists Perspective American Psychological Association. Accessed May 22, 2010.^Rubenstein, William B. (January 30, 2002) Do Gay Rights Laws Matter?: An Empirical Assessment The Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law. Accessed October 20, 2007.^(April 24, 2002) CBO Cost Estimate: S. 1284 Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2002 Congressional Budget Office. Accessed October 20, 2007.^"Employment Discrimination against Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender People in Oklahoma". The Williams Institute. Retrieved May 1, 2011. ^"Barry Goldwater, GOP Hero, Dies". Washington Post. Retrieved November 2, 2013. ^ abViagliano, Ed (September 2007). "How ENDA could begin an Uncivil war". American Family Association Journal (American Family Association). Retrieved May 22, 2010. ^CMI's 3rd Annual Gay and Lesbian Consumer Index Community Marketing, Inc. Accessed May 22, 2010/^"Why It Matters". Traditional Values Coalition. Retrieved April 30, 2011. ^"Context Matters: A Better Libertarian Approach to Antidiscrimination Law". Cato Unbound. Retrieved December 12, 2012. ^"Questions and Answers About the Employee Non-Discrimination Act". United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Retrieved November 4, 2013. External linksEdit

Last modified on 5 November 2013, at 02:37

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 12:54

Employment discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender workers is pervasive and harmful. It violates core American values of fairness and equality by discriminating against qualified individuals based on characteristics unrelated to the job.

Congress needs to act to ensure that LGBT individuals have the same workplace protections that apply based on race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, and disability. The reality remains that it is legal to fire or refuse to hire someone based on his or her sexual orientation in 29 states. Those who are transgender can be fired or denied employment solely based on their gender identity in 33 states. Such numbers demonstrate the need for the federal government to expand employment non-discrimination protections to LGBT workers.

This view is shared by the overwhelming majority of the American public, including majorities of self-identified Democrats, Republicans, and independents. A 2011 poll found that 73 percent of likely voters support protecting LGBT people from discrimination in employment. In addition, many large and small businesses '' including many federal contractors '' have already taken these steps on their own, and report that they have very few or no costs and actually reap longer-term benefits to their bottom lines (e.g. recruiting the best and brightest, minimizing turnover costs, increasing productivity, appeal to new markets, etc.).

While passage of ENDA is critical for LGBT people across the country, the legislation's current, sweeping religious exemption must be narrowed. ENDA's religious exemption could provide religiously affiliated organizations '' far beyond houses of worship '' with a blank check to engage in employment discrimination against LGBT people. Religious liberty guarantees use the freedom to hold any belief we choose and the right to act on our religious beliefs, unless those actions harm others or result in discrimination. ENDA's religious exemption essentially says that LGBT discrimination is different '' more legitimate '' than discrimination against individuals based on their race or sex.

CAMPAIGN INVOLVEMENT

Americans for Workplace OpportunityThe ACLU is part of a bipartisan campaign '' Americans for Workplace Opportunity '' that formed this summer to take advantage of a historic opportunity to pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act 19 years after its first introduction. The steering committee of Americans for Workplace Opportunity is a diverse and bipartisan group of organizations composed of: American Civil Liberties Union, American Federation of Teachers, American Unity Fund, Human Rights Campaign, Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, National Center for Transgender Equality, National Gay & Lesbian Task Force, and the Service Employees International Union. Dozens of other organizations that support ENDA will also be involved in the coalition.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 12:55

GovTrack's Bill SummaryWe don't have a summary available yet.

Library of Congress SummaryThe summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.

4/25/2013--Introduced.

Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2013 - Prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity by covered entities (employers, employment agencies, labor organizations, or joint labor-management committees).

Prohibits preferential treatment or quotas.

Allows only disparate treatment claims.

Prohibits related retaliation.

Makes this Act inapplicable to:

(1) religious organizations, and

(2) the relationship between the United States and members of the Armed Forces. Declares that this Act does not repeal or modify any federal, state, territorial, or local law creating a special right or preference concerning employment for a veteran.

Prohibits this Act from being construed to:

(1) prohibit an employer from requiring an employee to adhere to reasonable dress or grooming standards, or

(2) require the construction of new or additional facilities.

Prohibits the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) from compelling collection or requiring production of statistics from covered entities on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.

Provides for enforcement, including giving the EEOC, the Librarian of Congress (LOC), the Attorney General (DOJ), and U.S. courts the same enforcement powers as they have under specified provisions of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991, and other specified laws.

Allows actions and proceedings, subject to exception, against the United States and the states.

House Republican Conference SummaryThe summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.

No summary available.

House Democratic Caucus SummaryThe House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.

So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference's summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That's because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.

We'll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 13:38

What's the quickest, easiest -- if least effective -- way to deal with your downtown's unsightly problem of homelessness? Making it somebody else's problem.

Because the city government in Columbia, S.C., apparently cribs its planning for homeless outreach from old episodes of "South Park," it has decided to get its big push broom out of the garage and just sweep the homeless out of the city center.

The Columbia City Council unanimously approved the plan, creating special police patrols that would enforce "quality of life" laws involving loitering, public urination and other crimes not necessarily restricted to the homeless population. Those officers would then offer the homeless a choice: Go to jail for their homelessness or be shuffled to a 240-bed, 24-hour shelter on the outskirts of town, which they wouldn't be allowed to easily leave.

That second option isn't jail, mind you, because the homeless are being confined with the help of a local charitable organization. It's charitable incarceration, you see. The homeless can leave, but they need to set up an appointment and be shuttled by a van.

And just in case any of the offending homeless get any ideas about doing something crazy like, oh, walking into town, officials plan to post an officer -- we can only assume it won't be Brian Dennehy -- on the road leading to downtown just to make sure they don't walk back and go all John Rambo on the place.

But, hey, it's cool: That 240-bed shelter should totally hold the 1,518 homeless people currently living in the Columbia area. Besides, the city is partnering with a charity. Surely they'll be able to make this exile of the homeless work, right?

Michael Stoops, director of community organizing at the National Coalition for the Homeless, told ThinkProgress, the plan is the "most comprehensive anti-homeless measure" he had ever seen proposed "in any city in the last 30 years." He added: "Using one massive shelter on the outskirts to house all a city's homeless is something that has never worked anywhere in the country."

But there has to be a first time for everything. Maybe this policy doesn't do anything to make the homeless less homeless. Maybe it doesn't peek into bigger issues like South Carolina's 8.1% unemployment rate or Columbia's 7.9% rate -- each higher than the national average. Maybe it doesn't factor in a state foreclosure rate that ranks among the nation's Top 10 and far outstrips the national average.

But a city marking the 50th Anniversary of the Civil Rights Movement can't get into trouble for segregating a whole portion of the population from the rest of the city just because it doesn't like the way it looks, can it? Well, there is that whole "equal treatment under the law" business that applies whether someone is shaking a change cup outside of a Starbucks or not.

"The underlying design is that they want the homeless not to be visible in downtown Columbia," Susan Dunn, South Carolina ACLU's legal director said. "You can shuttle them somewhere or you can go to jail. That's, in fact, an abuse of power."

Good luck with that, Columbia.

More on moneyNOW

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 10:19

Dit jaar zendt de overheid in totaal drie controleberichten uit; eerdere berichten werden verstuurd op 4 februari en 6 mei. Foto ANP / Lex van Lieshout

BinnenlandDe overheid stuurt vandaag een NL-Alert-controlebericht uit, tegelijkertijd met de maandelijkse sirenetest. De bedoeling is dat vier miljoen Nederlanders dit bericht op het middaguur op hun mobiele telefoon ontvangen.

Dat wordt gemeten via een representatieve steekproef waarvan de resultaten eind november wordt verwacht. Met NL-Alert kan de overheid mensen in de directe omgeving van een noodsituatie met een tekstbericht informeren. In het bericht staat wat er aan de hand is en wat mensen op dat moment het beste kunnen doen.

Zo werd vorige week in de provincies Friesland, Groningen en Drenthe een NL Alert uitgestuurd om te waarschuwen voor de zware herfststorm. Mensen werd vanwege het gevaar voor omvallende bomen aangeraden binnen te blijven.

NL-Alert werkt op basis van zogeheten cell broadcast en niet met sms-berichten. Daardoor werkt het anonieme alerteringssysteem ook als het telefoonnetwerk overbelast is. Naam en telefoonnummer zijn onnodig voor de verzender en blijven dus onbekend. Alle aanbieders van mobiele telefonie ondersteunen NL-Alert.

Vrijwel alle toestellen van populaire merken, zoals Samsung, HTC en de nieuwste iPhones, kunnen het ontvangen. Wie het bericht vandaag niet ontvangt heeft zijn telefoon niet goed ingesteld of heeft een toestel dat niet geschikt is voor dergelijke alerts. Steeds meer mobiele telefoons zijn automatisch ingesteld om NL-Alert te ontvangen, maar sommige types moeten handmatig worden ingesteld. Volgend jaar zendt de overheid twee controleberichten uit. (Novum)

Lees meer over:NL-Alert

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: CNET News

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 02:11

Eyeball-scanning tech at British gas stations will determine your age and gender, and fire at you what it thinks are suitable ads.

November 5, 2013 1:06 PM PST British chain Tesco is rolling out "Minority Report"-style eyeball-scanning tech to target advertisements at customers. The supermarket giant will install screens that scan your eyes in its gas stations. Then while you queue at the cash register, the screen will show ads it hopes will appeal to you based on your age and gender.

The screens -- called OptimEyes -- are made by Lord Sugar's Amscreen company and contain built-in cameras and software that can identify certain key traits. They'll find their way into all 450 of Tesco's petrol stations, Amscreen said in a release, and could be used by other British supermarkets too.

"Yes, it's like something out of 'Minority Report,' but this could change the face of British retail and our plans are to expand the screens into as many supermarkets as possible," Simon Sugar, son of Alan and CEO of Amscreen, told The Grocer.

Read moreTesco to use eye-scanning tech to target ads at you" at Crave UK.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Dave says...

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 18:44

Ted's Tidbits: The Zen TV ExperimentThe Zen TV ExperimentPosted on Thursday, December 17, 2009 'ž

If you watch television, you should take a look at this post. It's a repost of an article that first appeared in Adbusters Magazine on the effects of television on individuals and society. It proposes four experiments to attempt at home. I did this, and I recommend you do it to.

1) Watch TV for 10 minutes and count the technical events.What is a technical event? We've all seen TV cameras in banks and jewelry stores. A stationary video camera simply recording what's in front of it is what I will call ''pure TV.'' Anything other than pure TV is a technical event: the camera zooms up, that's a technical event; you are watching someone's profile talking and suddenly you are switched to another person responding, that's a technical event; a car is driving down the road and you also hear music playing, that's a technical event. Simply count the number of times there is a cut, zoom, superimposition, voice-over, appearance of words on the screen, fade in/out, etc.

For this test, I watched the first 10 minutes of this episode of my namesake show. In that 10 minutes I counted 223 technical events, and then I realized I didn't count any audio effects!

2) Watch any TV show for 15 minutes without turning on the sound.For this, I simply muted the volume on the same show and watched the remainder.

3) Watch any news program for 15 minutes without turning on the sound.It took a while for me to find a recording of an actual news program online (I needed 15 contiguous minutes, and the news sites only offer clips) but I finally found this on Hulu.

4) Watch television for one half hour without turning it on.I must admit that I haven't done this yet. I want to do the experiment, but I just haven't been able to bring myself to waste a half hour sitting in front of a turned off television.

Well, the point is that television is messing with your mind. All the technical events that occur in a normal TV show make for a very disjointed set of scenes that we have trained our brains to assemble into a narrative.

Television inhibits your ability to think, but it does not lead to freedom of mind, relaxation or renewal. It leads to a more exhausted mind. You may have time out from prior obsessive thought patterns, but that's as far as television goes. The mind is never empty, the mind is filled. What's worse, it is filled with someone else's obsessive thoughts and images.

Watching the TV without the sound makes it more difficult to connect with the story and therefore easier to observe all the technical events occurring. Switching to a news program you realize that there are fewer technical events.

With fewer technical events the news show appears realistic relative to other shows in the TV environment. Further, it appears super-realistic relative to the commercial shows in this environment. As earlier, we witnessed the joining of technical events in a coherent narrative. Here, we witness the reduction of worldly events into a narrative.

I admit I haven't yet stared at a blank TV for a half hour, but I imagine two things would occur to me. First, I would realize just exactly how long a half hour feels, and I would be bothered by the things I could be doing with that time. Second, I would see the TV for what it is, an object, instead of what it is not, a companion.

If one is alone in one's room and turns on the TV, one actually doesn't feel alone anymore. It's as if companionship is experienced, as if communication is two-way.

This does make for an interesting, if not disturbing, academic discussion, but it is not fruitful unless a behavioral change occurs. I encourage you to make your own resolutions. As for me, I am making a deliberate effort to watch less TV. This is actually something I started doing a while back when we canceled our cable. There are still some shows I enjoy watching, and I will continue to watch them. I don't think I'm going to start watching any new shows, and I'm definitely going to stop watching shows I find myself complaining about. To do otherwise would just be stupid. Tonight, for example, I elected to write this blog post instead of watching The Office or some other show.

Maybe one day I'll stop watching TV altogether (although I have no plans to cease watching the Dallas Cowboys, no matter how frustrating of an experience that may be). I don't want to bind myself to a statement I won't be able to live up to. At least for now, I feel encouraged to read more.

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

comments powered by Copyright (C) 2013 Ted C. Howard

Ted's Tidbits: The Zen TV ExperimentThe Zen TV ExperimentPosted on Thursday, December 17, 2009 'ž

If you watch television, you should take a look at this post. It's a repost of an article that first appeared in Adbusters Magazine on the effects of television on individuals and society. It proposes four experiments to attempt at home. I did this, and I recommend you do it to.

1) Watch TV for 10 minutes and count the technical events.What is a technical event? We've all seen TV cameras in banks and jewelry stores. A stationary video camera simply recording what's in front of it is what I will call ''pure TV.'' Anything other than pure TV is a technical event: the camera zooms up, that's a technical event; you are watching someone's profile talking and suddenly you are switched to another person responding, that's a technical event; a car is driving down the road and you also hear music playing, that's a technical event. Simply count the number of times there is a cut, zoom, superimposition, voice-over, appearance of words on the screen, fade in/out, etc.

For this test, I watched the first 10 minutes of this episode of my namesake show. In that 10 minutes I counted 223 technical events, and then I realized I didn't count any audio effects!

2) Watch any TV show for 15 minutes without turning on the sound.For this, I simply muted the volume on the same show and watched the remainder.

3) Watch any news program for 15 minutes without turning on the sound.It took a while for me to find a recording of an actual news program online (I needed 15 contiguous minutes, and the news sites only offer clips) but I finally found this on Hulu.

4) Watch television for one half hour without turning it on.I must admit that I haven't done this yet. I want to do the experiment, but I just haven't been able to bring myself to waste a half hour sitting in front of a turned off television.

Well, the point is that television is messing with your mind. All the technical events that occur in a normal TV show make for a very disjointed set of scenes that we have trained our brains to assemble into a narrative.

Television inhibits your ability to think, but it does not lead to freedom of mind, relaxation or renewal. It leads to a more exhausted mind. You may have time out from prior obsessive thought patterns, but that's as far as television goes. The mind is never empty, the mind is filled. What's worse, it is filled with someone else's obsessive thoughts and images.

Watching the TV without the sound makes it more difficult to connect with the story and therefore easier to observe all the technical events occurring. Switching to a news program you realize that there are fewer technical events.

With fewer technical events the news show appears realistic relative to other shows in the TV environment. Further, it appears super-realistic relative to the commercial shows in this environment. As earlier, we witnessed the joining of technical events in a coherent narrative. Here, we witness the reduction of worldly events into a narrative.

I admit I haven't yet stared at a blank TV for a half hour, but I imagine two things would occur to me. First, I would realize just exactly how long a half hour feels, and I would be bothered by the things I could be doing with that time. Second, I would see the TV for what it is, an object, instead of what it is not, a companion.

If one is alone in one's room and turns on the TV, one actually doesn't feel alone anymore. It's as if companionship is experienced, as if communication is two-way.

This does make for an interesting, if not disturbing, academic discussion, but it is not fruitful unless a behavioral change occurs. I encourage you to make your own resolutions. As for me, I am making a deliberate effort to watch less TV. This is actually something I started doing a while back when we canceled our cable. There are still some shows I enjoy watching, and I will continue to watch them. I don't think I'm going to start watching any new shows, and I'm definitely going to stop watching shows I find myself complaining about. To do otherwise would just be stupid. Tonight, for example, I elected to write this blog post instead of watching The Office or some other show.

Maybe one day I'll stop watching TV altogether (although I have no plans to cease watching the Dallas Cowboys, no matter how frustrating of an experience that may be). I don't want to bind myself to a statement I won't be able to live up to. At least for now, I feel encouraged to read more.

Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

comments powered by Copyright (C) 2013 Ted C. Howard

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 20:12

Science | WorldNPR | Nov. 03, 2013 12:09 p.m.

The United Nations General Assembly may approve a plan soon for the world's space agencies to defend the Earth against asteroids.

The plan, introduced last week, is expected to be adopted by the General Assembly in December. It would do two things: create an International Asteroid Warning Network so countries can share what they know about asteroids; and spin up a group of scientists from several countries' space agencies to look for smaller asteroids, as well as make plans to divert them away from the Earth.

The problem here isn't a large asteroid. NASA has already found more than 90 percent of the comets and asteroids larger than 1 kilometer, or 0.6 miles, across '-- those are the ones big enough to do global damage.

The concern is for the smaller meteoroids '-- ones that are more than 450 feet across. These can still get through the Earth's atmosphere and rain down on the planet. Although most of the Earth is covered by oceans, an asteroid of this size could destroy several states or an entire city if it lands in the wrong spot.

An international group, formed from discussions at the U.N., would test a strategy to deflect an incoming asteroid by using ''a fleet of robot spacecraft to slam into the asteroids,'' says veteran NASA astronaut Tom Jones. These kamikaze robots would change the direction of the incoming asteroid so it doesn't crash into the Earth.

NASA tried something similar with its 2005 Deep Impact mission, which slammed into a comet to see how the inside differs from the outside.

Jones estimates the cost of a deflection plan would be comparable to the price tag for the Mars Curiosity Rover, which cost $2.5 billion. By working with other space agencies, this cosmic insurance policy would spread this cost around. The plan is for the space agencies to work together, like they have done on the International Space Station, except this project would come with the blessing of the U.N. and the global community.

Jones, who also chairs the Association of Space Explorers' committee on Near-Earth Objects, says the telescopes NASA currently has can't spot these small, but potentially deadly space rocks.

''Those telescopes are not sensitive enough to see distant, small, dark asteroids,'' Jones says. ''The only time they see those is by accident when those asteroids drift past the Earth close by, then you can catch a few of them in your sights.''

In 2005, Congress passed legislation asking NASA to find 90 percent of these small asteroids by 2020, but NASA is still working on that. The space agency recently called for the public's help in searching for them, and it brought back a retired spacecraft to spot them. To get closer to this goal, NASA needs special infrared telescopes in space, but the space agency doesn't have the money for them, says Lindley Johnson, program executive for NASA's Near-Earth Object Program, which tracks comets and asteroids in the Earth's neighborhood.

Johnson and Jones both say a plan from the U.N. would enhance what NASA is already doing.

''Here's the biggest of all natural disasters that we're talking about, and it's preventable,'' Jones says.

Earlier this year, a meteorite hit Chelyabinsk in Russia and injured 1,000 people. ''If the people in Chelyabinsk had been warned a day beforehand,'' Jones says, ''they could have been away from the windows or in shelters where almost nobody would have been hurt.''

Getting several space agencies and their respective countries on board can also avoid trust problems, Jones says.

''Do you trust the Russians? Do you trust NASA to do a deflection all by itself?'' he says. ''If they make a mistake halfway through and an asteroid happens to land somewhere else than where we originally thought, who's to blame? We'd rather have that responsibility shared and sanctioned by the U.N. rather than a unilateral approach.''

The U.N. member nations that are actively participating include the U.S., the U.K., the countries that are part of the European Space Agency, Russia, Japan, Nigeria and Mexico, says Sergio Camacho-Lara, director of the U.N. Office for Outer Space Affairs.

As the U.N. is the only universal forum for discussing international issues, Camacho-Lara says it is the best way to make sure the world's governments can start thinking about the threat from asteroids. As of now, the resolution is a draft that has been endorsed by several U.N. committees, but Camacho-Lara says in the past 50 years, only four resolutions have reached this point and not been adopted by the General Assembly.

''We will be finding, in the next five, 10 years, another half million or more [asteroids], so the magnitude of the problem is quite a bit larger than what we have right now,'' Camacho-Lara says. ''But the asteroids are there, it's a question of finding them before they actually find us.''

CommentsPlease enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

blog comments powered by

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 19:57

UK WikiLeaks journalist Sarah Harrison with Edward Snowden in Moscow in October. Photograph: Sunshine Press/Getty Images

Sarah Harrison, the British journalist and Wikileaks staffer who has been acting as an assistant to Edward Snowden since his arrival in Moscow, has left Russia and joined the growing band of net activists stranded in Berlin.

A statement released on the Wikileaks website, attributed to Harrison, states that she arrived in Germany on Saturday and has been advised by her lawyers that it is "not safe to return home" to the UK.

Harrison joins a growing group of journalists and activists who were involved in the publication of Snowden's files and are now living in the German capital "in effective exile", including Laura Poitras and Jacob Applebaum.

The statement, which is also quoted on Spiegel website, accused the US and UK governments of using "aggressive tactics" against journalists who have reported on unethical surveillance practices.

"It should be fanciful to suggest that national security journalism which has the purpose of producing honest government or enforcing basic privacy rights should be called 'terrorism', but that is how the UK is choosing to interpret this law."

Harrison has appeared in many of the photographs of Snowden that have emerged from Russia. Last Thursday, she was present at the meeting between the NSA whistleblower and the German Green politician Hans-Christian Str¶bele in Moscow.

The statement does not clarify why Harrison, 31, left Moscow, buy says: "Edward Snowden is safe and protected until his asylum visa is due to be renewed in nine months time", and that "there is still much work to be done".

Harrison, a graduate of City University's journalism programme, first started working with WikiLeaks before the Afghan war documents leak and played a key role during the publication of the embassy cables and in Julian Assange's fight against extradition to Sweden. She accompanied Snowden on the flight from Hong Kong to Moscow on 23 June.

' This article was amended on 6 November 2013. The original picture showed Edward Snowden with Jesselyn Raddack, not Sarah Harrison. This has been corrected

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 14:32

(on 2013-11-06)

As a journalist I have spent the last four months with NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and arrived in Germany over the weekend. I worked in Hong Kong as part of the WikiLeaks team that brokered a number of asylum offers for Snowden and negotiated his safe exit from Hong Kong to take up his legal right to seek asylum. I was travelling with him on our way to Latin America when the United States revoked his passport, stranding him in Russia. For the next 39 days I remained with him in the transit zone of Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport, where I assisted in his legal application to 21 countries for asylum, including Germany, successfully securing his asylum in Russia despite substantial pressure by the United States. I then remained with him until our team was confident that he had established himself and was free from the interference of any government.

Whilst Edward Snowden is safe and protected until his asylum visa is due to be renewed in nine months' time, there is still much work to be done. The battle Snowden joined against state surveillance and for government transparency is one that WikiLeaks '' and many others '' have been fighting, and will continue to fight.

WikiLeaks' battles are many: we fight against unaccountable power and government secrecy, publishing analysis and documents for all affected and to forever provide the public with the history that is theirs. For this, we are fighting legal cases in many jurisdictions and face an unprecedented Grand Jury investigation in the United States. WikiLeaks continues to fight for the protection of sources. We have won the battle for Snowden's immediate future, but the broader war continues.

Already, in the few days I have spent in Germany, it is heartening to see the people joining together and calling for their government to do what must be done '' to investigate NSA spying revelations, and to offer Edward Snowden asylum. The United States should no longer be able to continue spying on every person around the globe, or persecuting those that speak the truth.

Snowden is currently safe in Russia, but there are whistleblowers and sources to whom this does not apply. Chelsea Manning has been subject to abusive treatment by the United States government and is currently serving a 35-year sentence for exposing the true nature of war. Jeremy Hammond is facing a decade in a New York jail for allegedly providing journalists with documents that exposed corporate surveillance. I hope I have shown a counter example: with the right assistance whistleblowers can speak the truth and keep their liberty.

Aggressive tactics are being used against journalists, publishers and experts who work so courageously to bring truth to the world. Glenn Greenwald, Laura Poitras and Jacob Appelbaum are all in effective exile. Barrett Brown is indicted for reporting on unethical surveillance practices. My editor Julian Assange has asylum over US threats, but the United Kingdom refuses to allow him to fully exercise this right, violating the law. The UK government also detained David Miranda under the UK Terrorism Act for collaborating with Laura Poitras and Glenn Greenwald.

The UK Terrorism Act defines terrorism as the action or threat of action "designed to influence" any government "for the purpose of promoting a political or ideological cause". It prescribes actions that interfere with the functioning of an "electronic system" (i.e. the NSA's bulk spying program) or which the government alleges create a "risk" to a section of the public. It should be fanciful to suggest that national security journalism which has the purpose of producing honest government or enforcing basic privacy rights should be called "terrorism", but that is how the UK is choosing to interpret this law. Almost every story published on the GCHQ and NSA bulk spying programs falls under the UK government's interpretation of the word "terrorism". In response, our lawyers have advised me that it is not safe to return home.

The job of the press is to speak truth to power. And yet for doing our job we are persecuted. I say that these aggressive and illegal tactics to silence us '' inventing arbitrary legal interpretations, over-zealous charges and disproportionate sentences '' must not be permitted to succeed. I stand in solidarity with all those intimidated and persecuted for bringing the truth to the public.

In these times of secrecy and abuse of power there is only one solution '' transparency. If our governments are so compromised that they will not tell us the truth, then we must step forward to grasp it. Provided with the unequivocal proof of primary source documents people can fight back. If our governments will not give this information to us, then we must take it for ourselves.

When whistleblowers come forward we need to fight for them, so others will be encouraged. When they are gagged, we must be their voice. When they are hunted, we must be their shield. When they are locked away, we must free them. Giving us the truth is not a crime. This is our data, our information, our history. We must fight to own it.

Courage is contagious.

Sarah Harrison, Wednesday 6 November 2013, Berlin

WikiLeaks Legal Defence FundJournalistic Source Protection Defence Fund

Send to FriendPrint

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 23:25

Note: To use these shortcuts, users of screen readers may need to toggle off the virtual navigation.

EnterOpen Tweet detailsgfGo to user...?This menujNext TweetkPrevious TweetSpacePage down/Search.Load new Tweets

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 23:24

Invited Talk by Jacob AppelbaumIndependent Security Analyst and The Tor ProjectTitle: The New Threat Models

Time: Wednesday, Nov 6th, 2013 at 4:30 pm in Room B07-B08

Abstract: The recent leaks of information by Edward Snowden teach us about the behaviors, specific goals, various techniques, as well as the overall motivations behind certain well funded attackers. The information presented by journalists raise extremely serious questions about the trade-offs being made by these attackers. The subverting of academics, industry and scientific standardization bodies is not only concerning, it threatens to undermine analysis performed on the basis of certain ground truths. How does this impact society? How does it impact industry? What empowers these attackers and how is it that it does not empower other attackers? What problems and threat models need to be considered? What are the key problems that we must consider with regard to security, privacy, anonymity and society?

Bio: Jacob Appelbaum works as a journalist, a photographer, and as a software developer and researcher with The Tor Project. He also trains interested parties globally on how to effectively use and contribute to the Tor network, an anonymity network for everyone. He is a founding member of the hacklab Noisebridge in San Francisco where he indulges his interests in magnetics, cryptography and consensus based governance. He was a driving force in the team behind the creation of the Cold Boot Attacks; winning both the Pwnie for Most Innovative Research award and the Usenix Security best student paper award in 2008. Additionally, he was part of the MD5 Collisions Inc. team that created a rogue CA certificate by using a cluster of 200 PlayStations funded by the Swiss taxpayers. The ''MD5 considered harmful today'' research was awarded the best paper award at CRYPTO 2009.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 23:24

We thank all our sponsors:

Horst G¶rtz Stiftung BOSCH SAPARONSFCISCOIntelMicrosoft ResearchGoogleHeise SecurityNXPCertgateSIC Indiana UniversitySirrix AGKOBILIBM ResearchYou want to be a sponsor? See Call for Sponsorship.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Unfashionista

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 21:14

The Guardian has lied to the British people. They HAVE passed to foreign papers and blogs the names and identities of GCHQ agents, having lied and stated they did not to avoid prosecution, and to dupe other papers, police and some MPs into thinking that all they did was report on data collection, never giving up the names of British intelligence officers.

From the start of this affair, and the 'David Miranda is only a journalist's spouse' lie, the Guardian has sought to deceive its fellow papers and the public. But I confess that even I did not believe they would just dump out the identities of our intelligence personnel, copying those files and smuggling them to foreigners.

We already know Alan Rusbridger and Janine Gibson have duplicated and muled abroad the Snowden files, handing them to the New York Times and some bloggers at ProPublica.

For some months, I have been asking the Guardian to admit if they betrayed the names, or identifying details, of anybody working at GCHQ to foreign papers in order to boost their online readership while their paper sales are crumbling to insignificance.

It was not surprising that they refused to answer me, because communicating material identifying any person that works at GCHQ, and which could be of use to terrorists, is itself a terrorist offence under British law. Not just publishing the names, mark you '' communicating them. To anybody.

I've blogged before about how the editors of the Guardian boasted they were above the law, so I won't reiterate it here. They are also very fond of giving self-congratulatory online interviews and talking to lapdogs at the BBC, as well as giving unwittingly revealing profile access to friendly magazines. Nobody at the Guardian is willing to give even a single interview to a challenging paper.

In a nutshell then in the past month or so we have had:

Alan Rusbridger saying he is above the law: that he decided to ship the files to foreigners because of a ''threat'' to go to law: that he would not let British judges rule on the files: that he knows better than judges and security experts; and that Sen. Feinstein of the US Senate Security Committee knows less than him about it because she is, and I quote, ''an eighty year old woman.''

US editor Janine Gibson boasting of the trafficking they did ''By far the hardest challenge has been the secure movement of materials. We've had to do a great deal of flying of people around the world.''

And a New Yorker profile that stated that James Ball, formerly of Wikileaks and an Assange devotee, 27, was chosen to be the physical mule that carried the data to New York. Ball was threatened with exposure of emails between himself and the Wikileaks hacker Jacob Appelbaum, by Appelbaum, if he did not publish a story on Tor. Days later his byline appeared on the story that blew up GCHQ's efforts to decrypt the Tor network on which child pornography, illegal arms and drugs like crack are traded.

Ball has recently been moved by the Guardian from London to New York in the wake of that New Yorker story, presumably to avoid arrest if the New Yorker was correct on his role.

Throughout, in between breaks from pouring scorn on the British judiciary and laws, the Guardian have been busily lying to the British public. Saying that what they are doing is only journalism they have squirmed when asked (by me on Twitter, directly to @Arusbridger) and by the MP Julian Smith in Parliament, if they have passed over and sold out the names of British intelligence personnel working at GCHQ.

When the idea that they had revealed not just data collection news but actually given up the names of our intelligence agents surfaced, the paper started to panic. They denied it to the Daily Mail on October 9:

''The newspaper also said that the files it FedExed to America did not contain any names of British spies.''

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2456843/MI5-concerns-The-Guardian-sending-secret-files''Fedex-Newspaper-used-public-courier-firm-post-data-country.html#ixzz2je7dOu7r

This was a lie. It didn't matter if the names of our spies were in the 100 documents the Guardian FedExed to America. Ball had already taken them to New York, and Brazil, at least according to the story the New Yorker:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/10/07/131007fa_fact_auletta?currentPage=all

The idea that the Guardian handed over only 100 documents was yet another lie. There may have been 'only' 100 top secret documents in that FedExed memory stick (Dear God). But there were over 50,000 GCHQ documents muled abroad by Rusbridger and Gibson.

Think about that for a minute. Fifty. Thousand. Fifty thousand top secret GCHQ documents, and they are lying to the Daily Mail that none of these contain the names of any of our spies.

Yesterday in New York that lie was exposed, and the breathtaking extent of the Guardian's disregard for our agents' lives was laid bare.

In their front-page story, the New York Times laid it all out. It's a pretty long story, but I've read it so you don't have to.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/03/world/no-morsel-too-minuscule-for-all-consuming-nsa.html?_r=0

''documents taken by Mr. Snowden and shared with The Times, numbering in the thousands and mostly dating from 2007 to 2012, are part of a collection of about 50,000 items that focus mainly on its British counterpart, Government Communications Headquarters or G.C.H.Q''

''Even with terrorists, N.S.A. units can form a strangely personal relationship. The N.S.A.-G.C.H.Q. wiki, a top secret group blog that Mr. Snowden downloaded, lists 14 specialists scattered in various stations assigned to Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Pakistani terrorist group that carried out the bloody attack on Mumbai in 2008, with titles including ''Pakistan Access Pursuit Team'' and ''Techniques Discovery Branch.'' Under the code name Treaclebeta, N.S.A.'s hackers at Tailored Access Operations also played a role.

In the wiki's casual atmosphere, American and British eavesdroppers exchange the peculiar shoptalk of the secret world. ''I don't normally use Heretic to scan the fax traffic, I use Nucleon,'' one user writes, describing technical tools for searching intercepted documents.

But most striking are the one-on-one pairings of spies and militants; Bryan is assigned to listen in on a man named Haroon, and Paul keeps an ear on Fazl.''

Did you get that? The Guardian '' Alan Rusbridger, and Janine Gibson, editors, and James Ball, of Wikileaks, gave the New York Times and Pro-Publica the names and identities of GCHQ intelligence personnel in the NSA-GCHQ wiki. A bunch of staff at the New York Times can read their conversations and names, and the names of their targets.

To see how wide and deep the danger to GCHQ personnel really is, we can turn to the Guardian's first, grossly irresponsible story on just how much of GCHQ personnel's names and identities they had access to: they printed it on August 1st:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/02/gchq-spy-agency-nsa-snowden

a glimpse into the world of the 6,100 people crammed into the open-plan and underground offices at GCHQ; the fact that there is a sports day at all reveals something about the agency which most people outside their bubble could not appreciate.

Last year, GCHQ organised trips to Disneyland in Paris, and its sailing club took part in an offshore regatta at Cowes. It has a chess club, cake sales, regular pub quiz nights and an internal puzzle newsletter called Kryptos. A member of Stonewall since last year, GCHQ has its own Pride group for staff who are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender.

There is also a paranormal organisation. Describing itself as ''GCHQ's ghost-hunting group'', it is open to staff and their partners ''whether they are sceptics or believers'' for visits to ''reputedly haunted properties''.

Staff date themselves on the internal directory, ''GCWiki'', by their ''internet age'', a measure of how many years they have been adept on the web.

They make friends during annual family open days, or via messages on the agency's internal version of MySpace, which they have called SpySpace.

Colleagues are likely to find others cut from the same cloth. The agency's 2010/11 recruitment guide says GCHQ needs high-calibre technologists and mathematicians familiar with the complex algorithms that power the internet. It has room for a sprinkling of accountants and librarians. Classicists need not apply. Nobody at Cheltenham is particularly well paid, compared with the private sector at least '' a junior analyst might earn £25,000. ''We can offer a fantastic mission but we can't compete with [private sector] salaries,'' one briefing note lamented.''

The story goes on and on, talking about the wiki, quoting internal comms, describing the fears of one of GCHQ's ''most senior officers''.

All these documents have been muled to the Americans, because Alan Rusbridger doesn't like British judges. He was paying David Miranda specifically to spread and mule these files on GCHQ '' 53,000 of them, the same number cited by the NYT '' and now we know just how bad the paper's betrayal of our GCHQ personnel has been. Worse than even I could ever have imagined.

In his article for the Daily Mail recently, David Davis MP defended the Guardian's selling of British intelligence secrets. How bloody terrifying to think that but for a public meltdown he could have been Home Secretary. And when Julian Smith challenged the Guardian in a Westminster Hall debate, the Tory MP Dominic Raab said that he was scare-mongering. I wonder what those two of my former colleagues would say now. Would they defend the liars at the Guardian who swore they didn't give out any GCHQ names? Or do they think it's OK to mule and traffic to Brazil and American bloggers the NSA-GCHQ wiki? Every pair of eyes that sees those names can pass them on to anybody they like.

They gave out our intelligence agents' names, Dominic, David. Is that OK with you?

I pray to God it isn't OK with the Prime Minister, with Theresa May, and with anti-terror police.

Back when Miranda was stopped as he muled, Oliver Robbins, the National Security Adviser, said

'' 'A particular concern for HMG is the possibility that the identity of a UK intelligence officer might be revealed.'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2407152/Lives-MI6-agents-risk-secret-files-seized-Guardian-journalists-partner-Heathrow.html#ixzz2jeKIln00

But I'm afraid it was a bit more than just one.

Of course, £25,000 isn't a lot of money to risk your life keeping Britain safe. Alan Rusbridger makes a hell of a lot more money than that. But it wasn't enough for him, Janine Gibson, or James Ball, or any of the other Guardian staff to show some compassion and keep secret the identities of our agents Snowden, Poitras and Greenwald had endangered. Instead, the millionaire Mr. Rusbridger preened for the cameras, lied to other journalists, and threw GCHQ personnel to the wolves.

Mr. Rusbridger says he is above the law. I hope to God the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary '' and our anti-terror police, and our judges '' have the guts to prove him wrong.

The Terrorism Act 2000 lists various Terrorist Offences. Here is the last of them:

Eliciting, publishing or communicating information about members of armed forces etc(1)A person commits an offence who'--

(a)elicits or attempts to elicit information about an individual who is or has been'--

(i)a member of Her Majesty's forces,

(ii)a member of any of the intelligence services, or

(iii)a constable,

which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or

(b)publishes or communicates any such information.

