Monday, July 11, 2011

On China and the global economy



Posted by Kai Ryssdal
on July 11, 2011 12:58 PM


Every Wednesday at 3 o’clock, right after school, my kids have to do one of those things that falls under the general category of ‘You’re gonna do it ‘cause Mom and Dad said you’re gonna do it’: an hour and a half of Chinese lessons. And yeah, part of that’s just us — we speak Chinese; we’ve lived and worked there. Our daughter’s Chinese.

But part of it’s just common sense. We’re planning for their economic future. Because by the time they grow up China’s driving the global economy. Whether it’s ready for it or not, says China analyst Jim McGregor.

“If you look at the world economy as a Broadway musical, and all the countries are up dancing on the stage, you’ve got America and Japan dancing in the front. China was always dancing in the back,” McGregor says. “And then one day, the global financial crisis happened, and China found itself dancing alone — everybody else collapsed. And so China started thinking, ‘well maybe I do dance better than everyone else.’”

There’s nothing quite like an international financial crisis to get you thinking about your place in the world. From politicians to CEOs of Fortune 500 companies, China’s on a lot of people’s minds right now.

It’s been five years since we took the show there (you can listen to those original broadcasts in our interactive feature), trying to wrap our heads around the pace of change in that country, and what that would mean for our shared economic fates.

So this week, the sounds and voices of — and about — a China five years later.

Our trip in 2006 to Shanghai on the coast and Chongqing, 900 miles out west in Sichuan Province, was all about what happens when a country changes so much so fast — the goods and the bads. The trip back, one financial crisis and a global recession later, it turns out to have been about the same thing. Just with much higher stakes for the rest of us. We’ll go back to our Chinese future on our website and in the broadcast today and all the rest of this week.

SPECIAL REPORTChina: The Five-Year Plan Explore our comprehensive coverage on-air and online. Updated all week.

Source
.
Related
,

Now we call the proud happy

Photo (Courtesy)http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/LCWlz9Pth40/39th+Annual+Gay+Pride+Parade+Rolls+Through/MNjp0OEx7pX



And now we call the proud happy; yea, they that work wickedness are set up; yea, they that tempt God are even delivered.
-Malachi 3:15.
.

Sunday, July 10, 2011

DuPage-area hospital staffs dance for cancer awareness

6/22/2011 9:28 AM



Dr. Brian Ayuste does a little break dancing Tuesday at Adventist Bolingbrook Hospital. Dr. Ayuste and others were creating a musical video that organizers hope to use as part of a breast cancer awareness program.


By Megan Bannister ..


Flash mobs recently have gotten a bad rap around Chicago.

But on Tuesday, employees from four area Adventist hospitals set out to increase breast cancer awareness with a much more lighthearted, positive and true-to-the-idea take on the flash mob concept.

At 8 a.m., as the electronic beats of Taio Cruz's song “Higher” echoed through the halls of Adventist Bolingbrook Medical Center, more than 100 employees from all four hospitals, many dressed in pink, converged on the lobby to do a little dancing.

The physicians and other staff members from Bolingbrook, Hinsdale, LaGrange and GlenOaks were creating what they hope will be a popular and effective music video that will encourage more women to get mammograms.

“Everyone has been so enthusiastic and willing to chime in and take part,” Jeannine Arias, regional director in charge of breast cancer services, said.

Physicians and employees donning pink scrubs, sunglasses, feather boas and Hula Hoops boogied to the beat for video cameras.

Throughout the morning, participants pranced through the OR, danced around the ER and shimmied in the cath lab. To ensure everyone could participate, the flash mob was repeated throughout the day, Arias said.

The video compilation will be used in the Adventist campaign “Stomp Out Breast Cancer” and be released to YouTube in October for Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

While the crazy outfits and dancing is fun, the larger aim of the project is health related. The Adventist campaign encourages all women 40 and older to get annual mammograms in the hopes of catching more cases early on.

“We wanted to extend our reach and let everyone know what services we provide,” Arias said. “It's a nice way to see the hospital and what we offer without having to go there.”

“This is all about getting women screened early,” Dr. Jason Goliath, medical director of the Bolingbrook Hospital Breast Center, said in a written statement. “We see younger people who don't think they need to get screened, but it makes all the difference when it comes to survival rates.”

Though there are more than 2.5 million breast cancer survivors in the United States, one in 35 women will die of breast cancer.

Until there is a more effective cure, organizers of Tuesday's event said, the employees of Adventist Bolingbrook Hospital will keep on dancing.


Source: http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20110621/news/706219840/#ixzz1RkduK7Vq
.

Saturday, July 09, 2011

Southern Adventist University Flash mob 2011


From: SDAToday Mar 19, 2011

Southern Adventist University Flash Mob and Dances, with dye hair, with drum music, and more


Uploaded by coltsroc09 on Feb 10, 2011

Southern Adventist University Flash Mob

What are the UN's Agenda 21 and ICLEI?

Written by Thomas R. Eddlem


Wednesday, 06 July 2011 10:35


What is Agenda 21? The constitutionalist movement has heard vague echoes in recent years about a threat to the free economy from this Agenda 21.

Agenda 21 is not new. The New American magazine (and its affiliate, the John Birch Society), was one of the few constitutionalist organizations that was present when it was drawn up, back at the 1992 Earth Summit on climate change in Rio de Janeiro. The summit, organized by the United Nations, brought together the most extreme environmental activists from around the world to deal with the supposed threat from global warming, and Agenda 21 was the document they drew up.

The New American's William F. Jasper attended the conference as a reporter, and was able to report on events at the Rio Summit as they happened

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3qW2XJZdSA&feature=player_embedded

What came out of the Rio summit was summed up by the radical environmentalists themselves, and one United Nations-approved introduction to the Agenda 21 document claimed that:

Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a profound reorientation of all human society, unlike anything the world has ever experienced — a major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals and an unprecedented redeployment of human and financial resources. This shift will demand that a concern for the environmental consequences of every human action be integrated into individual and collective decision-making at every level.

The document left no one alone, stating that:

There are specific actions which are intended to be undertaken by ... in short, every person on Earth.

What it means for Americans is more than just an end to fossil fuels; it means a lower standard of living.

And the strategy for implementing Agenda 21 was much broader than ever attempted before by the environmentalist movement. They sought global treaties and national legislation, as in the past. They also sought to shame individuals and corporations into changing their behavior on a voluntary basis. That, too, was not new. But they began fighting for "soft-law" changes to consumers' living standards. "Soft law" is the use of centralized governments to bribe with aid either smaller government sub-units (states or localities) or private companies for following ever-more stringent eco-standards with tax breaks or outright cash "aid."

