Surveillance Costs: The NSA’s Impact on The Economy, Information Security, and Internet Freedom – Video

Posted on by


Surveillance Costs: The NSA #39;s Impact on The Economy, Information Security, and Internet Freedom
Surveillance Costs: The NSA #39;s Impact on The Economy, Information Security, and Internet Freedom There #39;s a debate raging in DC and around the world about the ...

By: NewAmericaFoundation

See the rest here:

Surveillance Costs: The NSA's Impact on The Economy, Information Security, and Internet Freedom - Video

Arizona's 'religious freedom' bill. How much would it cost the state? (+video)

Posted on by

Business leaders fear the 'religious freedom' bill allowing firms to refuse to serve gay customers could have serious consequences for Arizona. Topping their concerns: the fate of the Super Bowl.

As Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) weighs whether or not to sign a bill allowing private business owners to refuse to serve gay and lesbian customers in the name of "religious freedom," opponents of the measure are urging the governor to think hard about the economic consequences to the state if it becomes law.

Subscribe Today to the Monitor

Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of The Christian Science Monitor Weekly Digital Edition

Arizonas US Senators, John McCain and Jeff Flake, have both said they hope that Governor Brewer does not sign, and Apple Inc., which has announced plans to build a manufacturing plant in Mesa, Ariz., reportedly has urged the same.

Doug Parker, CEO of the new American Airlines Group, sent the governor a letter in which he discusses the states economic comeback and says, There is genuine concern throughout the business community that this bill, if signed into law, would jeopardize all that has been accomplished so far.

But the highest potential stakes involve the Super Bowl, which is scheduled to be played in Arizona in 2015. On Monday, the state Super Bowl Committee added its name to a letter urging the governor to veto the bill.

The big question is will the NFL take away the Super Bowl next year?, says Matthew Hale, a political scientist at Seton Hall University in South Orange Village, N.J. The NFL has a history of homophobia and bullying, and the first openly gay player is coming in the next draft. As a result, the pressure on the NFL to take away the big game" if the bill becomes law "will be tremendous.

If Arizona loses the Super Bowl because of antigay legislation, it would be "a true watershed moment in the fight for LBGT equality," he adds.

In urging a veto, many critics of the bill cite the negative economic fallout from SB 1070, the controversial immigration law that Arizona passed in 2010 authorizing police to stop people they felt looked like illegal immigrants. The so-called "show me your papers" law, much of which was struck down eventually by the US Supreme Court, generated headlines worldwide portraying the state as intolerant. Tourism income faltered, conventions were cancelled, and Arizona became the butt of late-night comics.

Read the original:

Arizona's 'religious freedom' bill. How much would it cost the state? (+video)

Religious-Freedom Bills Proliferate in Statehouses

Posted on by

Arizona has become amajor flashpointin the national debate over the boundaries between religious freedom and discrimination, as legislators there push to enact a new law that would allow business owners to deny service to customers for religious reasons.

But the state is hardly alone in mulling more explicit protections for religious business owners and individuals, whose objections to same-sex marriage have come into increasing conflict with newer lawsexpandingthe rights of gays andlesbians.

Heres a roundup of various religious-liberty measures circulating in other statehouses. Most have yet to pass a single chamber and a number have been tabled. Some deal specifically with the rights of businesses or students, while others are more broadly worded. In at least two states, the issue may go before voters as a ballot initiative.

* Proposed legislation:

Alabama:Abill introduced in the state Housewould create the Alabama Student Religious Liberties Act, which would prohibit school districts from discriminating against a student or parent on the basis of a religious viewpoint or religious expression in public schools and require school districts to allow religious expression in class assignments, coursework, and artwork.

Georgia:Lawmakers have introduced thePreservation of Religious Freedom Actmodeled after a two-decade-old federal law that sets a high legal bar for when the government may substantially burden an individuals exercise of religion.

Legislators in the lower house have also proposed a Georgia Student Religious Liberties Act that would prohibit teachers from penalizing students for expressing religious beliefs in assignments or homeworkand would also require schools to create forums for students to express their faith at school events.