(2)It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for their action.

(3)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable'--

(a)on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years or to a fine, or to both;

(b)on summary conviction'--

(i)in England and Wales or Scotland, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both;

(ii)in Northern Ireland, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 6 months or to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum, or to both.

(4)In this section ''the intelligence services'' means the Security Service, the Secret Intelligence Service and GCHQ (within the meaning of section 3 of the Intelligence Services Act 1994 (c. 13)).

Emphasis mine.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Unfashionista

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 23:48

There was some traction today on the Guardian's trafficking of GCHQ agents' names abroad, because the Telegraph had the guts to challenge the cosy journalists' club.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/10426204/Guardian-refuses-to-say-whether-it-sent-details-of-British-spies-overseas.htm

Written by Tom Whitehead, the story printed all my facts from yesterday's blog, including calling the Guardian out for their earlier lies.

The British newspaper has previously announced that it has shared some of its leaked GCHQ files with international partners but insisted on at least one occasion, that the identities of British spies were not included.

The sub for the online story wrote:

Guardian under fresh scrutiny as New York Times report on leaked GCHQ files contains detailed information on eavesdroppers

It went on:

Asked last night whether this suggested the files sent to the US contained the details of British spies, a spokeswoman for the Guardian said: ''It is well documented that we are working in partnership with the New York Times and others to responsibly report these stories.

'...

The development comes ahead of the latest legal battle surrounding the GCHQ files in the High Court this week.

I am truly grateful to the Telegraph for having printed this story. The more so, because it is fair to say I cordially detest its editor Tony Gallagher, (@GallagherEditor ) and he me, as our frequent spats on Twitter will attest.

But it is fairly obvious that just about every word in Tom Whitehead's piece came from my blog yesterday. The reason that we can safely say this is, if it were a piece of original research, it would have been written up on Sunday, when the New York Times exposed that the Guardian had handed them the NSA-GCHQ wiki, and then printed on Monday.

Here's what didn't come from me:

Asked last night whether this suggested the files sent to the US contained the details of British spies

You see what Tom Whitehead did, rest of the British press? He asked them the goddamned question.

A free press depends on a ballsy press. It depends on a lack of collusion. It depends on journalists showing no fear and no favour. Will Lewis (then Telegraph) went after MPs on their expenses and the whole world cheered, and now MPs who oppose the Leveson straitjacket cite that story to fight the royal charter,

But if the UK press closes ranks, acts like those few bent coppers in the Mitchell affair, declines to ask Rusbridger and Gibson any tough questions because well, they know them, they're mates with them, they drank with James Ball in a pub once '' then that really sucks. Freedom of the press totally depends on the guts of journalists and a willingness to investigate your own, your side, your mates.

I have always been against Leveson and the Royal Charter, in Parliament and out of it. My campaign against the Guardian is on a particular issue, the fact that they have very clearly sold our intelligence agents out for money. I do give a shit about the men and women in GCHQ who protect us. Those suckers the Guardian sneered at because they only make £25,000 a year to risk their lives. I don't believe in state control of the press, and investigating whether highly paid corporate executives like Rusbridger and Gibson have broken the law is not state control of the press. I believe that existing laws are good enough. There's a hacking trial going on right now, isn't there? And those saying 'hey there have been no arrests at the Guardian' have forgotten that the Metropolitan police have opened a criminal inquiry after the arrest of Miranda. Don't assume they aren't looking at that NSA-GCHQ wiki stuff.

But if there's going to be collusion amongst papers to protect their own, then fuck it, perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps Ed Miliband was right, and the press should be controlled by the government. Maybe @HackedOffHugh and the Brian Cathcart pizza party were on the right track at 3 am.

Here are exchanges today between me and the normally sensible journalist John Rentoul, of whom I am a long-standing admirer.

John Rentoul ''ª@JohnRentoul

/'ª@LouiseMensch Do you think you could make your case against The Guardian without using the words ''lie'', ''trafficking'' & ''mule''? Thank you

''ª@LouiseMensch'¬5h '¨'¨. 'ª@JohnRentoul unfortunately not, since they lied, they trafficked, and they muled, and there is chapter and verse on all three.'¨Details '¨

''ª@LouiseMensch'¬5h '¨'¨. 'ª@JohnRentoul it would be fantastic if a paper other than the 'ª@Telegraph had the guts to challenge them on their lies. Like, say, yours.

.''ª@JohnRentoul'¬3h '¨'¨'ª@LouiseMensch Guardian statement to Daily Mail on 9 Oct may have been incomplete & misleading but it was not a lie. 'ªhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2456843/MI5-concerns-The-Guardian-sending-secret-files''Fedex-Newspaper-used-public-courier-firm-post-data-country.html#ixzz2je7dOu7r '...

@JohnRentoul'¬3h '¨'¨'ª@LouiseMensch I disagree. Deliberately misleading is different from lying. Distinction is important itself but also as a matter of tactics.

So here we have a senior, well-respected journalist asking me to drop the word ''lie'' and ''mule'' and ''traffick''. When challenged, however, John admits that on October 9th the Guardian deliberately misled the Daily Mail when they denied to them that they sent agents names to America by FedEx (because they had sent them, according to the New Yorker, using James Ball, a 27 year old ex wikileaks activist). But Rentoul argues that ''deliberately misleading'' is different from ''lying''.

FFS John, man up. Ask the bloody paper why they lied.

As to his objections to the very clear ''mule'' and ''traffick'' I asked him:

''ª@LouiseMensch 'ª@JohnRentoulwhat is your objection to ''mule''? New Yorker cites'ª@jamesrbukand'ª@janinegibsonboasts of flying people ''round the world''

He didn't answer.

That kind of clubby ''they deliberately misled but they didn't lie'' and ''don't use mule and traffick even when Janine Gibson boasted online that that's exactly what they did'' is fear-and-favour journalism, the kind that looks after its own.

Earlier, John Rentoul tweeted that when Julian Smith MP raised a point of order about the Guardian shipping out GCHQ agents' names, ''the Speaker says it's no such thing.'' I hate to say it to a journalist I really do admire and like, but that was sheer bollocks. A point of order is almost always a rhetorical device in the House of Commons. John Rentoul, a political journalist, knows that full well, he knows it like the back of his hand. He was being dishonest. The Speaker condemned the Guardian's ''equivocation'' on whether they had passed the names of spies to American papers. John didn't have the guts to report that, however, because it didn't fit his agenda. Paul Waugh of politics home did.

Look, British press, get some bloody balls. Challenge Rusbridger. Here is a British paper that has sold the names of GCHQ agents out for money, and you are closing ranks and not asking the questions. The New York Times is challenging Glenn Greenwald more effectively than any of you are doing. Don't make a blogger (me) do all the heavy lifting. I am a columnist for the Sun on Sunday, and proud of it. I have featured this story again and again in my column. Do your part. I'm not an investigative journalist. Some of you call yourselves that. I don't see much bloody sign of it. I see chumminess that would shame the smoke-filled rooms of a Tory selection committee circa 1954.

Here '' off the top of my head '' are seventeen sample questions you could ask the paper, if any of you had even a tiny bit of shame. And by ''the paper'', I mean Alan Rusbridger. And Janine Gibson. They are the editors. Any chance of holding them to account?

The New Yorker story states that you used James Ball, a young ex wikileaks collaborator, to fly these files to New York and Brazil. Why didn't you, Rusbridger, take that legal risk on yourself instead of pinning it to a 27 year old?Why did you lie to the Daily Mail on the 9th October when you stated the files you sent to America didn't contain the names of any British agents?Why did you pass these files to bloggers at ProPublica?If the Guardian has broken the Terrorism Act 2000 should they be prosecuted, or are they above the law?What was the public interest for your story in August when you reported on GCHQ agents' gay and lesbian clubs, recreational and charity drives, and the internal chats of GCHQ agents? Why were any of those details necessary? Didn't they flag up to hostile actors just how much identifying info was in the Snowden files?Janine Gibson boasted online that 'by far the hardest challenge has been the movement of materials '' we've had to do a great deal of flying people around the world'. Given this boast why did you lie about David Miranda's paid-for role, alleging that he was harassed just because he was Greenwald's spouse?Why did you boast in August that the Snowden story had lifted your web traffic above the Daily Mail's when you were giving out GCHQ agents' names to achieve this? Kind of a shitty attitude, isn't it?The New Yorker story states that Ball flew the files not only to America but also to Brazil, and Gibson uses the words ''a great deal of flying around the world''. To how many countries have you shipped our agents' names?How many people worldwide have you passed agents' names to?Given that every exposed agent is in danger, have you let GCHQ know which agents and their families you have put at risk?Glenn Greenwald claimed that the Guardian US ran every story under his byline past the NSA for legal reasons, even though it then ignored their objections. Did you give GCHQ a similar chance to object?Are there any financial rewards or bonuses tied to increased web traffic for Rusbridger, Gibson or any other Guardian executives? If so, how much? And why did you not report that when selling GCHQ agents down the river and boasting of the traffic you derived from it?You talk about security for your files yet the New Yorker reports you kept them in a room with floor-to-ceiling windows. Are you aware how laser microphones work? In a story on 20 August you admit a government security expert had to explain this to you. Shouldn't you have asked GCHQ about secure storage of files previously yourselves?Given your hilarious ''secure room'' with the floor to ceiling windows, don't you think it's just possible GCHQ might be more aware of security risks than you are?What precisely is the point of saying '' falsely '' that you kept files ''secure'' when you then duplicate them and mule them, as you have said, all over the world?You've been happy enough to give the New York Times, some Brazilians, and ProPublica (at least) copies of the GCHQ files. How about giving a copy back to GCHQ so they can assess the damage you've done to the UK, as well as to their agents?What redactions did you make to the 50,000 GCHQ files you muled abroad to protect British intelligence officers? Did you make any redactions?And I haven't even started on the Tor story.

Come on, British press. Show some guts. Do your jobs. There are 6100 agents at GCHQ, so the Guardian tells us. They cannot strike. They cannot protest. They cannot email Alan Rusbridger asking why he is giving the NSA-GCHQ wiki to the New York Times. They have no voice.

You are meant to be their voice. No fear, no favour. Do your bloody job. Have some balls.

* and to those who might think this sexist, I will quote the great Sharon Osbourne: ''Women have balls. They're just higher up.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 23:10

At eight-thirty on the morning of June 21st, Alan Rusbridger, the unflappable editor of the Guardian, Britain's liberal daily, was in his office, absorbing a lecture from Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary to Prime Minister David Cameron. Accompanying Heywood was Craig Oliver, Cameron's director of communications. The deputy editor, Paul Johnson, joined them in Rusbridger's office, overlooking the Regent's Canal, which runs behind King's Cross station, in North London. According to Rusbridger, Heywood told him, in a steely voice, ''The Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, the Foreign Secretary, the Attorney General, and others in government are extremely concerned about what you're doing.''

Since June 5th, the Guardian had been publishing top-secret digital files provided by Edward Snowden, a former contract employee of the National Security Agency. In a series of articles, the paper revealed that the N.S.A., in the name of combatting terrorism, had monitored millions of phone calls and e-mails as well as the private deliberations of allied governments. It also revealed, again relying on Snowden's documents, that, four years earlier, the Government Communications Headquarters (G.C.H.Q.), Britain's counterpart to the N.S.A., had eavesdropped on the communications of other nations attending the G20 summit, in London.

Such articles have become a trademark of the Guardian. In 2009, it published the first in a torrent of stories revealing how Rupert Murdoch's British tabloids had bribed the police and hacked into the phones of celebrities, politicians, and the Royal Family. In 2010, the Guardian published a trove of WikiLeaks documents that disclosed confidential conversations among diplomats of the United States, Britain, and other governments, and exposed atrocities that were committed in Iraq and Afghanistan; in August, Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning, a private in the U.S. Army, was sentenced to up to thirty-five years in prison for his role in the leak.

Now Rusbridger was poised to publish a story about how the G.C.H.Q. not only collected vast quantities of e-mails, Facebook posts, phone calls, and Internet histories but shared these with the N.S.A. Heywood had learned about the most recent revelation when Guardian reporters called British authorities for comment; he warned Rusbridger that the Guardian was in possession of stolen government documents. ''We want them back,'' he said. Unlike the U.S., Britain has no First Amendment to guard the press against government censorship. Rusbridger worried that the government would get a court injunction to block the Guardian from publishing not only the G.C.H.Q. story but also future national-security stories. ''By publishing this, you're jeopardizing not only national security but our ability to catch pedophiles, drug dealers, child sex rings,'' Heywood said. ''You're an editor, but you have a responsibility as a citizen as well.'' (Cameron's office did not respond to requests for comment.)

Rusbridger replied that the files contained information that citizens in a democracy deserved to know, and he assured Heywood that he had scrubbed the documents so that no undercover officials were identified or put at risk. He had also taken steps to insure the story's publication. Days earlier, Rusbridger had sent a Federal Express package containing a thumbnail drive of selected Snowden documents to an intermediary in the U.S. The person was to pass on the package to Paul Steiger, the former editor of the Wall Street Journal and the founding editor of the online, nonprofit news site ProPublica; if the Guardian was muzzled, Steiger would publish the documents on ProPublica. Besides, Rusbridger reminded Heywood, the government's reach was limited: Glenn Greenwald, the Guardian blogger and columnist with whom Snowden had shared the documents, lived in Brazil, and was edited by Janine Gibson, a Guardian editor in New York.

''It was a little like watching two Queen's Counsel barristers in a head-to-head struggle, two very polished performers engaging each other,'' Johnson, the deputy editor, said. The Guardian has a reputation as a leftish publication that enjoys poking the establishment; its critics object that it allows commentary to occasionally slip into its headlines and news stories. Rusbridger, who is fifty-nine, has been its editor for eighteen years. He wears square, black-framed glasses and has a mop of dark hair that sprawls across his head and over his ears. He could pass for a librarian. ''His physical appearance doesn't tell you how tough he is,'' Nick Davies, the investigative reporter whose byline dominated the Murdoch and WikiLeaks stories, said.

After an hour, Rusbridger ushered Heywood and Oliver out with a thank-you. He had taken what he considered a cautious approach to publishing the Snowden revelations. He consulted Guardian lawyers. He called Davies back from vacation and summoned the longtime investigations editor, David Leigh, out of retirement for advice and to help analyze the documents. He sought the opinion of two associates: the centrist Guardian columnist Simon Jenkins and the liberal Observer columnist Henry Porter. ''He doesn't buckle,'' Porter, who is a close friend, said. ''He's extremely calm. He could easily head up any of the three intelligence agencies here.''

At 5:23 P.M., roughly eight hours after the encounter in his office, Rusbridger ordered the Guardian to post the G.C.H.Q. story on its Web site and then in its print edition. Although the British government had taken no further action, the mood in the Guardian's offices was anxious. As the stories based on Snowden's revelations were taking shape, Rusbridger had hired additional security for the building and established a secure office two floors above the newsroom, just down the corridor from the advertising department, to house the documents. When he flew to New York to work with his team there on the stories, ''he couldn't talk on the phone,'' his wife, Lindsay Mackie, said. ''He couldn't say what was going on.''

It has been the Guardian's biggest story so far. With eighty-four million monthly visitors, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations, the Guardian Web site is now the third most popular English-language newspaper Web site in the world, behind London's Daily Mail, with its celebrity gossip and abundant cleavage, and the New York Times. But its print circulation, of a hundred and ninety thousand, is half what it was in 2002. The Guardian, which is supported by the Scott Trust, established nearly eighty years ago to subsidize an ''independent'' and ''liberal'' newspaper, has lost money for nine straight years. In the most recent fiscal year, the paper lost thirty-one million pounds (about fifty million dollars), an improvement over the forty-four million pounds it lost the year before.

Last year, Andrew Miller, the director of the trust and the C.E.O. of the Guardian Media Group, warned that the trust's money would be exhausted in three to five years if the losses were not dramatically reduced. To save the Guardian, Rusbridger has pushed to transform it into a global digital newspaper, aimed at engaged, anti-establishment readers and available entirely for free. In 2011, Guardian U.S., a digital-only edition, was expanded, followed this year by the launch of an Australian online edition. It's a grand experiment, he concedes: just how free can a free press be?

Rusbridger and Mackie live in a nineteenth-century house in Kentish Town, a gentrifying neighborhood in northwest London that was once home to Karl Marx and George Orwell. A pug named Angus and a cat named Retro roam the main floor, which features a long sitting room, a fireplace, and a magnificent Fazioli grand piano that Rusbridger practices on most mornings. This September, in the U.S., he published ''Play It Again: An Amateur Against the Impossible,'' a professional memoir that, amid his recounting of the Guardian's coverage of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and Murdoch's News of the World, describes an eighteen-month-long effort he made to master a difficult Chopin piece, Ballade in G Minor. ''He's forensic,'' Lionel Barber, the editor of the Financial Times, says. ''He's got a very penetrating mind. It's very revealing that he learned to play the Chopin piece. It's the same thing: 'I am quite prepared to spend hours and hours to learn Chopin. I'm prepared to spend hours and hours to get the story.' ''

Rusbridger was born in 1953 in Lusaka, in what is now Zambia. He was the younger of two sons of H. G. Rusbridger, an Oxford-educated former missionary who was the Deputy Director of Education for the British colonial administration. His mother travelled to Africa as a nurse and later became an amateur artist. His father was ''very even-tempered, maybe placid,'' Rusbridger said. ''Is 'placid' pejorative? I mean 'placid' in a non-pejorative way. He was very straightforward, very solid.'' Mackie describes her husband similarly: ''He never comes home and kicks the cat.'' Emily Bell, a former Web editor at the Guardian, described Rusbridger as ''inscrutable'' and ''gnomic.'' David Leigh, who retired this year as the Guardian's investigations editor, and who is Rusbridger's brother-in-law, said, ''His style is to be blank. He speaks very quietly. He's like a duck: he appears to glide along the water, but the legs are paddling furiously.''

The family moved to London when Rusbridger was five. At fifteen, he read the four volumes of Orwell's collected writing, and he credits Orwell for his decision to pursue journalism. He attended a boys' boarding school in Surrey and was accepted to Magdalene College, Cambridge, where he studied English literature. In the summer of his first and second years, he worked as an intern at the Cambridge Evening News. In 1976, after graduation, he was offered a full-time reporting job there. He stayed for three years, until 1979, when the Guardian hired him as a general reporter, based in London.

Mackie, who is a few years older than Rusbridger, was also a reporter at the Guardian. Her sister was married to David Leigh, then an investigative reporter for the paper. Rusbridger approached Leigh and asked if Mackie was in a relationship.

''No,'' Leigh told him. ''Good luck.''

''This is a measure of Alan's careful approach to things,'' Leigh told me. ''He was reconnoitring before making his move.'' Mackie left the Guardian in 1981 to freelance for the paper; they married the following year.

Rusbridger's work impressed editors, and he was asked to write a daily diary column, in which he sometimes ridiculed the powerful; in 1985, he became a feature writer. In 1986, the Sunday Observer offered him the job of television critic. Nine months later, a new opportunity appeared. Robert Maxwell, the owner of the Daily Mirror and other newspaper and publishing ventures, decided to start the London Daily News; Rusbridger accepted a job as its Washington bureau chief, and he and his family'--the couple now had two young daughters'--moved to the U.S. ''It opened my eyes to American journalism,'' he said. ''I had never read the New York Times or the Washington Post. They had ethical debates, which we didn't have in the U.K. I liked the seriousness of the U.S. press.'' He credits his stint in Washington for his decision, some years later, to appoint an ombudsman and start a corrections page at the Guardian.

When the mercurial Maxwell closed the Daily News, six months later, Rusbridger welcomed an offer from the Guardian to return to London as a feature writer. In 1992, the editor, Peter Preston, offered him the editorship of a weekend supplement. Rusbridger introduced a mixture of life-style and other topics, including a narrative of a visit to a nudist colony. Rusbridger was dismissed by some as a middlebrow, but weekend circulation jumped. Preston then appointed Rusbridger to edit a new daily feature section, the G2. When Kurt Cobain died, the section ran an extensive account of his life and death. ''All the graybeards came and said, 'Why are we doing this?' '' he recalls. ''I said, 'Our daughters are crying. That's why we're doing this.' ''

The Guardian was founded in 1821 as the Manchester Guardian, a weekly owned by local merchants. In 1872, C. P. Scott became the editor and, eventually, the owner. During a fifty-seven-year reign, Scott steered the paper to the left. In 1936, his son set aside money and established the Scott Trust, ''to secure the financial and editorial independence of the Guardian in perpetuity: as a quality national newspaper without party affiliation; remaining faithful to liberal tradition.'' In 1959, the newspaper dropped ''Manchester'' from the masthead; five years later, it moved to London.

By 1993, the Guardian was a thriving six-day-a-week paper, and the trust decided to buy the Sunday Observer. The following year, Preston made Rusbridger the deputy editor. The board of the Scott Trust has final say in choosing the editor, but the tradition is for candidates to nominate themselves by writing a manifesto describing their vision for the paper, and to allow a staff vote. There were four candidates. The ballot results ratified the preference of Preston and the trust. In 1995, when Preston stepped down, Rusbridger became the editor.

In his manifesto, Rusbridger expressed his desire to change the image of the Guardian as a left-wing newspaper. ''I tried to make sure the reporting was straight,'' he told me, while weeding out the ''mix of reporting and opinion'' and the habit of ''telling people what to think.'' The editorial page would no longer automatically support the Labour Party. ''I saw opportunity and space in the middle left,'' Rusbridger said. The shift fit his own outlook. His friend Henry Porter says, ''His basic stance is skepticism.'' David Leigh thinks of his brother-in-law as ''genuinely moderate. From an American point of view, he is very left. From a British point of view, he is not.''

Rusbridger was intent on modernizing the Guardian'--hiring younger reporters, adding color to its black-and-white pages. Eventually, he decided to switch to new presses and publish the paper in the Berliner format, which is narrower and shorter than a broadsheet yet taller and wider than a tabloid; it is used by several other European papers, including Le Monde. Rusbridger believed that the new format would look fresh to readers; most of the U.K.'s twelve daily national newspapers were tabloids. The decision met with opposition within the paper and created an impression among some that Rusbridger was imperious. ''He delegates operationally to his journalists more than any editor I've seen,'' Ian Katz, a former deputy news editor*, said. ''But when it comes to big decisions he has a tendency to grip the reins tighter. The mood of most people was that we should go tabloid. We thought we'd do a better job than anyone else. There was this extraordinary moment when Alan said, 'This conversation is over. We're not going to go tabloid.' ''

The new presses cost eighty million pounds, and the expenditure was a costly mistake, Tony Gallagher, the editor of the Telegraph, told me. ''At best, the press is busy one and a half to two hours a day. It's silent because no one else prints in the Berliner format. There's no way that's a good investment.'' Rusbridger said, ''The option was to build presses or rent them. We had to go full color. I don't think there was any difference in costs.''

Meanwhile, Rusbridger was thinking about the Guardian's digital future. In 1994, a year before he became editor, he visited Silicon Valley. ''I came back and wrote a memo to Peter saying the Internet was the future,'' Rusbridger recalls. ''I told Peter this would change everything and we had to explore it.'' Emily Bell, the Observer's business editor at the time, remembers having dinner with Rusbridger and others during the Edinburgh TV festival in August, 1999, and telling him that changes he'd made to the paper's Web site were inadequate. She prodded him to move more aggressively into the online world, with more breaking news and analysis; in 2001, he placed her in charge of turning the Web site into a vibrant online paper.

Bell, who left the paper in 2010 to become the director of the Tow Center for Digital Journalism, at the Columbia Journalism School, says that she and Rusbridger agreed that they would not erect a pay wall for their online content. ''If the core purpose of the Scott Trust is to keep the Guardian going in perpetuity, there is no choice,'' Bell says. The Guardian has only sixty thousand subscribers, far fewer than the Times, the Wall Street Journal, or the Financial Times. It was competing with the BBC, which has the largest free Web site in the world. And its newspaper sales in the United Kingdom were falling. ''The Guardian really didn't stand a chance if it didn't do something with the digital future,'' Bell says.

Most important, Rusbridger wanted the newspaper to be known for investigative reporting. Under its previous editor, the Guardian had launched a few prominent investigations, including its coverage of Jonathan Aitken, a Tory Cabinet minister; the paper reported that Aitken had procured prostitutes and made business deals with wealthy Saudis and arms dealers, who showered him with gifts. Aitken denounced the allegations, sued the paper for publishing ''deliberate lies,'' and declared that he would ''cut out the cancer of bent and twisted journalism in our country with the simple sword of truth.''

After Rusbridger took over, and in the final stages of a libel trial, a Guardian reporter unearthed hotel bills that proved Aitken had concocted an elaborate series of fabrications; he had perjured himself, and was sent to jail. ''Jonathan Aitken seems to have impaled himself on the simple sword of truth,'' Rusbridger said at a press conference. Rusbridger had proved that ''he was in fact made of steel,'' Leigh said; the newsroom staff presented him with a stainless-steel sword.

Nick Davies works for the Guardian under a freelance contract and operates out of his home, just outside Brighton; he is sixty, with short-cropped white hair and a blunt manner. After graduating from Oxford, in 1974, Davies worked as a stable boy and a railway guard before joining the Guardian, in July of 1979. In 1984, he left for the Observer, and then to write books and to try other papers, before returning to the Guardian in 1989. The Guardian appealed to him because it is owned by a trust that is not driven by profits and it has a ''moral agenda,'' Davies says. ''Over and over again, the Guardian has been on what I would call the right side of the moral barricades in key moments.'' Davies cited the paper's exposure, in 2009, of corporations evading their tax liability. He insists that this liberal bias is reflected in ''the subjects we cover,'' not in the reporting. ''A moral agenda is not an excuse for distorting information to score points.''

In June of 2009, over lunch with Rusbridger, Davies recounted a story that had not received much press coverage. In 2006, a private investigator and a reporter at Murdoch's News of the World were arrested, and both later pleaded guilty to hacking into the phones of staff of the Royal Family. News International, under which Murdoch's four London newspapers operated, calmed a potential controversy by assuring Parliament that ''a full rigorous internal inquiry'' had determined that these were isolated acts. Davies told Rusbridger that he had learned this claim was untrue; the illegal activity was widespread. But digging deeper would entail taking on Murdoch, who dominated more than a third of national newspaper circulation in Britain, and who owned a controlling interest in BSkyB, a powerful satellite-broadcasting enterprise. Rusbridger told Davies to pursue the story. ''He has a really useful piece of equipment that most editors don't have, which is a spinal column,'' Davies says of Rusbridger.

Starting in July of 2009, Davies had filed a series of front-page stories exposing scandalous and criminal activity in and around the Murdoch empire: hush money to hacking victims; payoffs to police officials; and evidence that top editors had condoned the hacking. The stories initially attracted little attention. But Davies and the Guardian pursued the investigation; Scotland Yard was eventually compelled to reopen its case, and public outrage ensued. Senior Murdoch editors and executives resigned and others were arrested. Advertisers yanked ads from the News of the World, and Murdoch shut down the paper. ''It's now a billion dollars that's been wiped off News Corp shares,'' Rusbridger wrote in his memoir, describing the night he learned of the paper's closure. ''Emails until about 1:30 waiting for the adrenalin to subside. Realise it won't. Not for days. Or weeks.'' Murdoch offered a public apology, which Davies calls ''deeply phony.''

Davies believes that some of the most significant stories in a newspaper are buried in brief news items. In 2010, he reminded Rusbridger of a small story in the Guardian about the arrest of Bradley Manning for leaking thousands of government documents to WikiLeaks. ''That's an amazing story,'' Davies told Rusbridger. ''I'm going to persuade them to give me all the cables.'' Davies convinced WikiLeaks that it should share the documents with the Guardian, arguing that its publication of them would attract more notice than if they were published on the WikiLeaks Web site. On Davies's advice, Rusbridger took the unprecedented step of bringing in the New York Times as a partner. A British newspaper might be blocked from publishing, but an American outlet would have First Amendment protection.

WikiLeaks handed over hundreds of thousands of pages of documents. A Guardian team spent the summer digesting, scrubbing, and redacting them. Rusbridger was satisfied that the paper had eliminated any danger to the lives of U.S. intelligence officials or local people who co¶perated with them. He was still concerned that the release of government cables could undermine essential governance. ''Diplomacy relies on secrecy,'' he said. Nonetheless, after talking it through with colleagues, he decided to go ahead.

The Guardian's accounts included transcripts of U.S. officials condoning the use of torture by their Iraqi allies, and diplomats making public statements that contradicted cables they were sending to their governments. Rusbridger and the Guardian were criticized for the stories. Roger Alton, the executive editor of the London Times, told me that he would not have published the WikiLeaks documents ''in that form. I thought it was taking material and throwing it at the market without looking at what damage it caused. It came from an anti-American, Julian Assange.'' An editor of a London paper praised the Guardian for publishing the documents but said that it stayed ''a little too close to Assange.'' In his memoir, Rusbridger describes tense negotiations with Assange, an ''anarchist'' who could be paranoid one moment and lucidly ''strategic'' the next. ''He's both a collaborator and a source,'' Rusbridger writes, and his challenge as an editor was to persuade the deeply suspicious Assange to keep co¶perating. But in 2010, when Sweden began investigating allegations that Assange had raped and sexually assaulted two women, Davies and the Guardian were the first to reveal the details of the charges against him.

The Guardian's third major scoop owed nearly as much to Glenn Greenwald as to Edward Snowden. Greenwald, who is forty-six, graduated from N.Y.U. law school in 1994 and was recruited by a top corporate law firm, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz. After eighteen months, Greenwald left. ''I'm not an institutional person,'' he told me. ''I was not looking to represent Goldman Sachs and big corporations.'' He recently told BuzzFeed, the news site, ''If I had to do that one more day, I was going to jump out the window. I knew that I didn't want to be representing rich people. I wanted to be suing them.''

He set up a private practice and took on pro-bono civil-liberties cases. In 2004, looking to make a change, he rented an apartment in Rio de Janeiro. On his second day, at the beach, he met David Miranda, a nineteen-year-old Brazilian. They became a couple and remained in Rio. In late 2005, Greenwald started blogging, focussing on the N.S.A. and the Bush Administration's surveillance policies, which he abhorred. He has written four books, on civil liberties and Washington politics, and in 2007 was hired as a columnist for the online publication Salon. In August of 2012, the Guardian invited him to be a part-time blogger and columnist. Greenwald readily describes himself as an activist and an analyst. In his blog posts, he has encouraged readers to participate in an anti-surveillance rally in Washington, D.C., and has denounced the ''rampant, Strangelove-like megalomania in the National Security State.''

In January of 2013, Snowden, who was working as a computer specialist for Booz Allen Hamilton, an N.S.A. contractor, made contact with the filmmaker Laura Poitras, who was working on a documentary about surveillance. She had already made two documentaries exploring the consequences of the American invasion of Iraq and the war on terror. Snowden reportedly was a fan of her work, and he sent her a series of anonymous e-mails that contained explicit information about what he said was police-state-style spying by the N.S.A. Poitras consulted, among others, Barton Gellman, a former national-security reporter for the Washington Post, whom she had met in 2010, when they were fellows at N.Y.U.'s Center on Law and Security. Poitras knew that Gellman, now a senior fellow at the Century Foundation, had written extensively about government surveillance programs. Snowden asked her to contact Greenwald, with whom she had earlier developed a friendship. Both men told Poitras that the e-mails she'd received from this unnamed source seemed legitimate.

Greenwald told me that Snowden initially sent him a small number of encrypted documents through Poitras. In May, Snowden offered to share extensive government documentation of what the N.S.A. was doing. That month, with the Guardian's approval, Greenwald and Poitras met with Snowden in Hong Kong. For reasons he will not discuss, Gellman, who also obtained documents from Snowden, chose not to go. Nevertheless, as Gellman later wrote in the Post, Snowden offered to share with Gellman ''the full text of a PowerPoint presentation describing PRISM, a top-secret surveillance program that gathered intelligence'' from Silicon Valley companies. Snowden asked that the Post publish ''the full text'' of the PowerPoint presentation within seventy-two hours. ''I told him we would not make any guarantee about what we published or when,'' Gellman told me.

Gellman and the Post produced some impressive N.S.A. exclusives, including the first account of PRISM, on which Poitras shared the byline. But Greenwald and the Guardian dominated coverage of the leaks. With stories of such complexity, a newspaper often delays publication while it meets with government officials, who try to persuade editors of the harm that would come from publication. The Guardian did seek comment from government officials about the revelations. But Greenwald, outraged by the content of the material, pushed to publish quickly. ''I was getting really frustrated,'' he told me. ''I was putting a lot of pressure on them and insinuating that I was going to go publish elsewhere.'' He helped produce five stories that ran on five consecutive days in June. ''I wanted people in Washington to have fear in their hearts over how this journalism was going to be done, over the unpredictability of it,'' he said. ''Of the fact that we were going to be completely unrestrained by the unwritten rules of American journalism. The only reason we stopped after five days was that even our allies were saying, 'Look, this is too much information. We can't keep up with what you're publishing.' ''

Gellman, a fifty-two-year-old Pulitzer Prize winner and former Rhodes Scholar, took a more deliberate approach. ''It's hard to overstate the complexity of the journalistic, national security, and legal considerations in this story,'' he told me in an e-mail. ''I never saw anything like it in a couple of decades of covering defense, intelligence, and foreign policy. On first reading, I understood maybe half of any given memo or slide deck in the materials I got from Snowden. These are internal documents, dense with jargon and acronyms and references to things that are common knowledge at Fort Meade,'' the headquarters of the N.S.A. Additional research and reporting was essential, Gellman wrote. The material also raised ''legitimate and quite serious national security concerns. Neither I nor the Post would be prepared to write a story without hearing out U.S. government experts on those concerns.''

Bill Keller, a former executive editor of the New York Times and now a columnist for the paper, described the Guardian coverage as ''a terrific story,'' adding, ''I wish the Times had had it.'' But he differed with the Guardian's decision to attach the co-byline of an opinion columnist to what are supposed to be news stories. ''If one of our columnists had come up with a story of that magnitude'--something that could not be contained in a column'--we would have turned it over to the newsroom reporting staff,'' Keller said. ''And we would say in the story, 'Nick Kristof obtained these documents.' But we would not have Nick Kristof write the story for the front page of the New York Times.'' Jill Abramson, the current editor, offered a hedged response: Greenwald ''hasn't had a byline in the Times, and I make it a practice of not making decisions based on situations I haven't yet confronted.''

Greenwald bristled when he heard Keller's remarks. ''That to me is a really good reason why people like Edward Snowden don't want to go to the New York Times,'' he said. ''This idea that if you ever express an opinion in your life about the news topic on which you're reporting, that somehow that makes you not a real journalist'--that you wouldn't be able to write the story.'' The test for good journalism, he said, should be not ''whether you have opinions but if your reporting is reliable.''

Greenwald's praise for Snowden has at times been unrestrained. In a July 8th column in the Guardian, he seemed to compare Snowden to ''the greatest whistleblowing hero of the prior generation,'' Daniel Ellsberg, the American military analyst who leaked the Pentagon Papers to the Times and other outlets. But unlike Ellsberg, who stayed in the U.S. and took his case to court, Snowden sought refuge in China and Russia, autocratic countries where dissidents and journalists are often imprisoned. U.S. officials have expressed concern that those governments may have copied Snowden's hard drives. The Obama Administration has called Snowden a traitor, and is intent on apprehending and trying him for treason. Keller questioned the ''lionizing tone'' of the Guardian's coverage. ''When Snowden then threw himself into the arms of the Chinese, and then the Russians, and reportedly reached out to Ecuador'--all these countries that are not exactly pillars of freedom'--it compromised the Guardian a little bit,'' Keller said.

Greenwald believes there was no way that Snowden could have stayed in the U.S. and taken his case to the public, as Ellsberg did. These days, he says, whistle-blowers are immediately incarcerated: ''They have no opportunity to be heard from.'' Greenwald doesn't believe that the Russians or the Chinese have the documents. He has spoken to Snowden nearly ''every day for the last four months,'' he said, with the exception of two weeks that Snowden spent in a Moscow airport. They communicate through ''highly encrypted chat technology.'' Greenwald, who is now writing a book on the subject, says that, even if Russian or Chinese authorities tried to confiscate Snowden's electronic equipment, ''not even the N.S.A. can break it if they tried for five years,'' because Snowden had so skillfully encrypted it.

The disclosures have ignited a public debate over the trade-offs between the government's need to insure security and its mandate to protect civil liberties. In July, a national poll taken by Quinnipiac University found that a majority of Americans think Snowden is a whistle-blower, not a traitor, and, while half the public thinks the N.S.A.'s surveillance policies ''keep Americans safe,'' half also believes that the N.S.A. intrudes on ''personal privacy.'' In July, by a narrow vote, the House of Representatives defeated an amendment to restrict the N.S.A.'s phone-tracking program.

Rusbridger referred to the room where the Guardian kept Snowden's documents as ''the bunker.'' The door was kept locked, and a guard was stationed outside twenty-four hours a day. Before entering, the handful of people allowed admittance were required to put their smartphones and any other personal electronic devices on a nearby table, in case British or American intelligence agencies were to remotely transform them into recording devices. White blinds covered floor-to-ceiling windows. There were whiteboards, and on five white Formica tables sat five new laptops, unconnected to the Internet or to any other network. The trove of documents from Snowden were kept on these computers, in encrypted file containers. Accessing each container required three passwords, and no individual knew more than one.

In early July, Rusbridger held a meeting in the bunker with Paul Johnson, the deputy editor, and Julian Borger, the diplomatic editor, to discuss the next steps in their coverage of the N.S.A. They knew that the Post and others were pursuing the story, too. The British government, concerned that the Guardian's documents might be stolen, was again pressuring Rusbridger to turn them over. That afternoon, Borger was set to fly to New York to meet with the staff at ProPublica, to discuss what they might publish jointly or, if the Guardian were censored, what ProPublica might publish alone. Rusbridger took notes in a lined black Moleskine notebook, of which he now has two hundred, each dated, and which he carries to most meetings to retain a record.