On the state and local level, the push for "soft law" is led by the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives, or ICLEI, which had been founded a couple of years before the Rio Summit. More than 1,000 state, county, and municipal government organizations around the world are ICLEI members, and are pushing this radical environmentalist agenda with bribes and stiffer regulations. In many American towns, local officials boast about the impact of ICLEI in the form of putting state rebate checks on display for properly following new environmentalist incentives. For example, John Birch Society New England Regional Director Hal Shurtleff was able to point out that:

Here is what's disturbing. Here is a check, made out to the City of Newburyport from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. And why is this check on display? This is the second such check that I have found in a city or town that belongs to the ICLEI, the International Council on Local Environmental Initiatives, which is a government-to-government entity, unconstitutional on its face. And their goal is to implement Agenda 21, what they call "soft law" that came out of the Rio conference in 1992, very hostile to property rights, freedoms.

ICLEI has become a big part of the subsidy and regulation regime on the state and local level, but it's not the only part of the eco-subsidy agenda. That also extends to the White House, where President Obama has called for government to start picking winners and losers in the markets for more energy-efficient products. President Obama boasted in his May 6, 2011 weekly address to the nation that he would continue to "invest" in green jobs.

This is part of the reason why huge corporations such as General Electric were able to claim a $3.25 billion tax credit in 2010, paying no corporate income taxes last year. GE cashed in on federal "tax credits" for green projects, such as its wind turbine projects.

Of course, nobody objects to private companies offering more fuel-efficient automobiles or creating products that don't fill up landfills. The problem with ICLEI and Agenda 21 is that they primarily seek governments to pick winners and losers in the marketplace. Governments usually pick the wrong winners. That was the lesson from the housing bubble of the last decade. The federal government promoted home ownership by subsidies, tax credits, and suppression of interest rates, and crashed the economy. Government doing the same thing on green jobs will do the same thing to the economy on a much larger scale.

.

Dr. Manning Probes the Issue of Aztlan and La Raza



From: ATLAHWorldwide | Jul 7, 2011 | 1,012 views

Dr. Manning continues his discussion on the Aztlan and La Raza movement with Alice Novoa. Recorded on 6 July 2011. http://atlah.org

He will stir up the wicked powers of earth to destroy the people of God


The remnant church will be brought into great trial and distress. Those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, will feel the ire of the dragon and his hosts. Satan numbers the world as his subjects; he has gained control of the apostate churches; but here is a little company that are resisting his supremacy. If he could blot them from the earth, his triumph would be complete. As he influenced the heathen nations to destroy Israel, so in the near future he will stir up the wicked powers of earth to destroy the people of God. All will be required to render obedience to human edicts in violation of the divine law. Those who will be true to God and to duty will be betrayed "both by parents, and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends." --Testimonies, vol. 9, p. 231.
.

What Is True Sabbath Rest? A Brief Bible Study

Posted on May 27, 2011 by gospelbondservant

Here is a look at the issue of Sabbath Rest. So just what is this rest anyway?


1. Sabbath Rest is about Relationship. Hebrews 4:4 Says “For He has spoken in a certain place of the seventh day in this way: “And God rested on the seventh day from all His works.” The phrase ‘rested from His works is a direct quote from Genesis 2:2. Resting often conveys an idea of passivity. According to Tonstad, A better fit is the word “desisted or ceased”. A good mental picture of “cease is that of a ship gliding into harbor after a long voyage or a train coming to a halt at the train station. It is the anticipation of being with someone you love! Ceasing points to the joy of being with someone very special. This is exactly what I believe is meant in Hebrews 4:10 that “God ceased from His works” which is to say God had eager anticipation of being with His creation! The Prophet Ezekiel 12:12,20 plainly says that The Sabbath is a relational marker.

2. So Sabbath Rest is a “ceasing” from all activity of trying to save myself and anticipating an intimate saving relationship with Jesus. “And this is life eternal that they might know you”! John 17:3 Hebrews 4:4,10 Jesus is the only source for true rest and Salvation. He wants us to “cease” completely trying to save ourselves. Matthew 11:28-30. If we would only come to Him He then will Justify us, Sanctify us, and make us Holy just like Jesus. 1John 3:2 1Corinthians 1:29-31.

3. So how do I enter God’s rest?

We enter God’s rest by believing fully in Jesus! Hebrews 4:3.

And the converse is also true, we don’t enter God’s rest because of unbelief. Hebrews 3:19

In other words, we have the “assurance” of entering God’s rest when we “trust” Jesus with our lives, that’s it. It’s all about Jesus! He is the only one who can save us. Romans 3:26,5:10. The truth is we need to stop all efforts of trying to save ourselves! Jeremiah 13:23, John 15:5

We enter His rest when we consider Jesus Hebrews 3:1

We enter His rest when we listen to His voice Hebrews 3:7,15,4:7

We enter His rest when we cease completely from our own efforts to earn Salvation Hebrews 4:10.

All of these admonitions are saying the same thing, so Let me say it again, we have the “assurance” of entering God’s rest and obtaining Salvation when we “trust” Jesus with our lives, that’s it.

Hold firmly to Jesus my friend and never ever let go of your grip!

Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful. And let us consider one another in order to stir up love and good works, not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as is the manner of some, but exhorting one another, and so much the more as you see the Day approaching. Hebrews 10:22-25.


HAPPY SABBATH — SHABBAT SHALOM

Source
.

Will Jesus return when Obama is President?


White Horse E-News - 03-26-2009

Will Jesus return when Obama is President?

Dear friend,

We had a GREAT RESPONSE to our last e-newsletter, which shows us that MANY PEOPLE are reading it. We also received LOTS OF ORDERS for books and DVDs offered at discount prices. The Lord is good.

The book of Acts predicts, quoting Joel 2:28, that in "the last days… young men shall see visions… old men shall dream dreams" (Acts 2:17). A few days ago White Horse Media learned about a pastor in the 1980's who had a dream informing him that Jesus Christ would return during the time that America had a black president. Here are a few excerpts from the email we received:

"Back in the 1980s, Elder Jack Darnall… who ran an end-time training center to prepare people for end-time events, held a prayer meeting in his house. As the people were leaving, he called aside another man and said to him that he felt impressed to tell him an impressive dream that he had.

"In the dream, he dreamed that it was the time when Jesus returned to Earth in power and great glory. America had an African-American president (something unthinkable in the 1980s) when Jesus returned. He was tall and thin, with close-cropped hair and large ears. When elected, at first he was greatly beloved by the people, but then he became a terrible dictator.

"The dream was not widely discussed, because at that time they could not see a black man being voted in as president with so much prejudice in the country still.

"It was just a dream, but an unlikely one at the time... We are not saying Pastor Jack Darnall was a prophet. We are simply saying that he had a dream. It may have been from the Lord, after all, the Lord said that at the end-times 'your old men shall dream dreams.' Joel 2:28. Time will tell whether this dream fits into that category. File it away in the back of your brain for future reference."

Apparently, the story was verified to be true. In other words, Elder Darnall really did have this dream. There was another point in the dream worth mentioning: there would be one more pope after John Paul II.

