Translate

Thursday, October 31, 2013

NSA: New reports in German media deepen US-Merkel spy row

NSA: New reports in German media deepen US-Merkel spy row

The US embassy (R) is seen next to the landmark Brandenburg Gate in Berlin (25 October 2013)The US embassy, near Berlin's Brandenburg Gate, was used to monitor communications, the documents suggest
Fresh reports in German media based on leaked US intelligence documents are prompting damaging new questions about the extent of US surveillance.
Der Spiegel suggests the US has been spying on German Chancellor Angela Merkel's mobile phone since 2002.
Another report says Mr Obama was told in 2010 about the surveillance and failed to stop it.
The spy row has led to one of the worst diplomatic crises between the two countries in recent times.
Leaked documents say a US listening unit was based in its Berlin embassy - and similar operations were replicated in 80 locations around the world.
The German interior minister has been quoted as saying such an operation, if confirmed, would be illegal.
On Friday, Germany and France said they wanted the US to sign a no-spy deal by the end of the year.
As well as the bugging of Mrs Merkel's phone, there are claims the NSA has monitored millions of telephone calls made by German and French citizens.
'Obama's green light'
Der Spiegel claims to have seen secret documents from the National Security Agency which show Mrs Merkel's number on a list dating from 2002 - three years before she became chancellor.
This might indicate that there was extensive bugging of the phones of prominent people, says the BBC's Stephen Evans in Berlin.
File photo of U.S. President Barack Obama chatting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel after their speeches at the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, June 19, 2013. Relations between the two leaders have been warm
The nature of the monitoring of Mrs Merkel's mobile phone is not clear from the files, Der Spiegel says.
For example, it is possible that the chancellor's conversations were recorded, or that her contacts were simply assessed.

Analysis

By all accounts, Angela Merkel has been genuinely shocked by the revelations. People close to her told the BBC she felt personally affronted. When Barack Obama was in Berlin in June, they did seem to get on well. She is not good at hiding her feelings, and the glum scowl she used to reserve for Silvio Berlusconi, for example, was replaced by a beam of warmth. They were tactile - he would put his arm round her back; she would clutch his elbow. Perhaps the sense of betrayal is all the greater because of her background in the East German communist regime where spying was pervasive. She might have expected it from the Stasi but not from her new best friend.
Others might feel betrayed, too. When the original allegations of widespread phone-tapping emerged, some of Chancellor Merkel's confidantes belittled the problem, saying the criticism of the US had a touch of anti-Americanism and that the surveillance was about terrorism.
These people are now some of the strongest critics of the US. They are also saying that German law has been broken. If the activities of American government employees were investigated by the German authorities, that would make the whole affair harder to damp down. It would be in the system of justice and pursuit would be relentless.
Mrs Merkel phoned the US president when she first heard of the spying allegations on Wednesday.
President Barack Obama apologised to the German chancellor and promised Mrs Merkel he knew nothing of the alleged phone monitoring and would have stopped it if he had, Der Spiegel reports.
But on Sunday Bild newspaper quoted US intelligence sources as saying NSA head Keith Alexander personally briefed the president about the covert operation targeting Mrs Merkel in 2010.
"Obama did not halt the operation but rather let it continue," the newspaper quoted a senior NSA official as saying.
Her number was still on a surveillance list in 2013.
Germany is sending its top intelligence chiefs to Washington in the coming week to "push forward" an investigation into the spying allegations, which have caused outrage in Germany.
Criminal investigation?
The documents seen by Der Spiegel give further details about the NSA's targeting of European governments.
A unit called Special Collection Services, based on the fourth floor of the US embassy in Pariser Platz in Berlin, was responsible for monitoring communications in the German capital's government quarter, including those targeting Mrs Merkel.
Germany's Interior Minister Hans-Peter Friedrich told Bild that running such an operation on German soil would be illegal under German law, and adds that those "responsible must be held accountable".
Similar listening units were based in around 80 locations worldwide, according to the documents seen by Der Spiegel, 19 of them in European cities.
If the existence of listening stations in US embassies were known, there would be "severe damage for the US's relations with a foreign government," the documents said.
Mrs Merkel - an Americophile who was awarded the US Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2011 - is said to be shocked that Washington may have engaged in the sort of spying she had to endure growing up in Communist East Germany.