The next day, Rusbridger and Johnson met in the bunker with James Ball, a data editor whose byline has appeared on numerous N.S.A. stories. Ball, who is twenty-seven, previously worked for WikiLeaks and is prized at the Guardian for his deep understanding of computers. That afternoon, he would be flying to New York, and then on to Brazil. His decision to leave WikiLeaks for the Guardian had displeased some of his friends, he said. ''My colleagues thought I sold out.''

On July 12th, Rusbridger was visited again by Cabinet Secretary Heywood. According to Rusbridger, Heywood warned him, ''No newspaper is equipped to keep this secret. We want the documents back.'' Rusbridger patiently explained that there was more than a single set of documents. And even if the British and the American governments were able to muzzle the press, he said, there were bloggers like Glenn Greenwald who were beyond their reach. Heywood suggested that the government would seek a court injunction to block the Guardian from publishing more Snowden documents. As a precaution, Rusbridger spoke with Jill Abramson, at the Times; the two had worked on the WikiLeaks story when she was the Times's managing editor.

''Alan was not comfortable just talking on the phone,'' Abramson says, so she and the managing editor, Dean Baquet, flew to London, where they agreed that the papers would work together again. They would share the documents, agree on the subject matter of each story, but investigate separately. Either they would publish accounts of the documents on the same day or, if the Guardian were censored, the Times and ProPublica would publish.

On July 15th, Rusbridger received a call from Craig Oliver, Cameron's communications director, again insisting that the documents be returned. Rusbridger responded that the Guardian would continue to publish the material. Even if the Guardian was censored, he was confident that the Times would be free to publish. Abramson was less certain. ''I did worry about that,'' she told me. She felt that the Obama Administration was trying aggressively to criminalize leaks. In early August, the Times was working on a story about an intercepted terror threat when James R. Clapper, the Administration's director of intelligence, asked the paper's Washington bureau to withhold certain details. Clapper warned that, if the full version were made public, the Times ''would have blood on our hands,'' Abramson recalls. The paper complied with the request. But, to emphasize that the government could not expect the Times to withhold information that is in the public interest, she travelled to Washington to meet with Clapper. During the meeting, he urged her not to publish the Snowden material. ''The First Amendment is first for a reason,'' she told him. (A spokesman for Clapper disputed this account.)

On July 18th, Rusbridger received a call from Oliver Robbins, the U.K.'s deputy national-security adviser, alerting him that agents would be coming to the Guardian's offices to seize the hard drives containing the Snowden files. Rusbridger again explained that the files were also on encrypted computers outside England, but his reasoning did not sway Robbins. Rusbridger asked if, instead, his staff members could destroy the files themselves, and Robbins consented. That Saturday, Rusbridger told associates to take the five laptops from the bunker to the basement and to smash the hard drives and circuit boards in front of two agents from the G.C.H.Q.

On August 18th, David Miranda, Greenwald's partner, was detained by British security officials at Heathrow Airport while returning to Brazil. Miranda had spent a week with Poitras in Berlin and was serving as a courier between her and Greenwald. ''He was carrying material that she was working on that I needed for journalistic work that she and I were doing,'' Greenwald says. The authorities, invoking the Terrorism Act, questioned Miranda for nine hours; they confiscated his computer, cell phone, video-game consoles, DVDs, and U.S.B. sticks. Greenwald called the action ''despotic.''

The Guardian sent its lawyers to help extricate Miranda, who Rusbridger said was acting on behalf of a news outlet; he claimed that the British authorities were ''conflating terrorism and journalism.'' Reuters quoted Greenwald saying that British officials would be ''sorry'' for detaining his partner: ''I will be far more aggressive in my reporting from now on. . . . I have many documents on England's spy system.'' Asked what the implications for the British government might be, he said, ''I think they will be sorry for what they did.'' Greenwald later told me that he had been misquoted and that he never threatened the British government. ''I was stressed and angry and tired,'' he said. ''I was probably not as careful as I should have been.'' But he added, ''What I said was actually fine.''

On September 5th, another major front-page story, co-bylined by James Ball, Julian Borger, and Greenwald, and again based on Snowden's documents, was published. It disclosed that the N.S.A. and the G.C.H.Q. ''have successfully cracked much of the online encryption relied upon by hundreds of millions of people to protect the privacy of their personal data, online transmissions and emails.'' If so, the guarantees that Internet companies have given to consumers were compromised. Relying on the Guardian's Snowden documents, the Times and ProPublica simultaneously published a collaboratively written account. Publicly, Rusbridger has expressed alarm that, by leaving open a back door to monitor Internet communications, the U.S. and the U.K. may prompt less open governments, such as China and Iran, to move to a walled, state-operated Internet; the result would undermine the ideal of a worldwide, open communications system.

Greenwald told me that the Snowden material was far from exhausted. ''The majority of what is extremely newsworthy has yet to be published,'' he said. ''There's thousands and thousands of unbelievably revealing and fascinating documents. It's going to take a long time for everything to be reported that should be reported.''

The Guardian's coverage of Murdoch, WikiLeaks, and Snowden's files has brought acclaim and an international audience. Its online readership has tripled since 2009, and two-thirds of its readers are now located outside the U.K. That expansion is essential to the publication's financial strategy. ''We need to be global,'' Andrew Miller, the Guardian Media Group's C.E.O., told me. ''At the moment, I believe we could not survive in the U.K. with the oversupply'' of newspapers and the omnipresence of the BBC. That awareness has led the Scott Trust to embrace Rusbridger's strategy of pouring resources into a digital Guardian. ''We can either cut our way out,'' Rusbridger says he told the trust, ''or we can think, What is our future? There is no disagreement that print will shrink.'' By 2011, the trust had decided to invest more heavily in its online presence, starting with its U.S. effort.

The offices of Guardian U.S. occupy an entire floor of a loft in SoHo. There are nearly sixty staff members, half of whom are journalists. They report to Janine Gibson, the editor-in-chief, who presided over most of the team producing the paper's N.S.A. stories and has worked most closely with Greenwald. Gibson arrived in New York in July of 2011, after thirteen years at the paper; nine Guardian reporters were already in the U.S. The site has thrived. Today, a third of the Guardian's worldwide audience is American; after one N.S.A. story this summer, readership reached seven million daily visitors, and in June the U.S. site attracted more unique visitors'--twenty-seven million'--than its British counterpart.

Rusbridger visited the New York office in late June. The atmosphere earlier in the month, when the Guardian broke several N.S.A. stories, ''was amazing,'' he said. A few days later, Rusbridger was seated at a conference table in his London office with Tony Danker, the international director, discussing the Guardian's expansion in Australia and beyond. His desk was heaped with papers, books, and folders. Rusbridger told Danker that staff members were still adjusting to their broadened mandate. Employees think of the Guardian ''like a family newspaper,'' he said. ''There have been only ten editors of the Guardian since 1821. It's taken time for us to think of ourselves as a global newspaper.''

Danker, who previously worked for the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. and for the government of the Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown, told me, ''I think we do things differently than others do.'' The Guardian, he added, is ''a newspaper of protest,'' ''an outsider brand'' with a ''liberal'' view of the world. ''My job now is to think, What's next internationally?'' He mentioned ''five or six places where we're actively looking,'' including India, which has a weak Internet infrastructure but a vast English-speaking population. Rusbridger was encouraged by the start of the Australian online edition, which went live in May with a staff of fewer than twenty. In just five days, Rusbridger said, its traffic eclipsed that of Murdoch's national newspaper, the Australian. ''We're being a digital disrupter,'' he said, smiling. ''We're doing to that market what the Huffington Post is trying to do to us.''

But the paper remains dependent on the Scott Trust. One day, I accompanied Rusbridger as he visited with Andrew Miller, who supervises the business side of the newspapers as well as the company's other holdings, which include a profitable online car-selling company, Auto Trader. Their conversation centered on the soon-to-be-released financial results for fiscal year 2012-13, which ended on March 31st. Miller said he was encouraged by the numbers: digital-ad revenues rose twenty-nine per cent, to fifty-six million pounds, an increase exceeding the decline in print revenue. The company was on track to reduce costs by twenty-five million pounds by March, 2016, including voluntary staff reductions. In fiscal 2012, Rusbridger volunteered to take a pay cut'--his second'--reducing his salary from four hundred and thirty-eight thousand pounds to three hundred and ninety-five thousand pounds this year; Miller also voluntarily cut his pay.

Rusbridger called the numbers from the recent fiscal year a ''huge improvement.'' Still, the Guardian lost more money this past year than it did in fiscal 2007-08. To run its print and online operations, the Guardian employs sixteen hundred people worldwide, including five hundred and eighty-three journalists and a hundred and fifty digital developers, designers, and engineers. ''The toughest critique of Alan is that he has not faced up to the Guardian's costs,'' a longtime executive at the paper said. The newsroom ''is too big for a digital newspaper.'' Miller admits that he does not foresee the newspaper earning a profit anytime soon. Rusbridger said, ''The aim is to have sustainable losses.'' Miller defines that as getting ''our losses down to the low teens in three to five years.'' But at some point, if the Guardian does not begin to make money, the trust's liquid assets, currently two hundred and fifty-four million pounds, would be depleted.

Jeff Jarvis, an Internet evangelist who teaches journalism at the City University of New York and who advises Rusbridger, says that eventually the Guardian will have to generate more revenue from its digital edition, abandon its print newspaper, or reduce the number of days it publishes. ''Every day they wait is dollars gone,'' he said. As for printing only on certain days, he says, ''Die Zeit, in Germany, is a good model. One day a week in print and the rest digital.''

Rusbridger can envisage a paperless Guardian in five to ten years. He also ''can imagine,'' he says, printing on only certain days. For the moment, with digital dollars composing only a quarter of the company's revenues, ''if you want to support the kind of journalism we do, you can't kiss goodbye seventy-five per cent of your revenues,'' he said. ''But all that will change.''

Eventually, Rusbridger predicts, between the Guardian's worldwide reach and a more aggressive effort to reach its younger, liberal, well-educated audience, ad dollars will pour in. ''It will work for us because of scale and innovation,'' Rusbridger told me. ''With a rigid pay wall, you end up with a small, (C)lite audience, with restricted access for everyone else. We want a large audience and international influence, and not just with (C)lites. That appears to be an attractive mission for advertisers.'' The Guardian doesn't need to be profitable, so long as its losses are reduced and the trust can continue to subsidize them with its other businesses.

In his memoir, Rusbridger describes how the Guardian's coverage of Assange and WikiLeaks helped him realize the extent to which his industry had changed: now anyone could become a publisher. ''It's the amateurising of journalism'--with all that's good and bad about that,'' he writes. The path forward lies in what he calls ''open journalism,'' meaning a newspaper that not only is free for anyone to read but invites readers to participate in the journalistic venture. The bet is that greater reader involvement will attract a bigger audience, and more advertising dollars. The editors regularly mine the reader comments for story ideas and potential contributors. Last summer, during the Olympics, a British-born coach for the Chinese swim team wrote an anonymous comment describing the pleasure of working for a country that invests lavishly in its athletes; Guardian editors invited him to write a blog post about it. Rusbridger has said there's no reason that the Guardian couldn't include theatre reviews from audience members in addition to those written by Michael Billington, who has been the paper's drama critic since 1971, and whom Rusbridger treasures.

Exactly how a newspaper should ''filter the good responses from the bad'' isn't clear, he concedes, but editors are supposed to be curators. I asked whether his notion of an ''open'' newspaper extended to investigative reporting and other news. Emphatically yes, he said. ''No other institution would have hired Glenn Greenwald.'' In 2009, the Guardian posted a link asking readers for help in analyzing complicated expense documents filed by various Members of Parliament. Twenty-three thousand readers sent in their analyses; the Guardian staff reviewed them and found that many of the readers had discovered fraudulent charges.

A newspaper becomes ''a platform as well as a publisher,'' Rusbridger told me. But he knows that time is limited, and concedes that a pay wall is not out of the question. The Guardian charges for its iPad and iPhone apps, Rusbridgers notes. ''We are not the Taliban of free,'' he said. ''We are not free fundamentalists.'' He went on, ''Is there an economic model for the kind of journalism we're doing? We're all trying our different routes to get there. No one can honestly say they've got the answer.''

As one of twelve board members of the Scott Trust, Rusbridger probably has more say in the matter than most editors do, and more immunity from the consequences: the trust's founding document states that an editor can be dismissed only ''in extreme circumstances.'' If the editor lays out an objective and the board disagrees, Liz Forgan, a former Guardian journalist and the chair of the trust, says, he gets his way: ''Alan is the editor and he has the last word.''

When Rusbridger was young, his mother pushed him to practice piano and clarinet three hours a day. Later, for several years, he served as the chair of the National Youth Orchestra of England; he also wrote a play about Beethoven. In his memoir, which is dedicated to his late mother, he describes missing those passionate challenges; music and the arts must be squeezed in amid his other obligations. He felt ''a mundane need to have moments off the hamster wheel of editing,'' he writes, an ''instinct to wall off a small part of my life for creative expression, for 'culture.' '' To tackle the Chopin piece, which he ultimately performed at the 1901 Arts Club, in central London, before an audience of friends and family, he hired music teachers, consulted acclaimed pianists, and practiced for hours'--and kept a diary. ''The kind of journalism I like always explains things,'' he writes. ''I started keeping notes and thought, this is what musicians do.''

Rusbridger doesn't know what he'll do when he leaves the Guardian. ''We've been talking about that,'' Lindsay Mackie says. ''It might be something to do with music and young people. Access to music, I think.'' But for now retirement isn't up for discussion. ''I have an agreement with Alan that we will give each other a year's notice,'' Forgan said. ''He has not done that.'' Rusbridger says, ''Each six months, it becomes a radically different job.'' He adds that he could see staying for a while'--''whatever 'a while' is. I'm enjoying it. The paper is on fire.'' '...

*Correction: In an earlier version of this article, Ian Katz was referred to, incorrectly, as the Guardian's former deputy news editor.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: DavidShurter.com

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 18:35

http://www.cnn.com/2013/11/03/world/europe/edward-snowden-manifesto/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

So here we have the British Intel- which, by the way- is HEAVILY involved with the cult activity that has been happening in America- working the the National Security Agency to infiltrate and spy on normal people in society.

The problem that I have with this is that considering Jimmy Saville and all of his activities, how can anyone honestly say that these groups DIDN'T KNOW about what was happening with that jerk and his friends? What they know about normal people is bad enough, but then when they find out about crimes- and you can't tell me that PEOPLE DIDN'T KNOW- they do what American law officials are guilty of and they do their best to HIDE and PROTECT these events.

Cult and ritual abuse have been around for a long time-both in the US and the UK, and it is just interesting that a group of treasonous eavesdroppers- who obviously know more than they should- are HELL BENT on keeping this information quiet and hidden from the public. It isn't what these groups MIGHT know that is the problem- it is what they MUST KNOW and how they have reacted with regards to that information that is the issue.

How much did these groups know about Jimmy Saville and situations like that surrounding him- and WHY HAVEN'T THEY COME FORTH? Eavesdropping on people, saying you are looking for terrorists- but ignoring a bunch of satanic cult members abusing and trafficking children makes NO SENSE. As always- there doesn't seem to be any truth or accountability with regards to this mess, and that- FIRST AND FOREMOST- needs to change in my opinion.

Posted by admin on November 4, 2013

http://davidshurter.com/?p=3845

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 00:06

Apple on Tuesday published a formal report on federal government data requests and in so doing became the first tech company to disclose such inquiries by both account and device.

Foremost, the document explains Apple's philosophy on customer privacy. '''... Our business does not depend on collecting personal data,''* the report said in an obvious poke at Google, Facebook and others. ''We have no interest in amassing personal information about our customers. We protect personal conversations by providing end-to-end encryption over iMessage and FaceTime. We do not store location data, Maps searches, or Siri requests in any identifiable form.''

The news comes in the months following major allegations leveled against the U.S. National Security Agency by former employee Edward Snowden; it is a series of events which has done much to foster general feelings of public distrust in technology companies, and their ability to keep customer information safe and secure.

Apple has hardly been the only technology company to issue transparency reports. Google pioneered the practice years ago, and other giants like Microsoft, Twitter, Facebook and Yahoo have since followed suit. Along with Apple, many of these companies have lobbied the government to loosen some of the legal strictures applied to the amount and types of information that can be divulged.

The report continues, detailing Apple's methods for handling national security orders and then lists them by country, breaking them down into account requests and device requests. The former typically involve personal information about an account holder '-- name, address and occasionally stored photos or email. The latter typically involve customer contact information used to register a device. Device requests, as you might imagine, are often made in regard to lost or stolen iPhones and iPads, and initiated by Apple customers. Account requests are more likely to come at the behest of government agencies like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, and Apple isn't particularly happy about them or the disclosure rules it must observe in fulfilling them.

''At the time of this report, the U.S. government does not allow Apple to disclose, except in broad ranges, the number of national security orders, the number of accounts affected by the orders, or whether content, such as emails, was disclosed,'' Apple writes in its report. ''We strongly oppose this gag order, and Apple has made the case for relief from these restrictions in meetings and discussions with the White House, the U.S. Attorney General, congressional leaders, and the courts.''

And until the company sees some success on that front it can only disclose government data requests in broad, tough-to-parse ranges. Given that, Apple can say only that between January 1, 2013, and June 30, 2013, it received between 1,000 and 2,000 U.S. law enforcement requests spanning 2,000-3,000 different accounts. It objected to 0-1,000 of them and provided information on the same range. In terms of device requests, the company received 3,542 of them, targeting 8,605 devices, and provided data for 3,110 of them '-- about 88 percent.

Below, the document in full.

131105reportongovernmentinforequests2 ''

* Note that while this may be a straightforward denial, it isn't a blanket one.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:53

This morning I saw that The Guardian has jumped on Jacob Appelbaum's bandwagon with an editorial by Dan Gillmor titled:

Google, Yahoo et al have the power (and money) to fight back against the NSAThe tech billionaires should create the anti-surveillance, pro-security equivalent of the National Rifle Association

This hit The Guardian's (online) front page just a few days after Appelbaum's weird tweet predicting Google'' the tech company Gillmor trusts the most'' turning all ''white knight'' and saving us from an Orwellian State.

It is dawning, at long last, on the major American technology companies that they are under attack '' from their own government, not just from foreign powers and criminals. They'd already been co-opted by spies and law enforcement, forced to obey secret orders targeting their customers and users. Or, in some cases, they'd willingly collaborated with the government's mass surveillance schemes.

Now they are realizing that their own government considers them outright adversaries. They understand, especially in the wake of the Washington Post's report about western spy services hacking into the intra-corporate networks of internet giants Google and Yahoo, that no amount of cooperation will ever satisfy the people who wage a relentless campaign to spy on anything and everything that moves. (The NSA, of course, has issued a denial of sorts, but it's more of a non-denial denial of the Washington Post report).

So, gee, Larry Page and Sergey Brin are just 'one of us'? DiFi wouldn't class them in the 'Merkel' category?

Why, Mr. Gillmor, should these tech firms grow a pair now? You admit yourself that no practical alternative exists for these mega-corps' products. (That whole monopoly thing'...)

I think, Dan, that you're paid to spin Google's terrible violation of their customers' trust in Google's favor. I think you're on board with operatives like Appelbaum who are trying to help US intelligence clean up the Snowden mess. I look forward to calling out more of your accomplices in the coming weeks, as the ''tech firms must be saved'' talking point makes the rounds of mainstream media. Funny how early The Guardian got on board'...

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:53

Reports indicate that the NSA has been secretly intercepting data from internet giants like Google. Photograph: Jeff J Mitchell/Getty Images

It is dawning, at long last, on the major American technology companies that they are under attack '' from their own government, not just from foreign powers and criminals. They'd already been co-opted by spies and law enforcement, forced to obey secret orders targeting their customers and users. Or, in some cases, they'd willingly collaborated with the government's mass surveillance schemes.

Now they are realizing that their own government considers them outright adversaries. They understand, especially in the wake of the Washington Post's report about western spy services hacking into the intra-corporate networks of internet giants Google and Yahoo, that no amount of cooperation will ever satisfy the people who wage a relentless campaign to spy on anything and everything that moves. (The NSA, of course, has issued a denial of sorts, but it's more of a non-denial denial of the Washington Post report).

For the users of cloud services and computing/communications technologies, the evidence mounts that we have to be skeptical (I would go as far as to say highly skeptical) of what the tech companies are telling us. We can appreciate their avowed good intentions, but they have created an architecture that obliges us to believe they may be selling us out at just about every opportunity, even if they are not.

For the companies themselves, a fairly stark choice is emerging: protect us, or risk losing us. If they chose the former, they will need to change the way they do business. Or they can lead a political movement to radically change societal norms and laws in ways that restrict collection of data and punish its misuse. Ideally, they should do both.

Changing the way they do business will be wrenching for some of them. The internet companies '' cloud providers in particular '' rely on a business model that obliges them to do to users what governments want to do to everyone: watch and store everything we do and say.

In a practical sense, here's what that means for Google. The company utterly relies on its ability to store vast amounts of data about how we all use the internet, including email, in plain text on its own servers. More than any large company in history, Google is about data-mining: extracting meaning and value from what we collectively do when we use its immense networks.

Google does offer more security than some other cloud-based services. Gmail is encrypted by default, so what you do when you're logged in is (probably) protected between your computer and Google's servers. The company is moving to encrypt everything moving from one server to another '' to prevent the NSA, GCHQ and others from continuing to hack that data. But once the information arrives on Google's servers, it is decrypted so that Google can mine it for value.

To truly protect their users, Google and other tech companies would have to create a system that keep the information secret even from themselves. There would be a downside for the users, at least at first: We might lose some of the value that is created by the company's ability to learn from what we all do. Perhaps the tech industry could deploy a serious number of its high-paid engineers and designers to work on solutions that meet all of our needs.

If Google et al decided to make our security paramount, in an ecosystem where we users were no longer the product being sold, they'd have to ask us to pay for the services they provide. I would do so, gladly, if I could get an assurance of security. The reality, however, is that I can't imagine Google doing this, because the data collection and manipulation is so deep in the company's DNA.

I fear, in any case, that we've become so accustomed, even addicted, to the easy-to-use convenience of Google and its peers that not enough of us will opt for genuine safety. I hope the marketplace will come up with more products and services that are easy to use, robust in function and designed for security from the ground up; maybe the just-announced DarkMail will be part of the solution. I hope some nation (Iceland?) decides to offer genuine protections to companies that want to genuinely protect their customers.

This is not just a technical issue. It's about the DNA of our societies, too. And that's why I hope Google, the tech company I still trust the most, will launch one of its famous "moon shots" '' mega-risky projects aimed at mega-change '' in the cultural and political realms.

President Obama has said he wants a serious national conversation about surveillance and data, but his administration has done everything in its power to prevent that from happening. Some moves in Congress to tweak the current system are welcome but insufficient.

Google should take the lead in organizing a who's who of the technology industry to put some of its vast wealth to work in Washington and other national capitals, media, academic institutions and everywhere else that makes sense '' to push for fundamental changes in the way we collect and use data, in order to protect us from ourselves and each other in a world where surveillance potential is increasingly embedded into everything we touch.

The tech companies could start by loudly and publicly '' and financially '' supporting Lavabit, a company that shut down rather than agree to obey a government order to screw its customers, in its legal appeals.

The tech industry seems to think it can win back our trust by quietly objecting to what it decides to call "overreach" and by lobbying behind the scenes. No, it can't, because there's no reason why we should believe a word of it, even if we want (as I do) to believe it.

We need talk, yes, that deep and essential conversation about our future. We we also need action. When the tech billionaires and the companies they control create the anti-surveillance, pro-security equivalent of the National Rifle Association '' supporting pro-liberty candidates and targeting anti-liberty politicians for defeat '' I'll start to believe they're serious about this.

Your move, Larry Page. Please, please make the right one.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 01:46

Image: moodboard/Getty

Net neutrality is a dead man walking. The execution date isn't set, but it could be days, or months (at best). And since net neutrality is the principle forbidding huge telecommunications companies from treating users, websites, or apps differently '-- say, by letting some work better than others over their pipes '-- the dead man walking isn't some abstract or far-removed principle just for wonks: It affects the internet as we all know it.

Once upon a time, companies like AT&T, Comcast, Verizon, and others declared a war on the internet's foundational principle: that its networks should be ''neutral'' and users don't need anyone's permission to invent, create, communicate, broadcast, or share online. The neutral and level playing field provided by permissionless innovation has empowered all of us with the freedom to express ourselves and innovate online without having to seek the permission of a remote telecom executive.

But today, that freedom won't survive much longer if a federal court '-- the second most powerful court in the nation behind the Supreme Court, the DC Circuit '-- is set to strike down the nation's net neutrality law, a rule adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in 2010. Some will claim the new solution ''splits the baby'' in a way that somehow doesn't kill net neutrality and so we should be grateful. But make no mistake: Despite eight years of public and political activism by multitudes fighting for freedom on the internet, a court decision may soon take it away.

Marvin Ammori is a Future Tense Fellow at the New America Foundation and a lawyer who represents technology companies on internet policy issues. He is also the cofounder of a startup, Wearab.ly, which enables content to be distributed to wearable devices. A graduate of Harvard Law School, Ammori serves on the boards of Demand Progress, Fight for the Future, and Engine Advocacy. Fast Company named him one of the 100 Most Creative People in Business in 2012 for being Silicon Valley's ''go-to First Amendment guy'' and one of the leaders of the campaign against SOPA and PIPA.

Game of Loopholes and RulesHow did we get here?

The CEO of AT&T told an interviewer back in 2005 that he wanted to introduce a new business model to the internet: charging companies like Google and Yahoo! to reliably reach internet users on the AT&T network. Keep in mind that users already pay to access the internet and that Google and Yahoo! already pay other telecom companies '-- often called backbone providers '-- to connect to these internet users. [Disclosure: I have done legal work for several companies supporting network neutrality, including Google.]

But AT&T wanted to add an additional toll, beyond what it already made from the internet. Shortly after that, a Verizon executive voiced agreement, hoping to end what he called tech companies' ''free lunch''. It turns out that around the same time, Comcast had begun secretly trialing services to block some of the web's most popular applications that could pose a competitive threat to Comcast, such as BitTorrent.

Yet the phone and cable companies tried to dress up their plans as a false compromise. Counterintuitively, they supported telecommunications legislation in 2006 that would authorize the FCC to stop phone and cable companies from blocking websites.

There was a catch, however. The bills included an exception that swallowed the rule: the FCC would be unable to stop cable and phone companies from taxing innovators or providing worse service to some sites and better service to others. Since we know internet users tend to quit using a website or application if it loads even just a few seconds slower than a competitor's version, this no-blocking rule would essentially have enabled the phone and cable companies to discriminate by picking website/app/platform winners and losers. (Congress would merely enact the loophole. Think of it as a safe harbor for discriminating online.)

Luckily, consumer groups, technology companies, political leaders, and American citizens saw through the nonsense and rallied around a principle to preserve the internet's openness. They advocated for one simple, necessary rule '-- a nondiscrimination principle that became known as ''network neutrality''. This principle would forbid phone and cable companies not only from blocking '-- but also from discriminating between or entering in special business deals to the benefit of '-- some sites over others.

Unfortunately, the FCC decision that included the nondiscrimination rule still had major loopholes '-- especially when it came to mobile networks.

Both sides battled out the issues before Congress, federal agencies, and in several senate and presidential campaigns over the next five years. These fights culminated in the 2010 FCC decision that included the nondiscrimination rule.

Unfortunately, the rule still had major loopholes '-- especially when it came to mobile networks. It also was built, to some extent, on a shaky political foundation because the then-FCC chairman repeatedly folded when facing pressure. Still, the adopted rule was better than nothing, and it was a major advance over AT&T's opening bid in 2005 of a no-blocking rule.

As a result, Verizon took the FCC to court to void the 2010 FCC rule. Verizon went to court to attack the part of the rule forbidding them from discriminating among websites and applications; from setting up '-- on what we once called the information superhighway '-- the equivalents of tollbooths, fast lanes, and dirt roads.

There and Back AgainSo that's where we are today '-- waiting for the most powerful court in the nation, the DC Circuit, to rule in Verizon's case. During the case's oral argument, back in early September, corporate lobbyists, lawyers, financial analysts, and consumer advocates packed into the courtroom: some sitting, some standing, some relegated to an overflow room.

Since then, everyone interested in internet freedom has been waiting for an opinion '-- including everyday folks who search the web or share their thoughts in 140 characters; and including me, who argued the first (losing) network neutrality case before the DC Circuit in 2010.

Web and mobile companies will live or die not on the merits of their technology, but on the deals they can strike with AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and others.

But, in their questions and statements during oral argument, the judges have made clear how they planned to rule '-- for the phone and cable companies, not for those who use the internet. While the FCC has the power to impose the toothless ''no-blocking'' rule (originally proposed by AT&T above), it does not (the court will say) have the power to impose the essential ''nondiscrimination'' rule.

It looks like we'll end up where AT&T initially began: a false compromise.

The implications of such a decision would be profound. Web and mobile companies will live or die not on the merits of their technology and design, but on the deals they can strike with AT&T, Verizon, Comcast, and others. This means large phone and cable companies will be able to ''shakedown'' startups and established companies in every sector, requiring payment for reliable service. In fact, during the oral argument in the current case, Verizon's lawyer said, ''I'm authorized to state from my client today that but for these [FCC] rules we would be exploring those types of arrangements.''

Wait, it gets even worse. Pricing isn't even a necessary forcing factor. Once the court voids the nondiscrimination rule, AT&T, Verizon, and Comcast will be able to deliver some sites and services more quickly and reliably than others for any reason. Whim. Envy. Ignorance. Competition. Vengeance. Whatever. Or, no reason at all.

So what if you've got a great new company, an amazing group of founders, a seat in a reputable accelerator program, great investors and mentors. With the permission-based innovation over ''our pipes'' desired from the likes of Comcast, Verizon and AT&T'... there's no meritocracy here.

Of course, despite everything the judges suggested during the two-hour argument, it's possible that they offer net neutrality a reprieve. Given how sticky this morass is, there's one simple way for you to judge the opinion: If the court throws out the non-discrimination rule, permission-less innovation on the internet as we know it is done. If the nondiscrimination rule miraculously survives, then, for now at least, so too will freedom on the internet.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 23:13

MARTHA MENDOZAPublished: TodayAn Internet security firm says a limousine software company has been hacked, exposing credit card numbers and potentially embarrassing details about close to 1 million customers, including politicians, star athletes and corporate executives.

Alex Holden, chief information security officer of Milwaukee-based Hold Security, says he discovered the breach at Corporatecaronline more than a month ago. He said he informed the owner of the Kirkwood, Mo.-based software company that customers' credit card numbers, pickup and drop-off information, and other personal details had been stolen.

"The privacy implications of this are very disturbing," Holden said Monday.

Car services buy software from Corporatecaronline and use it to streamline reservations, dispatching and payments. Owner Dan Leonard did not return a call to his company for comment Monday from The Associated Press.

Cybersecurity blogger Brian Krebs, working with Hold Security, first reported the hack on his website krebsonsecurity.com, including details dispatchers gave to drivers heading out to pick up celebrity passengers. For example, Krebs reported a chauffeur driving Tom Hanks to a Chicago restaurant for dinner was advised the client was a "VVIP" who required "No cell/radio use" by the driver.

A chauffeur meeting Latin American textile magnate Josue Christiano Gomes da Silva inside an airport luggage claim area with a printed sign was warned: "SUPER VIP CLIENT. EVERYTHING MUST BE PERFECT!"

Other customers include Donald Trump, who required a new car with a clear front seat; LeBron James, who was picked up at an entrance for athletes at a Las Vegas sports arena; and Colorado Sen. Mark Udall, who was traveling to Boston with golf clubs.

The stolen files also include records about what took place in the vehicles, including sex, vomiting and smoking marijuana, Krebs reports.

Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., whose data was among those breached, declined to comment Monday. But his spokesman Andrew Schreiber said he was appreciative that the matter was brought it to his attention.

Other members of Congress also said they were uninformed.

"This is the first we have heard about this. We were never notified, but we are looking into the claim," said Leslie Shedd, spokeswoman for Rep. Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga.

Holden said he found the information from Corporatecaronline customers stored on the same computer server where he earlier found stolen usernames and passwords from PR Newswire, Adobe Systems and about 100 other firms. He said most firms took immediate action when informed; Adobe and PR Newswire went public when they learned of the breaches, warning millions of customers affected.

Holden declined to name dozens of other companies whose customers' data also appeared to have been hacked.

"If we start mentioning the names, there might be widespread panic," he said, noting that those companies are trying to deal with the breaches. But Holden said he was concerned that Corporatecaronline was failing to act, and that he contacted credit card companies himself.

Corporatecaronline's website boasts of robust data protection. "The only point of access to the servers is through our firewall, which is managed by our data center, 24/7, 365 days a year," it says.

But Jonathan Mayer, a cybersecurity fellow at the Center for International Security and Cooperation at Stanford University, did some poking Monday and found the website runs on outdated software prone to vulnerabilities. He said it has code dating back to Macromedia, which was acquired by Adobe nearly eight years ago; Internet Explorer 4, which rolled out in 1997; and 13-year-old Netscape 6.

"The point here is that you don't have to be a big target to be at risk online anymore," Mayer said. "This is the new normal, and it underscores the need for improving the regulatory framework."

The FBI did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

Cybersecurity firm McAfee's chief technology officer Raj Samani said Monday the hack underscores how vulnerable customers can be, even if they're trying to use complex passwords and take precautions with their privacy.

"You can do anything you want, but in many cases you entrust your data with multiple third parties, and it's out of your hands," he said.

___

Associated Press writers Alan Fram in Washington and Raphael Satter in London contributed to this report.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 11:42

University researchers say they've found an unnoticed defect in Bitcoin that could undermine the whole system, turning the decentralized currency into a centralized one.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney)

That's according to a research paper released Monday by Cornell University post-doctoral fellow Ittay Eyal and Professor Emin G¼n Sirer.

The flaw is due to the nature of how bitcoins are created -- people "mine" them by solving a complex puzzle with their computers. If used correctly, the system is set up so that someone guesses correctly every 10 minutes, and the winner gets 25 bitcoins. Because people compete against one another for the digital currency, bitcoins are mostly evenly distributed.

But bitcoin miners could exploit a weakness in the system that would give them a greater chance of getting bitcoins than rival miners: Solving a puzzle gives miners a much higher chance of solving the next one, and those solutions are typically stored in a public log called a "blockchain."

But solutions don't have to be publicized. If you solve a puzzle and keep it secret, you can start working on the next one and let everyone else keep mining in the wrong spot.

That unfair advantage becomes even more apparent when selfish, secretive miners group together and pool computing resources to solve puzzles. The bigger the group, the more frequently they win. If a group gets large enough, it could take control of the currency.

Related story: London Bitcoin exchange off to a rocky start

If that happens, bitcoins wouldn't be any different than dollars, yen and yuan -- currency whose supply is controlled by a powerful, central bank. The bitcoin control group could easily drive the value of the digital currency up or down by adding or withholding bitcoins from the system.

That could disrupt the very reason many have decided to use the four-year old currency, which represented a $2.6 billion market as of Monday morning. Many libertarians like the idea of a currency that has no government backing or centralized authority.

"No one wants to bring down Bitcoin," Eyal said. "But if you know you can increase your revenue by a bit, you're going to join the selfish pool."

Despite rampant fluctuations in in valuation, the price of bitcoins barely budged after the report was made public.

In the report, Eyal and Sirer say there already exist groups of miners that are big enough to take advantage of their selfish mining theory. And while they haven't seen anyone engage in that kind of strategy yet, it could be happening in the shadows.

Related story: Bitcoin mania is back! But is it a bubble?

As a solution, Eyal and Sirer suggest a bitcoin mining rule change: The total mining power of one group shouldn't be able to exceed one-quarter of the mining power of the bitcoin mining community as a whole. That tweak, which could be implemented with a simple software update, would prevent any one group from taking total control of the currency.

There are currently 11.9 million bitcoins in circulation. Some bitcoin users tend to get more attention, such as those illicit buyers at online black markets like the recently closed Silk Road. They tend to be drawn to the anonymous nature of the currency.

But bitcoins have also attracted some major business interests. Baidu(BIDU), a Chinese web services firm, recently started accepting bitcoin payments. And venture capital firms have begun investing in startups, like Circle Internet Financial, that make bitcoin payment tools.

First Published: November 4, 2013: 1:02 PM ET

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 21:42

The Silk Road is back. A relaunched version of the online drug marketplace has gone live today, joining existing alternatives that have seen a surge in popularity after authorities shut down the original Silk Road and busted its alleged mastermind. Silk Road 2.0 again tries to conceal the identity of both buyers and sellers by hiding itself behind the anonymizing network Tor, and Bitcoin remains the site's preferred currency. The site's administrator has even taken on the moniker of Dread Pirate Roberts, the same pseudonym that authorities believe was used by Ross Ulbricht before his capture.

Many members of the old site have already made the transition to Silk Road 2.0, even going so far as to reproduce popular discussion threads in the forums. New signups aren't being accepted, as for now only existing community members can issue invites to expand the site's audience. Despite reports that authorities are hunting down the Silk Road's most active sellers, things are already off to a fast start: Forbes reports that nearly 500 drug listings can already be found on Silk Road 2.0. Visually speaking, the new site is nearly identical to its predecessor. There is one change, though: a new login page taunts law enforcement by parodying the domain seizure notice commonly used by the Justice Department.

The goading goes even further: AllThingsVice reports that users are greeted with a victorious "we rise again" slogan upon successful sign-in. As an added layer of security, Silk Road members can choose to authenticate with a PGP encryption key, though it remains to be seen if these measures will help Silk Road 2.0 avoid the original's fate.

Our server has just had a phenomenal spike - bare with us.