As the above quote states, "Time will tell." At White Horse Media, we are not prophets. Neither do we jump at every dream we hear about. Nevertheless, we felt that this one was worth sharing for you to think about.

Here's another product special: Our "Hour of the Witch" DVD
(5 half-hour programs) and 217-page book reveal the hidden dangers of Wicca and how the current occult explosion is fulfilling Bible prophecy (see Duet. 18:9-11; Rev. 18:23; 21:8). Together, they normally retail for $24.95. Our e-news special is now only $18 (plus S & H). You can order by calling 1-800-782-4253. You must mention this offer.

"Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour in which the Son of Man is coming" (Matthew 25:13).


Maranatha!


Steve Wohlberg

www.whitehorsemedia.com


Copyright © 2009 White Horse Media. All rights reserved.

White Horse Media - PO Box 1139 Newport, WA 99156 (1-800-782-4253)


Source: http://whitehorsemedia.com/about/?p=newsletter
.

"We’re going to continue working over the weekend to bridge those gaps". ...




Remarks of President Barack Obama
Weekly Address
July 9, 2011
Washington, DC

(Excerpt)


Earlier this week, we did something that’s never been done here at the White House – we had a Twitter Town Hall. I even sent my first live tweet as President. The questions at the town hall were sent in from across the country and covered all kinds of topics – from jobs and the economy to education and energy.

Lots of people also submitted different versions of another question. They’d start by saying that our politics has grown so contentious. Then they’d ask, When will both parties in Congress come together on behalf of the people who elected them?

That’s a really important question, and it goes to the heart of a debate we’re having right now in this country – and that’s the debate about how to tackle the problem of our deficits and our debt.

Now, there are obviously real differences in approach. I believe we need a balanced approach. That means taking on spending in our domestic programs and our defense programs. It means addressing the challenges in programs like Medicare so we can strengthen those programs and protect them for future generations. And it means taking on spending in the tax code – spending on tax breaks and deductions for the wealthiest Americans.

But I also know that Republicans and Democrats don’t see eye to eye on a number of issues. And so, we’re going to continue working over the weekend to bridge those gaps.
The good news is, we agree on some of the big things. We agree that after a decade of racking up deficits and debt, we finally need to get our fiscal house in order. We agree that to do that, both sides are going to have to step outside their comfort zones and make some political sacrifices. And we agree that we simply cannot afford to default on our national obligations for the first time in our history; that we need to uphold the full faith and credit of the United States of America


Complete transcript

My Comments

For two consecutive weeks President Obama has required Congresspeople to work over the week-ends. What's with the working week-end tactic? Isn't the government supposed to be conducted Monday to Friday during "normal" business hours? In the current conditions in Washington D.C., I see a pattern of disregard for the 7th day SABBATH, and a demanding posture uncharacteristic of an American president. I see this as the beginning of birth pangs, or the harbinger of perilous times ahead for God's faithful servants...

Arsenio.

.

P.S. Are Congressman Roscoe Bartlett and Congresswoman Sheila Jackson-Lee, working this week-end, too?

.

Thursday, July 07, 2011

I Did It My Way


“I want to emphasize that nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to." *


With all due respect -
After today's Debt Ceiling Meeting at the White House President Obama emerged stating that "nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to".

Gee, golly, wow!

Does that sound despotic or what?
It sure does to me.

From my perspective as time progresses our government's top executive is acting more and more like a Banana Republic Tyrant. I don't know if it is just me that thinks this way? But, I'll go even further and use the "D" word to describe Mr. Obama's management style: He expresses himself more like a DICTATOR, than the democratically elected president of the world's oldest Constitutional Republic. We have no popes or kings!

I wonder if Mr. Obama has ever heard himself carrying on like a tin pot despot?
Always demanding to have things his way?

I'll borrow a phrase often used by Glenn Beck: I'm gonna go out on a limb here...
I'm amazed that more people don't notice the way our Congressmen and women are being bullied around by Mr. Obama? It's always his way or the highway. That sure doesn't sound like the USA to me; And, I've observed a number of American Presidents in my life.
Yet, none has been more forceful or persistent as our current commander in chief.

In my lifetime I've seen a few dictators. For example: Trujillo; Fidel Castro; Francisco Franco; Allende; Pinochet; Somoza; Torrijos; and Chavez. So, the traits of a tyrant are ever present on my mind; I can remember a despot when I see one. One characteristic that all despots share is they can not stand opposition to their will, and they always want things done their way...
Does that ring any bells?
Sound familiar, comrades or fellow proletarians???

Welcome to the new USA!

Arsenio.

*http://swampland.time.com/2011/07/07/inside-thursdays-white-house-debt-ceiling-meeting-a-consensus-to-go-big/#ixzz1RT30ZGiZ
.

Author: Obama’s father planned to give him up for adoption

New book ‘The Other Barack’ draws a candid portrait of a brilliant but troubled man


Ben Curtis / AP file
This photograph of Barack Obama Sr., the president’s father, hung on the wall of his grandmother Sarah Hussein Obama's house in Kenya

TODAY books

updated 7/7/2011 4:14:20 PM ET


A new book may shed new light on the background of President Obama’s father.

“The Other Barack: The Bold and Reckless Life of President Obama’s Father” is slated for release on Tuesday, July 12 by Public Affairs Press. In it, Boston Globe reporter Sally H. Jacobs takes a candid look at Barack Obama Sr. and paints a portrait in sharp contrast to the one provided by the president in his own memoir, “Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance,” published in 2004.

Through exhaustive interviews, Jacobs assembles a complex depiction of the elder Obama as a brilliant but troubled man. One of the most notable revelations she offers is that when Barack Obama Sr. was a 24-year-old college sophomore, he and Ann Dunham — his second wife and the mother of President Obama — initially planned to give their unborn child up for adoption via the Salvation Army.
Jacobs’ account was gleaned from a memo about a conversation with Obama Sr. conducted by the US Immigration and Naturalization Service. She further reports that upon the time of that memo’s release (through the Freedom of Information act), the president himself was unaware of it or its contents.

Ultimately, Jacobs recounts, the president’s father chose not to put his infant son up for adoption. How serious his original intention was remains unclear.

.

Wednesday, July 06, 2011

Obama warns against US debt default


Uploaded by telegraphtv on Jun 29, 2011

----------------------------------------------------

0:09 Obama: "Deee-fault"

Biscuits and gravy, grits and hush puppies, etc.

Well, my-my-my, lookie here, lookie here, he's got a southern drawl, y'all.

When W (Dubya) left office the national debt was $10.7 trillion.

During Obama's 30 months in office it has increased to 14.3 trillion. That's almost 4 trillion in less than 3 years!

Now the president is looking for someone to blame for the unparalleled spending spree? Gimme a break, please.

Arsenio.