More on This Story

Monday, October 28, 2013

Stop Watching Us rally in D.C. was the biggest anti-NSA event yet


pCk1dri.jpg (1024×512)

Thousands of privacy advocates showed up in Washington, D.C. Saturday to protest the National Security Agency and its perceived unconstitutional and unchecked surveillance of Americans and the world.
Organized by a who’s who of Internet and privacy activists under a coalition called Stop Watching Us, the rally was ostensibly to protest the 12th anniversary of the Patriot Act. Passed in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, the Patriot Act was interpreted by secret courts to allow the NSA to keep records of essentially every American phone call.
Really, the rally was an excuse for a public still angry with the NSA—and with Congress and President Obama for not yet tempering the agency in the more than four months since its controversial surveillance programs became public—to make some noise. It was the third Stop Watching Us protest, and the first to concentrate its efforts in a single city.
“They’re spying on us. It’s time to stop the spying,” a middle-aged Kentuckian protester named Ralph Smith told the Daily Dot. “I want the Fourth Amendment back. “
The rally started outside D.C.’s Union Station. There, the crowd listened to Bruce Schneier, one of the world’s foremost experts on cybersecurity, address the NSA’s capabilities. 
“The NSA has turned the Internet into a giant surveillance platform,” Schneier said. “We know this platform is robust. It’s robust technically. It’s robust legally. It’s robust politically.”
From there, the crowd marched the half mile to the Capitol Reflecting Pool. In front of the very building where Congress passed the Patriot Act, a host of some of the most prominent privacy experts and NSA critics, including NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake, lawyer Jesselyn Radack, and civil libertarian congressman Justin Amash (R-Mich.), took turns speaking.
“I had no idea what to expect. The country’s so virtual these days that the number of signatures and people who are going to show up could be widely different,” Schneier told the Daily Dot. “I’ve never seen so many people on one of my issues.”
The rally brought out all kinds: young and old, libertarians and progressives. Some dressed in costume—Guy Fawkes masks, clean suits with aviators,paper mache cameras on their heads—but most seemed like everyday Americans. Everyone seemed to echo the same basic sentiments: that the NSA’s vast technical capabilities are terrifying, but its practice of collecting the world’s communications metadata is even more upsetting, and possibly a violation of the Constitution.
The man responsible for revealing those capabilities, former NSA contractorEdward Snowden, has clearly become a folk hero to the privacy crowd. Scores of protesters held up signs with Snowden’s face, with the message “Thank you, Edward Snowden!” Some held life-size paper cutouts of Snowden’s face over their own, and cheers went up every time any speaker mentioned his name. Snowden’s father, Lon, who has become a celebrity in this world, stood to the side of the stage. He carried a homemade poster of his son’s face, but otherwise kept a low profile.
The event concluded with Rep. Amash symbolically receiving 12 boxes of signed petitions against the NSA—575,000 signatures—from Stop Watching Us, which he plans to deliver to Congress. 
“We’re going to keep fighting and we’re going to keep fighting and we’re going to pass something to rein in the NSA. But let me tell you, the NSA is fighting back,” Amash said. “We need you to speak up, to stand up, to call your representatives. I can't tell you how much of a difference it makes when you call people in Congress.”
Amash told the Daily Dot that Congress’ current best hope of limiting the NSA’s domestic spying powers is the USA Freedom Act. The bill, written by Patriot Act architect turned NSA reformer Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), could be introduced in the House as early as Tuesday.