'-- Dread Pirate Roberts (@DreadPirateSR) November 6, 2013

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 21:43

Log in with your social account:Or, you can log in or sign up using Forbes.New Posts+19 posts this hourMost Popular5 LinkedIn StrategiesListsThe Most Powerful PeopleVideoHillary Clinton's WorldThe ONE Stock to Buy in NovemberHelp|Connect

|Sign up|Log in

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 04:56

Wednesday, November 6, 2013Today, Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.), Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, released the following statement on the launch of the Silk Road 2.0:

''This new website '' launched barely a month after Federal agents shut down the original Silk Road -- underscores the inescapable reality that technology is dynamic and ever-evolving and that government policy needs to adapt accordingly. Rather than play 'whack-a-mole' with the latest website, currency, or other method criminals are using in an effort to evade the law, we need to develop thoughtful, nimble and sensible federal policies that protect the public without stifling innovation and economic growth. Our committee intends to have that conversation '' among others - at our hearing this month on virtual currency.''

Chairman Carper and Dr. Coburn's committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs began a formal inquiry into virtual currencies in April 2013. In August 2013 Chairman Carper and Dr. Coburn wrote to the Departments of Treasury, Homeland Security, and Justice, as well as the Securities and Exchange Commission, Commodities Futures Trading Commission, and the Federal Reserve.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: BBC News - Home

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 14:17

7 November 2013Last updated at 08:13 ET Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.

Instagram has blocked searches for certain terms associated with the suspected illegal sale of drugs via its service.

The photo-themed social network took the measure after being asked to respond to an investigation by #BBCtrending - a new social media series.

The journalists had uncovered many pictures and videos of narcotics posted alongside text advertising their sale.

Instagram is owned by Facebook.

The firm has a policy of acting on posts reported as being inappropriate, but it believes it would be impractical and invasive to search for such material.

"Instagram has a clear set of rules about what is and isn't allowed on the site," a spokeswoman told the BBC.

"We encourage people who come across illegal or inappropriate content to report it to us using the built-in reporting tools next to every photo, video or comment, so we can take action.

"People can't buy things on Instagram, we are simply a place where people share photos and videos."

Among Instagram's "report photo/video" choices is the option to identify suspected drug use.

The BBC understands Facebook's staff aim to review posts flagged to either of its social networks within 48 hours. They also have the option of blocking terms classed as "bad hashtags" - ones that promote banned activities - if they are mentioned in the press or in user reports.

The only content Facebook does actively search for is images of child abuse.

Hidden identitiesMost of the drugs-related activity appears to be taking place in the US.

"Just getting a few packs ready for tomorrow morning... Place your order today, it gets shipped out at 8AM tomorrow," read one post placed beneath an image of bags of marijuana.

Another picture showed a variety of pills, adding: "$2 a pop for xans, $10 a pop for roxys."

This refers to Xanax, a psychoactive anxiety treatment, and Roxicodone, an opiate used to treat pain.

Both require prescriptions in the US and the UK, but are sometimes bought on the black market.

Crystals of MDMA and other amphetamine-related substances were among other drugs advertised via photos and videos.

In many cases the buyer and seller arranged to finalise their deals using WhatsApp or Kik - instant messaging apps in which they could keep messages private. Like Instagram, accounts can be set up on these services without revealing either party's true identity.

Class-A drugsInstagram is not the only social network on which drugs are advertised.

The BBC has also seen instances of the practice in comments below some videos on Google's YouTube service.

But while it is relatively common for the person who uploaded a drug-themed photo or video on Instagram to be the one advertising the sale of the substance, on YouTube the person posting the ad tends to do so below videos belonging to others.

Like Facebook, Google relies on users reporting a problem before taking action.

"We take user safety seriously and have guidelines that prohibit any content encouraging dangerous, illegal activities," said a spokeswoman for YouTube.

"This includes content promoting the sale of drugs. YouTube's review teams respond to videos flagged for our attention around the clock, removing millions of videos each year that violate our policies."

One drugs abuse researcher - who has advised the UN, World Health Organization and the UK government - said he was concerned by what he had seen.

"I'm not particularly sophisticated on the internet, and it took me 10 seconds to see posts selling class-A drugs on Instagram," said Prof Neil McKeganey, founder of the Centre for Drug Misuse Research, in Glasgow.

"Here is a public space being used to trade some of the most dangerous substances that we know are being abused.

"I absolutely feel there is a responsibility to take proactive action.

"It seems to me far too serious for those who own the companies that provide the public space through which this is occurring to simply say it's up to contributors to bring this to their attention."

UK-based drugs treatment charity Addaction said it too wanted social media companies to act "swiftly and vigilantly", adding that it believed the companies could make a positive difference if they did.

"Social media is a great way of reaching out to millions and millions of people," said spokesman Elliot Elam.

"That's why we'd like to see providers of these sites work with organisations like ours, so they can find ways to engage with any users who may be struggling with drug or alcohol problems."

Google and Facebook are not the only companies that rely on user reports to indentify potential drugs deals.

Yahoo's blogging service Tumblr confirmed it had the same policy.

"For legal reasons, we do not proactively monitor the site," said a spokeswoman.

"We respond to reports of activity that is illegal or against our policies pursuant to those policies and relevant law."

Although the BBC found photos of illegal drugs on Tumblr, searches for the terms that brought up associated adverts on Instagram did not appear to do so on Yahoo's service.

Gun salesThis is not the first time Instagram's self-policing policies have been called into question.

In August the Fusion.net blog suggested that the illegal psychedelics 2C-I and 2CB were also being advertised via the app.

However it suggested that banning related hashtags would not solve the problem, saying "users would get more creative and choose other labels".

More recently US senator Edward Markey wrote to the service's chief executive, Kevin Systrom, asking him to look into reports that unregulated gun sales were being conducted through the app.

"Other companies that enable online sales have enacted commonsense protocols," he wrote.

"I encourage Instagram to take similar steps and adopt safe business practices that curb the marketing and sale of guns."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 16:09

By Associated Press, Published: MONDAY, NOVEMBER 04, 10:34 AM ET Aa NEW YORK '-- Actors Jonah Hill, Jamie Lee Curtis and Kristen Bell are among a batch of celebrities donning Russian-language ''Love Conquers Hate'' T-shirts to show support for gays in Russia alarmed by a new law banning pro-gay ''propaganda.''

It's part of an initiative launched Monday by the Human Rights Campaign, the largest U.S. gay-rights group.

Participating celebrities will share photos of themselves wearing the T-shirts on their social media platforms, encouraging followers to do likewise. The HRC says all net proceeds from shirt sales will go to a fund supporting gay-rights efforts in Russia.

''We stand with Russia's LGBT community and their allies,'' said HRC President Chad Griffin. ''We are committed to doing as much as we possibly can to support their efforts to repeal this heinous law.''

According to the HRC, other celebrities joining the T-shirt campaign include Fergie, Kelly Osbourne, Ricky Martin, Kevin Bacon, Doutzen Kroes, Anthony Bourdain, Tim Gunn, Perez Hilton, Todd Glass, Jonathan Del Arco, Amanda Leigh Dunn, Ana Matronic, Olympic swimmer Craig Gibbons, NBA basketball player Jason Collins, country singer Maggie Rose and soccer players Jozy Altidore, Lori Lindsey and Megan Rapinoe.

The law banning ''propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations among minors'' was enacted in June.

Gay-rights activists have asked the International Olympic Committee to call for the law's repeal ahead of the Winter Olympics, to be held in Russia in February.

___

Online:

http://www.loveconquershate.org

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

MORE

Contact us

Privacy policy

My Account

Sign InSubscribe(C) Copyright 1996-2013 The Washington Post

View desktop site

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 16:16

By Angela Cullen, Alex Webb and Catherine HickleyNovember 04, 2013 6:00 PM ESTGeneral Dwight Eisenhower views confiscated art recovered from the Nazi's after the end of World War II, 1945. Source: Universal History Archive/Getty Images

Cornelius Gurlitt rarely visited the Munich apartment which German customs officials entered two years ago in the hopes of nailing a suspected tax evader.

What they discovered was even rarer: a stash of 1,500 artworks that may be worth 1 billion euros ($1.35 billion) if confirmed to be by artists such as Pablo Picasso, Max Beckmann and Marc Chagall. The works originally may have been seized by the Nazis from German museums and private collectors. They were found amid piles of garbage and outdated food packets, according to a report in Focus magazine.

Prosecutors in the city of Augsburg have scheduled a news conference today to discuss the investigation. Representatives of Jewish families, from whom hundreds of thousands of works were stolen, called on the authorities to publish a list as soon as possible to help them identify missing art.

''Without a list, we can't do anything,'' said David Rowland of Rowland & Petroff in New York, who represents the heirs of Curt Glaser, an art critic and collector. ''They should put a list on the Internet with photos.''

The drab, beige apartment block at the center of the investigation is about 250 meters (820 feet) from the English Garden, in the affluent northern Munich neighborhood of Schwabing favored by rich intellectuals. Gurlitt is not listed in the Munich telephone directory and prosecutors declined to give his contact details.

''If only we'd known sooner,'' said Asma Omar, a 23-year-old student at the school for dietitians opposite the apartment block. ''It's crazy that all this art was right there and we're here every day. I mean, a billion euros of art with all the history that goes with it? Astonishing.''

'Degenerate' ArtMeike Hoffmann, an art historian, is helping prosecutors identify the works, according to Berlin's Free University, where Hoffmann works at the ''Degenerate Art'' research unit.

The Nazis seized more than 20,000 modern artworks that they saw as contrary to Aryan ideals from German museums. In 1937, Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels staged the exhibition ''Degenerate Art,'' which first opened in Munich, where it attracted more than 2 million people.

Paintings were hung crowded together, some with no frames, alongside slogans denigrating the artists for ''insulting German womanhood'' and revealing ''sick minds.''

Hard CurrencyThe Nazis auctioned the seized artworks from 1938. The museums which owned the art before World War II have no legal recourse to claim the works because a Nazi law allowing their seizure without compensation has never been repealed.

The Munich apartment is where Gurlitt kept the artworks handed down by his father, Hildebrand, according to Focus. Based in Hamburg before World War II, Hildebrand Gurlitt (1895-1956), was one of just four art dealers permitted by the Nazi authorities to sell artworks seized as ''degenerate'' from German museums from the end of 1938 to 1941.

Though they were instructed to sell them abroad for hard currency, the four passed many on to fellow German dealers or kept them for themselves, according to the Free University's ''Degenerate Art'' website.

Cornelius Gurlitt was held by officials investigating possible money laundering during a random check on a train from Switzerland to Munich. He was returning from Bern, where he had sold an artwork to the Galerie Kornfeld auction house, Focus said. The auction house denied the transaction.

''The last business and personal contact between Galerie Kornfeld and Cornelius Gurlitt goes back to 1990,'' the company said in an e-mailed statement yesterday. Gurlitt sold works confiscated during the Third Reich that his father had purchased cheaply in Berlin in 1938, and ''whose trade can't be challenged today,'' the auction house said.

Overwhelming Art''The number of works is overwhelming,'' Monika Tatzkow, a provenance researcher and author of several books on Nazi-looted art, said in an interview from Berlin. If confirmed as genuine, ''it shows that a lot of time has to pass for some of this art to emerge from shady sources.''

''The federal government is supporting the Augsburg prosecutors with experts in the field of so-called degenerate art,'' German chancellor Angela Merkel's spokesman Steffen Seibert said in a Berlin news conference. ''Of course we can't comment on the investigation. The government has been kept informed of this case for several months now.''

Hildebrand Gurlitt ''is well known as a red-flag name,'' said Robert Edsel, whose book ''The Monuments Men,'' an account of the taskforce assigned to rescue European cultural artifacts during World War II, has been made into a film by George Clooney to be released in February. Edsel spoke by telephone from Dallas yesterday.

Degenerate Thefts''If you see any work of art that he was involved with in terms of provenance, if his name crops up, there's a high likelihood that it was stolen or that it has come out of one of Germany's museums as one of the degenerate art pieces,'' Edsel said.

Customs authorities in Munich declined to comment on the report, citing confidentiality rules.

''As important a story as this is -- why have the Bavarian authorities been sitting on them for two years?'' said Anne Webber, co-chair of the Commission for Looted Art in Europe, a London-based organization which helps families recover art seized by the Nazis. ''Bavaria needs to publish a list of these works as soon as possible.''

Matisse PortraitThe works include a painting entitled ''Portrait of a Lady'' by Henri Matisse that once belonged to Jewish art collector Paul Rosenberg, Focus said.

Rosenberg -- whose granddaughter is Anne Sinclair, the journalist and estranged wife of former International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn -- was forced to leave his collection behind when he fled the Nazis, Focus said. Gurlitt kept the artworks and sold some as a source of income over the years, the magazine reported.

Works by Emil Nolde, Franz Marc, Paul Klee, Oskar Kokoschka, Ernst Ludwig Kirchner, Max Liebermann and Albrecht Duerer were also discovered in the raid, it said.

''This is not the end of it,'' Edsel said. ''As the World War II generation passes over the next five years, we're going to see more of this stuff coming out: paintings on walls, in attics from World War II veterans of all sides. We're going to find more of these. I don't know necessarily of this sort of scale, but we're going to see more of it.''

Muse highlights include Martin Gayford on European art, Greg Evans on U.S. television, Amanda Gordon's Scene Last Night and Philip Boroff on U.S. theater.

To contact the reporters on this story: Angela Cullen in Frankfurt at acullen8@bloomberg.net; Alex Webb in Munich at awebb25@bloomberg.net: Catherine Hickley in Berlin at chickley@bloomberg.net.

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Manuela Hoelterhoff at mhoelterhoff@bloomberg.net.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 19:59

In May, the White House leaked word that it would start shifting drone operations from the shadows of the CIA to the relative sunlight of the Defense Department in an effort to be more transparent about the controversial targeted killing program. But six months later, the so-called migration of those operations has stalled, and it is now unlikely to happen anytime soon, Foreign Policy has learned.

The anonymous series of announcements coincided with remarks President Obama made on counterterrorism policy at National Defense University in which he called for "transparency and debate on this issue." A classified Presidential Policy Guidance on the matter, issued at the same time, caught some in government by surprise, triggering a scramble at the Pentagon and at CIA to achieve a White House objective. The transfer was never expected to happen overnight. But it is now clear the complexity of the issue, the distinct operational and cultural differences between the Pentagon and CIA and the bureaucratic politics of it all has forced officials on all sides to recognize transferring drone operations from the Agency to the Defense Department represents, for now, an unattainable goal.

"The physics of making this happen quickly are remarkably difficult," one U.S. official told FP. "The goal remains the same, but the reality has set in."

Another U.S. official emphasized that the transfer is still continuing. "This is the policy, and we're moving toward that policy, but it will take some time," the official said. "The notion that there has been some sort of policy reversal is just not accurate. I think from the moment the policy was announced it was clear it was not something that would occur overnight or immediately."

The official noted that all involved are mindful not to disrupt the drone program just for the sake of completing the transfer from the CIA to the military. "While we work jointly towards this transition, we also want to ensure that we maintain capabilities."

Officials at the CIA and the Defense Department are loathe to try and fix a program that they don't think is broken, even if it has become a political liability for Obama, who has faced constant pressure from human rights activists, his political base, and a growing chorus of libertarian Republicans to scale back the program and subject it to greater public scrutiny. But the pitfalls of transferring operations reside in more practical concerns. The U.S. official said that while the platforms and the capabilities are common to either the Agency or the Pentagon, there remain distinctly different approaches to "finding, fixing and finishing" terrorist targets. The two organizations also use different approaches to producing the "intelligence feeds" upon which drone operations rely. Perhaps more importantly, after years of conducting drone strikes, the CIA has developed an expertise and a taste for them. The DOD's appetite to take over that mission may not run very deep.

The military operates its own drones, of course, and has launched hundreds of lethal strikes in Iraq and Afghanistan. But the CIA is more "agile," another former official said, and has a longer track record of being able to sending drones into places where U.S. combat forces cannot go.

"The agency can do it much more efficiently and at lower cost than the military can," said one former intelligence official. Another former official with extensive experience in intelligence and military operations said it takes the military longer to deploy drones -- in part because the military uses a larger support staff to operate the aircraft.

The military also cannot conduct overt, hostile action in Pakistan, where the drones have been most active and are practically the only means the United States has to attack terrorists and militants in remote regions. Yes, the pace of strikes has significantly decreased since the 2010 peak of an estimated 122 unmanned attacks in Pakistan. But the drones are most certainly still flying. Last week, a drone strike killed the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, Hakimullah Mehsud, who had a $5 million U.S. bounty on his head for his involvement in a 2009 attack in Afghanistan. Over the summer, a spate of drone strikes killed a dozen militants in Yemen.

Keeping the drones with the CIA also offers legal cover for drone strikes, former officials argued. By law, the military is not supposed to conduct hostile actions outside a declared war zone, although special forces do so on occasion acting at the CIA's behest.

When the White House began floating the idea earlier this year of transferring the drone program to the military, some lawmakers were skeptical, said a former U.S. official. John Brennan -- the White House counterrorism czar turned CIA director -- might have allegedly grown uncomfortable with the targeted killings that he helped oversee for so long. But the congressmen doubted whether the government of Pakistan would ever allow drone strikes run by the U.S. military to occur in their country.

"That was the president's aspirational goal, but no one ever believed the Pakistanis were going to let us do that," said the former official, who was involved in discussions over transferring the drone program to the military.

For years, the Pakistani government has given tacit approval to CIA-led strikes. But they were conducted as covert actions under U.S. law, meaning they were never officially acknowledged by U.S. officials. That gave the Pakistanis some wiggle room to tell an angry public, which would never tolerate American troops on the ground, that Pakistani leaders had nothing to do with the strikes on their territory.

Even though Obama and other senior U.S. officials now publicly discuss CIA drone strikes, they are still conducted as covert operations. In practical terms, that means it's extremely difficult for journalists and outside researchers to obtain data from the CIA about its drone operations. And they are still briefed to Congress as covert operations, so relatively few lawmakers and congressional staff know about them.

The secrecy of drone operations could have far reaching effects on U.S. foreign policy as other nations build and deploy their own drone fleets.

"We are setting precedent that other nations will follow," said Micah Zenko, a fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations who closely follows the CIA drone program. "If the executive branch wants maximum authority with this very minimal amount of transparency and limited-in-scope oversight, that's a precedent that other countries will look to as well."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 03:37

Study says warmer temperatures are largely due to natural 300-year cyclesActual increase in last 17 years lower than almost every predictionScientists likened continuing pause to a Mexican wave in a stadiumBy David Rose

PUBLISHED: 19:32 EST, 2 November 2013 | UPDATED: 20:00 EST, 2 November 2013

204shares

147

Viewcomments

The 17-year pause in global warming is likely to last into the 2030s and the Arctic sea ice has already started to recover, according to new research.

A paper in the peer-reviewed journal Climate Dynamics '' by Professor Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology and Dr Marcia Wyatt '' amounts to a stunning challenge to climate science orthodoxy.

Not only does it explain the unexpected pause, it suggests that the scientific majority '' whose views are represented by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) '' have underestimated the role of natural cycles and exaggerated that of greenhouse gases.

Pause: How the Earth's average temperature defied scientists' predictions by remaining almost the same

The research comes amid mounting evidence that the computer models on which the IPCC based the gloomy forecasts of a rapidly warming planet in its latest report, published in September, are diverging widely from reality.

The graph shown above, based on a version published by Dr Ed Hawkins of Reading University on his blog, Climate Lab Book, reveals that actual temperatures are now below the predictions made by almost all the 138 models on which the IPCC relies.

The pause means there has been no statistically significant increase in world average surface temperatures since the beginning of 1997, despite the models' projection of a steeply rising trend.

According to Dr Hawkins, the divergence is now so great that the world's climate is cooler than what the models collectively predicted with 'five to 95 per cent certainty'.

Curry and Wyatt say they have identified a climatic 'stadium wave' '' the phenomenon known in Britain as a Mexican wave, in which the crowd at a stadium stand and sit so that a wave seems to circle the audience.

Recovery: A new study suggests global warming is at a halt and Arctic seas are starting to recover

In similar fashion, a number of cycles in the temperature of air and oceans, and the level of Arctic ice, take place across the Northern hemisphere over decades. Curry and Wyatt say there is evidence of this going back at least 300 years.

According to Curry and Wyatt, the theory may explain both the warming pause and why the computer models did not forecast it.

It also means that a large proportion of the warming that did occur in the years before the pause was due not to greenhouse gas emissions, but to the same cyclical wave.

'The stadium wave signal predicts that the current pause in global warming could extend into the 2030s,' said Wyatt. This is in sharp contrast with the IPCC's report, which predicts warming of between 0.3 and 0.7C by 2035.

Wyatt added: 'The stadium wave forecasts that sea ice will recover from its recent minimum.' The record low seen in 2012, followed by the large increase in 2013, is consistent with the theory, she said.

Even IPCC report co-authors such as Dr Hawkins admit some of the models are 'too hot'.

He said: 'The upper end of the latest climate model projections is inconsistent' with observed temperatures, though he added even the lower predictions could have 'negative impacts' if true.

But if the pause lasted another ten years, and there were no large volcanic eruptions, 'then global surface temperatures would be outside the IPCC's indicative likely range'.

Professor Curry went much further. 'The growing divergence between climate model simulations and observations raises the prospect that climate models are inadequate in fundamental ways,' she said.

If the pause continued, this would suggest that the models were not 'fit for purpose'.

Share or comment on this article

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:41

Read Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science for free online by using the links below. These were updated onOctober 17, 2013; the updates consisted of completing the source citations for figures, copyediting, and formatting. No substantive changes were made to the content, but these updates did change pagination, so when citing the book please use the correct version for proper page references.

Forward and PrefaceExecutive SummaryChapter 1. Global Climate ModelsChapter 2. Forcings and FeedbacksChapter 3. Solar Forcing of ClimateChapter 4. Observations: TemperatureChapter 5. Observations: The CryosphereChapter 6. Observations: The HydrosphereChapter 7. Observations: Extreme WeatherAppendix 1:Acronyms Appendix 2:Authors Directory

The Summary for Policymakers was written in collaboration with the lead authors and approved by them. Because it is aimed at a larger popular audience than the book, it adds a discussion of the scientific method and the precautionary principle, a brief summary and critical analysis of each of the IPCC's main lines of argument, and a brief set of recommendations for policymakers. We also recommend you review the separate Executive Summary.

CCR II: Physical Science is an independent, comprehensive, and authoritative report on the current state of climate science. It is the fourth in a series of scholarly reports produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), an international network of climate scientists sponsored by three nonprofit organizations: Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), and The Heartland Institute.

Previous volumes in the Climate Change Reconsidered series were published in 2008, 2009, and 2011. Those volumes along with separate executive summaries for the second and third reports are available for free online on this site.

Whereas the reports of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warn of a dangerous human effect on climate, NIPCC concludes the human effect is likely to be small relative to natural variability, and whatever small warming is likely to occur will produce benefits as well as costs.

CCR-II consists of three parts: a Summary for Policy Makers (SPM), part one titled Physical Science, and part two titled Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerabilities. The SPM and Part One were released on September 17-18, 2013 in Chicago, Illinois USA. Additional release events took place the following weeks in Washington, DC, New York, Florida, St. Louis, England, Germany, Holland, and California. See the calendar feature in the right sidebar of this site for more event information.

Read More

In 2011, the Nongovernmental Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) published Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report, a 400-page report containing summaries and analysis of scientific research published since the original 2009 edition of Climate Change Reconsidered. While not as comprehensive as the 2009 report, the Interim Report contains reviews of nearly 1,000 new research studies covering subjects including computer models, forcings and feedbacks, paeloclimate and recent temperatures, and more.

According to the report, ''natural causes are very likely to be [the] dominant'' cause of climate change that took place in the twentieth and at the start of the twenty-first centuries. ''We are not saying anthropogenic greenhouse gases (GHG) cannot produce some warming or have not in the past. Our conclusion is that the evidence shows they are not playing a substantial role.''

Clickhere to view the Executive SummaryClick here for free PDFs of the entire book or individual chapters.Click herefor Reviews of this book

This 880-page rebuttal of the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), three years in the making, was released in June 2009 by The Heartland Institute. Coauthored and edited by S. Fred Singer, Ph.D., and Craig Idso, Ph.D. and produced with contributions and reviews by an international coalition of scientists, it provides an independent examination of the evidence available on the causes and consequences of climate change in the published, peer-reviewed literature examined without bias and selectivity. It includes many research papers ignored by the IPCC plus additional scientific results that became available after the IPCC deadline of May 2006.

Clickhereto view the Executive SummaryClick here for free PDFs of the entire book or individual chapters.Click herefor Academic References to this bookClick herefor Reviews of this book

In 2008, the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) released its first publication titled Nature, Not Human Activity, Controls the Climate. Written by 24 scientist from around the world and edited by distinguished climate scientists S. Fred Singer, the 50-page report offered an independent examination of the causes and consequences of climate change based on a review of in the published, peer-reviewed literature '' examined without bias and selectivity. It included many research papers ignored by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), plus additional scientific results that became available after the IPCC deadline of May 2006.

The foundation for NIPCC was laid five years earlier when a small group of scientists from the United States and Europe met in Milan during one of the frequent UN climate conferences. But it got going only after a workshop held in Vienna in April 2007, with many more scientists, including some from the Southern Hemisphere. The NIPCC project was conceived and directed by Dr. S. Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia.

NIPCC serves as the ''Red Team'' to the IPCC's ''Green Team.'' Whereas the IPCC is pre-programmed by its mission and organization to produce reports to support the hypotheses of anthropogenic warming and the control of greenhouse gases, NIPCC has no institutional bias at all. It is what it's name suggests: an international group of independent scientists seeking the truth about climate.

Click here for a free PDF of the entire report

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 08:43

Washington's Blog

All At Once?We've been reporting for years that huge quantities of debris from the Japanese tsunami would hit the West Coast of North America. And see this.

The Independent reports:

An enormous floating island of debris from Japan's 2011 tsunami is drifting towards the coast of America, bringing with it over one million tonnes of junk that would cover an area the size of Texas.

The most concentrated stretch '' dubbed the ''toxic monster'' by Fox News '' is currently around 1,700 miles off the coast, sitting between Hawaii and California, but several million tonnes of additional debris remains scattered across the Pacific.

If the rubbish were to continue to fuse, the combined area of the floating junkyard would be greater than that of the United States, and could theoretically weigh up to five million tonnes.

***

The latest statistics come from a report last week by the US Department of Commerce's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The NOAA commissioned the report in an effort to predict exactly when and where the giant floating junkyard would make landfall.

***

Some of the debris may have already crossed the Atlantic, however, with reports of Japanese fishing vessels washing up on the shores of Canada as long ago as winter 2011. If that proves to be the case, the levels of toxic junk already littering US beaches is likely to be high.

The Mirror notes:

Scientists have already discovered debris on the west coast but their latest findings suggest California is expected to be hit with a deluge allatonce.

Maybe '... but ocean currents are difficult to model over such long distances. As the Independent points out:

The results suggest the movement of the debris remains wildly unpredictable, with experts forecasting the bulk of the rubbish could wash-up anywhere between Alaska and Hawaii at any point in the next few years.

Some of the debris could be radioactive.

Washington's Blog

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:08

James Hansen says environmentalists and world leaders must accept nuclear power now to avoid catastrophic climate change.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

Top enviro-scientists call on world leaders to embrace nuclear powerOnly nukes can make enough clean power to slow climate change, they sayNuclear energy is too expensive and risky, says Natural Resources Defense CouncilScientist: Al Gore supports safer, better nuclear power, "but he won't come out and say that"For more on the future of nuclear power as a possible solution for global climate change, watch CNN Films' presentation of "Pandora's Promise," Thursday, November 7, at 9 p.m. ET/PT.

(CNN) -- Four top environmental scientists raised the stakes Sunday in their fight to reverse climate change and save the planet.

Climate and energy scientists James Hansen, Ken Caldeira, Kerry Emanuel and Tom Wigley have released an open letter calling on world leaders to support development of safer nuclear power systems.

Wait -- pro-nuclear environmentalists? Isn't that an oxymoron? Apparently, not so much anymore.

Embracing nuclear is the only way, the scientists believe, to reverse the looming threat of climate change which they blame on fossil fuels. Depending who you ask, they're either abandoning -- or leading -- traditional environmentalists who for a half-century have rejected clean-burning nuclear power as too expensive or too dangerous. Opponents cite disasters at Fukushima, Chernobyl and Three Mile island.

Related: Fukushima update

The fear is that time is running out. Without nuclear, the scientists believe global energy consumption will overtake the planet's ability to reverse the buildup of carbon dioxide pollution from burning oil, coal and other fossil fuels. At risk, said Hansen, are disintegrating polar ice sheets and rising sea levels which will threaten coastal regions.

The letter is among the scientists' strongest public statements backing nuclear power. It also comes as CNN plans to air "Pandora's Promise," a documentary about environmentalists and longtime nuclear opponents who've done complete 180s on nukes.

By releasing the letter, the scientists are "putting their reputations on the line to do something that the ultra-greens regard as treason," said Stanford University Nobel-winning physicist Burton Richter.

Nuclear power is burgeoning in some parts of the world and shrinking in others. Asia is embracing it -- except Japan -- which is still struggling to figure out how to safely deal with the dangerously radioactive Fukushima nuclear power plant.

The Japanese disaster left Germany so unnerved that they've chosen to phase out their 17 nuclear facilities by 2022.

"We've got four top guns in the environmental movement telling [German Chancellor] Angela Merkel, 'You're wrong to shut down nuclear,'" said Richter. "I think that's a relatively big deal."

Are we witnessing the birth of a mutiny within the environmental movement? Will typical 21st-century environmentalists eventually embrace the power of the atom? A leading environmental group opposed to nuclear power says no.

"I don't think it's very significant that a few people have changed their minds about nuclear power," said Ralph Cavanagh of the Natural Resources Defense Council. Nuclear fuel may burn cleaner, the NRDC says, but comes with too many safety issues and too high of a price tag.

The letter admits "today's nuclear plants are far from perfect." However, "... there is no credible path to climate stabilization that does not include a substantial role for nuclear power."

Read the letter

The four scientists say they have no connection to "Pandora's Promise," which blames resistance to nuclear energy on groundless fears rooted in the Cold War, Chernobyl in 1986 and 1979's Three Mile Island.

Related: Chernobyl's local health problems

Map: Closest nukes to your home

Nuclear power is dying a slow death in the market place.Ralph Cavanagh, Natural Resources Defense Council

In the documentary, which debuts on CNN Thursday at 9 p.m. ET/PT, climate change activist and author Mark Lynas says he knew publicly supporting nuclear energy would put his entire career at risk. "I'd have been much better just to keep my mouth shut," he admits in the film. "But I couldn't do that."

Cavanagh said the "movie attempts to establish the proposition that mainstream environmentalists are pouring into nuclear advocacy today. They aren't. I've been in the NRDC since 1979. I have a pretty good idea of where the mainstream environmental groups are and have been. I've seen no movement."

Selling nuclear energy to environmentalists is a tough pitch. Hansen acknowledged that many of them won't easily buy into it. Parts of the community operate like "a religion of sorts, which makes it very difficult," Hansen said. "They're not all objectively looking at the pros and cons."

The NRDC hasn't rejected nuclear power out of hand, Cavanagh said. It constantly evaluates nuclear power and "everything else," he said. "I think that's our obligation." Is it possible to be both an environmentalist and a supporter of nuclear power? "You can be," Cavanagh said.

Hansen has been spreading his message to the community's top influencers.

He tells of a recent meeting with Al Gore where he tried to sell the former vice president on how advanced nuclear technology might stabilize climate change. Gore invited two anti-nuclear advocates to the meeting, Hansen said, and by the time it was all over, Gore was unmoved. "I mean, Al essentially understands that we had better try to develop safer, better nuclear power," said Hansen, "but he won't come out and say that."

Here's what Gore did say publicly about it during a recent Reddit "Ask Me Anything" chat: nuclear energy "will continue to play a limited role, and IF the ongoing [research and development] produces cheaper, safer, smaller reactors, they may yet play a more significant role."

Decarbonizing

Among nuclear energy supporters, France remains a hero nation. In the 1970s, it chose to invest heavily in nuclear power creating a system that boasts some of the cheapest energy and cleanest air on the planet.

Germany puts out about 18% of its power with nuclear. But with the upcoming nuke phase-out, there are doubts about whether Germany can offset its nuclear output with wind and other clean energy sources.

Michael Limburg, vice president of the European Institute for Climate and Energy, told CNN in September that the government's energy targets are "completely unfeasible."

"Of course, it's possible to erect tens of thousands of windmills but only at an extreme cost and waste of natural space," he said. "And still it would not be able to deliver electricity when it is needed."

There are 65 commercially operating nuclear plants in the U.S., including 104 reactors. Five new reactors are currently being built, in Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee. In the past year, utilities have permanently shut down four others and plan to take a fifth out of service in 2014. At least two other planned projects have been shelved.

"Nuclear power is dying a slow death in the market place, which is what matters in determining its future," said Cavanagh.

As an alternative, the NRDC is touting efficiency. Energy-saving technology is becoming so successful, according to a new NRDC report, that efficiency has "significant potential to dramatically reduce power plant emissions." Total U.S. energy use peaked in 2007 and has been trending downward ever since, the NRDC says.

On the other hand, scientists in "Pandora's Promise" claim energy consumption globally could double by 2050 -- and perhaps triple or quadruple by 2100 -- as growing nations like China, India and Brazil start to want more energy.

A United Nations report released last month re-confirmed Hansen's fears. The study concluded that the planet is heating up, the oceans are rising and there's more evidence that neither development is natural.

Hansen, who was among the initial wave of scientists warning about climate change in the 1980s, said Friday he fears most its "irreversible effects."

"Once we get to a certain point and the ice sheets start to disintegrate, then you can't stop it."

Then Hansen paused. "And we're getting very close to that point."

If we stay on the current path, he said, "those are the consequences we'll be leaving to our children. The best candidate to avoid that is nuclear power. It's ready now. We need to take advantage of it."

CNN's Matt Smith and Oliver Joy contributed to this report.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Atomic Insights

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:59

At the end of September 2013, Robert Stone was interviewed about Pandora's Promise by Soci(C)t(C) Fran§aise d'Energie Nucl(C)aire (SFEN). During that interview, he described his inability to convince a single European broadcaster '-- outside the UK '-- to show his documentary. According to Stone, representatives of broadcasting companies throughout the EU have told him that his film contradicts many of the other documentaries and programs that they have paid to develop and show to their viewers.

When companies or individuals have invested large sums of money to tell a tale, even if it is untrue, it is in their best interest to do whatever they can to silence someone telling a different story, even it is absolutely true.

One of Stone's responses to the attempted blackout has been to arrange for a worldwide release on iTunes on December 3, 2013. In today's media world, it is essentially impossible to suppress anyone who correctly points out that the emperors have no clothes or that people who claim that the small doses of radiation that members of the public received from Chernobyl have resulted in a large number of negative health effects or excess fatalities are wrong.

At the end of the interview, Stone offers a rather profane Americanism that we use frequently when told to adhere to a party line way of thinking. I won't repeat it here because I do not like effect of having the 'F' word show up in searches on this site, but suffice it to say that I have heard '-- and used '-- the phrase many times during my long career.

I am, after all, a sailor.

PS '' For anyone who resides in the United States, and not the European Union, Pandora's Promise is scheduled to air on CNN on November 7 at 9:00 pm EST and on November 8 at 12:00 am.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: WT news feed

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 01:48

By Nathanael Johnson

Michael Skinner didn't start the experiment with the hypothesis that he'd find a connection between the insecticide DDT and obesity.

''We didn't expect to find that,'' he said. ''In fact, the frequency of obesity really came as a surprise.''

Skinner, a scientist at Washington State University, wanted to take a close look at the way DDT affected inheritance. So his team injected DDT into pregnant rats and watched first their children, and then their grandchildren (or is it grandrats?). It was only in the third generation, the great-grand-rat, that they saw it: Fully half of these rats were obese. The implication is that the same thing could be happening with humans.

Michael Skinner.''Is there a correlation between the fact that we were all exposed to DDT in the 1950s for 10 years, and the fact that we are now seeing high levels of obesity?'' Skinner asked. His work suggests that there could be.

Of course, the more immediate cause of obesity is too many calories. But there may be more going on here than too much food. Humans are getting fat, so are our pets, so are wild animals. There's a trend toward obesity in nearly every species scientists have studied.

Of course it's too early to lay the blame on DDT. This study simply raised the possibility. But the findings are plausible.

''I do believe that the observed obesity is real,'' emailed Andrea Gore, a professor of pharmacology and toxicology at the University of Texas Austin. Other experiments have already shown that endocrine-disrupting chemicals can cause obesity generations after exposure, Gore said.

Skinner had already seen that he could trigger the inheritance of disease with various chemicals. There's a narrow window during the gestation, where an exposure to lots of things can cause heritable epigenetic changes.

''The majority of things we've tested came up positive,'' he said.

So the obvious question: Is this a problem specific to DDT, or would we have seen similar results if Skinner's team had decided to inject the rats with vitamin C? In other words, is this about the chemical, or just the timing of the exposure?

If the DDT had caused kidney disease, Skinner said, he would have been reassured. A lot of things seem to have epigenetic effects that lead to kidney disease. But obesity is unusual '-- that suggests a problem with DDT itself, Skinner said.

Skinner started this experiment after the World Health Organization lifted the ban on DDT to help fight malaria. That was a good decision based on the available information, Skinner said, but no one had looked to see if DDT had an effect on subsequent generations. ''On the one hand, there are 2 million deaths per year in Africa from malaria. On the other hand, we're looking at the possibility of metabolic disease in every generation to come,'' Skinner said.

The word ''possibility'' there is key. This wasn't a risk assessment study, and we don't know if we'd see something similar in humans from environmental exposure to DDT, as opposed to direct injection. But this study should give pause to the people arguing to reintroduce DDT to places even without a malaria problem, Skinner said. It's now being used in France, among other places. And once you spray DDT, it's out there for a long time.

''If you go to any river in the U.S., and push your finger down into the mud one or two inches, the primary contaminant you will find there is DDT,'' Skinner said. The stuff just takes a really long time to break down, and Skinner's research suggests that its effects could last much longer.