TSA warns of implant bombers, prepares fliers for swab tests

By Bruce Newman, Ellen Huet and Joshua Melvin

Bay Area News Group

Posted: 07/06/2011 04:02:52 PM PDT
Updated: 07/06/2011 06:25:35 PM PDT


The latest threat to America's skies -- explosive surgical implants that authorities have dubbed "belly bombs" -- poses a security challenge so bizarre that air travelers learning of the new danger Wednesday could only scratch their heads and wonder what's next.

If those fliers had collagen injections or dental implants, what's next may mean having their heads examined. Literally.

The Transportation Security Administration advised airlines that terror groups are believed to be experimenting with explosives that could be implanted in buttocks and breasts, allowing suicide bombers to pass through airport body scanners undetected. This raised the specter of a surgically altered world in which it must be asked:

If Pamela Anderson has to undergo an MRI to get on an airplane, have the terrorists won?

Because airport body scans don't show the blood and bones beneath the skin, this new threat is at once so sophisticated and medieval that security officials may resort to trace detection swabs to detect bombs under the skin -- a procedure rarely used in this country.

"It's already so difficult with all the screening devices, maybe they should just spray everybody with those swabs," said Marilu Nieto, who brought her grandson to Mineta San Jose International Airport Wednesday. "That's what it's coming to. Just hose them all down."

A spokesman for the TSA acknowledged that current scanning devices wouldn't necessarily catch explosive compounds such as pentaerythritol tetranitrate implanted under a person's skin. "As a precaution, passengers flying from international locations to U.S. destinations may notice additional security measures in place," a statement from the TSA said.

The TSA said it had no evidence of a specific plot, but intelligence sources indicated this new threat to international air travel was likely the handiwork of Ibrahim Asiri, the al-Qaida mastermind behind the Christmas Day 2009 attempt to bring down a Northwest Airlines plane by the so-called "underwear bomber."

Few Americans could have imagined when the first airport metal detectors were installed more than four decades ago that travelers would one day be expected to nearly disrobe before boarding their flights. The idea of implanting explosives does not strike Zoltan Prokay as far-fetched.

"If they do it properly, like a breast implant where the skin is stretched to accommodate the device, it could work," said Prokay, who spent 2½ years in Iraq working to detect improvised explosive devices as a member of a U.S. Special Forces team. He was flying out of San Jose as a pilot for a private airline, which he declined to identify, when word of the TSA advisory began to spread. "It could be set to go off at a certain altitude. If you get an altimeter implanted in your other breast though, maybe you would set off the metal detector."

Prokay sees it as a natural -- if horrifying -- progression from the shoe bomber and the underwear bomber. "This would be the bosom bomber," he said. "It's not funny. And yet it is kind of funny. The bosom bomber."

"If (terrorists) really want to attack, there is always a way," Renata Boudon, 47, said in French after arriving at San Francisco International Airport for a two-week vacation in the western United States. "It doesn't scare me much." She and her two sons, 18-year-old Eric and 12-year-old Marc, live in Brazil and said they won't change anything about their travel habits because of the new information. "If it happens, it happens," she said. "There is nothing you can do."

In San Jose, visiting Mount Holyoke College history professor Holly Hanson said that instead of increased technology, airport security should focus on psychological profiling, a practice she said is used effectively at Israel's airports. "It's much more effective to search for anxiety in passengers than to search by technology," she said. "You use social psychology to find people who are morally conflicted about something they're planning to do."

Kimberly Merenz struck a more defiant note while waiting to fly home to New York state from SFO. "I'm not going to live my life in fear," she said. "It's my way of spitting in their faces."

Assuming those really are their faces.

Contact Bruce Newman at 408-920-5004.

Fuente
.

'Radical' changes needed to meet rising food demands: UN

A new United Nations report calls for a 'green revolution' in agriculture, saying farmers must increase food production by as much as 100 percent by 2050.
A farmer spreads fertilizer in a paddy field at Traouri village, located in the northern Indian state of Haryana on July 5.

Ajay Verma/Reuters


By Patrick Wall, Contributor / July 6, 2011

New York
The global food system is environmentally destructive and requires “radical” changes if it is to meet rising food demands, says a new United Nations report.

Current farming practices degrade the environment and contribute to global warming, which in turn reduces food production, according to the report. To feed a growing population, farmers around the world must increase food production by up to 100 percent by 2050 – but do so using sustainable methods, with a focus on small farming.

“The world now needs a truly green revolution in agriculture,” says the UN’s annual World Economic and Social Survey, which was released Tuesday.

Recent food shortages and price spikes highlight “deep structural problems” in the global food system, according to the report. Modern agriculture is plagued by over-cultivation, deforestation, and water pollution, the study says, which results in low crop yields.

These practices, combined with climate change and government polices, threaten almost two dozen nations with a “protracted food security crisis.” Worldwide, some 925 million people are undernourished, the report says, with the vast majority living in developing countries.

Meanwhile, the governments in these countries have done little to support the world’s 1.5 billion small farmers, who dominate agriculture in developing nations.

“There have been decades of underinvestment by the public sector,” says Manuel Montes, a UN economist and one of the survey authors. “Agricultural investment has to be revived in order to meet the demands of food production.”

Governments should improve infrastructure, such as roads and water systems, and provide credit and technical support to small farmers, according to the report. Nonprofit organizations and philanthropies can fund research and provide training to farm workers.

The report says the goal should be to provide small farmers with the skills and resources needed to increase food production without harming the environment.

“Small farm holders are at the heart of the food security challenge,” says the report, which cites estimates that up to 90 percent of staple foods are produced locally. “It is at this level that most gains in terms of both sustainable productivity increases and rural poverty reduction can be achieved.”

Small farmers can choose from a variety of eco-friendly agricultural practices, including crop rotation, rainwater harvesting, and organic fertilizing. They can also learn to properly store and preserve the food they grow – about a third of which is lost before consumption, according to a May UN report.

The Global Service Corps, a nonprofit founded in 1993, is one of many organizations that train rural farmers to use sustainable practices.

Volunteers in the group’s Tanzania program teach small farmers how to store grains, vaccinate chickens and use “bio-intensive” farming methods, such as composting. The training enables farmers with limited access to chemical fertilizers and fresh water to grow more food at a lower cost – which the UN report says is critical.

So far, most of the farmers have been eager to try the new techniques, says Global Service Corps founder, Rick Lathrop.

“They can see that the corn in our plot is eight feet high, and the corn in the conventional plot is only four feet,” says Mr. Lathrop. “All they have to do is see it.”

Source
.

A Journalist to Watch: Shane Harris Talks Scandal, Surveillance and the State of Reporting

Posted: 06/10/11 10:54 AM ET

By Angela Montefinise, The New York Public Library


It's not every day that a former national security advisor recognizes you, taps you on the shoulder and apologizes for not returning your calls.

But that's exactly what happened to journalist Shane Harris in March 2004 at a small, invitation-only discussion on homeland security at Syracuse University. Harris was scheduled to discuss the media's role in homeland security. Former National Security Advisor to President Ronald Reagan John Poindexter was also scheduled to attend.