Sunday, October 27, 2013

TIME Interview with Mike Bloomberg



TIME Interview with Mike Bloomberg




TIME Magazine Cover, October 21, 2013
Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/10/time-interview-with-mike-bloomberg/#ixzz2iztdoM4n
Mike Bloomberg is about to be unemployed for the second time in his professional life. The first was in August of 1981, when Saloman Brothers fired Bloomberg from the only full-time job he had ever known. The second time will be January 1, 2014, when he hands control of New York City over to the next mayor.
The cover story of this week’s TIME magazine is about what Bloomberg will do next, with a clear focus on his enormous wealth and his determination to spend it down changing the world to fit his vision. We live now in a new age of mega-philanthropy, when newly minted billionaires have enormous powers to influence politics and how we live our lives. To report the story, I travelled in late September with Bloomberg to Paris and London, where he reviewed grant proposals and launched new philanthropic efforts and met with British Prime Minister David Cameron.
Below are some additional excerpts from Bloomberg’s conversation with TIME in London.
On what he will do next:
I’ve said I’m not a consultant. I would want to own the company. I’m not a teacher. I want to learn, but that’s not my bag. I’m not an investor. I delegate that to others. I’m not an author. I wrote one book, did a book party, know what it’s like. I wrote every word in the book no matter what anybody says. But I’ve done it once. I want to do things. And I think the first answer to your questions is if you came to me and said, “I’m just retired or lost my job or whatever. What should I do?” My answer is wait a little while, a couple of months, and see what’s out there because of the things that will become available to you that you never ever even remotely thought about. And it would be a shame to commit yourself. And whatever’s available to you day one is going to be available two months later if it isn’t “So what?”
On how he approaches philanthropy:
I want to work on those things that others aren’t working on, where you can really make an impact and you can do groundbreaking work or set up the world for the next philanthropist or innovator to come along. So for example, smoking, nobody was working on that. AIDS lots of people are working on, but nobody’s working on obesity. Nobody’s working on traffic deaths. Malaria, yes, there are other people doing it, but at Johns Hopkins we’re trying to build a better mosquito, one that will drive out the old one but doesn’t carry the parasite.  With [Bill] Gates, on polio I gave him $100 million. I gave him an award the other day, the Lasker Award, he and Melinda, and he had sent me an email. We had talked about polio before. It’s down to three countries: Nigeria, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. We’ve had 40-odd workers who have been giving out vaccine killed so far working on this project. If you could stamp out polio, it wouldn’t come back. If you don’t stamp it out, it will catch on, like tuberculosis is — in Africa tuberculosis all of a sudden has reared its head. It’s a disaster. All of a sudden. If you can — and why not do that when there’s plenty of money? Because a lot of people will be afraid to go in with the dangers and the fact that that last three countries is going to cost a half a billion dollars.
On the resistance to his efforts:
None of these fights are going to be easy. If it was easy, we wouldn’t have to have a fight. It would have been done a long time ago. But all of these things. Yes, the tobacco companies are strong. Yes, now they’re attacking with e-cigarettes, which are not great for you, incidentally. Don’t smoke them. Or obesity with full-sugar drinks and fast food cultures and that sort of thing. Okay, you know, if it was easy, it would have been solved and I wouldn’t be attacking it. These are good problems to have. And nobody thinks you’re going to win all the time. But just take a look. Gay marriage is as good an example as any. There’s a whole bunch of states now. And background checks for internet and gun show sales on guns, 15 states now have background checks. And in every one of those states, the suicide rate’s half the national average. It’s fascinating. Suicide, you have to get a gun quickly. There’s fewer guns on the streets. Chances are you don’t find the gun. You don’t commit suicide. You say, “I’ll do it tomorrow.” And you never get around to it, okay?


Read more: http://swampland.time.com/2013/10/10/time-interview-with-mike-bloomberg/#ixzz2iztVuW3d

Protests Over Brazilian Oil Auction Rock Rio

As international oil companies bid for rights to explore a vast oil field off the Brazilian coast at an auction in a swanky Rio de Janeiro hotel, protesters massed outside and clashed with police. They were angry at the state selling off national assets to outside interests rather than licensing it to the country’s own companies.


Read more: http://world.time.com/2013/10/21/protests-over-brazilian-oil-auction-rock-rio/#ixzz2izsmSinq

Economist Caution: Prepare For 'Massive Wealth Destruction'

Economist Caution: Prepare For 'Massive Wealth Destruction'
Sunday, 27 Oct 2013 02:47 AM
Share:
More . . .
A    A   |
   Email Us   |
   Print   |
"Take immediate steps to protect your wealth . . . NOW!"

That’s exactly what many well-respected economists, billionaires, and noted authors are telling you to do — experts such as Marc Faber, Peter Schiff, Donald Trump, and Robert Wiedemer. According to them, we are on the verge of another recession, and this one will be far worse than what we experienced during the last financial crisis.

Marc Faber, the noted Swiss economist and investor, has voiced his concerns for the U.S. economy numerous times during recent media appearances, stating, “I think somewhere down the line we will have a massive wealth destruction. I would say that well-to-do people may lose up to 50 percent of their total wealth.”