Nathanael Johnson (@savortooth on Twitter) is Grist's food writer and the author of All Natural: A Skeptic's Quest to Discover If the Natural Approach to Diet, Childbirth, Healing, and the Environment Really Keeps Us Healthier and Happier.

Find this article interesting?Donate now to support our work.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 26 Oct 2013 23:59

By Maggie Fazeli Fard (@maggiefazeli) / October 25, 2013

Could your great-grandmother's pesticide exposure be the reason you're overweight today?

According to a new study, exposure to the synthetic insecticide DDT could set off a genetic chain reaction causing one's grandchildren, great-grandchildren and generations beyond to become obese.

''What your great-grandmother was exposed to during pregnancy, like DDT, may promote a dramatic increase in your susceptibility to obesity, and you will pass this on to your grandchildren in the absence of any continued exposures,'' said Michael Skinner, the Washington State University scientist behind the research, which was published this week in the journal BMC Medicine.

While investigating how DDT exposure might affect inheritance in general, Skinner and his team exposed pregnant rats to the insecticide, which was developed in the 1940s to combat insect-borne diseases like malaria and typhus, but banned in the United States in 1972 due to mounting public health and environmental concerns.

They found that while the exposed ''parent'' rats and their children didn't express an increased obesity risk, more than half of the third-generation rats '-- the ''grandchildren'' '-- developed the disease.

Skinner's lab has also demonstrated the ill effects of other chemical compounds, including plastics, pesticides, fungicides, dioxins, hydrocarbons and bisphenol-A, or BPA. These toxins have been shown to disrupt the molecular processes of DNA, causing certain genes to turn ''on'' or ''off'' without changing their sequence.

The DDT results have only been demonstrated in gestating rats, but the researchers believe similar effects could be seen in humans. DDT has now been banned in the United States for more than 30 years, but ''the third generation of people exposed in the 1950s is now of adult age and has a dramatic increase in diseases such as obesity,'' Skinner said in a statement.

It's worth noting that the study concluded that ancestral DDT exposure may be a factor in the current obesity crisis, but it's not the whole story. As tempting as it may be to blame grandma, lifestyle choices like diet, activity and stress level have also been shown to play a part in weight gain.

Maggie Fazeli Fard is an Experience Life staff writer.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sat, 26 Oct 2013 23:59

Skinner MK, Manikkam M, Guerrero-Bosagna C: Epigenetic transgenerational actions of environmental factors in disease etiology.

Trends Endocrinol Metab 2010, 21:214-222. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Jirtle RL, Skinner MK: Environmental epigenomics and disease susceptibility.

Nat Rev Genet 2007, 8:253-262. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Skinner MK: Environmental epigenetic transgenerational inheritance and somatic epigenetic mitotic stability.

Epigenetics 2011, 6:838-842. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Anway MD, Cupp AS, Uzumcu M, Skinner MK: Epigenetic transgenerational actions of endocrine disruptors and male fertility.

Science 2005, 308:1466-1469. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Anway MD, Leathers C, Skinner MK: Endocrine disruptor vinclozolin induced epigenetic transgenerational adult-onset disease.

Endocrinology 2006, 147:5515-5523. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Stouder C, Paoloni-Giacobino A: Transgenerational effects of the endocrine disruptor vinclozolin on the methylation pattern of imprinted genes in the mouse sperm.

Reproduction 2010, 139:373-379. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Manikkam M, Guerrero-Bosagna C, Tracey R, Haque MM, Skinner MK: Transgenerational Actions of Environmental Compounds on Reproductive Disease and Epigenetic Biomarkers of Ancestral Exposures.

PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e31901. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Nilsson EE, Schindler R, Savenkova MI, Skinner MK: Inhibitory actions of anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) on ovarian primordial follicle assembly.

PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e20087. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Bruner-Tran KL, Osteen KG: Developmental exposure to TCDD reduces fertility and negatively affects pregnancy outcomes across multiple generations.

Reprod Toxicol 2011, 31:344-350. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Waterland RA, Travisano M, Tahiliani KG, Rached MT, Mirza S: Methyl donor supplementation prevents transgenerational amplification of obesity.

Int J Obes (Lond) 2008, 32:1373-1379. Publisher Full Text

Hauser MT, Aufsatz W, Jonak C, Luschnig C: Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in plants.

Biochim Biophys Acta 1809, 2011:459-468.

Ruden DM, Lu X: Hsp90 affecting chromatin remodeling might explain transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in Drosophila.

Curr Genomics 2008, 9:500-508. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Greer EL, Maures TJ, Ucar D, Hauswirth AG, Mancini E, Lim JP, Benayoun BA, Shi Y, Brunet A: Transgenerational epigenetic inheritance of longevity in Caenorhabditis elegans.

Nature 2011, 479:365-371. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Pembrey ME: Male-line transgenerational responses in humans.

Hum Fertil (Camb) 2010, 13:268-271. Publisher Full Text

Guimaraes RM, Asmus CI, Meyer A: DDT reintroduction for malaria control: the cost-benefit debate for public health.

Cad Saude Publica 2007, 23:2835-2844. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Sadasivaiah S, Tozan Y, Breman JG: Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) for indoor residual spraying in Africa: how can it be used for malaria control?

Am J Trop Med Hyg 2007, 77:249-263. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Davies K: Strategies for eliminating and reducing persistent bioaccumulative toxic substances: common approaches, emerging trends, and level of success.

J Environ Health 2006, 69:9-15. PubMed Abstract

Enayati A, Hemingway J: Malaria management: past, present, and future.

Annu Rev Entomol 2010, 55:569-591. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

van den Berg H: Global status of DDT and its alternatives for use in vector control to prevent disease.

Environ Health Perspect 2009, 117:1656-1663. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Aneck-Hahn NH, Schulenburg GW, Bornman MS, Farias P, de Jager C: Impaired semen quality associated with environmental DDT exposure in young men living in a malaria area in the Limpopo Province, South Africa.

J Androl 2007, 28:423-434. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Hauser R, Singh NP, Chen Z, Pothier L, Altshul L: Lack of an association between environmental exposure to polychlorinated biphenyls and p, p?-DDE and DNA damage in human sperm measured using the neutral comet assay.

Hum Reprod 2003, 18:2525-2533. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

ATSDR: Agency for Toxic Substances and Diseases Registry (ATSDR)/US Public Health Service, Toxicological Profile for 4,4?-DDT, 4,4?-DDE, 4, 4?-DDD (Update). Atlanta, GA: ATSDR; 1994. PubMed Abstract

Longnecker MP, Klebanoff MA, Zhou H, Brock JW: Association between maternal serum concentration of the DDT metabolite DDE and preterm and small-for-gestational-age babies at birth.

Lancet 2001, 358:110-114. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Jaga K, Brosius D: Pesticide exposure: human cancers on the horizon.

Rev Environ Health 1999, 14:39-50. PubMed Abstract

Hamlin HJ, Guillette LJ Jr: Birth defects in wildlife: the role of environmental contaminants as inducers of reproductive and developmental dysfunction.

Syst Biol Reprod Med 2010, 56:113-121. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Eskenazi B, Chevrier J, Rosas LG, Anderson HA, Bornman MS, Bouwman H, Chen A, Cohn BA, de Jager C, Henshel DS, Leipzig F, Leipzig JS, Lorenz EC, Snedeker SM, Stapleton D: The Pine River statement: human health consequences of DDT use.

Environ Health Perspect 2009, 117:1359-1367. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Valvi D, Mendez MA, Martinez D, Grimalt JO, Torrent M, Sunyer J, Vrijheid M: Prenatal concentrations of polychlorinated biphenyls, DDE, and DDT and overweight in children: a prospective birth cohort study.

Environ Health Perspect 2012, 120:451-457. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

McAllister EJ, Dhurandhar NV, Keith SW, Aronne LJ, Barger J, Baskin M, Benca RM, Biggio J, Boggiano MM, Eisenmann JC, Elobeid M, Fontaine KR, Gluckman P, Hanlon EC, Katzmarzyk P, Pietrobelli A, Redden DT, Ruden DM, Wang C, Waterland RA, Wright SM, Allison DB: Ten putative contributors to the obesity epidemic.

Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 2009, 49:868-913. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Caballero B: The global epidemic of obesity: an overview.

Epidemiol Rev 2007, 29:1-5. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Trasande L, Attina TM, Blustein J: Association between urinary bisphenol A concentration and obesity prevalence in children and adolescents.

JAMA 2012, 308:1113-1121. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Manikkam M, Tracey R, Guerrero-Bosagna C, Skinner M: Plastics derived endocrine disruptors (BPA, DEHP and DBP) Induce epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of adult-onset disease and sperm epimutations.

PLoS ONE 2013, 8:e55387. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Tracey R, Manikkam M, Guerrero-Bosagna C, Skinner M: Hydrocarbon (Jet Fuel JP-8) induces epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of adult-onset disease and sperm epimutations.

Reprod Toxicol 2013, 36:104-116. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Janesick A, Blumberg B: Obesogens, stem cells and the developmental programming of obesity.

Int J Androl 2012, 35:437-448. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Sabin MA, Werther GA, Kiess W: Genetics of obesity and overgrowth syndromes.

Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2011, 25:207-220. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Phan-Hug F, Beckmann JS, Jacquemont S: Genetic testing in patients with obesity.

Best Pract Res Clin Endocrinol Metab 2012, 26:133-143. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Waterland RA: Is epigenetics an important link between early life events and adult disease?

Horm Res 2009, 71:13-16. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Anderson PJ, Critchley JA, Chan JC, Cockram CS, Lee ZS, Thomas GN, Tomlinson B: Factor analysis of the metabolic syndrome: obesity vs insulin resistance as the central abnormality.

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2001, 25:1782-1788. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Ferrannini E, Haffner SM, Mitchell BD, Stern MP: Hyperinsulinaemia: the key feature of a cardiovascular and metabolic syndrome.

Diabetologia 1991, 34:416-422. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Franks S: Polycystic ovary syndrome.

N Engl J Med 1995, 333:853-861. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Lauenborg J, Mathiesen E, Hansen T, Glumer C, Jorgensen T, Borch-Johnsen K, Hornnes P, Pedersen O, Damm P: The prevalence of the metabolic syndrome in a Danish population of women with previous gestational diabetes mellitus is three-fold higher than in the general population.

J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005, 90:4004-4010. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Chen SH, He F, Zhou HL, Wu HR, Xia C, Li YM: Relationship between nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and metabolic syndrome.

J Dig Dis 2011, 12:125-130. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Akahoshi T, Uematsu A, Akashiba T, Nagaoka K, Kiyofuji K, Kawahara S, Hattori T, Kaneita Y, Yoshizawa T, Takahashi N, Uchiyama M, Hashimoto S: Obstructive sleep apnoea is associated with risk factors comprising the metabolic syndrome.

Respirology 2010, 15:1122-1126. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Mathew AV, Okada S, Sharma K: Obesity related kidney disease.

Curr Diabetes Rev 2011, 7:41-49. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Kasturi SS, Tannir J, Brannigan RE: The metabolic syndrome and male infertility.

J Androl 2008, 29:251-259. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Rahmanpour H, Jamal L, Mousavinasab SN, Esmailzadeh A, Azarkhish K: Association between polycystic ovarian syndrome, overweight, and metabolic syndrome in adolescents.

J Pediatr Adolesc Gynecol 2012, 25:208-212. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Motta AB: The role of obesity in the development of polycystic ovary syndrome.

Curr Pharm Des 2012, 18:2482-2491. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Beard J: DDT and human health.

Sci Total Environ 2006, 355:78-89. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Nilsson EE, Anway MD, Stanfield J, Skinner MK: Transgenerational epigenetic effects of the endocrine disruptor vinclozolin on pregnancies and female adult onset disease.

Reproduction 2008, 135:713-721. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Xie F, Zhang R, Yang C, Xu Y, Wang N, Sun L, Liu J, Wei R, Ai J: Long-term neuropeptide Y administration in the periphery induces abnormal baroreflex sensitivity and obesity in rats.

Cell Physiol Biochem 2012, 29:111-120. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Phillips LK, Prins JB: The link between abdominal obesity and the metabolic syndrome.

Curr Hypertens Rep 2008, 10:156-164. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

National Task Force on the Prevention and Treatment of Obesity: Overweight, obesity, and health risk.

Arch Intern Med 2000, 160:898-904. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Anway MD, Skinner MK: Transgenerational effects of the endocrine disruptor vinclozolin on the prostate transcriptome and adult onset disease.

Prostate 2008, 68:517-529. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Taylor JA, Richter CA, Ruhlen RL, vom Saal FS: Estrogenic environmental chemicals and drugs: mechanisms for effects on the developing male urogenital system.

J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2011, 127:83-95. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Meredith S, Dudenhoeffer G, Jackson K: Classification of small type B/C follicles as primordial follicles in mature rats.

J Reprod Fertil 2000, 119:43-48. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Tateno H, Kimura Y, Yanagimachi R: Sonication per se is not as deleterious to sperm chromosomes as previously inferred.

Biol Reprod 2000, 63:341-346. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Ward WS, Kimura Y, Yanagimachi R: An intact sperm nuclear matrix may be necessary for the mouse paternal genome to participate in embryonic development.

Biol Reprod 1999, 60:702-706. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Guerrero-Bosagna C, Settles M, Lucker B, Skinner M: Epigenetic transgenerational actions of vinclozolin on promoter regions of the sperm epigenome.

PLoS ONE 2010, 5:e13100. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Guillette LJ Jr, Gross TS, Masson GR, Matter JM, Percival HF, Woodward AR: Developmental abnormalities of the gonad and abnormal sex hormone concentrations in juvenile alligators from contaminated and control lakes in Florida.

Environ Health Perspect 1994, 102:680-688. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Crews D, Gillette R, Scarpino SV, Manikkam M, Savenkova MI, Skinner MK: Epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of altered stress responses.

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012, 109:9143-9148. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Nilsson E, Larsen G, Manikkam M, Guerrero-Bosagna C, Savenkova M, Skinner M: Environmentally induced epigenetic transgenerational inheritance of ovarian disease.

PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e36129. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

McGrowder DA, Jackson LA, Crawford TV: Prostate cancer and metabolic syndrome: is there a link?

Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2012, 13:1-13. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Nelson RA, Bremer AA: Insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome in the pediatric population.

Metab Syndr Relat Disord 2010, 8:1-14. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Rose DP, Haffner SM, Baillargeon J: Adiposity, the metabolic syndrome, and breast cancer in African-American and white American women.

Endocr Rev 2007, 28:763-777. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Wisse BE: The inflammatory syndrome: the role of adipose tissue cytokines in metabolic disorders linked to obesity.

J Am Soc Nephrol 2004, 15:2792-2800. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Cao J, Rebuli ME, Rogers J, Todd KL, Leyrer SM, Ferguson SA, Patisaul HB: Prenatal bisphenol a exposure alters sex-specific estrogen receptor expression in the neonatal rat hypothalamus and amygdala.

Toxicol Sci 2013, 133:157-173. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

McMillen IC, Rattanatray L, Duffield JA, Morrison JL, MacLaughlin SM, Gentili S, Muhlhausler BS: The early origins of later obesity: pathways and mechanisms.

Adv Exp Med Biol 2009, 646:71-81. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Massiera F, Barbry P, Guesnet P, Joly A, Luquet S, Moreilhon-Brest C, Mohsen-Kanson T, Amri EZ, Ailhaud G: A Western-like fat diet is sufficient to induce a gradual enhancement in fat mass over generations.

J Lipid Res 2010, 51:2352-2361. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Dunn GA, Bale TL: Maternal high-fat diet effects on third-generation female body size via the paternal lineage.

Endocrinology 2011, 152:2228-2236. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Gambineri A, Pelusi C, Vicennati V, Pagotto U, Pasquali R: Obesity and the polycystic ovary syndrome.

Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord 2002, 26:883-896. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Martinez-Bermejo E, Luque-Ramirez M, Escobar-Morreale HF: Obesity and the polycystic ovary syndrome.

Minerva Endocrinol 2007, 32:129-140. PubMed Abstract

Doyle TJ, Bowman JL, Windell VL, McLean DJ, Kim KH: Transgenerational effects of di-(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate on testicular germ cell associations and spermatogonial stem cells in mice.

Biol Reprod 2013, 88:112. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Maric-Bilkan C: Obesity and diabetic kidney disease.

Med Clin North Am 2013, 97:59-74. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Mlambo SS, van Vuren JH, Barnhoorn IE, Bornman MS: Histopathological changes in the reproductive system (ovaries and testes) of Oreochromis mossambicus following exposure to DDT.

Environ Toxicol Pharmacol 2009, 28:133-139. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Cohn BA, Cirillo PM, Christianson RE: Prenatal DDT exposure and testicular cancer: a nested case?control study.

Arch Environ Occup Health 2010, 65:127-134. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | PubMed Central Full Text

Hart R, Hickey M, Franks S: Definitions, prevalence and symptoms of polycystic ovaries and polycystic ovary syndrome.

Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2004, 18:671-683. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Ozucelik DN, Karcioglu O, Topacoglu H, Fowler JR: Toxicity following unintentional DDT ingestion.

J Toxicol Clin Toxicol 2004, 42:299-303. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Carson R: Silent Spring. Houghton Mifflin: Greenburg; 1963.

Rogan WJ, Chen A: Health risks and benefits of bis(4-chlorophenyl)-1,1,1-trichloroethane (DDT).

Lancet 2005, 366:763-773. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Link to Article

Archived Version

Sun, 27 Oct 2013 00:02

Help to implant a human embryo; watch mouse eggs divide after fertilization; interview women about their experiences with emergency contraception; collect sperm from finches in the Galapagos Islands off Ecuador: specialists in reproductive biology undertake these duties and many more. The field provides a surfeit of career trajectories and research questions. ''We cover everything from fertilization to death,'' says Dolores Lamb, director of the Center for Reproductive Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas.

The reproductive sciences also touch on human life and biology at almost every level, from molecular and cellular events such as the recognition of the egg by sperm, to whole-body processes including hormonal regulation of puberty and population-level questions such as what factors affect teenage-pregnancy rates.

DIEKLEINERT/CORBIS

''It's amazing, the diverse backgrounds that all somehow feed into reproductive medicine,'' says Lamb. Many researchers study reproduction as part of a doctorate in reproductive or developmental biology. Others might find their way to the field through cell biology (focusing on sperm stem cells, for example) or animal sciences (perhaps studying cattle hormones). Attendees at the annual meeting of the Society for the Study of Reproduction, which is based in Madison, Wisconsin, hail from a wide range of disciplines.

Diversity does not guarantee jobs, however, and positions are scarce in many areas of industry and academia. Richard Sharpe, who heads the graduate programme at the UK Medical Research Council's Centre for Reproductive Health at the University of Edinburgh, says that three years ago he assured students that if they excelled, they could find work. ''We can no longer say that,'' he says. Academic opportunities have shrunk as the recession has taken a bite out of budgets and funding priorities have shifted to areas such as chronic disease, says Sharpe. (Although location does matter; see 'Renminbi for reproduction'.) In the reproductive sciences, as in most life sciences, the job market has constricted, agrees Michael Skinner, founder of the Center for Reproductive Biology at Washington State University (WSU) in Pullman.

Box 1: Renminbi for reproductionThirteen years after earning his PhD, and following two stints as a postdoc, Minghan Tong, a reproductive biologist at Washington State University in Pullman, has finally landed a tenure-track research position. Unable to find such a job in the United States, Tong is heading to greener pastures in his native China. In September, he will begin work at the Shanghai Institutes for Biological Sciences. Tong and others are applying for a 39-million-renminbi (US$6.3-million) grant to study the epigenetic regulation of sperm production.

China is a bright spot in the tight market for academic jobs in reproductive sciences. The sperm-production grant is part of a major funding initiative in the field by the Chinese government, which is interested in new approaches to contraception and in the reproductive impacts of environmental problems such as toxicants that may damage sperm and eggs by tweaking the epigenome to affect multiple generations.

In 2007, the Chinese Ministry of Science and Technology designated development and reproductive sciences as one of four core research areas, ramping up grant funding. This year, the ministry is expected to fund four 5-year projects in the field, each worth more than 24 million renminbi.

Other national and local agencies have also increased funding, spurring the establishment of dozens of research centres focused on reproductive sciences and creating hundreds of jobs, says Qinghua Shi, a professor of life sciences at the University of Science and Technology of China in Hefei.

C.S.

Even so, he says, studying reproduction will give doctoral students an edge with employers from fertility clinics to animal-agriculture companies. And areas such as global health continue to grow.

Looking to academia

WSU graduates have landed academic jobs in everything from toxicology to oncology, says Skinner, who notes that much cancer research focuses on reproduction-related cancers such as breast and prostate. These days, ''you have to market yourself broadly'', says Tracy Clement, who earned her PhD with Skinner and is looking for an academic post. ''It does not feel like a good time to be on the job market.''

If she does get a university job, Clement will face funding difficulties. The major source of US research money in the field is the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development in Bethesda, Maryland, but last year only 12.5% of grant applications for major research projects to the institute were successful '-- less than at many other National Institutes of Health (NIH) institutions.

In the future, says Skinner, academics will require support from multiple sources '-- something for which the broad field is particularly suited. Skinner, for instance, has received funding not only from the NIH, but also from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation in Seattle, Washington, to develop a male contraceptive and from the US Department of Defense to study how exposure to environmental toxicants affects subsequent generations. He has also applied to the John Templeton Foundation, based in West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, to study the role of epigenetics in finch evolution in the Galapagos.

Mixed outlook in industry

The pharmaceutical industry has shed jobs in contraception over the past 10 years, in part because of nervousness about the side effects of reproduction-related drugs, which have drawn numerous lawsuits. Companies such as Wyeth '-- acquired in 2009 by Pfizer in New York '-- and Bayer, based in Leverkusen, Germany, have cut back or dropped entire research programmes.

Daniel Johnston, a former principal research scientist at Pfizer who was laid off in 2010, could not find a job directly related to human reproduction at a pharmaceutical or biotechnology company despite more than 5 years of pharmaceutical experience in contraception and women's health. But while at Pfizer, Johnston had begun to work in oncology '-- and that experience helped him to find work at a company focused on liver cancer.

Johnston's lateral move is not unusual, given that reproduction overlaps with many areas (Johnston compares a testis to a tumour; both have a low-oxygen core of rapidly dividing stem cells '-- but one produces sperm instead of cancer cells). Susan Fisher, director of translational research in perinatal biology and medicine at the Center for Reproductive Sciences of the University of California, San Francisco, says that adaptability gives her graduates a leg up in industry. They have found jobs at biotechnology companies focused on oncology, stem cells and the rapidly expanding area of prenatal genetic testing, a market that could soon be worth more than US$1 billion yearly (see Nature486, 454; 2012). Companies competing in this area include Ariosa Diagnostics in San Jose and Natera in San Carlos, both in California. Skinner advises students and postdocs interested in an industry job to get training in the broadest possible range of lab technologies, including genomics.

STEVEN R SHAW/IMAGE ASOCIATES

Tracy Clement: ''You have to prepare for option one '-- but have option two and three in the wings.''

Reproductive biologists are also finding work in animal agriculture. ''I get calls maybe two or three times a year from companies looking for a master's- or PhD-level scientist to run a lab,'' says Derek McLean, a biologist who studies cattle, pig and mouse reproduction at WSU.

Scientists who can store and manage animal semen and test fertility products for female livestock are in demand at companies and organizations such as Select Sires, a federation of farmer cooperatives based in Plain City, Ohio, that provides livestock-breeding services. Candidates for such posts have generally trained in a reproductive-biology laboratory and have a degree in animal science. The job market is steady in the United States, and is expanding in Brazil and other emerging countries that are moving towards a more industrialized animal-agriculture system, says McLean, who is leaving WSU this autumn for Phibro Animal Health in Teaneck, New Jersey.

Genomics opportunities are also emerging at companies that are developing tests for genetic selection of farm animals; one such employer is Illumina in San Diego, California, which markets a high-density Bovine BeadChip, a genetic array that detects traits in cattle.

Fertility clinics are an option for those looking for something more applied '-- and perhaps more likely to have an immediate impact on people's lives. There are about 400 clinics in the United States, and they often hire PhD-level scientists to manage a staff of bachelor's- and master's-level technicians involved in tasks such as culturing and freezing human embryos and performing hormone assays. Such scientists often interact with patients '-- a lead embryologist, for instance, might contact patients with test results, and assist during implantation of the embryo. ''It brings a lot of joy in our profession to help people to have a family,'' says Pierre Miron, who heads a fertility clinic near Montreal in Canada. ''The interaction with patients is a great part of the job.'' Jobs at clinics affiliated with universities often provide more opportunities for fertility research than private clinics, says Miron.

The government of Quebec province began paying for in vitro fertilization in 2010 as part of the national health-care system, leading to rising demand for services. Many clinics are filling job slots with trainees from R(C)seau Qu(C)b(C)cois en reproduction (the Quebec Reproduction Network), a consortium of more than 80 researchers at institutions such as McGill University in Montreal. But in most of the world, jobs in fertility clinics are competitive. Strong candidates not only have the right human touch, says Miron, but also have training in a range of techniques, including sperm and egg manipulation.

Global impact

Global health may be a more fruitful area for reproductive-biology graduates. ''My personal feeling is that there is now a stronger market for people working at the population level than at the molecular level in the reproductive sciences,'' says Ward Cates, president emeritus of FHI 360, a global-health organization based in Durham, North Carolina. He points to Family Planning 2020, an ambitious initiative to roll out contraceptive services to 120 million girls and women in developing countries by 2020. Donors including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and governments of both developed and developing nations have pledged $2.6 billion to the programme, which was launched last July at a meeting in London spearheaded by Melinda Gates. ''This will define the future for public-health jobs in the reproductive sciences,'' says Cates.

He adds that the initiative will create jobs, mostly in the developing world, for researchers who know how to cost-effectively implement such services and for scientists who can evaluate their impact '-- by, for instance, assessing the uptake of contraception and its effects on population growth and women's and children's health. The effort will require researchers with backgrounds in areas such as demography, sociology, economics and public health.

Cates says that researchers with a basic-science background in reproductive sciences and extra training in fields such as epidemiology often have a leg up when competing for jobs in areas including clinical-trial design, because of their understanding of biology.

Patricia Sadate-Ngatchou earned a PhD studying sperm development at WSU. But a visit home to Cameroon during a major cholera outbreak in 2010 changed the course of her career. ''How do you help people on the ground?'' she asked herself.

Sadate-Ngatchou is now studying for a master's degree in epidemiology at the University of Washington in Seattle. Her ultimate goal is to move into a decision-making position in government or a foundation involved in reproductive health; a suitable post might be as a programme officer overseeing grants. However, Sadate-Ngatchou thinks that she may first have to do entry-level work as an epidemiologist, for instance in disease surveillance.

The variety of questions and opportunities in reproductive biology keeps some researchers hooked on the field, despite the tough market. Some end up in niches they never expected, such as facilitating panda or reptile reproduction in zoos, or assessing toxicants for their effects on embryonic and pubertal development at government institutions such as the US Environmental Protection Agency. Clement is open to a variety of possibilities. ''If you are a reproductive biologist,'' she says, ''you have to prepare for option one '-- but have option two and three in the wings.''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 18:34

The CEO of Serco, a British-based company whose North American division received one of the largest contracts to work on the Obamacare insurance exchanges,[1]resigned Friday amid allegations that the company had defrauded the British government of millions of pounds.

Even as myriad other allegations emerged about its work around the globe, Serco spent heavily on lobbying in Washington, D.C., and secured a multi-year contract potentially worth $1.249 billion to handle paper applications for the Obamacare exchanges. Serco did not respond to e-mail and voice-mail requests for comment.

Advertisement

Public records demonstrate Serco's concentrated effort to woo the U.S. government. In recent years, it has spent more than a million dollars[2] on lobbying and political activities, including $6,450 donated to President Obama's election campaign, according to the Sunlight Foundation.[3] This year, as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) was considering proposals for insurance-exchange work, Serco spent $100,000[4] to hire Greenberg Traurig, former home of Jack Abramoff, to lobby regarding the ''implementation of [the] Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,'' according to January registration papers.[5]Among the Greenberg Traurig lobbyists working on the Serco account was Mark Hayes,[6] a former Senate health-policy aide.[7] During his time on Capitol Hill, Hayes ''was instrumental in the key coverage, financing and delivery system reform provisions of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,'' according to his Greenberg Traurig bio, and ''acted as lead Republican staff negotiator for the 'Group of Six' health-care reform negotiations.''[8] Less than a year after the ACA was signed, Hayes left Capitol Hill to become a lobbyist, representing several health-sector clients.[9]

Earlier this year, Hayes became a central subject of a federal insider-trading investigation.[10] The Washington Post reported that Hayes had sent information on April 1 about a significant Medicare policy change to an analyst at Height Securities. The analyst then ''sent out an alert to Height's hundreds of investor clients '-- ahead of the administration's public announcement '-- and trading in Humana, Aetna, and other health-care stocks immediately soared.''[11] Hayes could not be reached for comment, and it's unclear whether the investigation is continuing. Papers filed in May, after the incident, stated that Hayes was expected to cease lobbying for Serco.[12]

Regardless of the recent federal scrutiny of Hayes, Serco's big spending seems to have paid off. In early July, the Obama administration awarded Serco a contract worth up to $1.249 billion[13] to manage paper applications for the new insurance exchanges. The company will determine eligibility for tax credits, Medicaid,[14] and exemptions from tax penalties.[15] Privacy concerns have already arisen, because in 2011, a data breach at the U.S. Thrift Savings Plan for federal employees '' managed by Serco '-- jeopardized the Social Security numbers and confidential information of more than 120,000 participants.[16]

Just weeks after the Obama administration announced Serco's contract award, news broke that Britain's Serious Fraud Office had opened an investigation into the corporation, which had government contracts to electronically monitor criminals released from prison. An audit discovered that Serco and another company may have been overbilling the government by as much as $80.8 million. As many as one in six criminals whose monitoring was being paid for by the British government were reportedly either dead, back behind bars, no longer under supervision, or no longer living in the U.K.[17]

Furthermore, although U.S. companies that are part of a foreign company are obligated to report any billing wrongdoings abroad, Serco did not give CMS such notice, Reuters reported in July.[18] Nevertheless, the Obama administration defended its decision to award the $1.249 billion contract to Serco, claiming it was a ''highly skilled company'' with ''a proven track record in providing cost-effective services to numerous other federal agencies.''[19]

Shortly after that, more red flags went up. In August, the London police opened an investigation into Serco after allegations that it had falsified documents for another government contract for transporting defendants from confinement to court. Serco had repeatedly delivered prisoners late, and after it received a warning last summer, evidence emerged of ''potentially fraudulent behavior,'' according to the U.K. secretary of state for justice.[20] Shortly thereafter, Serco said it had ''identified misreporting'' among its employees.[21]

Even so, in late September, the U.S. amended Serco's CMS contract, adding $87 million in value,[22], though it's unclear what work that will entail or whether it will add to the $1.249 billion potential worth of the original contract. As of this writing, contract officers and media spokespeople from CMS had not responded to National Review Online's requests for more details.

Serco's big role in the Obamacare exchanges is even more disturbing in the light of its record with the British National Health Service.

In 2006, Serco won a contract to provide out-of-hours physician service in Cornwall, England. Guardian reporter Felicity Lawrence reported that the quality of service promptly declined, as Serco cut costs by cutting staff. Reportedly, there were sometimes more than 90 patients at a time waiting on the telephone help line. And according to whistleblowers, Serco on at least one occasion, had only one general practitioner available overnight for the entire county.[23] Furthermore, ''in 2010,'' Lawrence wrote, ''a Cornish boy, Ethan Kerrigan, six, died as a result of a burst appendix when the Serco out-of-hours service advised putting him to bed rather than sending a [general practitioner] to examine him.''[24]

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 00:09

(Photo by Andrew Harrer/Bloomberg)

A Medicare official who oversaw HealthCare.gov's botched launch will leave the federal government for the private sector, according to an e-mail sent late Tuesday to Medicare employees.

Tony Trenkle is the chief information officer at the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the agency that built the Affordable Care Act's online portal. He is in charge of Henry Chao, a deputy chief information officer at Medicare whose name came up in congressional hearings as the source of key HealthCare.gov decisions.

Trenkle has pretty much spent his entire career in government, according to his biography on the Medicare Web site. His resume includes posts at Medicare, the General Services Administration and the Social Security Administration.

"Our chief operating officer announced yesterday Tony has accepted a position in private sector," Medicare spokeswoman Julie Bataille told reporters this afternoon. "We're certainly grateful to his service here. We've moved quickly to fill this position."

Bataille did not response to reporters' questions of whether Trenkle had been asked to leave the agency. When pressed on this point, she responded, "Tony made a decision that he was going to move to the private sector and that is what our COO announced yesterday."

The text of the memo, sent out to Medicare employees Friday, is included below.

Dear Colleagues,

I am writing to share news with you regarding some leadership changes in the COO offices.

Tony Trenkle, CMS' Chief Information Officer (CIO) and Director of the Office of Information Services, has announced that he is leaving CMS to take a position in the private sector. His last day will be November 15, 2013. Tony joined CMS in March 2005 as the Director of the Office of E-Health Standards & Services, and was responsible for leading national programs for the development and implementation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) and electronic prescribing standards. As the CIO, Tony provided oversight and leadership to CMS' 2 billion dollar annual expenditures on Information Technology (IT) products and services. Please join me in thanking Tony for his years of public service and wishing him great success in his future endeavors.

Dave Nelson, currently Director of the Office of Enterprise Management (OEM), has agreed to serve as the Acting CIO for CMS upon Tony's departure. Under his leadership, Dave has ensured that OEM serves as the Agency's primary resource for development and coordination of strategic governance frameworks, execution, review, analysis, performance management, and development of business requirements for enterprise level business solutions for CMS.

Additionally, Niall Brennan, currently the Director of the Office of Information Products and Data Analytics, Office of Enterprise Management, has agreed to serve as Acting Director of the Office of Enterprise Management. Niall has extensive experience in working collaboratively across the enterprise since joining CMS in 2010, including regulation development, program implementation, advanced analytics and data infrastructure and governance.

And last, but most certainly not least, Tim Love, Deputy Center Director in the Center for Medicare, has agreed to accept the position of Acting Deputy Chief Operating Officer effective November 3, 2013. Tim brings a wealth of knowledge and a wide range of experience across the various business lines within CMS. I know you will all join me in giving him your full support in his new role.

I am truly grateful for the dedication and expertise all of these individuals have brought to CMS, and the contributions they have made to this Agency over their years of service. I would also ask that you join me in thanking Tony, Dave, Niall and Tim for their commitment, leadership and service to CMS, and wishing them all continued success.

Sincerely,

Michelle SnyderChief Operating OfficerCMS

Sarah Kliff covers health policy, focusing on Medicare, Medicaid and the health reform law. She tries to fit in some reproductive health and education policy coverage, too, alongside an occasional hockey reference. Her work has appeared in Newsweek, Politico, and the BBC. She is on Twitter and Facebook.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 02:50

Another Sunday, another amazing reported piece on the rather amazing history of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act's health insurance exchanges. You'll have to read the whole thing, because summary won't do it justice. But here are a few highlights:

David Cutler, one of the top health-care economists in the U.S., wrote a memo to Larry Summers in 2010 warning him that the team in charge of implementing Obamacare was not up to the job. The memo makes it clear, though not quite explicit, that Cutler was writing to Summers, rather than someone on the health-care policy team, because the team had ignored his concerns. The memo is eerily prophetic: The key people were analysts with no experience in project management, technology, startups or the insurance business; responsibility was too diffused; the staff didn't understand either the magnitude or the urgency of what they had taken on; and neither the Department of Health and Human Services nor the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, to which most of the job had been delegated, had the personnel or technical experience to manage it well. The job of shepherding the project was given to Nancy-Ann Min DeParle, the director of the White House Office of Health Reform and a very wonky wonk who happens to be married to one of my favorite writers. According to one official, the president believed that ''if you were to design a person in the lab to implement health care, it would be Nancy-Ann.''Parts of the implementation were hamstrung by the assumption that all the states would build their own exchanges, and because it was a draft bill that no one had expected to pass, it didn't contain funding for federal exchanges or, apparently, for the policy wonks needed to put the law together. The Republicans, who continued to oppose the law to the apparent surprise of its architects and supporters, declined to provide funds on top of the nearly $1 trillion that had already been allocated (and, as I understand it, also restricted the ability of HHS to transfer funds from other areas). Funding instead had to be jerry-rigged and the job run out of CMS, which could get bureaucratic authority for the spending.But many of the bad decisions were designed to avoid Republican criticism. There was another reason that the exchanges' architects were tucked away inside CMS: to try to stay out of the public eye. Other such decisions followed. CMS carefully obscured the unwillingness of a large number of states to build exchanges -- despite the fact that this would greatly increase the complexity of the job -- lest Republicans seize on that fact. Then CMS kept extending the deadline to declare, in the hopes that some states would decide to build exchanges after the 2012 elections. The agency also refused to issue a bunch of regulations until after the election. But this is by far the most incredible:According to two former officials, CMS staff members struggled at ''multiple meetings'' during the spring of 2011 to persuade White House officials for permission to publish diagrams known as ''concepts of operation,'' which they believed were necessary to show states what a federal exchange would look like. The two officials said the White House was reluctant because the diagrams were complex, and they feared that the Republicans might reprise a tactic from the 1990s of then-Sen. Bob Dole (R-Kan.), who mockingly brandished intricate charts created by a task force led by first lady Hillary Clinton.

In the end, one of the former officials said, the White House quashed the diagrams, telling CMS, instead, to praise early work on those state exchanges that matched the hidden federal thinking.