Reporter Shane Harris (second from the right) receives the 2011 Helen Bernstein Book Award For Excellence In Journalism. Pictured (l-r) are NYPL President Paul LeClerc, Helen Bernstein, Harris and Committee Chairman Jim Hoge. Photo by Jonathan Blanc.

Harris was eager to meet Poindexter, a key figure in the Iran-Contra scandal who Harris had tried and failed to interview many times before while writing for Government Executive magazine.

"As enticing as it is to go up to Syracuse in late winter, I decided to go because I saw his name on the list," Harris told NYPL. "I'd seen one or two pictures of him since Iran-Contra. It's kind of like JD Salinger. There's very little information about him out there, but I was pretty sure I knew what he looked like."

Turned out, it didn't matter.

"All of a sudden, I hear this voice say behind me say, 'Shane Harris,'" Harris said. "I turned around and it was him. I said, 'Wow, John Poindexter. Nice to meet you.' He apologized to me that he had to turn down all of my requests for interviews. So he was fully aware I had asked. He explained that the press office at the Pentagon said, 'No press for you.'"

Poindexter had been working as head of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency's (DARPA) Information Awareness Office, developed after 9/11 to track terrorists. It came under harsh criticism for violating privacy and civil liberties.

Harris, who was placed on the technology and security beat after 9/11, wrote on the topic regularly.

Poindexter told Harris that he had "read everything" he had written, and Harris said, "It was good to know that everything I was writing was not going on in this vacuum. He said, 'I thought you were completely fair and I thought you were trying to figure out what we were doing. And I appreciate that.' It was very encouraging."
It was two weeks after that meeting that Poindexter told Harris he would actually grant him an interview, but on one condition.

"He said, 'You have to come out to my house for multiple times for two hours. Everything I say is on the record, and it must be taped,'" Harris recalled. "I thought, you don't know how reporters work if you think this is an onerous request."

They did four or five interviews for a magazine piece, and then Poindexter asked, "Are you interested in doing a project beyond this?"

The answer -- yes. The result -- The Watchers: The Rise of America's Surveillance State, the winner of the Library's coveted 2011 Helen Bernstein Award for Excellence in Journalism, presented on June 7.

The book, published by Penguin Press, isn't a biography of Poindexter, but a piece on the history of surveillance, and the slippery slope between protecting the country and invading people's privacy. It starts back before Iran-Contra, mentions the scandal, and winds up in modern times.

But Poindexter was a key source for the book, Harris explained.

"We set up this file sharing system, like a bulletin board," he said. "It was really cool to have this sort of living piece of history I could kind of ping whenever I needed... It was really neat, when [President Ronald] Reagan died, I immediately emailed him and asked for this thoughts."

Over the course of writing the book, Harris asked Poindexter if he would have done anything differently with Iran-Contra, what would he have done.

"I was expecting to hear, well, maybe we shouldn't have done it," Harris said. "But he said he would have come up with a better public relations strategy, because we knew if it ever got exposed that we would have an extremely difficult job of explaining it to people. He started literally drawing on a piece of paper the entire scheme, and it was extraordinarily complicated. And it frustrates him to this day that they did not have the chance in full to explain what they were trying to do. He realized fully that on its face it would look like a betrayal of the president's promise to negotiate with terrorists."

Harris said he "laughed with him and ripped him that he didn't see at all why people find that troublesome. He said I intellectually understand, but I just don't see it that way."

Harris may have his opinions, but they did not show up for almost any of the book. Despite the very sensitive and potentially controversial topics he explored in the book, Harris wrote it without any clear bias.

"I wanted the story to speak for itself," said Harris. "I didn't want to steer the reader in any one direction. So many times this debate gets polarized from the outset and everyone retreats to their individual camps. I don't think that leads to good policy decisions."

The book is fast-paced with very personal, inside stories, as well as several funny moments. For example, right before Christmas in 2006, Mike McConnell, director of the National Security Agency, gets a phone call. His secretary walked into his office and said, "The vice president's on the phone." McConnell responds, "The vice president of what?" The secretary responds, "The vice president of the United States."

"When I was in college, I studied screenwriting, playwriting and sketch comedy writing," Harris said. "My background is fiction writing. So throughout this book, there is comic relief. I was very conscious that you have this really heavy deep story, and it's often very depressing, and you have to give people a moment to lighten up. Mike McConnell, he's a pretty funny guy. I find a lot of people who have been in Washington for a long time find ways to cope with all the stress with these anecdotes. That's how you stay sane. So I tried to convey that by punctuating the story with these anecdotes."

Harris said tries "not to be depressed about the state of journalism," and said, "I do feel, particularly in Washington, that we're too quick to look for the easy storyline, collective wisdom and boilerplate explanations. I don't believe we're really focused enough on informing our readers about what's really going on. We're way too caught up in the political horserace... I think people are distracted. There's this notion that news is always, always happening. News does not happen, or at least significant news, doesn't necessarily happen every single day, and every single hour. There are plenty of outlets out there that feed on that idea.

"I think long form journalism can make a real contribution to that problem, not only by giving enough words, but by pushing things out when they're really ready and not now, now, now. Long form journalism gives us an opportunity to step back, take a breath and get it right. Magazines and books are the refuge for those who want to think.

"It sounds like a dirty word these days because it sounds like you're slowing down. It's really sad. It's also wrong. In the long term, books and magazines will continue to drive the conversation."

Harris said the Bernstein Award -- which honors long form reporting in books -- "shows that great journalism is being produced, and far from being dead, this medium of long form is thriving. It's really important that an organization like The New York Public Library highlights that."

Source
.

Have U.S. drone wars opened a Pandora’s Box?


By Philip Ewing Tuesday, July 5th, 2011 12:00 pm
Posted in International

When American unmanned aircraft fly over foreign countries, attack and kill people there, that doesn’t necessarily constitute “war,” President Obama argues. Tom Ricks says that when U.S. drones kill bad guys in third nations, it’s more akin to police work in a rough neighborhood than war. But hang on, argues Sanjeev Miglani at Reuters’ Afghan Journal blog — are Americans ready to handle the blowback from carrying on a perpetual drone campaign around the world?

Writes Miglani:


The idea that the United States can arrogate to itself the right of life and death of people around the world can set off a dangerous precedent. What happens if India decides to do a bit of police action of its own in next door Pakistan. Unlike the CIA, India has actually built up a legal case against the founder of the Lashkar-e-Taiba, Hafeez Sayeed, for involvement in the November 2008 attacks on Mumbai. Given the lack of action by Pakistani authorities, should India take the law into its hands and target Sayeed and his associates for the assault ?


Or as Greg Scoblete says in the Real World Compass blog, what if Iran develops the capability to fly drones of its own and blows up the suburban Virginia home of a CIA official that is suspects is instigating violence in Iran, how will America react ? Surely it is not going to say this is police action, but an act of war, or at the very least a terrorist strike on the homeland.