Idaho:House lawmakers areconsidering a measurethat would prohibit the government from denying, revoking or suspending any professional or occupational license or registration based upon actions involving the exercise or expression of sincerely held religious beliefs. Another measure would expand the states existing Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Kansas:Kansas lawmakersintroduced a measurethat would prohibit religious individuals or businesses from being required to serve customers or hire people if doing so would be contrary to the sincerely held religious beliefs about sex or gender. The states attorney general said if enacted, the measure would likely be challenged in court. It passed the House on Feb. 12 and was referred to the Senates judiciary committee.

Currently, Senate leadership has no intention of working or voting on the bill, said Senate majority leader Terry Bruce, who thought the measure was too ambiguously worded. He said the chamber is going back and reviewing religious-protection statutes already on the books.

Read more:

Religious-Freedom Bills Proliferate in Statehouses

Freedom Industries CEO speaks out about the chemical leak

Posted on by

CHARLESTON, WV -

The man caught at the center of the water crisis made a confession Tuesday.

"Of course we feel bad," said Gary Southern, the CEO of Freedom Industries.

Company executives testified in federal bankruptcy court Tuesday morning. Southern and Chief Financial Officer Terry Cline also answered questions about Freedom's assets and liabilities.

The company became infamous almost instantly Jan. 9, when first responders discovered the chemical crude MCHM had escaped from a storage tank last month, tainting the drinking water of nearly 300,000 West Virginians.

"This has been an extremely traumatic event for everybody to deal with, particularly our employees," said Southern, addressing the media outside the courthouse.

The executives testified that operations were "winding down" as they continue to liquidate their inventory.

"I"ve pretty much lived at Freedom Industries," Southern said, claiming he oversaw clean-up efforts every day.

The West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection ordered the company to start tearing down the Etowah River Terminal by March 15. One day after the spill, environmental regulators ordered Freedom Industries to remove all materials from the leak site. Southern said Freedom is "in compliance with the de-commission of the Etowah Terminal."

Cline and Southern said Tuesday most materials had been relocated, but some chemicals may still remain in the tanks. He previously estimated clean-up costs at $800,000 in the first week after the spill.

More:

Freedom Industries CEO speaks out about the chemical leak

Arizona's 'religious freedom' bill. How much would it cost the state?

Posted on by

Business leaders fear the 'religious freedom' bill allowing firms to refuse to serve gay customers could have serious consequences for Arizona. Topping their concerns: the fate of the Super Bowl.

As Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer (R) weighs whether or not to sign a bill allowing private business owners to refuse to serve gay and lesbian customers in the name of "religious freedom," opponents of the measure are urging the governor to think hard about the economic consequences to the state if it becomes law.

Subscribe Today to the Monitor

Click Here for your FREE 30 DAYS of The Christian Science Monitor Weekly Digital Edition

Arizonas US Senators, John McCain and Jeff Flake, have both said they hope that Governor Brewer does not sign, and Apple Inc., which has announced plans to build a manufacturing plant in Mesa, Ariz., reportedly has urged the same.

Doug Parker, CEO of the new American Airlines Group, sent the governor a letter in which he discusses the states economic comeback and says, There is genuine concern throughout the business community that this bill, if signed into law, would jeopardize all that has been accomplished so far.

But the highest potential stakes involve the Super Bowl, which is scheduled to be played in Arizona in 2015. On Monday, the state Super Bowl Committee added its name to a letter urging the governor to veto the bill.

The big question is will the NFL take away the Super Bowl next year?, says Matthew Hale, a political scientist at Seton Hall University in South Orange Village, N.J. The NFL has a history of homophobia and bullying, and the first openly gay player is coming in the next draft. As a result, the pressure on the NFL to take away the big game" if the bill becomes law "will be tremendous.

If Arizona loses the Super Bowl because of antigay legislation, it would be "a true watershed moment in the fight for LBGT equality," he adds.

In urging a veto, many critics of the bill cite the negative economic fallout from SB 1070, the controversial immigration law that Arizona passed in 2010 authorizing police to stop people they felt looked like illegal immigrants. The so-called "show me your papers" law, much of which was struck down eventually by the US Supreme Court, generated headlines worldwide portraying the state as intolerant. Tourism income faltered, conventions were cancelled, and Arizona became the butt of late-night comics.

See the original post here:

Arizona's 'religious freedom' bill. How much would it cost the state?

Freedom officers, creditors meet in bankruptcy court

Posted on by

Officials with Freedom Industries met with the company's creditors in federal bankruptcy court on Tuesday and answered questions about the company's insurance coverage and assets and liabilities.