The chief operating officer of CMS was nominally in charge. However, ''implementing the exchange was one of 39 things she did. There wasn't a person who said, 'My job is the seamless implementation of the Affordable Care Act.' ''The White House was heavily focused on regulations, rather than exchange design, for the first two years. President Barack Obama, the article reports, kept reminding people that the website had to work. But people didn't seem to understand this as an urgent priority. They didn't even begin writing the specifications for the contracts until spring of 2011. Then they kept changing deadlines and requirements, seemingly oblivious of the havoc they were wreaking on an already impossibly late system.Congressional Democrats were not given as much information as you'd expect, which is one reason that Max Baucus started worrying about a ''train wreck''; apparently, they found out that the employer mandate was being delayed just a half-hour before the rest of us.Reading between the lines a bit, I think that with 55 contractors and diffuse responsibility, the administration got into the kind of bad equilibrium that can affect big, unwieldy projects: Everyone was hoping that someone else would point out the obvious and say ''We can't go live by the deadline.''A month earlier, on Sept. 5, White House officials visited CMS for a final demonstration of HealthCare.gov. Some staff members worried that it would fail right in front of the president's aides. A few secretly rooted for it to fail so that perhaps the White House would wait to open the exchange until it was ready.

Yet on that day, using a simplified demonstration application, the Web site appeared to work just fine.

This has, rather predictably, triggered opposite reactions from left and right. The response from the right is somewhere between schadenfreude and slack-jawed amazement. The response from the left is, I think, summed up by Kevin Drum in ''The Lesson of Obamacare: Sabotage Works'':

Now, one obvious question is why the law failed to finance the federal exchanges. That was pretty clearly a mistake. Still, under normal circumstances, even an opposition party would end up cutting a deal eventually to shore up the missing funding. Not this time, though. As one White House official told the Post, "You're basically trying to build a complicated building in a war zone, because the Republicans are lobbing bombs at us."

There are plenty of other examples of this, and Sprung outlines them in his post today. No federal program that I can remember faced quite the implacable hostility during its implementation that Obamacare has faced. This excuses neither the Obama administration's poor decisions nor its timidity in the face of Republican attacks, but it certainly puts them in the proper perspective.

Andrew Sullivan echoes this interpretation.

You will perhaps be unsurprised to hear me say that this response is overblown. Let's remember what this ''sabotage'' consists of:

Many states not building their own exchanges, as permitted under the law.Republicans did not join together with Democrats to pass extra funding for a law that was already spending nearly a trillion dollars over 10 years.Criticism.The first is based on the false premise that state exchanges would now be going swimmingly, a premise belied by true-blue states such as Vermont and Oregon. The second is also pretty weak tea: HHS did, after all, find a way to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on software contractors. And neither of these things really forms the crux of the problem: Moving the administrative offices to HHS no doubt made things more difficult, but a competent manager whose sole job was to ensure that Obamacare happened could have overcome these difficulties.

But Obamacare's biggest problem, as I have written, was that the architects of the law demanded an enormously ambitious software project on an impossibly hubristic deadline. Whatever slim chance this had of working was ultimately doomed -- not by Republicans, but by the administration's own paranoid and self-destructive decisions to manage a software project as if it were a top-secret campaign strategy rather than a mission-critical component of the most ambitious federal entitlement expansion in almost 50 years.

Remember that when Cutler wrote that devastating memo, Democrats still had control of both houses of Congress. The administration failed to rectify the shortcomings he identified because it did not understand that making a program happen is very different from writing out a description of it.

The administration did not refuse to issue key regulations and guidelines, or to announce the final number of states that would be building their own exchanges, because Republicans used secret mind-control rays or stole the notebooks they had used to write the draft memo. They delayed because they did not want Republicans to be able to tell the public about them before Barack Obama was safely re-elected to a second term.

In other words, most of the damage was done not by lack of funding, but because the administration was either incompetent or trying to insulate itself from the perfectly ordinary, natural, legitimate and, dare I say, patriotic function of an opposition party, which is to point out to the public when the party in charge is doing something that the public wouldn't like. Reframing ''criticism of the administration'' as ''sabotage'' deserves an Oscar for outstanding lifetime achievement in the field of political spin.

Which is why I think that ''the lesson of Obamacare'' is something very different from Kevin Drum's lesson. It's not enough to win elections. To pass a major piece of legislation, you also need to have the political and institutional support to make it happen. If you pass a law without these things, you will likely come to regret it -- as I think some Democrats already have, and more probably will.

Barack Obama -- and Democrats more generally -- read his election as a mandate to make sweeping changes in the U.S. economy, particularly in health care. (From my Twitter feed that night: ''It's 1932!'') But as they got into the weeds, it turned out that a bill that can get scored as deficit-neutral by the Congressional Budget Office is considerably less fun than a bill that is getting scored by campaign reporters; they had to add the individual mandate, Medicare cuts and new taxes. With those measures attached, the law wending its way through Congress started unpopular and stayed unpopular. You can argue about how individual provisions poll really well, but this is like saying I want to go to heaven as long as I don't have to die. When you bundled in the very unpopular stuff, then threw in the fact that folks generally thought the Affordable Care Act would raise the deficit, the approval ratings never topped the disapproval ratings, much less 50 percent.

The administration could probably have expanded Medicaid pretty easily and gotten more than half of the coverage expansion. Republicans would probably have voted against it, yet in the long term, it would be about as much of a hot-button political issue as the expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program under George W. Bush. But Democrats wanted universal coverage and a major overhaul of both the insurance market and the American social contract.

Unsurprisingly, the massive and unpopular transformation failed to attract any Republican votes. When Republicans had faced similar electoral math on Social Security reform -- an opposition party implacably opposed, and the electorate clearly against it -- they'd abandoned their efforts. That is what parties do when they reach such an impasse; it's what Democrats did on Clintoncare. No program this large had ever passed on a party-line vote, because this was correctly viewed as political suicide. Nancy Pelosi managed to get it through the House anyway, which should go down as one of the most impressive political achievements in history, and Harry Reid shepherded another version through the Senate. When Republicans protested, they were rather smugly told that ''elections have consequences.''

Then Ted Kennedy died. Massachusetts -- Massachusetts! -- elected Republican Scott Brown in an election that often seemed to revolve around the health-care bill. Democrats still pressed forward. Without the votes to overcome a Republican filibuster, they had the House pass a draft Senate bill that had never been meant to become law and used some procedural tap-dancing to push some fixes through the Senate. Such maneuvering wasn't unprecedented, but it wasn't popular, either. And the limitations of the method they used left the bill with all sorts of problems, many of which we are dealing with now.

Democrats read this as a lesson on the evils of the filibuster. As it happens, I like the idea of minorities having a check on majorities. But that's sort of irrelevant, because this would have been a bad idea even if Democrats could have passed a cleaner bill with 59 votes in the Senate.

Democrats believed that the unpopular bill they had just rammed through on a party-line vote would not only get more popular, but also make them more popular, thereby giving them the political support they needed to pass more fixes -- fixes that would have been needed even on a less messy draft bill, because anything this complicated is unlikely to work as written. As I noted at the time, this seemed borderline delusional. Democrats lost the House and some Senate seats in the 2010 election, and Obamacare was a major contributor to that loss. Whereupon Democrats learned what apparently didn't occur to them in 2009: that there might be other elections, with different consequences.

There is a point to this history review, and it's not to laugh at Democrats -- I've made plenty of my own sizable analytical blunders. No, the point is this: Political support matters. Not an election mandate after beating the party of Iraq, Katrina and the financial crisis -- popular support for your law. If the bill had actually been popular, Republican opposition would not have been a problem; they would have folded, or the voters would have kicked them out.

Democrats have been complaining -- loudly and repeatedly -- that Republican opposition tactics on the Affordable Care Act are unprecedented. This is true, but not for the reasons that Democrats are telling themselves. No political party was ever foolhardy enough to pass such a big bill, with such sweeping consequences for so many people, without the support of a majority of their countrymen and at least a few members of the opposite party. Once they had done this unprecedented thing, the unprecedented reaction was predictable -- and indeed predicted by myself and others.

The mistake that Democrats made is akin to that made by a brash new outsider who is brought in to make over a government agency or turn around a company. Occasionally, folks in these roles think their job is just to come up with top-notch orders to give to their subordinates, and maybe have some meetings with key ''constituents'' like politicians or board members or customers. What happens next is generally a spectacular crash and burn, because they alienate the folks they need on board to make their new program work.

A smart leader knows that big strategic thinking and giving orders are the smallest parts of her job. The biggest is persuading people who are not invested in her agenda to carry out her grand plans -- and, equally important, figuring out which plans to abandon because they can never get enough support to work.

This is the constant danger of any law whose political foundations are built on sand. Any flaw in the structure atop them is likely to bring the whole thing crashing down. The architect may blame the wind or the rain or, well, sabotage. But that won't put the house back together.

About Megan McArdle>>Megan McArdle is a Bloomberg View columnist who writes on economics, business and public policy. Her book, "The ... MORE

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 02:56

In May 2010, two months after the Affordable Care Act squeaked through Congress, President Obama's top economic aides were getting worried. Larry Summers, director of the White House's National Economic Council, and Peter Orszag, head of the Office of Management and Budget, had just received a pointed four-page memo from a trusted outside health adviser. It warned that no one in the administration was ''up to the task'' of overseeing the construction of an insurance exchange and other intricacies of translating the 2,000-page statute into reality.

Summers, Orszag and their staffs agreed. For weeks that spring, a tug of war played out inside the White House, according to five people familiar with the episode. On one side, members of the economic team and Obama health-care adviser Zeke Emanuel lobbied for the president to appoint an outside health reform ''czar'' with expertise in business, insurance and technology. On the other, the president's top health aides '-- who had shepherded the legislation through its tortuous path on Capitol Hill and knew its every detail '-- argued that they could handle the job.

In the end, the economic team never had a chance: The president had already made up his mind, according to a White House official who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to be candid. Obama wanted his health policy team '-- led by Nancy-Ann De­Parle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform '-- to be in charge of the law's arduous implementation. Since the day the bill became law, the official said, the president believed that ''if you were to design a person in the lab to implement health care, it would be Nancy-Ann.''

Three and a half years later, such insularity '-- in that decision and others that would follow '-- has emerged as a central factor in the disastrous rollout of the new federal health insurance marketplace, casting doubt on the administration's capacity to carry out such a complex undertaking.

''They were running the biggest start-up in the world, and they didn't have anyone who had run a start-up, or even run a business,'' said David Cutler, a Harvard professor and health adviser to Obama's 2008 campaign, who was not the individual who provided the memo to The Washington Post but confirmed he was the author. ''It's very hard to think of a situation where the people best at getting legislation passed are best at implementing it. They are a different set of skills.''

The White House's leadership of the immense project '-- building new health insurance marketplaces for an estimated 24 million Americans without coverage '-- is one of several key reasons that the president's signature domestic policy achievement has become a self-inflicted injury for the administration.

Based on interviews with more than two dozen current and former administration officials and outsiders who worked alongside them, the project was hampered by the White House's political sensitivity to Republican hatred of the law '-- sensitivity so intense that the president's aides ordered that some work be slowed down or remain secret for fear of feeding the opposition. Inside the Department of Health and Human Services' Centers for Medicare and Medicaid, the main agency responsible for the exchanges, there was no single administrator whose full-time job was to manage the project. Republicans also made clear they would block funding, while some outside IT companies that were hired to build the Web site, HealthCare.gov, performed poorly.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 05:17

Healthcare.gov, the federal government's Obamacare website, has been under heavy criticism from friend and foe alike during its first two weeks of open enrollment. Repeated errors and delays have prevented many users from even establishing an account, and outside web designers have roundly panned the structure and coding of the site as amateurish and sloppy. The latest indication of the haphazard way in which Healthcare.gov was developed is the uncredited use of a copyrighted web script for a data function used by the site, a violation of the licensing agreement for the software.

The script in question is called DataTables, a very long and complex piece of website software used for formatting and presenting data. DataTables was developed by a British company called SpryMedia which licenses the open-source software freely to anyone who complies with the licensing agreement. A note at the bottom of the DataTables.net website says: "DataTables designed and created by SpryMedia (C) 2008-2013." The company explains the license for using the software on that website [emphasis added]:

DataTables is free, open source software that you can download and use for whatever purpose you wish, on any and as many sites you want. It is free for you to use! DataTables is available under two licenses: GPL v2 license or a BSD (3-point) license, with which you must comply (to do this, basically keep the copyright notices in the software).

The software, a version of which is available at DataTables.net, contains the copyright notice in the opening lines of the code:

At the Healthcare.gov website, however, the opening lines of the script appear as follows, with the copyright and all references to the author and SpryMedia deleted; a search of the entire script does not turn up the missing lines either:

Even a cursory comparison of the two scripts removes any doubt that the source for the script used at Healthcare.gov is indeed the SpryMedia script. The Healthcare.gov version even retained easily identifiable comments by the script's author, such as the following:

Here is a screen capture from the SpryMedia script:

Here is the same section at Healthcare.gov:

THE WEEKLY STANDARD contacted SpryMedia for comment. A representative for the company said that they were "extremely disappointed" to see the copyright information missing and will be pursuing it further with the Department of Health and Human Services, the agency that runs the Healthcare.gov site.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 13:40

The health care overhaul might get a Hollywood rewrite.

The California Endowment, a private foundation that is spending millions to promote President Barack Obama's signature law, recently provided a $500,000 grant to ensure TV writers and producers have information about the Affordable Care Act that can be stitched into plot lines watched by millions.

The aim is to produce compelling prime-time narratives that encourage Americans to enroll, especially the young and healthy, Hispanics and other key demographic groups needed to make the overhaul a success.

"We know from research that when people watch entertainment television, even if they know it's fiction, they tend to believe that the factual stuff is actually factual," said Martin Kaplan of the University of Southern California's Norman Lear Center, which received the grant.

The public typically gets as much, if not more, information about current events from favorite TV programs as mainstream news outlets, Kaplan said, so "people learn from these shows."

California Republican strategist Jonathan Wilcox, who has taught a course on politics and celebrity at USC, said the attempt to engage Hollywood was coming too late to influence views, and he doubted fictionalized TV would play into families' decisions about health care.

"This is an attempt to use entertainment pop culture to fix a political challenge," he said. "It will be received as a partisan political message, no matter how cleverly it's delivered."

About 16 percent of Americans are uninsured and surveys have shown many still know little or nothing about the health care law even though sign-ups for insurance have started. The challenge for law's supporters is to connect with the millions of Americans who, for whatever reason, haven't paid attention so far.

The 18-month grant, to the Lear Center's Hollywood Health & Society program, will be used for briefings with staff from television shows and to track health overhaul-related depictions on prime time and Spanish-language television.

Since the grant money was provided so recently, no plot lines involving health care have been written. And Kaplan isn't targeting specific shows.

For those who could benefit from coverage, "we want them to get the facts. We don't believe the government alone can break through with those facts," said David Zingale, a California Endowment senior vice president.

The grant announcement comes after the stumbling launch of the federal website where Americans shop for the health insurance they are required to have next year. The White House also has been forced to backtrack on vows that no one would lose their existing coverage and that anyone happy with their current insurance and doctor could keep them.

Arthur Caplan, head of the division of medical ethics at New York University's Langone Medical Center, said to have credibility Hollywood must present the health care plan warts and all.

"If there are drawbacks and glitches and discontent, that should be part of the presentations," said Caplan, who supports the law.

"It should not be a place to propagandize; it should be a place to have honest open discussion, wrinkles and all, flaws and all, on health reform," he said. Critics of the law will be closely watching to see if "Hollywood might be airbrushing the president's core program, because they are close to the Democrats."

Hollywood can be a forceful shaper of style and public sentiment.

A survey conducted several years ago for the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation found that among those who said their feelings toward gays and lesbians had become more favorable, many said a contributing factor was seeing more gay and lesbian characters on TV and in movies.

Vice President Joe Biden has credited the 1998-2006 TV sitcom "Will & Grace," which featured a gay character, with doing "more to educate the public than almost anything anybody's done so far."

Zingale and Kaplan both stressed that the writers and producers remain solely in control of the content they create, with no strings from the endowment or the USC center, which select the health care experts and academics who will provide advice to them.

Overall, the Los Angeles-based foundation expects to spend $130 million for advertisements and other enrollment efforts aimed largely at Hispanics. The foundation's president, Robert K. Ross, is a member of the board of Covered California, the state-run insurance exchange set up under the new law.

The center provides similar information for Hollywood writers on cancer, AIDS, climate change and other issues.

"Public health is a common good. Public health is not a partisan issue," Kaplan said. "America needs to be healthy. People need to have access to health care. That's not a controversial statement."

Wilcox doesn't believe Hollywood can make the health care law successful.

"The Bush White House wouldn't have asked 'Law and Order' to do a show defending the Patriot Act, because it wouldn't work," he said. "In my business, there is way too much reliance and investment in the power of creative communication. Because there is something more powerful than that, and that's people's personal experiences."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 13:51

Though video the CMA Awards' opening act mocking Obamacare went almost immediately viral, not everyone thought the skit was funny. In fact, some on the left were downright furious that the awards show dared to mock President Barack Obama and his signature health care law.

As reported by TheBlaze, country music superstars Brad Paisley and Carrie Underwood performed ''Obamacare by Morning,'' a spoof based on George Strait's remake of Terry Stafford's 1973 classic ''Amarillo by Morning,'' after Paisley faked a back injury. The crowd erupted in applause and sent the Internet buzzing. Even the ''Duck Dynasty'' crew made a surprise appearance.

Co-hosts Brad Paisley, left, and Carrie Underwood perform at the 47th annual CMA Awards at Bridgestone Arena on Wednesday, Nov. 6, 2013, in Nashville, Tenn. (Photo by Wade Payne/Invision/AP)

Here are the people who didn't enjoy the show (WARNING: Very strong language):

(Twitter)

(Twitter)

(Twitter)

(Twitter)

(Twitter)

(Twitter)

(Twitter)

Watch video of the opening skit here.

(H/T: Twitchy)

''

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: The Slog.

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 08:27

A regular Slog source late last night furnished me with updated opinion/voting behaviour research carried out secretly by senior political players in Greece. Astonishingly, the study has the Far Right Golden Dawn Party in first place, followed closely by the Leftist Party Syriza.

As I predicted last month, the attempt by Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras to frame neo-Nazi Party Golden Dawn in the case of the murder of a young Leftist has backfired. The last poll from this source had GD in 2nd place. The Party has now taken over the top spot.

Between 25-29th of October, 1,423 Greeks were polled about their voting intentions. Golden Dawn scored 22%, followed very closely by Syriza. New Democracy (the governing Party in Coalition with PASOK) came a very poor third. Men and older respondents are significantly more likely to vote Golden Dawn than women and the young.

Two Golden Dawn members were murdered last week, after the Poll took place. It is likely that this will have strengthened rather than weakened sympathy among traditional Greeks for the Far Right Party.

The Slog has been travelling into, out of, and around Greece since last March. While I am surprised by the size of the Golden Dawn revival, I am not remotely surprised by the confrontation now boiling up between the Hard Left and the Hard Right. Middle class and skilled working class Greeks talk openly about the possibility of Civil War and/or a military putsch. Senior professional and other well-off Greeks still seem to be living in a bubble '' as are the bureaucratic and political classes.

The country is heading towards a classic reversion to the extreme, caused by an economic crisis massively exacerbated by Brussels-am-Berlin austerity obsession. The support for Golden Dawn has jumped further since EC commissioner Olli Rehn admitted late last month that debt relief for Greece was to be delayed. The west European and US mainstream media may have lost interest in Greece, but they need to reverse that apathy with all speed.

Related Stories: from October 24th '' Brussels lets Greece down, delays debt support until mid 2014

from October 17th '' PASOK support collapses as Golden Dawn surges into 2nd place

from October 1st: Why Samaras turned on Golden Dawn

Like this:LikeLoading...

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 13:48

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: VK: Home

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 02:59

Bewerkt door: redactie '' 04/11/13, 02:56 '' bron: ANP

(C) thinkstock.

Britten zijn door de economische crisis steeds slechter gaan eten. Dat blijkt uit een maandag verschenen onderzoek van het Instituut voor Fiscale Studies, dat het aankoopgedrag van ruim 15.000 huishoudens onder de loep nam. Gemiddeld zouden Britse consumenten zo'n 8,5 procent minder uitgeven aan voedsel dan voor de recessie.

(C) thinkstock.

Volgens de onderzoekers heeft de economische crisis vooral de lage-inkomensgroepen veroordeeld tot junkfood. Voedselprijzen in Groot-Brittanni stegen tussen 2005 en 2012 veel sterker dan in andere ontwikkelde economien, terwijl het inkomen van de meeste Britten nauwelijks toenam.

Suikerrijk etenVeel minima zetten daarom het mes in het budget voor maaltijden. Ze kopen soms minder eten dan voorheen, of kiezen voor goedkope en ongezondere gerechten. Zo zouden families met kinderen vaak meer suikerrijk eten kopen dan voor de crisis, terwijl gepensioneerden juist meer verzadigde vetten zijn gaan eten.

De regering en de linkse oppositiepartij Labour steggelen al tijden over de dalende levensstandaard in het land. Zo is het aantal Britten dat een beroep doet op voedselbanken enorm gestegen.

Minder bewegenUit een andere IFS-studie blijkt nu dat Engelse consumenten in vergelijking 1980 nu zo'n 15 tot 30 procent minder calorien binnenkrijgen. Dat het aantal Engelsen met fors overgewicht ondertussen is toegenomen, komt volgens het instituut vermoedelijk doordat mensen minder zijn gaan bewegen.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 20:38

State-owned railway group NS uses Ireland to dodge Dutch taxesSaturday 01 September 2012

The state-owned Dutch railway company NS has managed to cut its Dutch tax bill by at least '‚¬250m since 1999 by routing the cost of new trains through Ireland, the Volkskrant reported at the weekend.

The tax dodge means the treasury has lost out on income generated by a company it owns, the paper points out. The finance ministry, meanwhile, is said to be 'unhappy' about the arrangement, which it has been aware of from the beginning.

In effect, NS's Irish subsidiary, NS Financial Services, has spent '‚¬1.7bn on new trains which it then rents to the NS in the Netherlands. None of the trains has ever been used on the Irish railways, the paper said.

Dividends

This allows the Dutch operation to avoid tax. In Ireland, railway companies have paid an average 9% tax on their profits in recent years. In the Netherlands, NS would have to pay 25% profit tax on the train rental. Some of the 'missing' cash does end up with the treasury in the form of dividends.

In a statement, the NS said the tax route had been developed to allow it to 'better compete in the market'. Other large transport firms also use Ireland to reduce their tax liabilities and there is nothing illegal about this, the NS said.

The Volkskrant points out that there is effectively no competition on the Dutch railways and NS operates all intercity and most local train services.

Morals

Political party leaders were quick to react to the news. CDA leader Sybrand Buma told a Tros radio programme it showed a 'lack of morals'. Labour leader Diederik Samsom said the NS had used a 'bizarre construction which just is not right', and an SP spokesman said the situation is 'unacceptable'.

Caretaker tax minister Frans Weekers told the paper through a spokesman: 'Of course, we would rather have seen these activities take place in the Netherlands.'

Economist Martin Holterman, who is an expert on the Dutch railways, told the Volkskrant the NS is busy 'playing at being a company'. But the NS is not a company but a government service, he said.

Is the NS right to try to cut its tax bill? Have your say using the comment form below.

(C) DutchNews.nl

Readers' comments (16)

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: BBC News - Home

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 14:16

Greek riot police have cleared the headquarters of the former state broadcaster ERT, using tear gas to gain entry and arresting several people.

Police formed a cordon round the building in Athens, before going from room to room to evacuate protesters.

Former employees have occupied the building since the government closed ERT and sacked its 2,600 staff in June.

Mark Lowen reports from Athens.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 16:53

ADVERTISEMENT

Register Today

Earn Free CME Credits by reading the latest medical news in your specialty.

Sign UpPublished: Nov 4, 2013 | Updated: Nov 4, 2013

Pediatricians who told parents their child needed a vaccination rather than asked if they wanted one met less parental resistance, researchers found.

Three-quarters of providers brought up the issue of vaccination by using a "presumptive" approach, which assumes parents will immunize their child, according to Douglas J. Opel, MD, MPH, of the University of Washington School of Medicine in Seattle, and colleagues.

Only 26% of parents were resistant to vaccine recommendations when providers used the presumptive approach. However, 83% resisted when providers used a "participatory" approach, which invites parental involvement, researchers noted in the study published online Nov. 4 in Pediatrics.

"I think we've known for sometime that ... we have to be careful in our language when we broach the subject of vaccines with parents, and especially now when more and more parents are resistant to vaccines," Robyn Strosaker, MD, a pediatrician at University Hospitals Rainbow Babies & Children's Hospital in Cleveland told MedPage Today. She was not involved in the study.

When the researchers controlled for parental hesitancy status, parent and child demographics, and visit characteristics, they found that the participatory approach was associated with a significantly increased odds of parental resistance to the physician recommendation, but the confidence interval was very wide (OR 17.5, 95% CI 1.2''253.5).

This is the first study to "address the existing gap in evidence for provider communication behaviors that are effective in increasing parental acceptance of childhood vaccines," researchers wrote. And as such, the results can "help guide the development of quality improvement interventions aimed at increasing vaccination rates among vaccine-resistant parents."

Opel and colleagues cited studies that demonstrated the value parents place in their pediatrician for trusted vaccine recommendations.

Parents initially resistant to vaccine recommendations have cited their pediatrician's reassurance and vaccine information as reasons for changing their minds. In the current study, when pediatricians persisted in recommending vaccinations (50% persisted when initially met with resistance), 47% of the resistant parents eventually accepted the recommendation for vaccination.

"There is a lot of information out there and it can be really confusing to parents who mean well, but not all sources are credible," Jay Homme, MD, a pediatrician at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., who was not involved with the study, told MedPage Today.

"I feel like we have to build on a trust relationship. I've seen their children since they were infants. I've seen other children of theirs and really work on developing a trusting relationship," he said.

Opel and colleagues enrolled 16 pediatric providers from nine primary care practices in the Seattle area. They videotaped and analyzed 111 vaccine discussions during a child's check-up visit.

Parents also filled out a questionnaire that assessed their level of hesitancy toward vaccines -- 55 were vaccine-hesitant parents and 56 were vaccine-receptive parents.

The children ranged in age from 1 to 19 months and 77% of parents were older than 29. Most of the parents were married or living with a partner, most had better than a high school education, and most were white.

More than half (57%) the participants had one child, 62% of the eligible children were the first born, and it was the first immunization discussion for 26%.

A total of 38% of providers explicitly solicited questions or concerns about shots -- a percentage that did not differ between vaccine-hesitant (36%) and vaccine-receptive (39%) parents.

A little more than half (55%) of providers gave a rationale for shots, with no difference among the two groups of parents (55% each). Slightly more than half (55%) the providers discussed side effects, again with no difference between the resistant and receptive parents (51% versus 59%).

Several experts contacted by MedPage Today said because parents don't see the diseases that these vaccines help to prevent, they don't think they are real anymore.

"I've seen whooping cough and we've had whooping cough in Arkansas and certainly in other parts of the country. So I try to tell the parents why that particular disease is so dangerous and potentially dangerous for their child, and try to address their concerns in that way," Eddie Ochoa, MD, a pediatrician at Arkansas Children's Hospital in Little Rock, told MedPage Today.

The study was limited because of the potential for the Hawthorne effect, the heterogeneity of the parents, and because the categorization of vaccine-resistant parents was not based on immunization records and was merely a proxy of immunization behavior, researchers said.

The research was supported by the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

The authors reported no relevant financial relationships.

Chris has written and edited for medical publications for more than 15 years. As the news editor for a United Business Media journal, he was awarded Best News Section. He has a B.A. from La Salle University and an M.A. from Villanova University. Chris is based outside of Philadelphia and is also involved with the theater as a writer, director, and occasional actor.

MOST READ IN Primary Care

false

ADVERTISEMENT

Resources (from Industry)

Video Library

Medical Education (Non-CME)

ADVERTISEMENT

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:38

Lybrido and Lybridos are two drugs intended to treat hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) in premenopausal women. Both are being studied in clinical trials and have not yet been approved by any regulatory agency.

Lybrido contains testosterone and sildenafil, which is the same active ingredient in the erectile dysfunction drug Viagra. It helps activate desire in the brain while improving blood flow to the genitals, helping a woman's body respond to sexual cues.

Lybridos contains testosterone and buspirone, a type of anxiety medication. It also helps increase a woman's desire, but does so by easing some of the inhibitory responses in the brain.

If the clinical trials are successful and the drugs are approved, they may be available in some markets by 2016.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:37

Lybrido was the first product we developed for the treatment of HSDD. It proved effective for women with low sex drive and motivation as a result of insensitivity to sexual cues.

Lybrido increases central sexual motivation and physiological sexual response, such as swelling of vaginal erectile tissue and lubrication.

However, in our studies we found that Lybrido was not effective in the subgroup of women who suffer from HSDD as a result of inhibitory mechanisms. We depart from the assumption that these women can be aroused, but negative associations with sex '' as a result of past experiences, for instance '' trigger an inhibitory reflex in the brain.

For the effective treatment of this second group, we subsequently developed Lybridos.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:37

Een lustopwekkende pil voor vrouwen, bedacht door de Nederlander Adriaan Tuiten, wordt deze week door de Amerikaanse medicijnautoriteit FDA onder de loep genomen. Dat meldt De Volkskrant.

Tuiten doorliep met zijn pil al verschillende stadia van de erkenningsprocedure van de FDA, de Amerikaanse Food and Drug Administration die over de effectieve toepassing van medicijnen beslist.

Eigenlijk gaat het om twee pillen: Lybrido en Lybridos, die voor twee groepen vrouwen bedoeld zijn: Lybrido voor wie al lang, soms levenslang, geen seksueel verlangen (meer) ervaart; Lybridos voor wie in haar seksuele beleving geremd is, bijvoorbeeld door een traumatische ervaring.

Laatste fase

Tuiten en zijn collega's van het Almeerse onderzoeksinstituut Emotional Brain hopen dat de FDA groen licht geeft voor een proef met 1.200 vrouwen. Dit experiment, klinische fase 3, is normaal gesproken de laatste fase voordat een nieuw middel in de verkoop kan. Tuiten hoopt dat de pil in 2016 op de markt komt.

Volgens de onderzoeker worstelt (C)(C)n op de vijf vrouwen met weinig lustgevoelens. Als slechts een klein deel van hen de pil probeert, is de potentile markt volgens hem enorm. 'Minstens zo groot als die van Viagra. We schatten 6 miljard euro omzet binnen tien jaar.'

De pil krijgt ook kritiek. Zo wordt er gesproken van een onnodige medicalisering van seks.

Geen wondermiddel

Isabelle Demets, consulente bij het Centrum voor Seksuele Voorlichting Gent, ziet er geen graten in. Wel waarschuwt ze ervoor dat een pil geen wondermiddel is. 'Een pil alleen is niet voldoende', zei ze vanmorgen in 'Hautekiet' op Radio 1.

'Het is belangrijk te kijken naar de oorzaak van het gebrek aan zin in seks. Prestatiedruk en goede communicatie tussen de partners spelen zeker een rol bij veel vrouwen. Maar als er dan een pilletje bijkomt, zie ik daar geen probleem in', zegt Demets.

'Al moet men in het achterhoofd houden dat een pil alleen niet voldoende is. Het maakt deel uit van een groter geheel.'

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 22:46

From http://projects.propublica.org/docdollars. (C) Copyright 2013 Pro Publica Inc.

Payment Category

Payment period

With 2 Million records, this database represents:$2.1 billionin disclosed payments

15companies

~ 47%of total market share

Payments in Your StateClick on a state to see payments made to practitioners and institutions there. See notes below.

Alabama$26,650,785Alaska$497,019Arizona$31,322,594Arkansas$13,093,875California$245,426,008Colorado$31,726,642Connecticut$28,799,062Delaware$3,806,129District of Columbia$8,182,279Florida$172,940,919Georgia$54,733,386Hawaii$3,252,737Idaho$7,522,721Illinois$69,778,363Indiana$36,318,156Iowa$10,547,297Kansas$25,066,858Kentucky$26,341,044Louisiana$23,284,061Maine$3,763,637Maryland$46,752,272Massachusetts$98,217,577Michigan$49,094,722Minnesota$26,689,687Mississippi$9,346,971Missouri$50,048,268Montana$2,672,796Nebraska$15,869,287Nevada$12,858,667New Hampshire$5,995,299New Jersey$57,268,034New Mexico$7,189,701New York$144,101,323North Carolina$73,390,960North Dakota$5,098,812Ohio$83,344,844Oklahoma$20,539,751Oregon$21,551,614Pennsylvania$99,168,664Rhode Island$12,539,542South Carolina$38,831,666South Dakota$3,100,279Tennessee$48,252,057Texas$163,304,438Utah$26,170,810Vermont$1,845,993Virginia$33,482,489Washington$36,097,167West Virginia$6,493,809Wisconsin$23,546,140Wyoming$470,491Puerto Rico$12,438,331[Unknown State]$611,157Company DisclosuresThe totals listed here cover different time periods and spending categeories, and aren't directly comparable. See notes below. See what each company discloses >>

CompanyTotal DisclosedAbbVieDisclosed: July to Sept. 2012$6.9MAllerganDisclosed: July 2011 to Sept. 2012Ranges*AstraZenecaDisclosed: Jan. 2010 to Sept. 2012$236.1MCephalonDisclosed: Jan. 2009 to Dec. 2012$89.7MEli LillyDisclosed: Jan. 2009 to June 2012$490.6MEMD SeronoDisclosed: Jan. 2011 to Sept. 2012$4MForestDisclosed: Jan. to Dec. 2012$95.6MGlaxoSmithKlineDisclosed: April 2009 to Sept. 2012$238.6MJohnson & JohnsonDisclosed: Jan. 2010 to Sept. 2012$54.6MMerckDisclosed: July 2009 to Sept. 2012$224.3MNovartisDisclosed: Oct. 2010 to Sept. 2012$54.2MPfizerDisclosed: July 2009 to Sept. 2012$538.2MUCBDisclosed: Jan. to Sept., 2012$7.2MValeantDisclosed: Jan. 10, 2010 to Sept. 2012Ranges*ViiVDisclosed: Jan. 2010 to Sept. 2012$18.4MNotes: Disclosures made or altered since Jan. 2013 are not listed or reflected on this website. Because they are reported in ranges, some of Valeant's payments and all of Allergan's payments are excluded from state and national totals. Also, Valeant did not disclose any payments between Sept. 27, 2010 and Jan. 1, 2011.

Local Stories Based on This DataSee recent stories that use our data below. Interested in being notified when we update our app? Find out how.

See more stories +

Our StoriesWe've identified 22 doctors who've earned at least $500,000 since 2009.

New data show drugmakers' payments to hundreds of thousands of doctors, and some have made well over $500,000.

Background StoriesReporters, Use Our DataHave questions about how you can best use Dollars for Docs for your own localized reporting? Contact Nicole Collins Bronzan at communications@propublica.org.

Additional reporting and development by Jennifer LaFleur, Joe Kokenge, Liz Day, David Frackman, Jeff Larson and Jason Das. Pharmacy icon from The Noun Project.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: bertb news feed

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 08:28

Turkey recently announced a $3.4 billion order for a Chinese missile defence system. An offer including the US Patriot missiles (seen in picture) was among the failed bidders. H¼rriyet Daily News photo by Selahattin S¶nmez

It was on Oct. 24 that United States Ambassador to Turkey Francis Ricciardone explicitly stated Washington's concerns over Turkey's decision to launch negotiations with a Chinese company for the purchase of a $3.4 billion missile defense systems.After echoing U.S. and NATO officials' statements that the Chinese system would not be operable under NATO's comprehensive anti-ballistic missile defense system, the ambassador announced the start of expert-level talks between Turkey and the U.S. ''In order to make sure that the full facts are taken into due consideration, we really have just begun expert discussions with the Government of Turkey. We will keep them very respectful. This will be done in official channels between friends and allies,'' he had said.

Apart from unannounced ones, four important high-level U.S. officials visited Turkey recently and held meetings with their Turkish counterparts, with two of them mainly to discuss the government's selection of the Chinese Precision Machinery Import and Export Corp. (CPMIEC) for its long air-range air and missile-defense system.

U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Jim Miller's visit of last week was followed by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Space and Defense Policy Frank Rose. While Miller is the third highest-ranking figure at the Pentagon, Rose is expected to be appointed as the assistant secretary in the event of his nomination being approved by the Senate. In the meantime, NATO officials also conducted talks with Turkish officials at various levels. All, as expected, voiced how the Turkish decision caused concerns at the alliance's headquarters in Brussels.

Talking to reliable sources about the reflections of these meetings, I've come to the conclusion that Washington regards Turkey's picking of the Chinese proposal as a ''message'' to its NATO allies, who were reluctant toward Turkey's call for co-production and technology transfer in its billion-dollar defense industry tenders.

''The Americans have understood the Turkish government's message and have passed it onto their companies,'' a source said yesterday. The source added that the partnership of Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, whose Patriot anti-ballistic missile system came third, had been advised to move quickly in order to renew their proposal before it was too late.

The core of this message is obviously the fact that the Chinese bid is nearly $1 billion cheaper than the U.S. and European companies' offers and includes the opportunity of co-production and technology transfer, something Turkey has long been aggressively looking for.

US continues to urge Turkey

Although the Raytheon-Lockheed Martin partnership is expected to knock on the doors of Turkey's Undersecreteriat of Defense Industry with a more generous offer, Washington's concerns that Ankara could still sign a deal with the Chinese firm are still there. Here are some important points made by the Washington administration over Ankara's position over the purchase:

* First, these concerns brought to Ankara's attention are not new. Even during the course of the tender, Turkey was notified about potential interoperability problems in the event of the purchase of this non-NATO system. Considering the fact that this Chinese company was under U.S. sanctions due to its violations of Iranian and North Korean non-proliferation acts in the last decade, Ankara was told that its purchase would make the situation much more difficult and complicated.

* Turkey's signing of the contract with the CPMIEC would create a lot of political consequences with the U.S. It would have a chilling effect on other U.S. companies seeking to engage with Turkey's defense-related companies. Ankara has already been urged that its important defense related companies like Havelsan, Aselsan, TAI, Roketsan or TAI would hardly find counterparts in the U.S. for future cooperation.