The U.S. leads the world in the use of unmanned aircraft for warfare by a distance, but it can’t be very long before other nations scale up their capabilities in unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) as they are also known.

The drone technology may be sophisticated, but it can be reverse-engineered and replicated (the Chinese are reportedly already doing it). Forty countries already have UAVs in their arsenals, as do reportedly non-state actors such as Hezbollah. Today the U.S. is able to fly its drones over Waziristan and Yemen, but it is not inconceivable that in the future others too might be able to fly their drones over New York and Washington.

Not inconceivable at all, but this argument misses the point: When the U.S. conducts drone attacks, it does so with authorization from the local host government, not as an attacking power — or so we open-source normies are told. (When we can find out anything at all.) And in the case of Libya, American Predators are part of the multi-national force that Obama spent weeks assembling, and they’re following attacks by manned American warplanes. If Iran approached the U.S. government and asked for permission for UAV orbits over Washington, it would be disappointed with the response — so if it tried them, that would be an old-fashioned act of war.

The broader idea here is worth considering, and it dovetails with this summer’s scuffle over the War Powers Resolution: Do presidents now have the authority, in perpetuity, to conduct low-level attacks anywhere in the world? The U.S. will never run out of enemies. When they pop up in Western countries, American officials can call allies in, say, Germany, and ask that they be arrested. But when terrorist suspects hide in lawless failed states such as Yemen and Somalia, can American presidents just order their deaths, then the deaths of the ones that come after, and so on — forever? Many Americans might say yes, that they still subscribe to President Bush’s argument that we’ve gotta fight ‘em over there so we don’t have to fight ‘em here. What’s extraordinary is that we seem to have arrived at this point without realizing it.

Congressional lawmakers and the president apparently consider this matter settled, that Bush’s drone campaign in Pakistan, which Obama has intensified, proved the point that the U.S. has to to be able to act decisively. Maybe Bush and Obama both believe they’ve addressed this issue when they’ve included vague lines in their speeches about “taking the fight to the enemy” or “doing whatever we have to do to protect America.” But doesn’t it seem as though this expansion in presidential power happened almost without debate? Although Congress picked a fight with the White House over Libya and the War Powers Resolution, most lawmakers have remained silent about the larger questions on America’s drone wars, apparently satisfied about the president’s authority to commit these attacks.

That, in turn, could be why Obama was so dismissive about congressional arguments that he has violated the War Powers Resolution. Not only has Obama been “consulting,” on Libya as the law requires, he might argue, Congress years ago conceded the president’s ability to conduct UAV attacks as he sees fit, which is part of what the U.S. is doing in Libya. No politician wants to be seen tying the hands of American counter-terrorism, which is why the House’s actions on Libya were structured to embarrass or criticize the president, but not actually affect the U.S. campaigns already underway — and no one mentioned Yemen or Somalia.

So as for Miglani’s fear “that the United States can arrogate to itself the right of life and death of people around the world?” That, for America’s top leadership, apparently is a done deal.


Source: http://www.dodbuzz.com/2011/07/05/have-u-s-drone-wars-opened-a-pandoras-box/#ixzz1RNKwpJV5DoDBuzz.com
.

Cyber-Physical Attacks and Drone Strikes: The Next Homeland Security Threat


An unarmed U.S. "Shadow" drone is launched.

John Villasenor, Nonresident Senior Fellow, Governance Studies, Center for Technology Innovation

The Brookings Institution

July 05, 2011 —

Most of the attention to the issue of cyberattacks is focused on the potential for the malicious use of electronic devices, computer systems and networks. But there is a closely related and much less widely appreciated threat in the form of physical attacks launched using cyber-physical systems. The U.S. National Science Foundation defines cyber-physical systems as “the tight conjoining of and coordination between computational and physical resources.”[1] While the research community has focused on the many beneficial uses of cyber-physical systems including robotic surgery, search and rescue, healthcare monitoring, and high-performance manufacturing,[2] it is important to recognize that these platforms can be used for malicious purposes as well. In that respect, drones, also known as unmanned aerial vehicles or UAVs, constitute a significant potential security threat.

Drones are essentially flying – and sometimes armed – computers. The same advances in information technology that enable video-capable smartphones and wireless Internet-based movie delivery to laptop computers also make it possible to build smaller, less expensive, and more versatile drones. For example, the Wasp III microdrone used by the U.S. Air Force weighs under a pound and is less than a foot long, yet carries two on-board cameras and a GPS receiver and can fly at an altitude of 1000 feet.[3] In February 2011, California-based company AeroVironment announced the successful demonstration of the prototype Nano Hummingbird, a video-capable drone developed under DARPA funding that weighs only two-thirds of an ounce and has a wingspan of 6.5 inches.[4]

As drones become smaller and quieter, they become easier to move and launch, and harder to detect in operation. The prospect of foreign-owned drones not under U.S. control operating within the United States without our knowledge or permission is not purely theoretical. In fact, it has already happened.

In December 2010, a small Israeli-made drone operated by the Mexican federal police crashed in an El Paso, Texas backyard, causing no injuries.[5] That incident, which U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Alan Bersin later characterized as “an accident, no question about it,”[6] illustrated the uncomfortable reality that all of the analysis regarding the drone’s origin, ownership, purpose, trajectory, and payload took place after the crash had occurred. Before the crash, U.S. officials had not even been aware that drones were operating in the area.[7] Had the incursion been purposeful, targeted, and malicious as opposed to accidental, it appears highly unlikely that it would have been detected and stopped in advance of reaching its target.

To believe that drones will remain the exclusive province of responsible nations is to disregard the long history of weapons technology. It is only a matter of time before rogue groups or nations hostile to the United States are able to build or acquire their own drones and to use them to launch attacks on our soil or on our soldiers abroad.[8]

The national security threat posed by drones has been considered before. For example, Dennis Gromley of the Monterey Institute's Center for Nonproliferation Studies described the possible use of drones by terrorists in testimony before a House of Representatives subcommittee in 2004[9] and in a 2006 paper published through the Naval Postgraduate School.[10] Similar issues were also considered in a 2005 paper by Eugene Miasnikov of the Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies at the Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology.[11]

In addition, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report[12] in January 2004 addressing nonproliferation issues related to cruise missiles and drones from the standpoint of U.S. export control as well as multilateral export control through the Missile Technology Control Regime[13] and the Wassenaar Arrangement.[14] The drones of the early 2000s were often akin to cruise missiles in terms of size and weight, so in that era considering them jointly from the standpoint of nonproliferation in the manner of the 2004 GAO report was eminently reasonable.

Times have changed. In some respects today’s drones are more similar to smartphones than to cruise missiles. This is due in large part to several game-changing information technology advances that have occurred over the last several years. First, spurred in part by general consumer demand for high-quality commercial mobile video solutions for products such as smartphones and tablet computers, miniature cameras and computer chips able to acquire and process high-resolution, high-frame-rate video while consuming very little battery power have become inexpensive and widely available. Second, commercial wireless communications technologies and the associated standards and protocols have evolved to the point where wireless transmission of video has become routine.

These advances, in combination with innovations in drone airframe and propulsion system design, have made it possible to build very small, inexpensive drones, and to control them using an interface as simple as a laptop screen and computer mouse. Partly as a result of these changes, the U.S. military has increased its inventory of drones from under 50 drones a decade ago to about 7000 today.[15] Drones have transformed the way the U.S. military wages war, making it possible to gather unprecedented amounts of aerial imagery using nearly undetectable platforms, and to strike at targets without putting pilots at risk. However, these capabilities can be exploited by anyone with access to suitably equipped drones. That access will become dramatically easier as drones continue to become more numerous, smaller, cheaper, and more widely distributed in the global supply chain.

One source that a rogue group wishing to gain possession of one or more drones might look to is the U.S. military itself. The Pentagon is requesting almost $5 billion for drones next year, and as the Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer recently stated, drones are “a growth market.”[16] A recent study from the Virginia-based Teal Group predicts that global spending on drones will exceed $94 billion over the next ten years, with the United States accounting for nearly 70% of the procurement expenditures.[17] With thousands of drones flowing through a complex U.S. military procurement and deployment process in the coming years, there are multiple scenarios that would enable a U.S. military drone to end up in the wrong hands.

Some degree of loss in the distribution process is almost certain.[18] Somewhere, a box containing a drone will be left on a pallet, will fall off a truck, or will be left momentarily unattended and will disappear. Or, the box, when opened at its final destination, will be empty, with no practical way to determine when or where its contents were removed. Some drones will crash during missions and could be recovered by persons hostile to the U.S. In some cases the crash may leave the drone irreparably damaged, but in others the damage may be slight and easily repaired.

There is also the very real threat of an insider sale, as illustrated by the 2007 arrest of an ex-Navy officer for stealing and in some cases selling military equipment including machine guns, a shoulder-fired rocket launcher, and weapons-mounted infrared laser-aiming devices.[19]

The computer systems on U.S. military drones are presumably highly secured. But these are also easy to replace. A rogue group in possession of an airframe and propulsion system obtained from the U.S. military could use commercial off-the-shelf electronics components to replace the systems for acquiring video and for enabling ground-based control of the drone.

Alternatively, the group could attempt to buy a drone on the global market. As an El Paso Times newspaper article noted in December 2010, the drone model that crashed in El Paso is offered for sale on the Internet.[20] Increased demand for drones from the militaries of many different countries has led to larger numbers of drone suppliers, some based overseas and thus outside the direct reach of U.S. regulation, and some of those located in countries that are not members of the Missile Technology Control Regime or the Wassenaar Arrangement. For example, as noted in a July 4, 2011 Washington Post article,[21] China has a very active program to develop its drone design and manufacturing capabilities, as well as a desire to sell drones on the international market. China is not currently listed as a member state of the Missile Technology Control Regime[22] or of the Wassenaar arrangement.[23] An Air Force expert on the history of drones wrote in 2007 that there were over 50 countries engaged in the “development and employment” of drones,[24] and the Teal Group’s 2011 World Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Systems report contains individual market forecasts for over 70 countries.[25] In short, the drone industry is large, complex, and global.

Solutions to the national security risk posed by drones in the wrong hands include 1) measures designed to make it as difficult as possible for rogue groups to obtain drones, and 2) steps aimed at stopping or minimizing the harm due to attempted drone attacks on American interests. The process of putting such solutions into place will require significant time and coordination among multiple U.S. Government and international entities, and should to be started well in advance of receiving indications of a possible impending attack.

Specific steps that can be taken include the following:

Stages in the U.S. drone supply chain with relatively weaker security and that would therefore be more vulnerable to robbery or theft can be identified and secured. In addition, information about the operational characteristics, computer hardware, software systems, and communications and networking environments associated with drone operation can be more highly compartmentalized.

Drone communications and control systems can be evaluated and modified as necessary to ensure that they are secure. As reported by the Wall Street Journal in 2009, in at least some instances U.S. Predator drones were transmitting video over an unprotected communications link, enabling insurgents in Iraq to intercept the video using inexpensive, off-the-shelf software.[26] Drone software systems can be designed so that they can be reprogrammed as needed post-deployment to implement appropriate encryption and anti-jamming methods.

U.S.-made drones can be designed to include chips or other electronics that would enable them to be tracked if they are lost. With appropriate design, these chips can be made very difficult to find without destroying or significantly damaging the drone in the process.

On-board computer systems on drones can be equipped with kill switches that could be tripped remotely if the drones go missing. Of course, it would also be important to ensure that the kill switches can only be accessed by a very limited group of trusted people. In addition, or in the alternative, in the manner of theft recovery software that is increasingly installed on laptop computers, the on-board computer systems on drones could include the ability to “phone home” upon activation, and to provide imagery and information related to location.

Electronics and other system components used in drones can be designed to include steganographic (hidden) information that would allow the original manufacturer and purchaser to be traced and identified. This could aid after-the-fact identification of the perpetrators of a drone-based attack, and could also provide a disincentive to carry out attacks in the first place.

Drones will be increasingly available internationally, potentially including on the international arms market. While that market is notoriously hard to monitor and even more difficult to regulate, the United States can use its engagement with other countries through organizations such as the Missile Technology Control Regime to continue to enhance global standards for drone export control, supply chain monitoring and integrity.

It should also be recognized that nonproliferation is a particularly complex issue with respect to small surveillance drones given their size and their legitimate uses for applications such as law enforcement. Another complicating factor is that many of the core information processing technologies used in today’s drones are similar or identical to solutions found in commonly available consumer electronics devices such as laptop computers and gaming platforms. Despite these challenges, domestic and multilateral export control laws and agreements can be reevaluated to assess their suitability given the changes in drone technologies in recent years. For example, current U.S. export control laws specifically address various aspects of drones, and, among other restrictions, specify a license requirement for non-military drones (as well as the associated systems, equipment, and components) having the “capability of controlled flight out of the direct visual range involving a human operator.”[27] Increased export control coverage with respect to the nature of the onboard processing on drones may also be warranted.

Sensitive U.S. government buildings and areas could be equipped with systems to detect and, if appropriate, electromagnetically or physically engage low-flying drones that would literally be under the radar of the systems deployed today that were built to track higher-altitude, passenger-bearing aircraft. The same advances in information technology that increase the risk that drones will end up in the wrong hands also make it much more practical to monitor the low-altitude airspace in sensitive areas and to effectively communicate and analyze the information gathered by such systems.

Physical defenses against drone attacks are more challenging both technologically and in terms of cost. However, there may be no choice but to develop them. An analog can be found in the Israeli Iron Dome system, which is designed to detect and destroy incoming rocket attacks. While that system has cost well over $1 billion dollars to date and is still only partially effective,[28] there are few people on the receiving end of those attacks who would argue against its development. Some of the technologies developed by the U.S. military and the major defense contractors for missile interception, if appropriately modified, would likely be highly effective in targeting drones.