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Officials with Freedom Industries met with the company's creditors in federal bankruptcy court on Tuesday and answered questions about the company's insurance coverage and assets and liabilities.

Freedom Industries, which contaminated the water of thousands of West Virginians with a chemical leak into the Elk River on Jan. 9, filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on Jan. 17. Chapter 11 allows a company to reorganize and continue operating, but during a hearing last week, Freedom's attorney said the company would soon shut down.

After the meeting with creditors, Freedom President Gary Southern said company officials were dedicated to cleaning up from the leak and trying to find other jobs for its employees.

"This has been an extremely traumatic event for everybody to deal with, particularly our employees," Southern said outside the Robert C. Byrd U.S. Courthouse in Charleston.

"We're absolutely committed to the people of the state of West Virginia in terms of our remediation of the facility and our employees, with whom we're working extremely hard to find them new positions for those that will be displaced as a result of the bankruptcy," Southern said. "That is the forefront of our focus and will continue to be so until we meet all of our obligations."

During the meeting Tuesday, Southern and the company's chief financial officer, Terry Cline, testified that chemicals had been removed from the property. In an agreement with the state Department of Environmental Protection, Freedom has agreed to dismantle its site on Barlow Drive on or before March 15.

There are about 240 unsecured creditors to whom Freedom owes money. Many of the unsecured creditors are those who filed lawsuits against the company before its bankruptcy filing. There are at least 30 lawsuits against Freedom.

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Ronald G. Pearson said in a hearing last week "there's a serious limit on funding available."

CHARLESTON, W.Va. -- Officials with Freedom Industries met with the company's creditors in federal bankruptcy court on Tuesday and answered questions about the company's insurance coverage and assets and liabilities.

Original post:

Freedom officers, creditors meet in bankruptcy court

Prometheus and Canada part 3: The Huxley/Trudeau Eugenics Revolution re-shackles Prometheus – Video

Posted on by


Prometheus and Canada part 3: The Huxley/Trudeau Eugenics Revolution re-shackles Prometheus
This third part of the Prometheus and Canada series begins with a political overview of the world in 2014. After situating the world dynamic as being shaped ...

By: Committee for the Republic of Canada

Read more here:

Prometheus and Canada part 3: The Huxley/Trudeau Eugenics Revolution re-shackles Prometheus - Video

Opinion: Three-Parent Babies Are an Ethical Choice

Posted on by

Perhaps the biggest fear raised by advances in genetic engineering like the ability to create a baby with three parents is that we are heading straight down a road that leads to eugenics the attempt to create perfect "designer" babies.

From "Star Trek" to "Star Wars" to many more films like "Gattaca" and "The Boys from Brazil," Hollywood has warned us time and again that genetic engineering of animals or people is nothing but bad news.

History sadly also shows the horror that eugenics programs have produced in Germany, Japan and many other nations when some people are deemed more desirable and others are seen as defective, burdensome or subhuman. Death camps, forced sterilization, restrictions on marriage, exile, concentration camps, prohibitions on immigration all have all been carried out in the name of eugenics.

But Hollywood is wrong. Not everything about genetic engineering is morally horrible. Nor is human genetic engineering always motivated by eugenic goals.

"Hollywood is wrong. Not everything about genetic engineering is morally horrible."

The FDA is considering approving an experiment to repair a genetic disease in humans by creating embryos with DNA from three parents. Genes would be transferred from a healthy human egg to one that has a disease and the "repaired" egg then fertilized in the hope that a healthy baby will result. The goal of the experiment in genetic engineering is not a perfect baby but a healthy baby.

One in 4,000 children inherit terrible diseases due to genetic mutations in their mitochondria. The mitochondria are the batteries of cells. They provide the energy that lets cells divide and grow. All mitochondria are inherited from the mother from her eggs. And, the mitochondria are separate, tiny units in the egg meaning you can pick them out and transplant them.

So if you know that a mitochondrial disease runs in your family, you might want to try getting pregnant using one of your eggs that has been genetically engineered to have mitochondria from a donor egg.

None of this should raise concerns about abortion. Only eggs, not embryos, would be involved. There are, however, safety concerns. We won't really know if mitochondrial transplants work until healthy young people exist who have been made using the technique. Studies in primates look promising but safety in humans is still a risk.

"How far we go in engineering future generations through genetic manipulations is up to us."