* These concerns not only exist among the administration, but also in Congress, whose approval is a must in all governmental defense contracts. ''Congress is very closely following this tender,'' the source stressed.

* The fate of Chinese FD-2000s will not be much different from Greece's S-300 systems deployed in Crete if Turkey insists on purchasing them in the face of NATO opposition. These systems had to be deployed to Greece following a major crisis between Turkey, Greek Cyprus and Greece, but they did not turn out to be a functioning part of NATO's system.

* One other point is that the Chinese system is not specifically designed to be an anti-ballistic missile defense system. It's rather an air defense system and can hit a missile through the blast fragmentation system. NATO believes Turkey should adopt a system specifically designed to ''hit to kill a missile threat'' in the right place.

November/06/2013

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 15:22

Misiewicz and Francis moved Navy vessels like chess pieces, diverting aircraft carriers, destroyers and other ships to Asian ports with lax oversight where Francis could inflate costs, according to the criminal complaint. The firm overcharged the Navy millions for fuel, food and other services it provided, and invented tariffs by using phony port authorities, the prosecution alleges.

"It's pretty big when you have one person who can dictate where ships are going to go and being influenced by a contractor," said retired Rear Adm. Terry McKnight, who has no direct knowledge of the investigation. "A lot of people are saying how could this happen?"

So far, authorities have arrested Misiewicz; Francis; his company's general manager of global government contracts, Alex Wisidagama; and a senior Navy investigator, John Beliveau II. Beliveau is accused of keeping Francis abreast of the probe and advising him on how to respond in exchange for such things as luxury trips and prostitution services. All have pleaded not guilty. Defense attorneys declined to comment.

(Read more: US officials say Iran hacked Navy computers)

Senior Navy officials said they believe that more people would likely be implicated in the scheme, but it's too early to tell how many or how high this will go in the naval ranks. Other unnamed Navy personnel are mentioned in court documents as getting gifts from Francis.

Francis is legendary in military circles in that part of the world, said McKnight, who does not know him personally. He is known for extravagance. His 70,000-foot bungalow in an upscale Singapore neighborhood drew spectators yearly since 2007 to its lavish, outdoor Christmas decorations, which The Straits Times described as rivaling the island city-state's main shopping street with replicas of snowmen, lighted towering trees, and Chinese and Japanese ornaments.

"He's a larger-than-life figure," McKnight said. "You talk to any captain on any ship that has sailed in the Pacific and they will know exactly who he is."

Navy spokesman, Rear Adm. John Kirby said Navy Criminal Investigative Service agents initiated their probe in 2010, but declined to comment further, citing the ongoing investigation.

That same year, Misiewicz caught the world's attention when he made an emotional return as a U.S. Naval commander to his native Cambodia, where he had been rescued as a child from the violence of the Khmer Rouge and adopted by an American woman. His homecoming was widely covered by international media.

Meanwhile, Francis was recruiting him for his scheme, according to court documents.

(Read more: Why this one event will dominate trading this week)

Misiewicz's family went to a Lion King production in Tokyo with a company employee and was offered prostitution services. Within months, the Navy commander was providing Francis ship movement schedules for the USS George Washington Carrier Strike Group and other ships, according to the criminal complaint.

Shortly after that, the manager wrote to Francis: "We got him!!:)," according to court documents.

Misiewicz would refer to Francis as "Big Brother" or "Big Bro" in emails from a personal account, while Francis would call him "Little Brother" or "Little Bro," according to the complaint.

The company bilked the Navy out of $10 million in just one year in Thailand alone, U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy said.

In December 2011, the two exchanged emails about the schedule of the USS Blue Ridge, investigators say. According to court documents, Francis wrote Misiewicz: "Bro, Slide a Bali visit in after Jakarta, and Dili Timor after Bali."

The complaint alleges Misiewicz followed through on the demands: In October 2012, the USS George Washington was scheduled to visit Singapore and instead was redirected by the Navy to Port Klang, Malaysia, one of Francis' preferred ports where his company submitted fake contractor bids.

After Francis offered Misiewicz five tickets to a Lady Gaga concert in Thailand in 2012, Francis wrote: "Don't chicken out bro we need u with us on the front lines," according to court documents.

The federal government has suspended its contracts with Francis.

The defendants face up to five years in prison if convicted of conspiracy to commit bribery.

'--By The Associated Press

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 08:40

What can I say? This is bad news for non-minorities in New York City everywhere :Bill de Blasio, that preening, status-whoring, anti-fascist crusading, competitive-compassion athlete we barely knew existed forty days ago (at a time when ironically he admitted his own ignorance [NYPOst: "He Drew A Blanksy"] of that ultimate SWPL-approved street artist, Banksy, who was busy back then titillating the editorial staffs of the New York Times and the NYPost alike)... Billy de Blasio has been elected mayor of New York City.

;-(

This is a man - can we really call it a man? - this is a creature that hates, I mean really despises, his own kind, and so much so, that he not only changed his legal name from "Warren Wilhelm, Jr." to "Billy de Blasio" - in a gesture of self-hatred designed to distance himself from his high-accomplishment Teutonic father, and side instead with the maternal, female, Mediterranean side of the family... - this is a creature that loathes its European heritage so much, that it not only legally changed its family name, it also married a dark-skinned African American woman five years its senior.

As if that weren't the ultimate "F-You, Dad!", Wilhelm went one step further to truly smear the shit in the face of his heritage, by breeding the hybrid offspring freak show with the big-afro(C) that the New York Times has been editorializing about in glowing terms ever since they became aware of it, about 45 days ago :Imagine the hatred and bitterness you would have to have in your heart to do such a thing to your own father, knowing that there is no greater way to hurt a man than for his own progeniture to betray him.De Blasio's father was a celebrated WW2 warrior and, after the war, a successful business man. All things, in the snakey-eyes of the vermin at the New York Times, to be suspicious about. The New York Times traces "de Blasio's" journey toward self-hatred and siding with the enemy ion this puff piece from last month : "From His Father's Decline, de Blasio Learned "What Not To Do"From that article :

"Bill physically resembled his father '-- he grew to be the same height, and both had broad foreheads '-- but he identified increasingly with his mother, her sisters and their Italian heritage, rather than his father's German roots. In high school, classmates called him Senator Provolone, reflecting his twin penchants for politics and Italian sandwiches. When he graduated from high school, he asked that his mother's last name be added to his diploma. He wanted to be known as Bill de Blasio-Wilhelm. "

This is a cautionary tale of what happens when a beta-fied dweeb succombs to the ultimate evil: namely: being influenced by evil outsiders to hate his own kind to the point of endorsing and even fighting for - Stockholm-syndrome style - the elimination of his peers.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 01:22

The Mexican soft drink's use of sugar, rather than corn syrup, has given it cult status among some American Coca-Cola purists, but a new levy may prompt the company to change its recipe.

Reuters/Romeo RanocoMexico's new soft drink tax could push the nation's Coca-Cola makers away from the cane sugar that's made ''Mexicoke'' a cult hit in the U.S.

Executives from the second-largest bottler of Coca-Cola in Latin America suggested that a shift away from cane sugar might be in the cards as a result of the steep sales tax on soda Mexico's congress approved on Thursday (Oct. 31). American Coke enthusiasts claim the Mexican version tastes better than what they get in the US, which some say is because Mexican Coca-Cola is made with cane sugar rather than high-fructose corn syrup.

More From QuartzOn an earnings call with analysts last week, the head of Arca Continental SAB said that the Mexico-based Coca-Cola bottler could ''move to more fructose,'' which is cheaper than cane sugar. Arca Continental's Francisco Garza added ''that's a very important part of the savings that we are foreseeing now.'' The independent bottlers who distribute Coke in local markets use the same recipe but have some latitude from Coca-Cola to tinker with the sweetening ingredients. (Arca Continental hasn't yet responded to a request for further comment.)

Mexico's new soda levy will tack on an extra peso ($.08) per liter to all soft drink sales in the country. The move is part of a growing campaign to address what has become an obesity epidemic'--over 70% of Mexico's population is now overweight. And the hope is that it will help curb the country's unmatched affinity for soda. On a per capita basis, Mexicans drink more Coca-Cola products than residents of any other country in the world.

Any decision by Arca Continental'--or Coca-Cola's other large Latin American bottlers'--to turn more heavily toward high-fructose corn syrup would surely dismay fans of Mexicoke around the world. Over the last decade, ''hecho en Mexico'' Coca-Cola has acquired cult status.

After steadily cutting the amount of real cane sugar in Coca-Cola in the early 1980s, most U.S. Coca-Cola bottlers had switched over to high-fructose corn syrup by the middle of that decade. When Coca-Cola introduced Coca-Cola Classic in 1985'--after the disastrous attempt to launch New Coke'--it was sweetened with corn syrup rather than cane sugar, which drew the ire of the U.S. sugar lobby.

Latin American bottlers have some leeway when it comes to how they mix up their pop. The largest Coca-Cola bottler in Latin America, Coca-Cola FEMSA, explains this in its annual report: ''Under our agreements with The Coca-Cola Company, we may use raw or refined sugar or [high-fructose corn syrup] as sweeteners in our products.'' Coca-Cola FEMSA opts for different sweeteners in different markets. For instance in Colombia, it uses sugar as a sweetener. In Argentina, it's high-fructose corn syrup.

For the record, while Mexican bottlers might shift their mix of sweeteners toward high-fructose corn syrup, it's unclear what, if any, implications that would have for consumers outside Mexico who've grown accustomed to cane sugar Coke. And it should also be noted that Mexicoke fans might already be getting more corn syrup than they think. Researchers from the University of Southern California's Keck School of Medicine tested Mexican Coca-Cola purchased in east Los Angeles back in 2010. Their findings:

The Mexican Coca-Cola lists ''sugar'' on the ingredient list, but the laboratory did not detect any sucrose, but rather near equal amounts of fructose and glucose, results which suggest the use of [high fructose corn syrup]. According to the FDA guidelines, the word ''sugar'' can only be used in reference to sucrose.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 03:18

A collection of 1,500 artworks confiscated by the Nazis in the 1930s and 1940s has been found in the German city of Munich.

The trove is believed to include works by Matisse, Picasso and Chagall.

Art historian Godfrey Barker told the BBC that this is "possibly the biggest story of art recovered from World War II since the Austrians unveiled 10,000 pictures three years ago".

Link to Article

Archived Version

Mon, 04 Nov 2013 15:28

The 23-year-old suspect charged in carrying out a shooting rampage at Los Angeles International Airport has reportedly told authorities that he acted alone.

Paul Ciancia, who is under heavy sedation and monitoring at the hospital after being shot by airport police, told law enforcement officials he had been dropped off at LAX's Terminal 3, the Associated Press reported.

Federal prosecutors charged Ciancia with murder of a federal officer and commission of violence at an international airport on Saturday evening. Both charges are potentially punishable by life in prison or the death penalty.

On Friday, Ciancia shot a Transportation Security Administration officer, Gerardo I. Hernandez, at point-blank range, left the scene and then returned to shoot him again after Hernandez was seen moving on a surveillance video, the officials said. Hernandez later died. Ciancia is also accused of shooting two other TSA employees and a civilian, and causing other injuries.

Gerardo I. Hernandez's Wife Says He Was a Loving Husband and Father

Ciancia wrote in a signed note he carried with him to the airport that he targeted TSA officials and "made the conscious decision to try to kill" because he wanted to "instill fear in your traitorous minds," according to a federal affidavit outlining the charges against him.

"He targeted, specifically, TSA officers," FBI Special Agent in Charge David L. Bowdich told reporters this evening. "His intent was very very clear in his note."

LAX Gunman Identified After Airport Shooting Spree

In addition to the note and eyewitness accounts, investigators have surveillance video of the shootings, Bowdich said, and they are seeking additional digital media evidence potentially gathered by civilians at the airport. Such evidence or information can be submitted at https://laxshootingtips.fbi.gov.

However, investigators said Saturday that they have not been able to speak directly with Ciancia because of wounds he suffered as he was subdued.

"He is receiving medical treatment," Bowdich said. "I'm not going to talk about his gunshot wounds. At the moment, he is unresponsive and we are unable to talk to him, as of today."

Bowdich credited a swift law enforcement response for preventing further carnage.

"They did stop this before, we believe, it would have been a much more grave action to include additional casualties," Bowdich said.

According to the affidavit, "at approximately 9:20 a.m. [PT Friday], Ciancia entered Terminal 3 at LAX and approached the Transportation Security Administration checkpoint. Ciancia pulled a Smith & Wesson .223 caliber M&P-15 assault rifle out of his bag and fired multiple rounds at point-blank range at a TSA officer [Hernandez] who was then on duty and in uniform, wounding the officer. Ciancia began to walk up an escalator, looked back at the wounded officer, who in video appeared to move, and returned to shoot the wounded officer again. The TSA officer was fatally wounded.

"Ciancia then fired his weapon on at least two other uniformed, on-duty TSA employees and one civilian passenger, all of whom sustained gunshot wounds," the affidavit added. "Ciancia was pursued and shot by a sergeant and an officer of the Los Angeles Airport Police."

Besides those shot, two civilians suffered what Bowdich described as "evasion injuries" caused by efforts to escape once the shooting erupted.

The shooting sent hundreds of passengers streaming out of the terminal, with many fleeing onto the airport runway. Dozens of flights to and from the airport were delayed or canceled as a "tactical alert" was triggered for the Los Angeles Police Department.

Witnesses described a chaotic scene, as many ducked for cover inside bathroom stalls or dropped to the floor upon officers' commands.

"I heard gunshots, and a few seconds later, I saw him coming up the elevator and walked by about 10 feet away from me with his gun pointed," Andrea Trujillo, who was at the terminal when shots first rang out, told ABC News.

Jose Martes, who was at the airport with his wife, Miriam Rodrigez, awaiting a flight to Norman, Okla., said he didn't realize what was happening at first.

"There was a loud bang. At first we looked at each other and everyone in line. We're like, OK, nothing unusual," he told ABC News. "We thought it was something else, but from, like a couple of seconds from that, that's when we heard just straight shots going down. That's when we all fell to the ground and we knew that this was not a test."

Authorities said Ciancia was able to make it all the way to the back of the terminal, near the departure gate, before he was shot down by officers and taken into custody, according to Mayor Eric Garcetti.

As law enforcement officials work to uncover Ciancia's motivations, the note found at the scene indicated Ciancia's anti-government sentiments and suggested that he expected to die in the airport shootout.

The note ended with the letters "NWO," according to law enforcement sources, which is believed to stand for "New World Order." The note also specifically mentioned anger and frustration targeted toward the TSA.

Suspect's Family Feared He Was Suicidal

Ciancia's family was also concerned for his well-being. Ciancia's father contacted police in Pennsville, N.J., on Friday with the concern that his son may be suicidal, Chief Allen Cummings of the Pennsville Police Department told ABC News.

"Their younger child got a text message from Paul stating that there were some comments in there about his well-being, and he wanted to possibly take his own life," Cummings said.

Cummings said he called the LAPD today and asked for officers to "try to get a well-being check" on Ciancia.

Officers went to Ciancia's apartment in Los Angeles before the shooting and talked to his roommates, Cummings said.

"He was a really nice guy," one of his roommates told ABC News. "A little introverted, but nothing I would ever, ever expect him to do."

Ciancia was believed to be from Pennsville, N.J., however authorities said he had a residence in Los Angeles. Overnight, officials searched both his East Coast and West Coast residences.

Witnesses described Ciancia as a short, young, white man, carrying a long-rifle.

One of the shooting victims was a TSA officer who died of his wounds. The officer was a behavioral detection officer, assigned to identify passengers acting strangely, said J. David Cox, president of the AFGE, the officers' union.

The TSA confirmed the identity of the officer killed as Hernandez, 39, who has been with the TSA since 2010.

The officer is the first TSA employee to be killed in the line of duty.

"It's a sad occasion," Cox said.

Six people were injured, including three TSA officers. Five were taken to nearby hospitals.

"One arrived in critical condition and two are listed in fair condition," a spokesman from Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center said in a statement.

An emergency physician said the patients suffered bullet wounds and other injuries. Two other patients were taken to other hospitals.

"No words can explain the horror that we experienced," TSA Administrator John Pistole said in a statement.

ABC News' Cecilia Vega and Pierre Thomas

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 11:47

On a recent visit to Hong Kong, Google Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt spoke to Deborah Kan about allegations that the U.S. National Security Agency spied on the company's data centers, censorship in China, and the country he wants to visit next.

HONG KONG'--Google Inc. Executive Chairman Eric Schmidt reacted to reports that the U.S. government allegedly spied on the company's data centers, describing such an act as "outrageous" and potentially illegal if proven.

"It's really outrageous that the National Security Agency was looking between the Google data centers, if that's true. The steps that the organization was willing to do without good judgment to pursue its mission and potentially violate people's privacy, it's not OK," Mr. Schmidt told The Wall Street Journal in an interview. "The Snowden revelations have assisted us in understanding that it's perfectly possible that there are more revelations to come."

Mr. Schmidt said Google had registered complaints with the NSA, as well as President Barack Obama and members of the U.S. Congress.

"The NSA allegedly collected the phone records of 320 million people in order to identify roughly 300 people who might be a risk. It's just bad public policy'...and perhaps illegal," he said.

When contacted Monday, the NSA referred to its statement last week that said recent press articles about the agency's collection had misstated facts and mischaracterized the NSA's activities.

"NSA conducts all of its activities in accordance with applicable laws, regulations, and policies'--and assertions to the contrary do a grave disservice to the nation, its allies and partners, and the men and women who make up the National Security Agency," it said in a statement last week.

Mr. Schmidt said in the interview that the right balance of security and privacy starts with finding the appropriate level of oversight.

"There clearly are cases where evil people exist, but you don't have to violate the privacy of every single citizen of America to find them," he said.

Separately, Mr. Schmidt said in order for Google to restart its China-based search engine, the Chinese government would need to change its heavy-handedness on censorship. "China's censorship regime has gotten significantly worse since we left so something would have to change before we come back," he said.

Google in 2011 rerouted its China-based search engine to Hong Kong due to censorship concerns.

In his role as executive chairman, Mr. Schmidt has taken to engaging governments around the world and promoting free speech on the Internet. He traveled to North Korea last January in hopes that he may be able "to convince the government it's in their interest to open up a little bit."

"They [North Korea] need the Internet for electronic commerce and for business and they are certainly grappling with issues of food availability, education and social unrest."

When asked where Mr. Schmidt wanted to travel next, he said Cuba was at the top of his list.

'--Danny Yadron in San Francisco contributed to this article.

Write to Deborah Kan at Deborah.Kan@wsj.com

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 03:07

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 04:58

Quotes are real-time for NASDAQ, NYSE, and NYSEAmex when available. See also delay times for other exchanges. Quotes and other information supplied by independent providers identified on the Yahoo! Finance partner page. Quotes are updated automatically, but will be turned off after 25 minutes of inactivity. Quotes are delayed at least 15 minutes. All information provided "as is" for informational purposes only, not intended for trading purposes or advice. Neither Yahoo! nor any of independent providers is liable for any informational errors, incompleteness, or delays, or for any actions taken in reliance on information contained herein. By accessing the Yahoo! site, you agree not to redistribute the information found therein.

Fundamental company data provided by Capital IQ. Historical chart data and daily updates provided by Commodity Systems, Inc. (CSI). International historical chart data and daily updates provided by Morningstar, Inc.

Yahoo! - ABC News Network

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 03:57

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 03:54

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 04:29

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) 2013, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 03:51

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 03:39

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 03:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 21:02

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 21:02

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 23:35

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 20:29

Though I sometimes suffer from the blues, I am not crazy '-- I swear. Even though I am just a guy who often blogs in my PJs, I'm also pretty sure that I am not a nobody. In fact, none of us are nobodies, we are all somebody to our friends, families and ourselves.

Therefore, my stomach tightens when someone like Van Jones asserts that ''no body wants a nuclear plant in their backyard.'' Perhaps it is because I have lived for several months at a time '-- 11 times '-- with a nuclear propulsion plant sealed up in the same 425 foot long steel tube that I occasionally called ''home''. Maybe is because I have lived in or visited a number of towns that already have a nuclear plant in their figurative backyard.

I also just returned from a meeting in another town '-- Idaho Falls, ID '-- where nearly every resident would vote to host a new nuclear power plant. The state's Lieutenant Governor spoke at that meeting and essentially told the assembled audience full of vendors, suppliers, academics, and operators to ''come to Idaho'' and build.The residents of Idaho Falls, a town that is on the border of a place that was once known as the National Reactor Testing Station, are comfortable with nuclear energy because they know nuclear energy. The Idaho National Laboratory proudly reminds visitors that it has been the site of 52 nuclear reactors during its 60 year history.

EBR-I lit four 200 Watt light bulbs

Idaho Falls residents have personally experienced many of nuclear energy's positives and negatives. Some of them have been around long enough to have first hand memories of the response and investigation of the only fatal nuclear reactor accident that ever took place in the United States. That accident at the SL-1 occurred when a marginally trained operator on a reactor built and operated with a politically constrained budget pulled too hard on a sticky control rod and caused a steam explosion. Some of them are involved in the current clean up effort and recognize that many past practices were not well thought out. Some recall early experiments like the very first production of electricity from a nuclear fission reactor, lighting up ARCO, Idaho in June 1955 or purposely ejecting control rods at BORAX to find out how much damage a destroyed reactor might cause.

Too few of the residents have experienced one of the biggest positives about nuclear energy, its ability to provide as much or as little emission-free energy as anyone could need or want. Idaho Falls itself has never been powered by a fission power plant, though EBR-II used to provide about half of the electricity used by the entire Idaho National Lab complex.

However, when a substantial number of the town's residents gathered at their historic Colonial Theater on October 30 to watch Robert Stone's Pandora's Promise, they cheered with pride when the film turned its attention to their home territory. They paid close attention as the film told the story of Chuck Till and the effort that he led for a decade to develop the Integral Fast Reactor (IFR), a sodium cooled fast reactor that was intelligently designed with several evolutionary features worth a brief mention.

It used a large pool of sodium rather than a piping system to move coolant.It used double walled tubes in the steam generator.It used a metal alloy fuel.The project also included development of a fuel recycling method that, while still not perfect, addressed many of the issues associated with the first generation aqueous reprocessing method first developed to isolate virtually pure Pu-239 for explosive uses.Those features combined to form a complete system that demonstrated '-- by physical testing '-- that it could withstand a complete loss of all power without any damage. That was the initiating event that led to the memorable core melts and hydrogen explosions at some of the units at Fukushima Daiichi.

EBR-II, the power plant part of the Integral Fast Reactor project, produced reliable electricity for 30 years; it was a demonstration plant, not a ''bread-board'' prototype. The IFR project also came close to showing that the system could recycle material that other reactors discharged as ''waste'' and that it could perform that task without producing any material that would be even as useful for weapons as the low grade uranium ore that is distributed throughout the world.

Of course, the Idaho Falls audience for Pandora's Promise also knew enough of their history to be saddened by the politically driven decision, announced by President Clinton in 1994, to remove funding from all nuclear reactor research, including the IFR. I was sitting close enough to Chuck Till in the audience that I heard several people come up to him after the film's showing to console him about the tragedy of having his program halted just when it was getting close to final success.

Aside: During the Wolf Blitzer discussion above, Robert Stone mentioned the recent letter signed by four climate scientists admonishing the leaders of the environmental community for their steadfast opposition to nuclear energy. Van Jones defensively states that it is not the environmental community's fault that nuclear energy is not succeeding and that he thought all of them would welcome the kind of advanced reactor technology that Stone has described, if it existed.

Like Joe Romm, Jones seems to be forgetting that it was focused political action '-- driven partially by the leadership of major groups claiming the ''environmental'' title '-- that led President Clinton to declare that nuclear energy research and development was so unnecessary that it should be zeroed out in the federal budget. It is impossible to perform ground-breaking, paradigm-changing, business-disrupting, fundamental research with no money. It can take decades to recover from that kind of budget decision. End Aside.

Getting back to my assertion that many of the people who know the most about nuclear energy would be happy to host new facilities in their virtual backyard, I would also like to point Mr. Jones to 2013 survey results from Bisconti Research, Inc. conclusively demonstrating that the people who live the closest to nuclear energy facilities remain the people who are the most supportive of the technology.

Some people whose thinking seems to align with Mr. Jones will immediately dismiss those survey results by stating that obviously the people who live closest to the facilities have a vested interest in the continued success of the facilities, but I'll respond by reminding detractors that people who raise their families closest to the facilities are also the people who bear the most ''risk'' and who have the most detailed knowledge of the inner workings of the technology. Nuclear professionals and their families are generally pretty bright, risk-averse people that understand the concept that all decisions must be made by balancing risk and reward. The survey results show that they have decided the rewards substantially outweigh any risks.

Now, I'll bring it home, literally. I live in one of the most nuclear friendly areas in the United States, greater Lynchburg, VA. This very pleasant town, nestled in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains, has been the home of world-class nuclear power plant designers and builders for more than 50 years. It hosts the largest North American offices for Areva and it's one of several technical centers for The Babcock & Wilcox Company.

New London Business and Technology Center

A few miles west of downtown Lynchburg, B&W recently built an Integral System Test (IST) facility to test its latest power plant design, the B&W mPowerTM Reactor. The Center for Advanced Engineering Research (CAER) that hosts the IST is currently the only building '-- other than a fire station '-- in a fully developed commercial park that was initially constructed at least a half a decade ago.

I recently drove around that park and saw that at least one of the numerous vacant parcels is a little more than 40 acres in size. That number caught my attention; it is almost exactly the right size to support a two unit B&W mPower station that could provide 360 MW of emission free electricity. The project would be at least a quintuple play win for the local area.

It would help Virginia reduce its need to import electricity from neighboring states. Currently, my home state produces about 50% of the electricity that we use.It would provide good jobs in an area where traditional employment power houses like tobacco farming, furniture manufacturing and textile production have been decimated.It would demonstrate a wonderful principle taken from the high tech industry and allow B&W to show that it is willing to ''eat its own dog food''. That would help convince others that they are ready to stand behind their new mPower reactor technology.It would help fill up a beautiful, fully developed commercial park with supplier companies that could see their products in use, allowing them the opportunity for rapid refinements.It would allow the plant designers to have easy, routine access to the site where their ideas are turning into physical structures, systems and components. It is hard to describe how important that could be for ensuring that the design is evolved to maturity as quickly as possible.One of the many reasons that I decided to leave my former employment with the B&W mPower reactor design team is that my suggestions to pursue this possibility were not taken very seriously by the company leadership. They are smart people working on a great idea, but most of them are very conservative thinkers who are constrained by having been beat up too many times by vocal minorities that claim that no one likes nuclear energy.

I think they might have been afraid to take the time to ask their neighbors if they would be excited to host the construction of the very first B&W mPower right here in greater Lynchburg. Well, I am not afraid because I am pretty sure that the answer will be, sure, build our machine in our back yard.

By the way, not only do I live less than 20 minutes away from the site I am talking about, I happen to know that the primary reactor designer lives within a couple of miles of the CAER facility. Maybe he will visit this post and testify about his acceptance of my suggested course of action.

Correction: (November 6, 2013 0831) Based on a comment from a well-informed reader, the post has been modified to indicate that Lynchburg is the home to Areva's largest North American offices. Areva's headquarters are now located in Charlotte, NC.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 09:06

PENNSVILLE, New Jersey - Relatives of the suspect charged in last week's Los Angeles airport shooting offered sympathy Monday to the family of the federal officer who was killed, saying they were "shocked and numbed" by the deadly rampage.

An attorney for the family of Paul Ciancia said his relatives also expressed hope for the recovery of the other victims and regret for the travel disruption caused by the attack on the nation's third-busiest airport.

Family lawyer John Jordan read a brief statement outside the town hall in Pennsville, a working-class town near Wilmington, Delaware, where Ciancia grew up.

"Paul is our son and brother. We will continue to love him and care for him and support him during the difficult times ahead," Jordan said on the family's behalf.

The relatives, who had not spoken publicly before, said they were cooperating with the FBI and other law-enforcement agencies.

Jordan, who is also the town's municipal judge, declined to take questions.

Ciancia, a 23-year-old unemployed motorcycle mechanic, is accused of shooting his way past an airport checkpoint with a .223-caliber rifle he pulled from a duffel bag. He was wounded in a shootout with airport police. He faces charges of murder of a federal officer in the death of Transportation Security Administration screener Gerardo I. Hernandez and committing violence at an international airport.

In the Ciancia family's neighborhood in New Jersey, stop signs at either end of the street were adorned with sticker advertising Infowars.com, a website that discusses many of the same anti-government ideas officials said Ciancia mentioned in a hand-written note found in his bag. There was no way to tell who put the stickers on the signs.

Orange construction cones blocked the family's long driveway, and two police officers were at the auto-body shop owned by Ciancia's father, also named Paul.

On Monday, the FBI revisited the suspect's Sun Valley apartment -- the same duplex that agents searched Friday after the attack.

A man was escorted out of the apartment and drove away in a black Hyundai -- the same type of car that a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation told The Associated Press was seen in surveillance video dropping Ciancia off at the airport minutes before the shooting began. Ciancia told investigators that an unwitting friend gave him a ride.

The FBI would not identify the man or discuss the investigation.

Neighbors say they remembered little or nothing about Ciancia. Some did not even recognize his photograph.

Ciancia, who was shot four times by airport police, remained in critical condition. He has not been scheduled to appear in court. Any appearance will depend on when his doctors say he's ready, FBI spokeswoman Laura Eimiller said.

The TSA said the other two officers wounded in the attack -- James Speer, 54, and Tony Grigsby, 36 -- were released from the hospital.

Grigsby read a statement outside his Los Angeles home Monday, saying he was trying to help an elderly man get to safety when he was shot twice in the right foot. He fought back tears as he called Hernandez a wonderful person who will be missed.

"Only now it has hit me that I will never see him again," Grigsby said.

Brian Ludmer, a high school teacher, also remained hospitalized. He has to undergo at least one more surgery on his leg and extensive physical therapy, hospital officials said Monday, but his condition was upgraded from fair to good.

The bullet pierced the back of Ludmer's right calf, shattering two bones and creating a 4-inch hole as it left his shin. The bullet also grazed his left leg as he was running.

He was scheduled to undergo a second surgery Monday to implant a titanium rod into his leg because of the extreme damage.

Dan Stepenosky, superintendent of Las Virgenes Unified School District, visited with Ludmer on Sunday at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center. With the metal rod, Ludmer joked that he would now have an even harder time getting through security at the airport, the superintendent said.

Two other people suffered injuries trying to evade the gunman but were not shot.

Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Source: Planet Money

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 01:52

One thing Twitter has that other social networks don't: Users who talk about the world in real time. In practice, this largely means one thing. Millions of people use Twitter while they're watching TV.

Frank Franklin II/ASSOCIATED PRESSThose people often use hashtags to let other fans find their tweets (#BreakingBad, #NFL). More importantly, from Twitter's perspective, this lets advertisers know which users are watching what.

"Twitter is now that public theater where people are yelling, booing, exclaiming, laughing, clapping," says Antonio Garcia-Martinez, who helped build Facebook's ad exchange and now works for a social-advertising company, Nanigans. Getting into that public theater is incredibly valuable for advertisers, he says.

In other words, Twitter could become the key ad space for what marketing people call "the second screen." The first screen '-- TV '-- is still a huge source of ad revenue. That's why Twitter wants to become as indispensable as chips and beer for watching TV.

That will let the company sell advertisers on the idea that being on TV is no longer enough '-- they also need to advertise to all the Twitter users who are talking about the show.

At least, that's part of the pitch the company's making in Thursday's IPO.

Investors will have to weigh that against a pretty obvious downside: Twitter has yet to turn a profit. That's partly because the company has spent millions of dollars in the past year buying up companies to help Twitter sell more ads.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 02:11

Link to Article

Archived Version

Thu, 07 Nov 2013 02:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Wed, 06 Nov 2013 08:58

Paul Anthony Ciancia, aged 23, from Pennsville, New Jersey named as the gunmanShooter was dressed in fatigues and carrying a handwritten note, reading that he 'wanted to kill TSA and pigs'Described himself as 'p*****-off patriot' who was upset with former Homeland Security Secretary Janet NeapolitanoPolice say shooter's brother got a text message from Ciancia on Friday saying he was thinking about taking his lifeTSA agent shot and killed; one other agent was shot and two others were injured but some of those injuries are classified as evasion injuries meaning that they harmed themselves while trying to get out of the terminalThis is the first time that a TSA agent has ever been killed in the line of dutySuspect's former schoolmate said Ciancia may have been bulliedBy Louise Boyle, Rachel Quigley, Meghan Keneally and Daily Mail Reporter

PUBLISHED: 08:23 EST, 3 November 2013 | UPDATED: 09:36 EST, 3 November 2013

Accused: Paul Ciancia faces charges of first degree murder and violence at an international airport

After shooting a TSA agent on Friday, LAXgunman Paul Cianciastarted upan elevator to find his next target. But whenthe 23-year-old turned around, he saw that theagentwas moving- so he went back and finished him off, according to footage reviewed by investigators.

The unemployed motorcycle mechanic suspected of carrying out the deadly shooting at Los Angeles airport set out to kill multiple employees of the Transportation Security Administration, authorities said yesterday.

As first-degree murder charges were filed against Paul Ciancia, it was revealed that the 23-year-old had hoped the attack would 'instill fear in their traitorous minds'.

In a news conference announcing charges against Ciancia, U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr spelled out a chilling chain of events inside LAX that began when Ciancia strode into Terminal 3 on Friday, pulled a Smith & Wesson .223-caliber assault rifle out of his duffel bag and fired repeatedly at point-blank range at a TSA officer before the main screening area.

After killing that officer, Ciancia fired on at least two other uniformed TSA employees and an airline passenger, who were all wounded.

Airport police eventually shot him as panicked passengers cowered in stores and restaurants.

Ciancia's duffel bag contained a handwritten letter signed by the 23-year-old stating he'd 'made the conscious decision to try to kill' multiple TSA employees and that he wanted to stir fear in them, FBI Special Agent in Charge David L. Bowdich, said.

The bag also had five magazines of ammunition.

Federal prosecutors filed charges of first-degree murder and commission of violence at an international airport against Ciancia. The charges could qualify him for the death penalty.

He is still in a serious condition in hospital after being shot in the head and leg by officers.

'He is receiving medical treatment,' Agent Bowdich said. 'I'm not going to talk about his gunshot wounds. At the moment, he is unresponsive and we are unable to talk to him, as of today.'

The widow of the TSA agent he killed paid tribute to her husband yesterday, describing him as a 'great man' who loved his job.

Heartbroken: Ana Hernandez, whose husband Gerado was killed in the attack, said he loved his job with the TSA

Gerardo I. Hernandez, who would have celebrated his 40th birthday next week, is the first TSA agent to be killed in the line of duty.

Victim: Gerardo Hernandez, 39, is the first TSA agent to be killed in the line of duty

Mr Hernandez's widow, Ana, told NBC News the couple, who have two children, met as teenagers and married on Valentine's Day in 1998.

'He was always excited to go to work. He was a joyful person, he took pride in his duty for the American public and for the TSA mission,' Mrs Hernandez said, adding that the family were heartbroken.

The FBI is still looking into the gunman's past, but said they had not found evidence of past crimes or any run-ins with the TSA. They said he had never applied for a job with the TSA.

Authorities believe someone dropped Ciancia off at the airport. Agents are reviewing surveillance tapes to piece together the exact sequence of events, he said.

'We are really going to draw a picture of who this person was, his background, his history. That will help us explain why he chose to do what he did,' Agent Bowdich said. 'At this point, I don't have the answer on that.'

The note found in the duffel bag suggested Ciancia was willing to kill almost any TSA officer.

'Black, white, yellow, brown, I don't discriminate,' the note read, according to a paraphrase by a law enforcement official briefed on the investigation.

The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly.

Inquiry: FBI special agent David Bowdich, left, TSA administrator John Pistole, center, and attorney Andre Birotte discuss the shooting today

Terror: Horrified passengers flee as shots are heard in Terminal 3 of Los Angeles International Airport shortly before 10am on Friday

Arrest: Paul Ciancia was handcuffed to a gurney after being shot by officers

Terminal 3, the area where the shooting happened, reopened Saturday. Passengers who had abandoned luggage to escape Friday's gunfire were allowed to return to collect their bags.

The TSA planned to review its security policies in the wake of the attack. Administrator John Pistole did not say if that would mean arming officers.

As airport operations returned to normal, a few more details trickled out about Ciancia, who by all accounts was reserved and solitary.

Former classmates barely remember him and even a recent roommate could say little about the young man who moved from New Jersey to Los Angeles less than two years ago. A former classmate at Salesianum School in Wilmington, Delaware, said Ciancia was incredibly quiet.

History: Ciancia is a New Jersey native but recently moved to Los Angeles before the shooting

Investigation: Police are looking into the 23-year-old's past but say they don't yet have a clear picture of who he is

'He kept to himself and ate lunch alone a lot,' David Hamilton told the Los Angeles Times. 'I really don't remember any one person who was close to him .... In four years, I never heard a word out of his mouth.'

The suspected gunman allegedly had a grudge against former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

Grudge: The gunman allegedly had a dislike of Janet Napolitano

He was carrying a one-page handwritten manifesto in which he called Napolitano a 'bull d***' and said 'FU Janet Napolitano,' according to a report from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Napolitano, a Democrat, resigned from DHS in August after four years and was named president of University of California last month.

The note found in Ciancia's bag after the shooting spree also contained references to the Federal Reserve, the New World Order conspiracy theory and 'fiat currency' - any money declared by a government to be legal tender.

Ciancia's views appear to be in line with the anti-government Patriot movement, whose members subscribe to the theory that a powerful secret alliance of international elites is plotting to form a one-world government, also known as a New World Order.

According to the SPLC's sources, the 'Patriots' consider the Department of Homeland Security, which oversees the TSA, a participant of the global conspiracy.

In Ciancia's note, the 23-year-old suspect allegedly referred to himself as a 'p****d-off patriot' and stated that he wanted to kill 'TSA and pigs.'

So far, however, police and FBI working on the case have been unable to pinpoint Ciancia's exact motive for the deadly attack.

The investigation has been hindered by the fact that Ciancia remained in critical condition Saturday after being shot in the mouth and leg, making it impossible for officers to question him.

Kill zone: Terminal 3 remained closed Saturday as the forensics investigation continued. Only the ticket counter and parking structure were open

Back to work: TSA employees classify the luggage abandoned in the melee to return to passengers at LAX's Terminal 3 on Saturday

According to the account of a person who saw officers taking down Ciancia, they had to shoot him several time before he crumpled to the ground.

The witness told the Los Angeles Times that the 23-year-old was wearing a bulletproof vest over his fatigues.

LAX's Terminal 3, where the shooting occurred, fully reopened late Saturday afternoon. Most airlines issued waivers for people traveling through Los Angeles, allowing them to change flights without paying a fee.

LAX officials were working to get airport operations back to normal after the shooting that affected abut 1,550 flights and 167,000 passengers.

Ciancia, a native of Pennsville, New Jersey, who has lived in Los Angeles for more than a year, was carrying a high-powered AR-15 assault rifle as he stalked through Terminal 3, terrifying passengers and causing the surrounding buildings to be evacuated Friday morning.

Pictured: Paul Anthony Ciancia is the 23-year-old man who opened fire at Los Angeles International Airport on Friday morning, killing one TSA agent and injuring five others

A TSA officer (pictured in the center) gets medical attention after several people were wounded by gunfire at Los Angeles International Airport on Friday by a lone gunman armed with an assault rifle

Back to work: Transportation Security Administration employees wear black ribbons over their badges today as LAX re-opens

When the shooting stopped, officer Gerardo I. Hernandez, 39, was dead, becoming the first TSA employee in the agency's 12-year history to be killed in the line of duty.

During a press conference Saturday evening, airport police chief Patrick Gannon said that Hernandez's TSA colleagues immediately rushed to his side and administered first aid, trying to revive him, but to no avail.

Two other TSA agents were hospitalized, along with a person who suffered a broken ankle in the melee. A sixth person was treated at the scene for ringing in the ears from gunfire.

'I really thought I saw death,' said Anne Rainer, who witnessed the gunfire with her 26-year-old son Ben. The pair were about to leave for New York so her son could see a specialist for a rare genetic condition he has.

They took refuge behind a ticket counter where she said people prayed, cried and held hands. She watched as one person jumped from a second-floor balcony to get away from the gunman.

'Adrenaline went through my head, my body went numb, and I said, "If I have to go, it's OK because I'm not going to feel it, but I have to save him,"' Rainer said

More than a dozen passengers who were evacuated from the airport were treated for minor injuries such as twisted ankles.

A law enforcement official said the gunman was dressed in fatigues and carried at least five full 30-round magazines of ammunition. In his bag he had a one-page, handwritten note that said he wanted to kill TSA employees and 'pigs.'

The official, who was not authorized to discuss the investigation publicly, said the note referred to how the gunman believed his constitutional rights were being violated by TSA searches and that he was a 'p*****-off patriot' upset at former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.

The gunman was believed to be acting alone. One witness said that the shooter walked up to him and simply asked: 'TSA?'

Airport police chief Patrick Gannon said the shooter came into Terminal 3 around 9.20am, pulled an assault rifle from a bag and opened fire in the LA terminal. He proceeded up to the screening area, shot his way past screeners and into the airport, making it as far as a Burger King restaurant, where he was gunned down by police.

The one fatality has been identified as Gerardo I. Hernandez, a 39-year-old father-of-two who had been working at Los Angeles airport for the past three years.

Victim: Gerardo Hernandez, 39, was killed in the attack on Friday

Friends and family have begun paying their respects to the slain public servant, saying that he was a loving husband and caring father who enjoyed spending his free time with his children.

The shooting makes Hernandez the first TSA agent shot and killed in the line of duty. One of his colleagues- whose name has not been released- was also shot in the Friday rampage but that individual is expected to make a full recovery.

City officials have ordered several tributes be paid to Hernandez across Los Angeles, as the flags at all government-owned buildings in the area will be flown at half mast.

The LAPD chief has also mandated that all police officers wear black bands on their police badges in his honor.

One of the people injured in the shooting spree was Brian Ludmer, a 29-year-old high school teacher from Calabasas, California.

Ludmer was waiting to catch a plane to attend a friend's wedding when he came face to face with the gunman. He turned to run, but was struck in the leg by a bullet.

The teacher was able to drag himself into a closet, where he spent a few minutes hiding until he heard police officers outside.

According to Las Virgenes School Superintendent Dan Stepenosky, the wounded teacher thought he was not going to make it out of LAX alive.

The Los Angeles Times reported that the 29-year-old victim underwent surgery, but is expected to recover.

A federal official said that it was clear from a note that they found in Ciancia's bag at the airport that he expected to die in the standoff.

'This was clearly a suicide mission... he did not expect to walk away from this,' the official told USA Today.

Victim: One of the people injured in the shooting spree was Brian Ludmer, a 29-year-old high school teacher from Calabasas, California, who was struck in the leg

The TSA agent was reportedly killed when the gunman opened fire at the desk where he was checking passengers' passports and boarding cards.

The Los Angeles Times reported that in a note found in his bag, he wrote about his 'disappointment with government' and how he did not intend to injure any civilians, only federal employees.

Witness Stephanie Rosemeyer told the paper that she was waiting to board a flight and was walking near the food court in Terminal 3 when she saw a man carrying a gun walking around while wearing a bulletproof vest.

She said that she locked eyes with the man, who did not appear to be a police officer.

'He looked back at me and said "I don't like this." I took a step toward him,' she told The LA Times.

The man, who is presumably Ciancia, then shouted an expletive about the TSA.

'I decided to walk away, and then I heard gun shots and so I walked faster,' Ms Rosemeyer said.

Waiting for action: At first officers told the people in the terminal to 'get down' and take cover but that quickly progressed into a state of evacuation

Police officers on the scene at LAX next to a gun. One person has been confirmed dead in the shooting

A similar story was told my traveler Leon Saryan who spoke to CNN's Anderson Cooper.

'I was just getting ready to pick up my shoes and belt and pick up my other stuff... (when) people hit the ground and then started to run,' Mr Saryan told CNN.

He said that while he was going to get his shoes taht were waiting on the conveyer belt, a uniformed TSA agent 'grabbed the shoes and the two of us started running down the corridor towards the gate. This agent got hit it seemed to be a grazing wound.'

WHAT DOES NWO MEAN?The motive for the Friday morning shooting has not been confirmed, but a note thought to be written by the gunman is shedding some light on his thought process.

Shooter Paul Anthony Ciancia had 'anti-government' leanings and was reportedly carrying a note which said that he 'wanted to kill TSA and pigs'.

The Los Angeles Times reported that in a note found in his bag, he wrote about his 'disappointment with government' and how he did not intend to injure any civilians, only federal employees.

Sources also added that the note was signed with the letters 'NWO' which stands for 'New World Order'.

The conspiracy theory of a 'new world order' asserts that there is a secret group of powerful individuals who used their money and global influence to eventually gain control of the world.

The concept of the New World Order has many different strains that have evolved over time, and has come to include mysterious elite groups such as the Illuminati and Freemasons.

Some of the more radical conspiracy theorists believe that the secret members of the New World Order will order a coordinated coup d'etat in the United States and other powerful countries using black helicopters and implement a totalitarian regime to control the world.

At that point the agent kept running and seemed fine because the bullet hit him in the shoulder as Mr Saryan huddled in the corner- right when the gunman came up to him.

'(Suspect Paul Ciancia) looked at me and said "TSA?" I just shook my head and he kept going,' Mr Saryan told Anderson Cooper.

'It was kind of hard to see his expression. I was more focused on the weapon.

'If I had a TSA uniform I wouldn't be here talking to you.'

Initial reports said that seven people were injured in the terminal with six transferred to hospital but an afternoon press conference reaffirmed that only three people were injured aside from the male TSA agent who was killed. Three victims were being treated at UCLA Medical Center, where one is listed in critical condition and two others were in fair condition.

Police say the shooter's brother got a text message from Ciancia on Friday saying he was thinking about taking his own life.

According to ABC, Ciancia's brother received a 'worrying' text from him before the shooting, and after that message was relayed to his father, the father called the local police station to warn them of the possible threat to his own life. His father Paul to reached out to local Pennsville police in New Jersey who in turn contacted LA authorities.

Pennsville Police Chief Allen Cummings said he called Los Angeles police, who sent a patrol car to Ciancia's apartment. There, two roommates said that they had seen him a day earlier and he had appeared to be fine.

Cummings said that the Ciancias - owners of an auto body shop - are a 'good family' and that his department had had no dealings with the son.

People who knew Ciancia said they were shocked that he was the alleged gunman.

Ciancia's former roommate in Los Angeles, James Mincey, said he appeared to be unemployed but never showed any disturbing qualities, such as a fascination with guns.

He spoke to Ciancia last week.

'He said he was going back to Jersey, going to work for his dad, and making amends with family problems ... and spending holidays with his family,' Mincey told KABC-TV.

Ciancia had been into a next-door restaurant called The Morrison several times, owner Marc Kreiner said.

'He was kind of a quiet guy, came in mostly by himself,' Kreiner told the Los Angeles Times.

CNN reports that his text to his brother was not the first one that he had sent in recent days that scared family members. In others, which were sent to his brother and father, Ciancia was said to have rambled about his negative outlook on life, his disgust with the government and his disappointment with his life in Los Angeles.

Los Angeles police officers went to Ciancia's apartment in California for a welfare check, and spoke to the 23-year-old's roommate before reporting back to headquarters that there was nothing to be worried about.

LAPD officials called Pennsville police Chief Allen Cummings after making the welfare check and said that everything okay- not knowing that as that phone call was being made, Ciancia had begun opening fire at LAX.

At a lunchtime news conference, LA Mayor Eric Garcetti described it as a 'static' situation with no other threats at the airport. Mayor Garcetti thanked the first responders from multiple law enforcement agencies for their courage. The mayor gave limited information due to the large scale of the ongoing investigation.

During the investigation, being led by the FBI, a large box of ammunition was found on airport grounds.

SWAT teams, bomb disposal and emergency responders rushed to the scene although many vehicles were slowed down by the clogged LA traffic. Dozens of ambulances and fire engines formed lines in front of the terminal building.

Terminal 3 is still on lockdown with the rest of LAX operating at around 50 per cent. Flights continued to take off through terminals 4-8 on the south side of the airport on Friday.

Armed response: The LA Police Department is taking the lead on the investigation but SWAT teams were a major presence in the area as the terminal was being searched after the shooting

Airport authorities encouraged passengers to stay away from LAX this afternoon not because there was any danger but because the ongoing investigation meant that the airport was working at half capacity.

Brian Adamick, 43, who was boarding a Spirit Airlines flight to Chicago told the LA Timessaid people ran screaming through emergency exits on the tarmac away from an area where shots were being fired.

Mr Adamick said buses showed up to evacuate those in the airport - including a TSA agent who had been shot but was reassuring everyone that he was fine.

TV personality Tory Bellecci, who presents Mythbusters, tweeted: 'Heard gun shots then everyone starting running for the door. Not sure if anyone was hurt. #LAX.'

Getting them out: Those injured in the airport attack are escorted to safety

John Forstrom, who was in the terminal at the time, tweeted: '#lax passenger just told us he saw person casually walk into terminal with rifle. Just started shooting.'

Witness Nick Pugh told NBC Los Angeles: 'We were just standing there and someone started shooting. I heard a total of maybe eight or 10 shots fired.'

Fox Sports reporter Bill Reiter who was at terminal tweeted: 'First came the gunfire. Then people including me hiding our seats. It felt very Columbine. A new kind of fear, at least for me.'

Virgin passengers were locked inside the airline's lounge. Mythbusters co-star Grant Imahar tweeted: 'Virgin promptly locked the lounge doors. About ten minutes later, LAPD armed with automatic weapons arrived to secure the area.'

One passenger Billy Bey told CBS2: 'I was waiting for my flight and heard a rumble of people, which I thought was an earthquake, but then I saw people running and heard gun shots, immediately dove under the benches at my gate, and then gunshots stopped and I got up and called my wife.

'Then I saw a man walking towards the gate, when I saw him I thought he was just a passenger looking for his gate, but when he kept walking, I saw he had something looked like an assault rifle, a huge gun strapped over his shoulder, hanging down on the right side of his waist.'

Terrified passengers were escorted to safety after the area was secured, where empty gun cartridges littered the ground. One passenger told NBC he saw a stain on the ground that he thought might be blood.

Map of Los Angeles International Airport where a man opened fire at a TSA checkpoint in Terminal 3

Terminal 3 has a mix of domestic and international flight departures. Los Angeles International is the U.S's third largest airport. AirTran, Alaska, Horizon, JetBlue, V Australia and Virgin America all operate from the terminal.

Last month, an airport employee was arrested in connection with dry ice explosions at LAX. One dry ice bomb exploded and two soda bottles containing the dangerous material were found at Terminal 3 in a restricted area.

More is beginning to emerge about the shooter, painting a picture of the young man who killed the first TSA agent in U.S. history.

Neighbor Whitney Hankins, 18, who went to Pennsville Memorial High School with Ciancia, said the family were very quiet and kept to themselves, especially after the 2009 death of mother Susan, who suffered from MS for years.

'I didn't know him personally as he was a few years older than me,' she told MailOnline. 'But I would see him around school and the neighbourhood. He was kinda strange, very quiet and shy. Wouldn't really make eye contact or talk much.

Passengers wait for Los Angeles International Airport to reopen at Terminal 1 on Friday following a gunman going on a shooting spree at terminal 3

Emergency responders load someone who appears to be injured into an ambulance at LAX International on Friday morning

'Though I would never have expected him to do anything like this. Some of the girls on the street called him ''the creepy guy.'''

Whitney said in the tight-knit, middle-class neighborhood, the Ciancia's house was set back into the woods and was 'humungous' compared to others on the street. A police presence was in front of the New Jersey family home this evening.

Miss Hankins added: 'We just assumed they were really wealthy because they have a really big house compared to the others and his dad owns an auto shop up the street. It's a really small town and everyone knows everyone else's business. But everyone just kind of left them alone after the mom died.'

MOST WATCHED NEWS VIDEOS

MOST READ NEWS

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 21:23

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 21:38

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 16:05

By Fareed Zakaria

The revelations about the U.S. National Security Agency and its spying on foreign '' even allied leaders '' has been embarrassing for the Obama administration at a time when it hardly needs more bad news. Last week, European leaders reacted angrily to claims that the United States had been eavesdropping on calls, including listening in on German Chancellor Angela Merkel's cell phone.

The revelations prompted Merkel to warn relations with the U.S. had been severely shaken. But is all this more than just an embarrassment? And should it raise alarms abroad and at home?

At first glance, this is a story that is less about ethics and more about power '' the great power gap between the United States and other countries, even rich European ones. The most illuminating response to the revelations came from Bernard Kouchner, formerly the foreign minister of France. He said in a radio interview: "Let's be honest, we eavesdrop too. Everyone is listening to everyone else." Kouchner went on to add "we don't have the same means as the United States, which makes us jealous."

America spends tens of billions of dollars on intelligence collection. It's hard to get the data to make good comparisons, but it's safe to assume that Washington's intelligence budget dwarfs that of other countries just as it does with defense spending.

It has seemed particularly strange that this rift should develop between the United States and its closest allies in Europe. But it was predictable and in fact, in a sense, predicted.

More from GPS: Intelligence situation unacceptable

In 2002, the British diplomat Robert Cooper wrote an influential essay in which he argued that Europe had become a "postmodern" international system in which force was no longer a serious option. Instead, economic interdependence and cooperation were the governing ideas of statecraft. And certainly when one looks at the European Union, this does seem to describe its reality. The prospect of war between France and Germany '' which had gone to war three times between 1870 and 1950 '' seems utterly impossible.

But outside of Europe, the world is not post-modern. Cooper argues that the solution is "double standards." Within Europe, one set of rules. Outside it, he recommends ''rougher methods of an earlier era '' force, preemptive attack, deception, whatever is necessary.''

''Among ourselves we keep the law, but when operating in the jungle, we must use the laws of the jungle,'' Cooper wrote in Re-Ordering the World.

This is what was violated by the NSA activities. Washington was playing by the laws of the jungle, but inside Europe's system. Partly this is because the distinction is not easy to maintain: what if you're looking for terrorists within Europe, that is, people who still play by the laws of the jungle '' or even worse.

More from CNN: 5 things to know

America as a global power is operating all over the world, trying to tackle some of the nastiest threats out there. Perhaps it doesn't have the luxury to retreat to a garden and renounce nasty tactics. If it did, it's not likely that China, Russia, Iran '' not to mention al Qaeda '' would follow suit.

But precisely because Washington has to get its hands dirty, it should be smart about this. The rewards of spying on friendly heads of government are probably outweighed by the risks. And most troubling, it's not clear that many of these specific activities were clearly thought through and directed by the White House. Nor do they appear to have been vetted by Congress. At least, not thoroughly enough.

In the wake of 9/11, America got scared and dropped any sense of constraints on its intelligence activities. It is not an accident that the eavesdropping on Chancellor Merkel began in 2002. But the fact that technology now allows the NSA to do anything doesn't mean it should do everything. We need a better and clearer set of rules for intelligence activity. And we need confidence that these rules are being followed and observed.

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 16:11

CTV British ColumbiaPublished Monday, November 4, 2013 10:09PM PSTLast Updated Monday, November 4, 2013 10:12PM PST

A Langley elementary school has banned kindergarten students from touching each other at recess, a policy some parents think is both unnecessary and unworkable.

Mom Julie Chen said she was shocked when she received a letter sent home with Coghlan Fundamental Elementary students on Friday outlining the new hands-off rule.

''I can't imagine little kids not being able to hug each other or help each other on the playground,'' Chen told CTV News. ''No tag, no hugging, no touching at all.''

The letter blames the ban on playground injuries that have resulted from games and other forms of hands-on play during recess.

It calls on parents to talk to their children about the ban and encourage them to play imaginary games that don't involve fighting.

''We will have a zero-tolerance policy with regards to hands-on play, resulting in the missing of playtime and trips to the office for those who are unable to follow the rules,'' it reads.

School district spokesman Ken Hoff said Coghlan Fundamental was simply responding to parents' complaints about rough play during recess, and that students won't be severally penalized for slipping up.

''It wasn't meant to be an instantaneous situation where the hammer is just going to drop if a child touches another child,'' Hoff said. ''I think what it was meant to convey is we are taking the issue seriously.''

Hoff said the school intends to start from a zero-touching approach and gradually reintroduce appropriate playground behaviour.

Parents like Chen feel it's still too extreme.

''I get that kids have to have rules but at some point, where do we draw the line?'' she said. ''I am not going to tell my daughter she can't touch her friends at school. I am going to teach her boundaries.''

With a report from CTV British Columbia's Shannon Paterson

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 21:40

Updated 5:25 a.m. ET

PARAMUS, N.J. A gunman fired at least six rounds into an escalator near closing time in a popular northern New Jersey mall Monday evening before taking his own life, authorities said.

Bergen County, N.J. prosecutor John Molinelli told reporters early Tuesday the body of Richard Shoop, 20, of Washington Township, N.J., was found behind a construction storage area of the Westfield Garden State Plaza Mall in Paramus.

It doesn't appear Shoop entered the mall to shoot anyone because had ample opportunity to but didn't, Molinelli says, adding that Shoop's motive seems to have been self-inflicted suicide or suicide-by-police - ending his life at the hands of officers.

Molinelli says Shoop's family told police Shoop had a history of drug abuse, and relatives believe MDMA was his drug of choice.

A note was recovered at Shoops' home, Molinelli says, but authorities aren't calling it a suicide note or disclosing its content.

Shoop's body and the gun were still at the scene early Tuesday, Milinelli said. The weapon looks like an AK-47 assault rifle but may have been a modified handgun.

Shoop appears to have stolen it from his brother, Molinelli said.

Shoop wore a black outfit with a black motorcycle helmet, and fired the rounds into an escalator.

Shoppers and mall workers, who'd hid in stores and anywhere else they could when the shots rang out, were leaving throughout the night via a Chili's restaurant at a parking lot adjacent to the mall. It was unlikely any were still in the mall, Molinelli said.

The mall was to be closed Tuesday.

A woman who works at a store in the mall told CBS New York station WCBS-TV she saw a man carrying a rifle.

"I saw him walk past our door, and he paused for a second and just looked inside the store, and he fired two more (shots)," she said. "He was all dressed in black from head to toe with a helmet, I would say with a motorcycle helmet. I just froze. I didn't want to run, because he might maybe come after me. I just stood there."

A witness tweeted that the shooting occurred by Nordstrom department store on the second floor.

"As I was closing the store, I heard these loud fire-cracking noises. I never heard a gunshot before," an employee at the Michael Kors store who gave his name as Adam told WCBS radio. "I had a customer that shopped before, and she was running back into the store and saying, 'Someone has a gun.' So automatically, I ... started locking the gate and told the staff to go to the back with the customers even in the store."

Link to Article

Archived Version

Tue, 05 Nov 2013 21:55

Copy

Close

Link to this video

Copy

Close

Embed this video

Next video starts in 5 seconds

'); nbcVideoPageUtils.player442('videoStill'+nbcVideoPageUtils.videoStillSeq, videoIDString, width, height, thisTitle, playertype); nbcVideoPageUtils.videoStillSeq+=1; } } else { jQuery('#featuredPlayerContainer').html(''); nbcVideoPageUtils.player442('featuredPlayer'+nbcVideoPageUtils.videoStillSeq,videoIDForThePlatform,625,352); nbcVideoPageUtils.videoStillSeq+=1; s.pageName = nbcVideoPageUtils.currentClipTitle; //s.tl(); } } });} nbcVideoPageUtils.mobileStart = function() { nbcVideoPageUtils.hasMobileStarted = true; var now = jQuery.now(); // Parameter string for HTML5 Omniture Beacon //var hlsAdditionalTrackingValues="|trackVars=eVar11,eVar12,eVar13,eVar14,eVar27,eVar36,eVar37,eVar38,eVar39,eVar40,eVar41,eVar42,eVar43,eVar45,eVar47,eVar48,eVar50,prop2,prop8,prop9,prop20,prop42,prop43,prop44,prop45,prop46,prop50,products,eVar9,eVar10|trackEvents=event20,event21,event22,event23,event24,event25,event26,event27,event28,event29,event30,event31,event81,event82,event70,event71,event72,event73,event74,event75,event76,event77,event78,event79,event80|prop2=|prop8=|prop9=|eVar9="+nbc.siteKey+"|eVar10="+nbc.callLetters+"|prop20="+nbcVideoPageUtils.RSID+"|eVar36=Video|eVar27=Flash|eVar37="+nbcVideoPageUtils.currentClipTitle+"|eVar39=Video Player|eVar41=|eVar42=|eVar45="+nbc.brand+"|eVar47=normal|prop50="+nbcVideoPageUtils.currentClipTitle+"|eVar48=fullplayer|eVar42=|a.media.name=eVar40|mediaCategoryVars=eVar36|mediaIdVars=eVar50|trackMilestones=25%25,50%25,75%25|pageName=" + nbcu.pageName; player = new Player("featuredPlayer"); player.fp.bgcolor = "0x131313"; player.fp.wmode = "opaque"; player.logLevel = "warn"; player.allowFullScreen = "true"; // Cypress Omniture Plugin //player.pluginOmniture = "type=tracking|priority=1|URL=/includes/omnitureMedia.js|account="+ mmModule.omni +"|jsInstanceName=nbcu|visitorNamespace=nbcuniversal|dc=122|host=oimg.nbcuni.com|secureHost=osimg.nbcuni.com" + hlsAdditionalTrackingValues; if(nbc.htmlPreroll == true) { try { player.pluginTremor = "type=adcomponent|URL=http://objects.tremormedia.com/embed/sjs/html5/plugins/theplatform/tpAcudeoPlugIn.js|policy="+nbc.tremorHTMLKey+"|contentData.videoDescriptionUrl="+nbcVideoPageUtils.videoSocialShare+"|contentData.AdUnit1stLevel="+nbc.gptParams.suitename+"|contentData.AdUnit2nd-5thLevel="+nbc.gptParams.gptZone+"|contentData.videoplatform=html5|contentData.feature="+nbc.gptParams.pageData.feature+"|contentData.contentid="+nbcVideoPageUtils.videoMediaId+"|contentData.pagetype="+nbc.gptParams.pageData.pagetype+"|contentData.sponsor="+nbc.gptParams.pageData.sponsor+"|contentData.pt="+nbc.omniture.playerType+"|contentData.stage="+nbc.gptParams.pageData.stage+"|contentData.sensitive="+nbc.gptParams.pageData.sensitive+"|contentData.nopreroll="+nbcVideoPageUtils.runpreroll+"|contentData.adtest="+nbc.gptParams.pageData.adtest+"|contentData.TIMESTAMP="+now; console.warn("nbcVideoPageUtils.mobileStart | Tremor HTML5 plugin active."); } catch(e) { alert("nbcVideoPageUtils.mobileStart | Tremor HTML5 plugin failure"); } } player.pluginConviva="type=reporting|url=http://livepassdl.conviva.com/thePlatform/ConvivaThePlatformPlugin.js|customerId=c3.TP-NbcUniversal|priority=3|cdnName=AKAMAI|serviceUrl=http%3A%2F%2Flivepass.conviva.com"; player.playerURL = location.href; // DO NOT TOUCH player.backgroundColor = "0x131313"; player.controlBackgroundColor = "0x131313"; player.controlColor = "0xBEBEBE"; player.controlFrameColor = "0x545759"; player.controlHoverColor = "0xBEBEBE"; player.controlSelectedColor = "0x00CCFF"; player.frameColor = "0x545759"; player.pageBackgroundColor = "0x131313"; player.playProgressColor = "0x00CCFF"; player.scrubberColor = "0xBEBEBE"; player.scrubberFrameColor = "0x00CCFF"; player.scrubTrackColor = "0xBEBEBE"; player.textBackgroundColor = "0x383838"; player.textColor = "0xBEBEBE"; player.loadProgressColor = "0x5D9070"; player.layoutUrl = "/templates/nbc_mobileplayer_layout"; player.skinUrl = nbc.fullDomain + '/assets/pdk449/pdk/skins/glass/glass.json'; player.showControlsBeforeVideo=true; // player.releaseUrl = "http://link.theplatform.com/s/Yh1nAC/clAU8uFm7yvfj2f8obA6MT06FQXbWr2e?mbr=true&manifest=m3u&assetTypes=LegacyRelease"; player.releaseUrl = "http://link.theplatform.com/s/Yh1nAC/"+nbcVideoPageUtils.forcedCorrectPid+"?manifest=m3u&format=SMIL"; player.autoPlay = false; player.useDefaultPlayOverlay = true; player.bind("featuredPlayer"); U.log("VIDEO PAGE FEATURE | "+ player.releaseUrl); U.log("VIDEO PAGE FEATURE | iOS player configuration complete!"); }NBCUOmniture.initialize('nbcu');nbcVideoPageUtils.videoReplay = function(targetScope) { nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue = 4; try { U.log("Attempting to clear timer."); clearTimeout(startTimer); clearInterval(ecCountdown); } catch(e) { U.log(e); U.log("Timer not present, moving on..."); } if(targetScope == null) { targetScope == "*"; U.log("nbcVideoPageUtils.videoReplay: WARNING: Scope not defined, defaulting to wildcard.") } jQuery('#endcard').fadeOut(); if($('.shareLink').hasClass('active')){ $('.shareLink').removeClass('active'); $('.linkBox').fadeOut('fast'); $('.linkBox .zclip').remove(); } if($('.shareEmbed').hasClass('active')){ $('.shareEmbed').removeClass('active'); $('.embedBox').fadeOut('fast'); $('.embedBox .zclip').remove(); } tpController.clickPlayButton(targetScope);}nbcVideoPageUtils.resetPreroll = function() { var content = { id:nbcVideoPageUtils.videoReleaseId, title:nbcVideoPageUtils.currentClipTitle, site:nbc.siteKey, zone:nbc.zone, descriptionUrl:location.href, sect:nbc.section, sub:"", contentgroup:nbcVideoPageUtils.currentClipAdCampaign, pid:nbcVideoPageUtils.currentClipContentCode, hascompanion:"companion", companionexists:true, pt:'fullplayer', videoDescriptionUrl:nbcVideoPageUtils.videoSocialShare, catetory:'fullplayer' } try { if(console) { console.warn("Attempting to re-write Tremor plugin data..."); } AcudeoSetContentData(content); } catch(e) { if(console) { console.warn("nbcVideoPageUtils.resetPreroll | Call to AcudeoSetContentData(content) | " + e); } }}// START SOCIALIZE SHARE BAR ON ENDCARDfunction socializeEndcardShare(choseVideoUrl,choseOldSchoolUrl,choseCmsId,choseVideoTitle) { var uaEndcard = new gigya.socialize.UserAction(); var videoSummary = $(".feature_summary_top").find(".summary").text() // If oldschool url is not loaded from bottom list of videos // Then assumed it's the right-rail list of videos if (choseOldSchoolUrl == null || choseOldSchoolUrl == ""){ choseOldSchoolUrl = $("#featuredSummaryShare").find("span.featureContentOldSchoolUrl").html(); } var activityContext = new Object(); activityContext["ACTION_CONTEXT"] = "video_hub_endcard"; activityContext["ACTION_CONTENT_ID"] = choseCmsId; activityContext["ACTION_CONTENT_TITLE"] = encodeURI(choseVideoTitle); activityContext["ACTION_CONTENT_LINK"] = encodeURI(choseOldSchoolUrl); activityContext["ACTION_CONTENT_DESCRIPTION"] = encodeURI(videoSummary); activityContext["ACTION_ACTIVITY_FEED_ID"] = "www.nbcwashington.com_2"; activityContext["USER_ACTION"] = uaEndcard; uaEndcard.setLinkBack(choseOldSchoolUrl); uaEndcard.setTitle(choseVideoTitle); // Define Share Bar plugin's Parameters var breadCrumbSection = $("#videoHeaderBreadcrumb a:nth-child(3)").text(); if(breadCrumbSection == "sounddiego"){ var twitterHandle = "SoundDiegoblog"; } else if(nbc.market == "nbcmiami"){ var twitterHandle = "nbc6"; } else{ var twitterHandle = nbc.market; }; var endcardShareParams ={ userAction:uaEndcard, shareButtons:[{provider:"facebook-like",tooltip:"Recommend this on Facebook",action:"recommend",width:"160",font:"arial"},{provider:"twitter-tweet",via:twitterHandle,defaultText:window.document.title,countURL:encodeURI(choseOldSchoolUrl)},{provider:"google-plusone",size:"medium"}], containerID:'socialEndcardButtons' // location of the Share Bar plugin } // Load Share Bar plugin showShareBar(endcardShareParams,activityContext);}// END SOCIALIZE SHARE BAR ON ENDCARDnbcVideoPageUtils.goToNextClip = function(evt) { console.warn("nbcVideoPageUtils.goToNextClip: Is it an ad?"+evt.data.baseClip.isAd); if(evt.data.baseClip.isAd == false) { U.log("start timer "+startTimer); if( startTimer == 1 ) { if(jQuery('#feature_rr_list > li.next_playing').length > 0) { nextUpThumbnail = jQuery('#feature_rr_list > li.next_playing img').attr('src'); jQuery('div.nextUpThumbnail').css({'background-image':'url('+nextUpThumbnail+')'}); nextUpCopy = jQuery('#feature_rr_list > li.next_playing span.feature_rr_item_desc').html(); jQuery('div.nextUpInfo').html(nextUpCopy); jQuery("#endcard").fadeIn("fast"); socializeEndcardShare(); startTimeMS = (new Date()).getTime(); nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue = 4; timerStep = 5000; startTimer = setTimeout("nbcVideoPageUtils.triggerNextClip()",5000); ecCountdown = setInterval("nbcVideoPageUtils.endcardCountdown()",1000); } else { jQuery('div.nextUp').hide(); jQuery('div.countdownContainer').hide(); jQuery("#endcard").fadeIn("fast"); socializeEndcardShare(); } } else { if(jQuery('#feature_rr_list > li.next_playing').length > 0) { nextUpThumbnail = jQuery('#feature_rr_list > li.next_playing img').attr('src'); jQuery('div.nextUpThumbnail').css({'background-image':'url('+nextUpThumbnail+')'}); nextUpCopy = jQuery('#feature_rr_list > li.next_playing span.feature_rr_item_desc').html(); jQuery('div.nextUpInfo').html(nextUpCopy); startTimeMS = (new Date()).getTime(); timerStep = 5000; startTimer = setTimeout("nbcVideoPageUtils.triggerNextClip()",5000); } else { jQuery('div.nextUp').hide(); jQuery('div.countdownContainer').hide(); } jQuery("#endcard").fadeIn("fast"); socializeEndcardShare(); forceEventHandlers(); /* if(timerPaused == false){ timerEventsOn(); }*/ embeddedPlayerHTML = ''+'var nbcLP={};nbcLP.aRandomNumber=Math.floor(Math.random()*10000);nbcLP.currentPageLoc=encodeURIComponent(window.location.href);nbcLP.currentSiteLoc=encodeURIComponent(window.location.host);nbcLP.defaultWidth=652;nbcLP.defaultHeight=367;nbcLP.cmsID="'+videoReleaseID+'";nbcLP.vidPid="'+nbcVideoPageUtils.currentClipPlatformPid+'";nbcLP.vidSec="TK";nbcLP.vidSubSec="TK";nbcLP.vidFrame=document.getElementById("nbcLP'+videoReleaseID+'");nbcLP.vidFrame.style.border="none";nbcLP.vidFrame.width=nbcLP.defaultWidth;nbcLP.vidFrame.height=nbcLP.defaultHeight;nbcLP.vidFrame.scrolling="no";nbcLP.vidFrame.src="http://'+nbc.env+nbc.domain+'/templates/nbc_partner_player?cmsID="+nbcLP.cmsID+"&videoID="+nbcLP.vidPid+"&width="+nbcLP.defaultWidth+"&height="+nbcLP.defaultHeight+"&sec="+nbcLP.vidSec+"&subsec="+nbcLP.vidSubSec+"&turl="+nbcLP.currentSiteLoc+"&ourl="+nbcLP.currentPageLoc+"&rand="+nbcLP.aRandomNumber;'+'ipt>'; // embeddedPlayerHTML = 'View more videos at: http://nbcwashington.com.

'; jQuery('.shareBoxes .linkBox fieldset').html(''+nbcVideoPageUtils.videoSocialShare+''); jQuery('.shareBoxes .embedBox fieldset').html(''+embeddedPlayerHTML+''); jQuery('#endcard div.countdownContainer span.countdown').html('05'); if(jQuery('#feature_rr_list > li.next_playing').length > 0) { ecCountdown = setInterval("nbcVideoPageUtils.endcardCountdown()",1000); } // dont put parsing of Social Widgets - WE have all together in one function } }}nbcVideoPageUtils.triggerNextClip = function() { try { U.log("Attempting to clear timer."); clearTimeout(startTimer); clearInterval(ecCountdown); } catch(e) { U.log(e); U.log("Timer not present, moving on..."); } U.log("Jump to next clip here."); try { triggerNextVideoTarget = jQuery('li.next_playing > a').attr('id'); jQuery('#'+triggerNextVideoTarget).trigger('click','autoplay'); jQuery('#'+triggerNextVideoTarget).trigger('click','autoplay'); jQuery("#endcard").fadeOut("slow"); //timerEventsOff(); if($('.shareLink').hasClass('active')){ $('.shareLink').removeClass('active'); $('.linkBox').fadeOut('fast'); $('.linkBox .zclip').remove(); } if($('.shareEmbed').hasClass('active')){ $('.shareEmbed').removeClass('active'); $('.embedBox').fadeOut('fast'); $('.embedBox .zclip').remove(); } } catch(e) { alert(e); }}nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue = 4;nbcVideoPageUtils.endcardCountdown = function() { if(nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue > 0) { U.log(nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue); if(nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue > 4) { jQuery('#endcard div.countdownContainer span.countdown').text(nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue); } else { jQuery('#endcard div.countdownContainer span.countdown').text('0'+nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue); } nbcVideoPageUtils.countdownValue-=1; } else { clearInterval(ecCountdown); U.log("Clear"); }}jQuery(document).ready(function() { if (navigator.userAgent.match(/like Mac OS X/i)) { // DO NOTHING } else { tpController.addEventListener("OnMediaEnd","nbcVideoPageUtils.goToNextClip"); } $('#endcard').css({'visibility':'visible','display':'none'}); $('.linkBox').css({'visibility':'visible','display':'none'}); $('.embedBox').css({'visibility':'visible','display':'none'});});//Timer pause functions for embed and link popupspauseTimer = function(){ clearTimeout(startTimer); clearInterval(ecCountdown); timerCount=0; remainingTime = timerStep - ((new Date()).getTime() - startTimeMS); timerStep = remainingTime; timerPaused = true;};resumeTimer = function(){ if (!timerCount){ timerCount=1; timerPaused = false; startTimeMS = (new Date()).getTime(); startTimer = setTimeout("nbcVideoPageUtils.triggerNextClip()",remainingTime); ecCountdown = setInterval("nbcVideoPageUtils.endcardCountdown()",1000); }}//Pause and resume timer on window blur and focus (ie Facebook/Twitter login)var isIE = (navigator.appName == "Microsoft Internet Explorer");function timerEventsOn(){ if (isIE){ document.onfocusout = function(){pauseTimer();} document.onfocusin = function(){resumeTimer();} } else{ window.onblur = function(){pauseTimer();} window.onfocus = function(){resumeTimer();} }}function timerEventsOff(){ if (isIE){ document.onfocusout = null; document.onfocusin = null; } else{ window.onblur = null; window.onfocus = null; }}//]]>