Today we have the luxury of assuming that the sky above us is free of nearly invisible pilotless aircraft under the control of a hostile group and possibly carrying a payload that might do us harm. Continued advances in drone technology make it all but certain that in future years we will no longer have that luxury. Investing effort now to put in place the policies, systems, and procedures to address that inevitability can play a vital role in minimizing the chances of a successful drone attack on American interests.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] http://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=503286, retrieved July 3, 2011.
[2] Ibid.
[3] http://www2.afsoc.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=9114, retrieved July 3, 2011.


[4] http://www.avinc.com/resources/press_release/aerovironment_develops_worlds_first_fully_operational_life-size_hummingbird, retrieved July 4, 2011.

[5] http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_17021017, retrieved July 3, 2011.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Iran has a longstanding drone program. As long ago as 2004, Iran was believed to be supplying drones to Hezbollah that were then used to penetrate Israeli airspace. See http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2004-11-08/news/0411080154_1_lebanese-airspace-hezbollah-israel-and-iran, retrieved July 4, 2011.

[9] Testimony of Dennis M. Gormley before the Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Affairs of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Reform, March 9, 2004, http://cns.miis.edu/testimony/testgorm.htm, retrieved July 3, 2011.


[10] Dennis M. Gormley, "Globalization and WMD Proliferation Networks: The Case of Unmanned Air Vehicles as Terrorist Weapons," Strategic Insights, Volume V, Issue 6, Center for Contemporary Conflict, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California, July 2006, http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA521376&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf, retrieved July 3, 2011.

[11] Eugene Miasnikov, "Threat of Terrorism Using Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Technical Aspects," Center for Arms Control, Energy and Environmental Studies, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, 2005, http://www.armscontrol.ru/UAV/UAV-report.pdf, retrieved July 3, 2011. This report includes an appendix on pages 25-26 listing “Media Reports of Terrorist Attempts to Employ UAVs.”

[12] See http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-04-175 (retrieved July 4, 2011) for a summary; a detailed report is available at http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04175.pdf, retrieved July 4, 2011. Drones are referred to as “UAVs” in the report.

[13] See http://www.mtcr.info/english/index.html, retrieved July 4, 2011. “The Missile Technology Control Regime is an informal and voluntary association of countries which share the goals of non-proliferation of unmanned delivery systems capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, and which seek to coordinate national export licensing efforts aimed at preventing their proliferation.” There are currently 34 countries participating in the MTCR, including the United States. The MTCR “Equipment, Software, and Technology Annex” is available at http://www.mtcr.info/english/annex.html.

[14] The Wassenaar Arrangement currently has about 40 member states including the United States, and promotes “transparency and greater responsibility in transfers of conventional arms and dual-use goods and technologies.” See http://www.wassenaar.org/introduction/index.html, retrieved July 4, 2011. UAVs are addressed in the December 2010 Wassenaar Arrangement Control List under Category 9,
“Aerospace and Propulsion,” available at http://www.wassenaar.org/controllists/index.html.

[15] http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/world/20drones.html, retrieved July 2, 2011.

[16] Ibid.

[17] http://tealgroup.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=74, retrieved July 4, 2011

[18] Procedures to track and account for military equipment, including weapons, are not always followed. For example, a November 2007 report from the Pentagon Inspector General identified thousands of unaccounted for weapons (though not drones) that passed through the 810,000 square foot warehouse complex at Abu Ghraib in Iraq, including rocket-propelled grenade launchers and machine guns. See http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/IG_Report_Security_Forces_Fund.pdf, retrieved July 3, 2011, pages 9 and 32.
[19] http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/10/navy_lasertheft_102308/, retrieved July 4, 2011.


[20] http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_16875462, retrieved July 3, 2011.

[21] http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/global-race-on-to-match-us-drone-capabilities/2011/06/30/gHQACWdmxH_story.html, retrieved July 4, 2011.

[22] http://www.mtcr.info/english/partners.html, retrieved July 4, 2011.

[23] http://www.wassenaar.org/participants/index.html, retrieved July 4, 2011.

[24] Lt. Kendra L.B. Cook, “The Silent Force Multiplier: The History and Role of UAVs in Warfare,” 2007 IEEE Aerospace Conference, pp. 1-7, http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/freeabs_all.jsp?arnumber=4161584, retrieved July 3, 2011.


[25] http://tealgroup.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=395, retrieved July 4, 2011.

[26] http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126102247889095011.html, retrieved July 4, 2011


[27] See, for example, category 9 of the U.S. Commerce Control List, which is Part 774 of the Export Administration Regulations Database, available at http://www.gpo.gov/bis/ear/ear_data.html.

[28] http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/apr/11/israel-iron-dome-anti-missile-system, retrieved July 2, 2011.

Source
.

Military fighter plane crashes in NM after pilot ejects safely; crash starts brush fire

By Associated Press, Updated: Wednesday, July 6, 7:44 PM

ROSWELL, N.M. — A military fighter plane crashed Wednesday in southern New Mexico after the pilot ejected safely, Air Force officials said.

The QF-4 Phantom from Holloman Air Force Base crashed in grasslands southwest of Roswell near the community of Hope. The crash sparked a fire that burned 28 acres before it was contained.

The pilot was in good condition, according to a statement from Col. David Krumm, commander of the 49th Wing.

Base officials confirmed there was no live ammunition aboard the plane. However, Krumm said in his statement that the base was “asking the public to cooperate with military and civilian authorities at the scene to ensure the safety of everyone involved.”

The aircraft was assigned to and operated by Detachment 1, 82nd Aerial Target Squadron.

The QF-4 is used as a target for weapons testing. It can be flown by remote control or with a pilot.

Base officials said a safety board would be convened to investigate the crash.


Source
.

Here's one for Twitterpalooza


Where are the jobs that the 'stimulus' was supposed to produce?
Where are all the 'shovel ready' jobs?
Time for re-election means time for more promises; Promises of hope and change, and we can't forget, YES WE CAN!

Tuesday, July 05, 2011

George Hunt Utah 5-10-91 Pt 1 - Introduction



George Hunt Utah 5-10-91 Pt 1 - Introduction
From: thebigbadbank | Jul 22, 2010 | 155 views
http://www.thebigbadbank.com

George Hunt Speaks in Utah, May 10th, 1991 - Pt. 1 - Introduction -- George is introduced by the speaker with a little background about Mr. Hunt including his background as a business analysts and his role as a host at the 4th World Wilderness Congress in Estes Park in 1987. To begin George explains his background in religion and how he learned about the 4th World Wilderness Congress and why he first became interested in becoming a part of it.


(To see the continuing parts of this event click on links below):


George Hunt Utah 5-10-91 Pt 16 - The End