When he was asked what sort of odds he put on a global recession happening, the economist famous for his ominous predictions quickly answered . . . “100 percent.”

Faber points out that this bleak outlook stems directly from Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke’s policy decisions, and the continuous printing of new money, referred to as “quantitative easing” in the media.

Faber’s pessimism is matched by well-respected economist and investor Peter Schiff, the CEO of Euro Pacific Capital. Schiff remarks that the stock market collapse we experienced in 2008 “wasn’t the real crash. The real crash is coming.”

Schiff didn’t stop there. Most alarming is his belief that daily life will get dramatically worse for U.S. citizens.

“If we keep doing this policy of stimulus and growing government, it’s just going to get worse for the average American. Our standard of living is going to fall . . . People who are expecting Social Security can’t get all that money. People expecting government pensions can’t get all their money . . . We simply can’t afford to pay them.”

Equally critical of the current government and our nation’s economy is real estate mogul and entrepreneur Donald Trump, who is warning that the United States could soon become a large-scale Spain or Greece, teetering on the edge of financial ruin.

Trump doesn’t hesitate to point out America’s unhealthy dependence on China. “When you’re not rich, you have to go out and borrow money. We’re borrowing from the Chinese and others.”

It is this massive debt that worries Trump the most.

“We are going up to $16 trillion [in debt] very soon, and it’s going to be a lot higher than that before he gets finished,” Trump says, referring to President Barack Obama. “When you have [debt] in the $21-$22 trillion [range], you are talking about a [credit] downgrade no matter how you cut it.”

In a recent appearance, Trump went to so far as to say the dollar is “going to hell.”

Where Trump, Faber, and Schiff see rising debt, a falling dollar, and a plunging stock market, investment adviser and author Robert Wiedemer sees much more widespread economic destruction.

In a recent interview to talk about his New York Times best-seller Aftershock, Wiedemer says, “The data is clear, 50 percent unemployment, a 90 percent stock market drop, and 100 percent annual inflation… starting in 2013.”

Editor’s NoteWatch the disturbing interview with Wiedemer.

Before you dismiss Wiedemer’s claims as impossible or unrealistic, consider this: In 2006, Wiedemer and a team of economists accurately predicted the collapse of the U.S. housing market, equity markets, and consumer spending that almost sank the United States. They published their research in the book America’s Bubble Economy.

When the interview host questioned Wiedemer’s latest data, the author unapologetically displayed shocking charts backing up his allegations, and then ended his argument with, “You see, the medicine will become the poison.”

The interview has become a wake-up call for those unprepared (or unwilling) to acknowledge an ugly truth: The country’s financial “rescue” devised in Washington has failed miserably.

The blame lies squarely on those whose job it was to avoid the exact situation we find ourselves in, including Bernanke and former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan, tasked with preventing financial meltdowns and keeping the nation’s economy strong through monetary and credit policies.

Shocking Footage
See the eerie chart that exposes the ‘unthinkable.’

At one point, Wiedemer even calls out Bernanke, saying that his “money from heaven will be the path to hell.”

But it’s not just the grim predictions that are causing the sensation in Wiedemer’s video interview. Rather, it’s his comprehensive blueprint for economic survival that’s really commanding global attention.

The interview offers realistic, step-by-step solutions that the average hard-working American can easily follow.

The video was initially screened for a relatively small, private audience. But the overwhelming amount of feedback from viewers who felt the interview should be widely publicized came with consequences, as various online networks repeatedly shut it down and affiliates refused to house the content.

Bernanke and Greenspan certainly would not support Wiedemer publicly, and it soon became apparent mainstream media would not either.

“People were sitting up and taking notice, and they begged us to make the interview public so they could easily share it,” said Newsmax Financial Publisher Aaron DeHoog. “But unfortunately, it kept getting pulled.”

“Our real concern,” DeHoog added, “is the effect even if only half of Wiedemer’s predictions come true.

“That’s a scary thought for sure. But we want the average American to be prepared, and that is why we will continue to push this video to as many outlets as we can. We want the word to spread.”

Editor’s NoteFor a limited time, Newsmax is showing the Wiedemer interview and supplying viewers with copies of the new, updated Aftershock book including the final, unpublished chapter. Go here to view it now. 