Read the original:

Opinion: Three-Parent Babies Are an Ethical Choice

3-parent babies

Posted on by

By Matt Smith, CNN

updated 9:28 PM EST, Wed February 26, 2014

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

(CNN) -- A promising way to stop a deadly disease, or an uncomfortable step toward what one leading ethicist called eugenics?

U.S. health officials are weighing whether to approve trials of a pioneering in vitro fertilization technique using DNA from three people in an attempt to prevent illnesses like muscular dystrophy and respiratory problems. The proposed treatment would allow a woman to have a baby without passing on diseases of the mitochondria, the "powerhouses" that drive cells.

The procedure is "not without its risks, but it's treating a disease," medical ethicist Art Caplan told CNN's "New Day" on Wednesday. Preventing a disease that can be passed down for generations would be ethical "as long as it proves to be safe," he said.

"These little embryos, these are people born with a disease, they can't make power. You're giving them a new battery. That's a therapy. I think that's a humane ethical thing to do," said Caplan, the director of medical ethics at New York University's Langone Medical Center.

"Where we get into the sticky part is, what if you get past transplanting batteries and start to say, 'While we're at it, why don't we make you taller, stronger, faster or smarter?' "

But Susan Solomon, the director of the New York Stem Cell Foundation, said there are no changes to existing genes involved.

"There is no genetic engineering. It isn't a slippery slope. It's a way to allow these families to have healthy children," said Solomon, whose organization developed the technique along with Columbia University researchers.

The rest is here:

3-parent babies

FDA Considering In Vitro Fertilization Using DNA From 3 Parents

Posted on by

A promising way to stop a deadly disease, or an uncomfortable step toward what one leading ethicist called eugenics?

FDA deciding whether to approve trials of a pioneering in vitro fertilization technique using DNA from three people in an attempt to prevent illnesses. (Credit: Getty Images)

U.S. health officials are weighing whether to approve trials of a pioneering in vitro fertilization technique using DNA from three people in an attempt to prevent illnesses like muscular dystrophy and respiratory problems. The proposed treatment would allow a woman to have a baby without passing on diseases of the mitochondria, the powerhouses that drive cells.

The procedure is not without its risks, but its treating a disease, medical ethicist Art Caplan told CNNs New Day on Wednesday. Preventing a disease that can be passed down for generations would be ethical as long as it proves to be safe, he said.

These little embryos, these are people born with a disease, they cant make power. Youre giving them a new battery. Thats a therapy. I think thats a humane ethical thing to do, said Caplan, the director of medical ethics at New York Universitys Langone Medical Center.

Where we get into the sticky part is, what if you get past transplanting batteries and start to say, While were at it, why dont we make you taller, stronger, faster or smarter?

But Susan Solomon, the director of the New York Stem Cell Foundation, said there are no changes to existing genes involved.

There is no genetic engineering. It isnt a slippery slope. Its a way to allow these families to have healthy children, said Solomon, whose organization developed the technique along with Columbia University researchers.

What were doing is, without at all changing the DNA of the mother, just allowing it to grow in an environment that isnt sick, she added.

A Food and Drug Administration advisory panel concluded two days of hearings into the procedure Wednesday. The panel discussed what controls might be used in trials, how a developing embryo might be monitored during those tests and who should oversee the trials, but no decisions were made at the end of the session.

The rest is here:

FDA Considering In Vitro Fertilization Using DNA From 3 Parents

FDA pondering 3-parent babies

Posted on by

Posted on: 8:44 pm, February 26, 2014, by CNN Wire, updated on: 08:45pm, February 26, 2014

(CNN) A promising way to stop a deadly disease, or an uncomfortable step toward what one leading ethicist called eugenics?

U.S. health officials are weighing whether to approve trials of a pioneering in vitro fertilization technique using DNA from three people in an attempt to prevent illnesses like muscular dystrophy and respiratory problems. The proposed treatment would allow a woman to have a baby without passing on diseases of the mitochondria, the powerhouses that drive cells.

The procedure is not without its risks, but its treating a disease, medical ethicist Art Caplan told CNNs New Day on Wednesday. Preventing a disease that can be passed down for generations would be ethical as long as it proves to be safe, he said.

These little embryos, these are people born with a disease, they cant make power. Youre giving them a new battery. Thats a therapy. I think thats a humane ethical thing to do, said Caplan, the director of medical ethics at New York Universitys Langone Medical Center.

Where we get into the sticky part is, what if you get past transplanting batteries and start to say, While were at it, why dont we make you taller, stronger, faster or smarter?

But Susan Solomon, the director of the New York Stem Cell Foundation, said there are no changes to existing genes involved.

There is no genetic engineering. It isnt a slippery slope. Its a way to allow these families to have healthy children, said Solomon, whose organization developed the technique along with Columbia University researchers.

What were doing is, without at all changing the DNA of the mother, just allowing it to grow in an environment that isnt sick, she added.

A Food and Drug Administration advisory panel concluded two days of hearings into the procedure Wednesday. The panel discussed what controls might be used in trials, how a developing embryo might be monitored during those tests and who should oversee the trials, but no decisions were made at the end of the session.

Read this article:

FDA pondering 3-parent babies

FDA considering '3-parent babies'

Posted on by

By Matt Smith, CNN

updated 9:28 PM EST, Wed February 26, 2014

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

(CNN) -- A promising way to stop a deadly disease, or an uncomfortable step toward what one leading ethicist called eugenics?

U.S. health officials are weighing whether to approve trials of a pioneering in vitro fertilization technique using DNA from three people in an attempt to prevent illnesses like muscular dystrophy and respiratory problems. The proposed treatment would allow a woman to have a baby without passing on diseases of the mitochondria, the "powerhouses" that drive cells.

The procedure is "not without its risks, but it's treating a disease," medical ethicist Art Caplan told CNN's "New Day" on Wednesday. Preventing a disease that can be passed down for generations would be ethical "as long as it proves to be safe," he said.

"These little embryos, these are people born with a disease, they can't make power. You're giving them a new battery. That's a therapy. I think that's a humane ethical thing to do," said Caplan, the director of medical ethics at New York University's Langone Medical Center.

"Where we get into the sticky part is, what if you get past transplanting batteries and start to say, 'While we're at it, why don't we make you taller, stronger, faster or smarter?' "

But Susan Solomon, the director of the New York Stem Cell Foundation, said there are no changes to existing genes involved.

"There is no genetic engineering. It isn't a slippery slope. It's a way to allow these families to have healthy children," said Solomon, whose organization developed the technique along with Columbia University researchers.

Read more here:

FDA considering '3-parent babies'

FDA weighs 3-parent baby to prevent disease

Posted on by

Posted on: 3:14 pm, February 26, 2014, by Katrina Lamansky, updated on: 06:19pm, February 26, 2014

(CNN) A promising way to stop a deadly disease, or an uncomfortable step toward what one leading ethicist called eugenics?

U.S. health officials are weighing whether to approve trials of a pioneering in vitro fertilization technique using DNA from three people in an attempt to prevent illnesses like muscular dystrophy and respiratory problems. The proposed treatment would allow a woman to have a baby without passing on diseases of the mitochondria, the powerhouses that drive cells.

The procedure is not without its risks, but its treating a disease, medical ethicist Art Caplan told CNNs New Day on Wednesday. Preventing a disease that can be passed down for generations would be ethical as long as it proves to be safe, he said.

These little embryos, these are people born with a disease, they cant make power. Youre giving them a new battery. Thats a therapy. I think thats a humane ethical thing to do, said Caplan, the director of medical ethics at New York Universitys Langone Medical Center.

Where we get into the sticky part is, what if you get past transplanting batteries and start to say, While were at it, why dont we make you taller, stronger, faster or smarter?

A Food and Drug Administration advisory panel concluded two days of hearings into the technique Wednesday. The panel discussed what controls might be used in trials, how a developing embryo might be monitored during those tests and who should oversee the trials, but no decisions were made at the end of the session.

Mitochondrial problems are inherited from the mother. In the procedure under discussion in Washington for the past two days, genetic material from the nucleus of a mothers egg or an embryo gets transferred to a donor egg or embryo thats had its nuclear DNA removed.

The new embryo will contain nuclear DNA from the intended father and mother, as well as healthy mitochondrial DNA from the donor embryo effectively creating a three-parent baby.

In June, Britain took a step toward becoming the first country to allow the technique. One in 6,500 babies in the United Kingdom is born with mitochondrial disorder, which can lead to serious health issues such as heart and liver disease.

Read more:

FDA weighs 3-parent baby to prevent disease