© 2013 Moneynews. All rights reserved.
Share:
More . . .
   Email Us   |
   Print   |


Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.moneynews.com/MKTNews/Massive-wealth-destruction-economy/2013/06/20/id/511043/?promo_code=13E5C-1&utm_source=taboola#ixzz2izrxSPCY
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

The Campaign to Kill Killer Robots Gains Steam


The Campaign to Kill Killer Robots Gains Steam

A global movement is gaining traction in its effort to ban 'killer robots' that are able to target designated enemies on their own



A slew of reports over the last two weeks detailing cases of U.S. armed drones killing civilians signaled a new wave of outrage over the unregulated use of drones by the U.S. There was one report from the United Nations, another from Human Rights Watch, and one from Amnesty International. The uproar—and the sense that Washington has done little to make more transparent its use of drones—culminated in a debate Friday at the UN.
But a parallel movement has emerged to make sure that a different and perhaps more terrifying technology never makes it this far.
The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots is a coalition of weapons monitors and human rights groups leading an effort, formally since April, to establish an international ban on fully autonomous lethal weapons. Dubbed (by opponents) “killer robots,” it’s a technology that can kill targets (humans) without any human input. Whereas drones today have someone somewhere remotely determining where and when to fire, a fully autonomous air, land, or sea weapon could be making the decisions on its own.
It sounds like the stuff of sci-fi, but the technology is well within reach given existing weaponry. The U.S. Navy’s X-47B, a Northrop Grumman-developed drone, has taken off and landed on an aircraft carrier—one of the hardest maneuvers in aviation—entirely on its own, and it would only be a short step to add missiles to its weapons bay. In South Korea, a Samsung subsidiary designed—several years ago already—a stationary robot sentry that sits along the demilitarized zone and can identify and fire at a target on its own. It’s linked up with a human operator for now.
Some critics say giving a non-human technology the ability to decide if a human lives or dies is simply morally reprehensible—on the same level as chemical and nuclear weapons. They also say there are just too many uncertainties in the machines’ circuitry. What if a killer robot malfunctions and begins firing at random? What if it’s hacked? How quickly will the technology proliferate, to rival states and to non-state actors like extremist militants? And who exactly is held legally accountable when a killer robot attacks?
The Campaign released a statement earlier this month signed by some 272 computer science experts from 37 countries supporting a ban on development “given the limitations and unknown future risks of autonomous robot weapons technology.”
“We are concerned about the potential of robots to undermine human responsibility in decisions to use force, and to obscure accountability for the consequences,” the statement reads.
Still, the U.S. military is loath to rule out development of a new technology. Last year, days after Human Rights Watch released a report calling for a ban, the Department of Defense issued an ambiguous directive on autonomous weapons that restricts but does not rules out their use in the field for the time being. It remains the only government policy on the technology, and, unsurprisingly, few countries have formal policies on the issue. But advocates say the weapon could, down the line, in fact become a crucial tool for saving lives.
“While a preemptive ban may seem like the safest path, it is unnecessary and dangerous,” wrote law professors Matthew Waxman and Kenneth Anderson, both members of the Hoover Institution Task Force on National Security and Law. “If the goal is to reduce suffering and protect human lives, a ban may be counterproductive. It is quite possible that autonomous machine decision-making may, at least in some contexts, reduce risks to civilians by making targeting decisions more precise and firing decisions more controlled.”
Opponents point out that a preemptive weapons ban is not unprecedented. In 1995, parties to the UN’s Convention on Conventional Weapons added a protocol banning blinding lasers. Leading up to that ban, the U.S. was against it before it was for it—after considering the potential for mass proliferation, recalled Stephen Goose, the director of the arms division at HRW. The U.S. change of heart was enough to generate the necessary support.
For now, the U.S. says it doesn’t support an international ban. But representatives at the U.N. met over the potential threat of automated weapons earlier this week, and France, which chairs the next meeting of the CCW in November, has pledged to put the topic of killer robots on the agenda. The U.S. will conspicuously be there.
“It really reinforces that governments and militaries understand that this is something of real concern,” Goose said. “Them sitting down and talking about this is a very good thing.”



Read more: http://world.time.com/2013/10/25/the-campaign-to-kill-killer-robots-gains-steam/#ixzz2izrEA19r

Twitter

Add to Flipboard Magazine.

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *