Select Page ::

Free Speech: The Left Moves In for the Kill – PJ Media

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

The Left is mounting an all-out assault against the freedom of speech, and is using Charlottesville as its Reichstag Fire moment to try to crush all dissent.

Several days ago, I received an email that set in motion a chain of events leading to my website, Jihad Watch, being dropped from PayPal. After an immense public outcry, the Jihad Watch PayPal account was restored -- not that I ever intend to use it again. But this episode illustrates the Lefts determination to silence all of its foes rather than debate them, and these fascists wont rest until no one dares oppose their agenda.

The email that started this incident has ominous implications far beyond the incident itself. Far-Left journalist Lauren Kirchner sent similar emails to other counter-jihad sites as well -- here are her questions, along with the answers I sent her:

Yes, certainly I do. For years, Leftists and Muslim groups with numerous ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood have smeared as hate all attempts to speak honestly about the motivating ideology behind jihad terrorism.

In reality, it is not hateful, racist or extremist to oppose jihad terror, and the claim that it is [is] not only libelous but insidious: the intent has clearly been to intimidate people into thinking it wrong to oppose jihad terror, and it has worked, as illustrated by the neighbors of the San Bernardino jihad murderers, who saw suspicious activity at their home but didnt report them for fear of being racist.

2) We identified several tech companies on your website: PayPal, Amazon, Newsmax, and Revcontent. Can you confirm that you receive funds from your relationship with those tech companies? How would the loss of those funds affect your operations, and how would you be able to replace them?

The intent of your questions, and no doubt of your forthcoming article, will be to try to compel these sites to cut off any connection with us based on our opposition to jihad terror. Are you comfortable with what youre enabling?

Not only are you inhibiting honest analysis of the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, but youre aiding the attempt to deny people a platform based on their political views. This could come back to bite you if your own views ever fall out of favor.

Have you ever lived in a totalitarian state, where the powerful determine the parameters of the public discourse and cut off all voice from the powerless? Do you really want to live in one now? You might find, once you get there, that it isnt as wonderful as you thought it would be.

3) Have you been shut down by other tech companies for being an alleged hate or extremist web site? Which companies?

No. This is a new thing.

First came the ridiculous claim that opposing jihad terror was hate, and now comes the other shoe dropping: the attempt to cut out the ground from under the feet of those who hate. You can only hope that you arent similarly defamed one day; perhaps if that does happen, you will realize (too late) why the freedom of speech is an indispensable element of a free society.

4) Many people opposed to sites like yours are currently pressuring tech companies to cease their relationships with them -- what is your view of this campaign? Why?

Nazis will be Nazis. Fascists will be fascists. Today they call themselves Antifa and the like, but theyre acting just like Hitlers Brownshirts did, when they shouted down and assaulted anti-Nazi speakers. Now the violent thugs work in a more genteel fashion: they just pull the Internet plug on those they hate. You, Lauren Kirchner, are aiding and abetting a quintessentially fascist enterprise. Authoritarianism in service of any cause leads to a slave society despite the best intentions of those who helped usher it in.

Free Speech: The Left Moves In for the Kill - PJ Media

Pantheism – History – AllAboutHistory.org

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

QUESTION: What is Pantheism?

ANSWER:

The word "pantheism," like many theological words, comes from the Greek language. Pan means "all" or "everything" and Theos means "god." So, pantheism is the belief that everything somehow is a part of god. Our galaxy, the stars, our solar system, all living things, all thoughts, all people, everything is part of who or what god is. Much of the pantheistic view can be summed up in the statement, "All is god, and god is all." Although a form of the word "Pantheism" was first used in English in 1705, its roots go far back into antiquity. Many current religious and philosophical systems that have their basis in Pantheism include Buddhism, Confucianism, Darwinism, Freemasonry, Hinduism, Occultism, Taoism, and the New Age movement. These are based on three broad types of Pantheism.

Materialistic Pantheism holds that the material universe is all that exists - there is nothing else. Our thoughts, feelings, hopes, dreams, and aspirations are nothing more than biochemical reactions occurring in the cells of the brain, glands, and organs. We are nothing but organic machines. In addition, since nothing but matter exists there was no one or nothing to create this matter. Thus matter must be eternal. "God" is just another name for the material universe. This form of Pantheism has more in common with atheism than with other forms of theism.

Idealistic Pantheism teaches that just as the human soul or mind resides in the human body, the universal soul or mind (i.e. god) resides in the physical universe. God infuses, works through, and expresses the divine essence through the material world. Ultimate reality is found, therefore, not in the material world, but in the spiritual world. Some go so far as to say that the physical world is merely an illusion - either god's or mine - in which I play my part. The sum of all thoughts and feelings is therefore "god."

Neutral Pantheism is like a hybrid of the other two. Both the material and immaterial emanate from a single neutral substance or energy. God is this energy that generates all mind and all matter. God creates physical reality out of this divine substance and then extends spiritual attributes to it from this divine substance. Then, in the end, all things return to god. Therefore, the totality of all thought and all matter is what we call "god."

There are at least two significant problems with Pantheism. First, it cannot account for the existence of the universe. Most scientists today accept that matter, energy, space, and even time (our universe) had a point of beginning. But, if god is just part of the universe or another name for the universe, who or what began god? God could not create himself! Second, since our universe includes beings with personality (you and me for example), the Creator of the universe must have personality also. An effect cannot be greater than its cause.

In contrast to Pantheism, the Bible teaches that God is a Person (Exodus 3:7; Hebrews 6:17), that He created the physical universe (Genesis 1:1; John 1:3), and that He wants to have a relationship with you and me (John 3:16; 1 John 4:10).

Learn More about God!

What is your response?

Yes, today I am deciding to follow Jesus

Yes, I am already a follower of Jesus

I still have questions

The rest is here:

Pantheism - History - AllAboutHistory.org

Pantheism – Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Pantheism is the belief that God and the universe are equivalent (the same thing). A pantheist believes that everything that exists is a part of God or that God is a part of everything that exists. The name pantheism comes from the Greek words theism (belief in God) and pan (all).

Any doctrine or philosophy that believes that the universe and everything in it is God is said to be pantheistic. Most pantheists believe the universe is sacred and the earth and nature are divine. Most of the early Greek philosophers from Thales on to Aristotle believed in some sort of pantheism.

Pantheism is an important part of many eastern religions such as Hinduism, Druidism and Taoism.

Some western philosophers such as Baruch Spinoza and some scientists are pantheists.

Some Christians, Jews and Sufis are Pantheists. However, their majority believes that while God is in everything, there is more to God than just the universe.

Go here to read the rest:

Pantheism - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Atheism – The New York Times

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Why We Should Be Compassionate Toward Atheists | ncregister.com – National Catholic Register (blog)

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Blogs | Aug. 18, 2017

Atheism is gaining converts every day, and we have a rather daunting job of evangelizing those who would rather God did not exist.

Dr. Thomas Nagel, professor of philosophy at New York University, wrote in his 1997 book, The Last Word:

I want atheism to be true and am made uneasy by the fact that some of the most intelligent and well-formed people I know are religious believers. It isnt just that I dont believe in God and, naturally, hope that Im right in my belief. Its that I hope there is no God! I dont want there to be a God; I dont want the universe to be like that.

Whether or not Dr. Nagel intended to speak for anyone other than himself, I suspect his sentiments are shared by many atheists who not only dont believe there is a God, but dont want there to be a God.

From the standpoint of Christianity, this prompts this question: Why would anyone not want a loving God to exist? This is a question that all apologistsindeed, all Christians who seek to evangelize atheistsmust ask and attempt to answer. Because if we dont know the answer to that question, we can have all the other answers to all the other questions, and it wont matter. For instance, we can talk about the inexplicable characteristics of the Shroud of Turin, the tilma of Guadalupe, the sun dancing at Fatima, the incorruptibles, and the Eucharistic miracle in Lanciano, but we may not have addressed the real issue for those who wish atheism to be true.

There may be lots of reasons for atheisms recent prevalence, but it is clear that the rise in atheism has taken place alongside the fall of the family. Is there a connection between the two? In his book Faith of the Fatherless: The Psychology of Atheism, psychologist Dr. Paul Vitz answers in the affirmative.

Specifically, Vitz argues that a father often exerts a powerful influence on his childs concept of God. (Since his original book was published in 1999, other studies have provided support for this point.) Dr. Vitz takes a biographical tour of modern atheists and discovers a relatively consistent thread: Looking back at our thirteen major historical rejecters of a personal God, we find a weak, dead, or abusive father in every case. Of course, it is not true, nor is Vitz making the case, that every atheist had a bad fatheror that the mere absence of a father must propel one to atheism. It would also be a fallacy to claim that each atheists fundamental reason for embracing atheism is his paternal relationship. But to Vitzs point (and consistent with the findings of other studies), it is legitimate to argue that some persons may be predisposed to atheism because of their family circumstances.

In his book, Jesus of Nazareth, Pope Benedict XVI makes an interesting point along the same lines, alluding to the connection between fatherhood and faith. Pointing out that the Our Father is a great prayer of consolation, insofar as it recognizes and professes God as our Father with Whom we have a personal relationship, Pope Benedict XVI notes that consolation is not experienced by everyone:

It is true, of course, that contemporary men and women have difficulty experiencing the great consolation of the word father immediately, since the experience of the father is in many cases either completely absent or is obscured by inadequate examples of fatherhood.

As Pope Benedict suggests, the idea of God as a father can be a painful reminder that their own father did not, could not, or would not love them. Thus, the idea of spending fifteen minutes, much less eternity, with a father is remarkably unpleasant.

Where does that leave those who are sincerely and charitably trying to convey Gods love to those who are so desperate to disbelieve? Perhaps it starts by recognizing that they are hurt, and what we should do is act with compassion instead of trying to win a debate with them. If you convince someone that their best hope is to spend eternity with a Being they equate with someone who has been abusive to them, you have done them no favors. You may do well to first explain to them who God is, and what Gods love means to you. Along with true knowledge, love and mercy are the essential qualities of a Catholic apologist.

Try to explain Gods love to them, and ask the Holy Spirit for the right words. Sad though it may be, its entirely possible that no one has ever triednever talked about Gods love to them. Its entirely possible that no one has ever told them that God wants them to be happy.

Patience is also critical. Some might seem obstinate in their refusal to believe, or in their inability to admit the possibility that they might be wrong. Respond with patience, and remember that though the argument at hand might be Saint Thomas Aquinas five proofs for Gods existence or the Shroud of Turin, for instance, that may not be what they are actually arguing about. They might be really arguing about their parents, the past, and their pain. Thus, for them, the Shroud of Turin serves as a spiritual Rorschach test in which they dont see Gods pain, but their own. Explain to them that no one wants to ease their pain more than God. It sometimes helps to explain to them how God has eased your own. Dont forget that comforting the afflicted is a spiritual work of mercy not just for other Christians, and it very often must precede instructing the ignorant.

Atheism is gaining converts every day, and we have a rather daunting job of evangelizing those who would rather God did not exist. Many people have had difficult and painful family experiences, and they deserved better. We need to help people understand that God is better. Scripture does not assure us that our own parents will love us; quite the contrary, God warns us that some parents will not love their own children. Thats terribly sad, but its connected with an overwhelming promise that we need to remind people again and again and again: God will never stop loving you. This message is made many times in Scripture, but perhaps most explicitly in passage that must be in our hearts and on our lips going forward in our discussions. It is Isaiah 49:15, and it reads: Can a woman forget her nursing child and have no compassion on the son of her womb? Even these may forget, but I will not forget you.

The rest is here:

Why We Should Be Compassionate Toward Atheists | ncregister.com - National Catholic Register (blog)

Interplanetary Transport System – Wikipedia

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

The Interplanetary Transport System (ITS),[1] formerly known as the Mars Colonial Transporter (MCT), is SpaceX's privately funded development project to design and build a system[2] of spaceflight technology and remote human settlements on Marsincluding reusable launch vehicles and spacecraft; Earth infrastructure for rapid launch and relaunch; low Earth orbit, zero-gravity propellant transfer technology; and extraterrestrial technology to enable human colonization of Mars. The technology is also envisioned to eventually support exploration missions to other locations in the Solar System including the moons of Jupiter and Saturn.[3]

Development work began in earnest before 2012 when SpaceX began design work for the large Raptor rocket engine to be used for both the ITS launch vehicle and spacecraft (ITS tanker and Interplanetary Spaceship). New rocket engine designs are typically considered one of the longest of the development subprocesses for new launch vehicles and spacecraft. By June 2016, the company publicly announced conceptual plans[4] that included the first Mars-bound cargo flight of ITS launching no earlier than 2022, followed by the first ITS Mars flight with passengers one synodic period later in 2024,[5] following two preparatory research launches of Mars probes in 2018 and 2020 on Dragon/Falcon Heavy equipment.[6] SpaceX CEO Elon Musk unveiled details of the system architecture at the 67th International Astronautical Congress on September 27, 2016.[7]

As publicly discussed, SpaceX is concentrating its resources on the transportation part of the project including a propellant plant that could be deployed on Mars to make methalox rocket propellant from local resources. However, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is championing a much larger set of long-term interplanetary settlement objectives, ones that go far beyond what SpaceX will build and that will ultimately involve many more economic actorswhether individual, company, or governmentto facilitate the settlement to build out over many decades.[8][9][10]

As early as 2007, Elon Musk stated a personal goal of eventually enabling human exploration and settlement of Mars,[11][12] although his personal public interest in Mars goes back at least to 2001.[10] Bits of additional information about the mission architecture were released in 20112015, including a 2014 statement that initial colonists would arrive at Mars no earlier than the middle of the 2020s.[13] Company plans as of mid-2016 continue to call for the arrival of the first humans on Mars no earlier than 2025.[5][14]

Musk stated in a 2011 interview that he hoped to send humans to Mars's surface within 1020 years,[12] and in late 2012 he stated that he envisioned a Mars colony of tens of thousands with the first colonists arriving no earlier than the middle of the 2020s.[13][15][16]

In October 2012, Musk articulated a high-level plan to build a second reusable rocket system with capabilities substantially beyond the Falcon 9/Falcon Heavy launch vehicles on which SpaceX had by then spent several billion US dollars.[17] This new vehicle was to be "an evolution of SpaceX's Falcon 9 booster ... much bigger [than Falcon 9]." But Musk indicated that SpaceX would not be speaking publicly about it until 2013.[13][18] In June 2013, Musk stated that he intended to hold off any potential IPO of SpaceX shares on the stock market until after the "Mars Colonial Transporter is flying regularly."[19][20]

In August 2014, media sources speculated that the initial flight test of the Raptor-driven super-heavy launch vehicle could occur as early as 2020, in order to fully test the engines under orbital spaceflight conditions; however, any colonization effort was reported to continue to be "deep into the future".[21][22]

In January 2015, Musk said that he hoped to release details in late 2015 of the "completely new architecture" for the system that would enable the colonization of Mars. but those plans changed and, by December 2015, the plan to publicly release additional specifics had moved to 2016.[23] In January 2016, Musk indicated that he hoped to describe the architecture for the Mars missions with the next generation SpaceX rocket and spacecraft later in 2016, at the 67th International Astronautical Congress conference,[7] in September 2016.[24][25] Musk stated in June 2016 that the first unmanned MCT Mars flight was planned for departure in 2022, to be followed by the first manned MCT Mars flight departing in 2024.[5][6] By mid-September 2016, Musk noted that the MCT name would not continue, as the system would be able to "go well beyond Mars", and that a new name would be needed: Interplanetary Transport System (ITS).[1]

On 27 September 2016, at the 67th annual meeting of the International Astronautical Congress, Musk unveiled substantial details of the design for the transport vehiclesincluding size, construction material, number and type of engines, thrust, cargo and passenger payload capabilities, on-orbit propellant-tanker refills, representative transit times, etc.as well as a few details of portions of the Mars-side and Earth-side infrastructure that SpaceX intends to build to support the flight vehicles. In addition, Musk championed a larger systemic vision, a vision for a bottom-up emergent order of other interested partieswhether companies, individuals, or governmentsto utilize the new and radically lower-cost transport infrastructure to build up a sustainable human civilization on Mars, potentially, on numerous other locations around the Solar System, by innovating and meeting the demand that such a growing venture would occasion.[8][9]

The Interplanetary Transport System consists of a combination of several elements that are keyaccording to Muskto making long-duration beyond Earth orbit (BEO) spaceflights possible by reducing the cost per ton delivered to Mars:[26][27][28]

The super-heavy lift launch vehicle[30] for the Interplanetary Transport System will place up to 300 tonnes (660,000lb) (reusable-mode) or 550 tonnes (1,210,000lb) (expendable-mode)or carry 380 tonnes (840,000lb) of propellant on an ITS tankerto low Earth orbit.[29]

The ITS launch vehicle will be powered by the Raptor bipropellant liquid rocket engines on both stages, using exclusively densified liquid methane fuel and liquid oxygen oxidizer on both stages.[29][30] The tanks will be autogenously pressurized, eliminating the need for the problematic helium gas pressurization.[29]

The ITS launch vehicle is reusable, making use of the SpaceX reusable technology that was developed during 20112016 for Falcon 9 and Falcon Heavy.[29][2]

On all Earth-away launches, the long-duration spacecraft (tanker or spaceship) will also play a role briefly as the second stage of the launch vehicle to provide acceleration to orbital velocity, a design approach not used in other launch vehicles.

The Interplanetary Spaceship is an interplanetary ship with a carbon-fiber primary structure propelled by nine Raptor engines operating on densified methane/oxygen propellants. It is 49.5m (162ft)-long, has a maximum hull diameter of 12 m, and is 17m (56ft)-diameter at its widest point, and is capable of transporting up to 450 tonnes (990,000lb) of cargo and passengers per trip to Mars, with on-orbit propellant refill before the interplanetary part of the journey.[27][29] Early flights are expected to carry mostly equipment and few people.[13]

As of September 2016, there is no name for the class of spacecraft beyond the descriptor Interplanetary Spaceship. Musk did indicate however that the first of those ships to make the Mars journey might be named Heart of Gold[1] in reference to the ship carrying the Infinite Improbability Drive, from the novel The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.[31] Although it was noted that the number of first-stage engines seemed to be inspired by The Answer,[32] Musk didn't allude to such a connection.

The transport capacity of the spaceship from low Earth orbit to a Mars trajectorywith a trans-Mars trajectory insertion energy gain of 6km/s (3.7mi/s) and full propellant tanksis 450 tonnes (500 tons) to Mars orbit, or 300 tonnes (330 tons) landed on the surface with retropropulsive landing. Estimated Earth-Mars transit times vary between 80150 days, depending on particular planetary alignments during the nine discrete 20202037 mission opportunities, assuming 6 km/s delta-v added at trans-Mars injection.[27]

The spaceship is designed to enter the Martian atmosphere at entry velocities in excess of 8.5 km/s and allow aerodynamic forces to provide the major part of the deceleration before the three center Raptor engines perform the final landing burn. The heat shield material protecting the ship on descent is PICA 3.0, and is reusable. Entry g-forces at Mars are expected to be in order of 46 g during the descent.[27] The spaceship design g-load would be in the range of 5 g nominal, but able to withstand peak loads 2 to 3 times higher without breaking up.[33]

Energy for the journey is produced by two large solar panel arrays, generating approximately 200kW of power while at the distance of Earth from the Sun, and less as the journey progresses and the Sun is farther away as the ship nears Mars.[26]:19:38

The spaceship may use a large internal water layer to help shield occupants from space radiation, and may have a cabin oxygen content that is up to two times that which is found in Earth's atmosphere.[13] The initial tests of the spaceship are not expected prior to 2020, with the ITS booster to follow only later.[14]

According to Musk, the spaceship would effectively become the first human habitat on Mars.[34]

A key feature of the system is a propellant-cargo-only tanker: the ITS tanker. Just as the spaceship, the tanker would serve as the upper stage of the ITS launch vehicle during the launch from Earth. The vehicle is designed exclusively for the launch and short-term holding of propellants to be transported to low Earth orbit for re-filling propellants in the interplanetary ships. Once on orbit, a rendezvous operation is effected with one of the Interplanetary Spaceships, plumbing connections are made, and a maximum of 380 tonnes (840,000lb) of liquid methane and liquid oxygen propellants are transferred in one load to the spaceship. To fully fuel an Interplanetary Spaceship for a long-duration interplanetary flight, it is expected that up to five tankers would be required to launch from Earth, carrying and transferring a total of nearly 1,900 tonnes (4,200,000lb) of propellant to fully load the spaceship for the journey.[27]

The ITS tanker is the same physical dimensions as the Interplanetary Spacecraft: 49.5m (162ft)-long, maximum hull diameter of 12 m, and is 17m (56ft) at its widest point. It will also be powered by six vacuum-optimized Raptor engines, each producing 3.5MN (790,000lbf) thrust, and will have three lower-expansion-ratio Raptor engines for flight maneuvering and Earth-return landings.[35][29] Following completion of the on-orbit propellant offloading, the reusable tanker will reenter the Earth's atmosphere, land, and be prepared for another tanker flight.[27] The tanker could also be used for cargo missions.[citation needed]

A key part of the system Musk is conceptualizing to radically decrease the cost of spaceflight to interplanetary destinations is the placement and operation of a physical plant on Mars to handle production and storage of the propellant components necessary to launch and fly the Interplanetary Spaceships back to Earth, or perhaps to increase the mass that can be transported onward to destinations in the outer Solar System. Coupled with the Earth-orbit tank filling prior to the journey to Mars, and the fully reusable launch vehicles and spacecraft, all three elements are needed to reduce the transport cost by the multiple orders of magnitude that Musk sees as necessary to support sustainable colonization of Mars.[27]

The first Interplanetary Spaceship to Mars will carry a small propellant plant as a part of its cargo load. The plant will be expanded over multiple synods as more equipment arrives, is installed, and placed into mostly-autonomous production.[27]

The propellant plant will take advantage of the large supplies of carbon dioxide and water resources on Mars, mining the water (H2O) from subsurface ice and collecting CO2 from the atmosphere. A chemical plant will process the raw materials by means of electrolysis and the Sabatier process to produce molecular oxygen (O2) and methane (CH4), and then liquefy it to facilitate long-term storage and ultimate use.[27]

The initial launch site for the launch and rapid reuse of the ITS launch vehicle will be the SpaceX leased facility at historic Launch Pad 39A along the Florida space coast. While originally thought to be too small to handle the ITS launch vehicle, the final optimized size of the Raptor engine is fairly close to the physical size of the Merlin 1D, although each engine will have approximately three times the thrust. Falcon Heavy will launch from 39A with 27 Merlin engines; ITS LV will launch with 42 Raptor engines.[29]

Musk indicated on September 27, 2016 that the ITS launch vehicle would launch from more than one site. A prime candidate for the second launch site is somewhere along the south Texas coast.

As of March 2014[update], no launch site had yet been selected for the super-heavy lift rocket and the then-named "Mars Colonial Transporter." SpaceX indicated at the time that their leased facility in Florida at Launch Pad 39A would not be large enough to accommodate the vehicle as it was understood conceptually in 2014, and that therefore a new site would need to be built in order to launch the >10-meter diameter rocket.[36]

In September 2014, Elon Musk indicated that the first person to go to another planet could possibly launch from the SpaceX South Texas Launch Site,[37] but did not indicate at the time what launch vehicle might be used to carry humans to orbit.

Musk has indicated that the earliest SpaceX-sponsored missions would have a smaller crew and use much of the pressurized space for cargo. The first cargo mission of the Interplanetary Spaceship would be named "Heart of Gold" and would be loaded with equipment to build the propellant plant.[33]

The first crewed Mars mission would be expected to have approximately 12 people, with the primary goal to "build out and troubleshoot the propellant plant and Mars Base Alpha power system" as well as a "rudimentary base." In the event of an emergency, the spaceship would be able to return to Earth without having to wait a full 26 months for the next synodic period.[33]

Before any people are transported to Mars, some number of cargo missions would be undertaken first in order to transport the requisite equipment, habitats and supplies.[38] Equipment that would accompany the early groups would include "machines to produce fertilizer, methane and oxygen from Mars' atmospheric nitrogen and carbon dioxide and the planet's subsurface water ice" as well as construction materials to build transparent domes for crop growth.[13]

The early concepts for "green living space" habitats include glass panes with a carbon-fiber-frame geodesic domes, and "a lot of miner/tunneling droids [for building] out a huge amount of pressurized space for industrial operations." But these are merely conceptual and not a detailed design plan.[33]

As of 2016 when publicly discussed, SpaceX the company is concentrating its resources on the transportation part of the overall ITS project as well as an autonomous propellant plant that could be deployed on Mars to produce methane and oxygen rocket propellants from local resources. If built, and if planned objectives are achieved, then the transport cost of getting material and people to space, and across interplanetary space, will be reduced by several orders of magnitude. SpaceX CEO Elon Musk is championing a much larger set of long-term interplanetary settlement objectives, ones that take advantage of these lower transport costs to go far beyond what the company SpaceX will build and that will ultimately involve many more economic actorswhether individual, company, or governmentto build out the settlement over many decades.[8][9]

In addition to explicit SpaceX plans and concepts for a transportation system and early missions, Musk has personally been a very public exponent of a large systemic vision for building a sustainable human presence on Mars over the very long term, a vision well beyond what his company or he personally can effect. The growth of such a system over decades cannot be planned in every detail, but is rather a complex adaptive system that will come about only as others make their own independent choices as to how they might, or might not, connect with the broader "system" of an incipient (and later, growing) Mars settlement. Musk sees the new and radically lower-cost transport infrastructure facilitating the build up of a bottom-up economic order of other interested partieswhether companies, individuals, or governmentswho will innovate and supply the demand that such a growing venture would occasion.[8][9]

While the initial SpaceX Mars settlement would start very small, with an initial group of about a dozen people,[33] with time, Musk hopes that such an outpost would grow into something much larger and become self-sustaining, at least 1 million people. According to Musk,

Even at a million people youre assuming an incredible amount of productivity per person, because you would need to recreate the entire industrial base on Mars. You would need to mine and refine all of these different materials, in a much more difficult environment than Earth. There would be no trees growing. There would be no oxygen or nitrogen that are just there. No oil.

Excluding organic growth, if you could take 100 people at a time, you would need 10,000 trips to get to a million people. But you would also need a lot of cargo to support those people. In fact, your cargo to person ratio is going to be quite high. It would probably be 10 cargo trips for every human trip, so more like 100,000 trips. And were talking 100,000 trips of a giant spaceship.[39]

The notional journeys outlined in the November 2016 talk would require 80 to 150 days of transit time,[40] with an average trip time to Mars of approximately 115 days (for the nine synodic periods occurring between 2020 and 2037).[27] In 2012, Musk stated an aspirational price goal for such a trip might be on the order of US$500,000 per person,[13] but in 2016 he mentioned that long-term costs might become as low as US$200,000.[40]

As of September 2016[update], the complex project has financial commitments only from SpaceX and Musk's personal capital. The Washington Post pointed out that "The [US] government doesn't have the budget for Mars colonization. Thus, the private sector would have to see Mars as an attractive business environment. Musk is willing to pour his wealth into the project" but it will not be enough to build the colony he envisions.[41]

The overview presentation on the Interplanetary Transport System given by Musk on 27 September 2016 included concept slides outlining missions to the Saturnian moon Enceladus, the Jovian moon Europa, Kuiper belt objects, a fuel depot on Pluto and even the uses to take payloads to the Oort Cloud.[29] "Musk said ... the system can open up the entire Solar System to people. If fuel depots based on this design were put on asteroids or other areas around the Solar System, people could go anywhere they wanted just by planet or moon hopping. 'The goal of SpaceX is to build the transport system ... Once that transport system is built, then there is a tremendous opportunity for anyone that wants to go to Mars to create something new or build a new planet.'"[10] Outer planet trips would likely require propellant refills at Mars, and perhaps other locations in the outer Solar System.[40]

The extensive development and manufacture of much of the space transport technology has been to date (through 2016), and is being, privately funded by SpaceX. The entire project is even possible only as a result of SpaceX multi-faceted approach focusing on the reduction of launch costs.[29]

As of 2016[update], SpaceX is expending "a few tens of millions of dollars annually on development of the Mars transport concept, which amounts to well under 5 percent of the companys total expenses",[40] but expects that figure to rise to some US$300 million per year by around 2018. The cost of all work leading up to the first Mars launch is expected to be "on the order of US$10 billion"[40] and SpaceX expects to expend that much before it generates any transport revenue.[9]

Musk indicated in September 2016 that the full build-out of the Mars colonialization plans will likely be funded by both private and public funds. The speed of commercially available Mars transport for both cargo and humans will be driven, in large part, by market demand as well as constrained by the technology development and development funding.[9][40]

Elon Musk has said that there is no expectation of receiving NASA contracts for any of the ITS system work. He also indicated that such contracts, if received, would be good.[42]

In September 2016, Musk presented the following high-level, forward-looking, fabrication cost projections, given a set of assumptions. Those assumptions include: Cost of propellant: US$168/tonne; Launch site costs: US$200,000/launch; Discount rate: 5%; Cargo delivered: 450 tonne per single Interplanetary Spaceship; and full reuse. All assumptions are about a single mission once thousands of launches and hundreds of flights to Mars are a realistic prospect. They do not apply to costs for the much smaller number of early missions envisioned for the 2020s. Given these assumptions, Musk presented the following long-term mission cost projections:[31][27]

Calculated result: total average cost (based on the life cycle of the system, included costs of the initial fabrication, propellant, maintenance and company's amortization) of one Interplanetary Spaceship transported to Mars: US$62 million; or less than US$140,000 cost per tonne of mass transported to Mars.

SpaceX plans to fly its earliest missions to Mars using its Falcon Heavy launch vehicle prior to the completion, and first launch, of any ITS vehicle. Later missions utilizing ITS technologythe ITS launch vehicle and Interplanetary Spaceship with on-orbit propellant refill via ITS tankerwould begin no earlier than 2022. The company is planning for launches of research spacecraft to Mars using Falcon Heavy launch vehicles and specialized modified Dragon spacecraft. Due to planetary alignment in the inner Solar System, the launches are typically limited to a window of approximately every 26 months. Originally (in June 2016), the first launch was planned for Spring 2018, with an announced intent to launch again in every Mars launch window thereafter. In February 2017, however, the first launch to Mars was pushed back to 2020.[43] The early missions will collect essential data to refine the design of the ITS, and better select landing locations based on the availability of extraterrestrial resources such as water and building materials.[6]

The tentative mission manifest from November 2016 (now outdated) included three Falcon Heavy missions to Mars prior to the first possible flight of an ITS to Mars in 2022:[6]

In February 2017, the first launch was postponed to 2020 and it was unclear whether the overall sequence of Mars missions would be kept intact and simply pushed back by 26 months. In July 2017, Musk announced that development of propulsive landing for the Red Dragon capsule was cancelled in favor of a "much better" landing technique, as yet unrevealed, for a larger spacecraft.[45] As of August 2017[update], no new schedule for Mars missions has been forthcoming.

Italics indicate unflown vehicles and future missions or sites. denotes failed missions, destroyed vehicles and abandoned sites.

See the rest here:

Interplanetary Transport System - Wikipedia

Elon Musk signs letter urging UN to protect world from ‘Pandora’s box’ of deadly autonomous weapons – Washington Examiner

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Tesla CEO Elon Musk joined more than 100 technology leaders in signing a new letter that urges the United Nations to protect the world from the "dangers" of deadly autonomous weapons.

The letter, released at the opening of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Melbourne, Australia, warns that these weapons "threaten to become the third revolution in warfare."

"Once developed," the letter continues, "they will permit armed conflict to be fought at a scale greater than ever, and at timescales faster than humans can comprehend."

The letter was signed by more than 116 founders of robotics and artificial intelligence companies from 26 countries, according to the Faculty of Engineering at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia. Toby Walsh, a professor on artificial intelligence at UNSW, unveiled the letter. It is also signed by Mustafa Suleyman, who is co-founder of Google's DeepMind AI project.

Musk, a billionare whose other business ventures include SpaceX and Mars colonization, has repeatedly warned about the dangers of AI. In July, he told America's governors that people "should be really concerned" about artificial intelligence, which "is a fundamental risk for human civilization." Earlier this month he tweeted that AI is more dangerous than North Korea.

In December 2016, 123 nations that are part of the U.N. Convention on Conventional Weapons agreed to set up formal talks on the dangers of autonomous weapons. At the time, 19 countries called for a complete ban, and Human Rights Watch cheered the move towards formal talks as "a major step toward negotiations for a ban" on "killer robots."

The new letter warns that autonomous weapons could be used by despots and terrorists alike against "innocent populations," and even weapons held by more responsible powers could be hacked.

"We do not have long to act. Once this Pandora's box is opened, it will be hard to close," the letter says. It beseaches the U.N. "to find a way to protect us all from these dangers."

IJCAI previously sent a letter in 2015 about dangers of autonomous weapons, signed by thousands of researchers in AI and robotics from around the world, which included the endorsements of Musk, British physicist Stephen Hawking and Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak.

Go here to read the rest:

Elon Musk signs letter urging UN to protect world from 'Pandora's box' of deadly autonomous weapons - Washington Examiner

Ancient Aliens: Did Truman create the Majestic 12 to conceal UFOs? – Hidden Remote

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Photo Credit: Ancient Aliens/History Channel Image Acquired from A&E Networks Press

Will there be a Baby Driver sequel? by Sooz

Fear Factor finale preview: Get a sneak peek at the the chilling challenges the final crop contestants must face by Cody Schultz

Photo Credit: Ancient Aliens/History Channel Image Acquired from A&E Networks Press

In 1984, a roll of 35mm film was sent from an anonymous source in Albuquerque, NM to the doorstep of filmmaker Jaime Shandera in Burbank, CA. The film contained still pictures of eight top secret pages known as the Eisenhower Briefing Document. The documents are a briefing from the head of the CIA to Eisenhower from 1952, and they inform him of not only the MJ12 organization, but also groups composition and purpose. That purpose is UFOs and communication with aliens.

In April 2017, Giorgio Tsoukolos met with investigator Linda Moulton Howe, one of the first people to see Top Secret documents in 1994. Those documents are from April 1954 and have official Majestic 12 Group markings, as well as a war office stamp.

Regardless of opinions on the matter, many believe the Roswell Incident is incontrovertible proof of Americas involvement and interaction with aliens. In fact, the local newspaper reported that a flying saucer was captured at Roswell Army Air Field in the following days paper. Government officials may have clarified with the whole weather balloon comment the following day, but a close examination of all the available data makes that fairly difficult to believe.

Could the Roswell Incident and the formation of MJ12 be mutually revealing? If not, its awfully coincidental. Furthermore, other Top Secret organizations were formed around the same time:

According to Dwight D. Eisenhowers great-granddaughter, the organization was real, and her famous relative had no choice but to continue what Truman had started. In fact, she says Eisenhower physically met with aliens.

Any secret with more than one person involved risks not being a secret. So its interesting to consider MJ12 as a hoax considering its relative anonymity.

In the first place, MJ12 itself may have actively attempted to throw investigators off the scent. Famous astrophysicist Donald Menzel may have been the perfect person to dissuade potential believers. Menzel was a UFO contrarian and skeptic. In fact, he wrote multiple books on the matter. According to Robert Wood, PhD, Menzels books were nothing more than counter-intelligence. Indeed, while some of the information in MJ12 documents has been disproven, there is certainly more than a grain of truth when it comes to Menzels inclusion in the group.

Americas first Secretary of Defense was James Forrestal, who was also the first man to lead MJ12. Appointed by Truman to be in charge of the secret MJ12 investigations, Forrestal may have uncovered German secrets that needed to be kept secret. The official stance is that he suffered from depression, and committed suicide from the 16th floor of a hospital.

His suicide is highly questionable. Some have mentioned scratch marks were allegedly on the window, and his own brother unequivocally refutes the possibility of suicide. Among his brothers concerns are the plans James had following hospital discharge, the bill of health given by all top level people (including Truman), and the fact he committed suicide a few hours before was to be discharged.

Perhaps James Forrestal was planning on spilling the beans on Americas involvement with UFOs?

JFKs death has been discussed, researched, reported and debated ad nauseam. Those details wont be discussed. Howe provides one extra piece of information. She breaks down one Top Secret document often referred to as the Scorched Memo, recovered from a fire. That document is allegedly from CIA chief Allen Dulles referencing JFK. For example, it says LANCER the Secret Service name for JFK at the time was getting a little too curious for their liking.

The fact that a later portion mentions that it should be wet, makes the document potential authorization to kill JFK if he doesnt cease his inquiries.

Furthermore, author Douglas Caddy was interviewed on the episode about his last interaction with CIA operative E. Howard Hunt. Caddy says he had personal communication with Hunt in 1975, and explicitly asked about a JFK assassination. According to Caddy, the reply was that JFK was indeed assassinated. Apparently JFK was about to give Americas most vital secret to the Soviets.

Much of this Ancient Aliens episode revolves around a second roll of film unveiled in March 1994. According to Howe, its the most compelling document to confirm the MJ12 cover-up.

Howe states the documents titled Extraterrestrial Entities and Technology, Recovery and Disposal have been authenticated multiple ways, one of which includes the typeset. In fact, typeset nuances were traced back to a monotype in a government printing lab, and confirmed by a longstanding employee there.

Other details contained within the second roll of film are four different sketches of UFOs (e.g. Triangle, Long tube, Ice cream cone), a note about mutually agreed upon, alien initiated, obscure location meetups, and an investigation into Interplanetary Phenomena Unit (IPU) in July 1947. The IPU investigation was ordered by President Eisenhower, and conducted at the White Sands Proving Ground by General Nathan Farragut Twining. According to Eisenhower, Twinings report was for the purpose of making an appraisal of the reported unidentified objects being kept there. Additionally, the final report included talks of a possible atomic engine inside a UFO confirmed by Dr. Robert Oppenheimer.

The rest of the Ancient Aliens episode rambles a bit, as most episodes do. If there were a format for 45 minute shows, Ancient Aliens would be a perfect candidate. Speaking of perfect candidates, there is a guy named Corey Goode who alleges to be part of a secret military space program (i.e. Solar Warden) and Mars colonization effort that involves three dozen nations.

Furthermore, a hacker named Gary McKinnon may have found more proof of a link between MJ12 and current space operations. He hacked into NASA and Pentagon servers to uncover files he claims provide undeniable proof of MJ12 and their legacy. In one such document, he found a list of people and ships that were named after original MJ12 personnel. For what its worth, Corey Goode confirms his experiences with Solar Warden.

Both believe the truth is being hidden from the general population, but everything will soon be disclosed.

This episode of Ancient Aliens is a bit different. It deals more with cover-ups than actual aliens. Nonetheless

The total count for the ancient astronaut theorists suggest/say/theorize phrase variation: 3.

Ancient Aliens airs Friday nights on the History channel.

More here:

Ancient Aliens: Did Truman create the Majestic 12 to conceal UFOs? - Hidden Remote

Nato allies shy away from Trump’s demand for more Afghanistan troops – Telegraph.co.uk

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Ursula von der Leyen said: "We increased our troop numbers by 18 percent last year when others were cutting theirs. So we don't see ourselves in the front row of people who should be asked for more soldiers."

The Ministry of Defence in London said it had already announced in June that 85 more soldiers would be sent, bringing the UK detachment to 600.

A Whitehall source said: We dont see that number changing.

French defence expert Jean-Dominique Merchet, said: "I would be astonished if France was prepared to send troops back to Afghanistan.

"We are already heavily present in the Sahel with 4,500 troops in Mali, Niger, Chad and Burkina Faso, and in Iraq, where there are around 1,000 French soldiers. That's a lot.

"France lost not far off 100 men in Afghanistan for nothing and their presence there could not be called a success."

Mr Trumps decision to remain in Afghanistan risked angering supporters who voted for his America First campaign promises to end US foreign interventions.

Breitbart, the conservative news website run by his former strategist Steve Bannon, called the new strategy a "flip-flop."

After his speech, Mr Trump flew to Arizona to rally supporters and try to recapture the Republican fervour that helped put him in office.

Here is the original post:

Nato allies shy away from Trump's demand for more Afghanistan troops - Telegraph.co.uk

NATO Drills: Bulgarian Soldiers Refused to Shoot Targets with Russian Signs – Center for Research on Globalization

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

How fragile the NATO ranks are is illustrated by the following incident that happened at the Noble Jump exercise (NOJP 17) held in June in Romania. Military units from 11 NATO countries: Albania, Bulgaria, Great Britain, Greece, Spain, Latvia, Holland, Norway, Poland, Romania and the USA took part in the drills. During the shooting at the training grounds, the Bulgarian soldiers flatly refused to shoot as Russian identification marks have been placed on the targets, and they wont shoot at Russians!

It turned out that the Romanians responsible for the equipment of the landfill saved by using for the targets canvasses taken from billboards located near shopping malls, with images that strongly resemble the identification signs of the Russian Armed Forces. The Romanians were too lazy to repaint the canvases, and from the distance it really looked like they had signs of Russian aircraft. The error was quickly corrected. Cloths changed, and the NATO members apologized to the Bulgarians. Agreed not to disclose publicly what happened, but the information still leaked into space.

In 2014-2015 years Bulgaria refused to accept elements of American missile defense complexes on its territory. Subsequently, the US received the consent of neighboring Romania to create an appropriate infrastructure for them.

In 2016, Bulgaria again categorically refused to participate in the formation of the anti-Russian Black Sea flotilla with the participation of Turkey, Romania and Ukraine, which had to counteract the transformation of the Black Sea into a Russian lake. As a result, the whole project was buried.

The current dispersion in NATO alludes to a deep crisis in this organization and shows an extremely low level of its fighting efficiency.

Featured image is from the author.

NATO Drills: Bulgarian Soldiers Refused to Shoot Targets with Russian Signs - Center for Research on Globalization

UP govt to use NSA, Goondas Act to curb power theft, award informers – Hindustan Times

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

The Uttar Pradesh government has decided to slap the National Security Act (NSA) and Goondas Act against those obstructing electricity department officials from discharging their duties in checking power thefts and award those who give information about such thefts.

State Energy Minister Shrikant Sharma said honest customers suffer because of power theft and the government is committed to check the menace.

National Security Act and Goondas Act will be slapped on those obstructing officials from discharging their duties while curbing electricity theft. Power theft is a national crime. We are in the process of setting up 75 bijli thane (power police stations) for this, he said here.

Under the stringent NSA, a person can be detained without bail or trial and the authorities need not disclose the grounds of detention if they believe the detainee can act in a way that poses a threat to the security of the state/country or the maintenance of public order.

The Goondas Act aims at a year-long preventive detention of habitual offenders. According to the law, a goonda is a person who, either by himself or as a member or leader of a gang, habitually commits or attempts to commit or abets the commission of offences.

Meanwhile, in a bid to ensure adequate availability of electricity by minimising the line losses, the state Cabinet has given approval to the Protsahan Yojana (encouragement scheme).

In this regard, provisions have been made that a person informing about power theft will be given 10 per cent of the compounding fee (realised from a person indulging in power theft) as protsaahan (encouragement).

Similarly, 10 per cent of the compounding fee will also be given to the enforcement team, the Uttar Pradesh Cabinet said in an official statement.

Sharma said the state government would follow the Gujarat Model of power distribution and keep a check on pilferage and establish dedicated police stations in all 75 districts where cases of power theft would be taken up.

The tough Gujarat Model envisages constitution of dedicated vigilance squads and setting up special police stations to check pilferage.

The Uttar Pradesh government has already initiated name and shame policy for power bill defaulters under which names of big defaulters are disclosed in a bid to cajole them to pay their bills at the earliest.

See the original post:

UP govt to use NSA, Goondas Act to curb power theft, award informers - Hindustan Times

What the Announced NSA / Cyber Command Split Means – Defense One

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Cyberwar and cyber intelligence are diverging, as are Cyber Command and the NSA. Heres what that means for the man who leads both entities, the future of signals intelligence collection, and cyberwarfare.

The move to elevate Cyber Command to a full Unified Combatant Command and split it off from the National Security Agency or NSA shows that cyber intelligence collection and information war are rapidly diverging fields. The future leadership of both entities is now in question, but the Pentagon has set out a conditions-based approach to the breakup. That represents a partial victory for the man who directs both Cyber Command and theNSA.

The move would mean that the head of Cyber Command would answer directly to the Defense Secretary and the National Security Agency would get its own head. Its a move that many have said is long overdue, and its exact timing remains unknown. So what does the split mean for the Pentagon, for Cyber Command, and for the future of U.S. cybersecurity?

The split will give the commander of Cyber Command central authority over resource allocation, training, operational planning and mission execution. The commander will answer to the Defense Secretary directly, not the head of Strategic Command. The decision means that Cyber Command will play an even more strategic role in synchronizing cyber forces and training, conducting and coordinating military cyberforce operations and advocating for and prioritizing cyber investments within the department, said Kenneth Rapuano, assistant defense secretary for Homeland Defense and GlobalSecurity.

The Start of aProcess

Receive daily email updates:

Subscribe to the Defense One daily.

Be the first to receive updates.

The move announced on Friday fulfills a mandate in the National Defense Authorization Act of 2017. Former Defense Secretary Ash Carter hinted at the split back in May 2016. But it wont happenimmediately.

Instead, Defense Secretary James Mattis and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Joe Dunford will nominate a flag officer to take over the new Cyber Command as well as the NSA. That person could be Adm. Michael Rogers, who currently heads both, or someone else. Trump has reportedly asked Mattis to give him the name of a nominee. Speculation has focused on Army Lt. Gen. William Mayville as the nominee to head CyberCommand.

Once that new person is nominated and confirmed and once Mattis and Dunford are satisfied that splitting the two entities will not hamper the ability of either Cyber Command or the NSA to conduct their missions independently, only then will Cyber Command and the NSA actuallysplit.

What Does it Mean forLeadership?

Read one way, the announcement means Rogers will lose power. Even were he to become the nominee to the new elevated Cyber Command, he would still wind up losing the NSA eventually, or, as the eventual head of the NSA, lose CyberCommand.

Read another way, the lack of a concrete timetable for the split, despite such a requirement in the authorization bill, represents a partial win forRogers.

Rogers took over the NSA and Cyber Command in the spring of 2014. He has been resistant to the idea of a split, telling lawmakers in September that U.S. national security benefitted from the dual-hat arrangement. This view was not shared by then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper nor then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter. Rogers resistance was one of many issues that rubbed them the wrongway.

It got so bad that in November, unnamed sources told The Washington Post that Clapper and Carter were urging President Barack Obama to fireRogers.

The truth is a bit more nuanced. Clappers goal was to split the NSA from CyberCom. He was not a strong advocate of removal, but was willing to defer to [the Secretary of Defense] if Carter felt strongly about selecting new leadership at Cyber Command, a source inside the intelligence community said. There were other concerns unrelated to the potentialsplit.

Rogers outlasted both Clapper, who had long planned to retire at the end of the Obama administration; and Carter, a political appointee. Rogers attitude toward an NSA-Cyber Command split evolved. In May, he testified that he would support a split was done in a way that did not hamper either the NSA or CyberCommand.

The manner in which the split was announced is in keeping with what Rogers has said hewanted.

The move toward a conditions-based split also met with the approval of Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz, a longtime Rogers ally. I appreciate the administrations commitment today to ensuring that a future separation of the so-called dual hat relationship between Cyber Command and the National Security Agency will be based on conditions, rather than arbitrary political timelines, McCain said in a statement. While Cyber Command and the National Security Agency should eventually be able to operate independent of one another, the administration must work closely with the Congress to take the necessary steps that will make this separation of responsibilities successful, and to ensure that each agency will emerge more effective and more capable as aresult.

What It Means for Cyber Command, the NSA, and CyberOperations

The elevation of Cyber Command represents a big step forward for the militarys cyber ability, but it has yet to be catch up to the NSA in terms of collecting signals intelligence or creating network accesses, according to Bill Leigher, who as a rear admiral helped stand up Navy Fleet Cyber Command. Leigher, who now directs government cyber solutions for Raytheon, applauds the split because the NSA, which collects foreign intelligence, and Cyber Command, a warfighting outfit, have fundamentally different missions.This caused tension between the two organizations under one roof. Information collected for intelligence gathering may be useful in a way thats fundamentally different from intelligence for military purposes, he says. If you collecting intelligence, its foreign espionage. You dont want to get caught. The measure of success is: collect intelligence and dont get caught. If youre going to war, I would argue that the measure of performance is what we do has to have the characteristics of a legal weapon in the context of war and the commander has to know what he or she usesit.

This puts the agencies in disagreement about how to use intel and tools that they share. From an NSA perspective, cyber really is about gaining access to networks. From aCyber Command point of view, I would argue, its about every piece of software on the battlefield and having the means to prevent that software from working the way it was intended to work [for the adversary], hesaid.

The split will allow the agencies to pursue the very different tools, operations, and rules each of their missions requires, he said. Expect NSA to intensify its focus on developing access for intelligence, and Cyber Command to prepare to rapidly deploy massive cyber effects at scale during military operations and shut down the enemy. Both of this will likely leverage next-generation artificial intelligence but in very different ways saidLeigher.

Former NSA official named to M&T board – Buffalo News

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

M&T Bank Corp. has named a former deputy director of the National Security Agency to its board of directors.

Richard H. Ledgett Jr., a Maryland resident, spent 29 years with the NSA, including serving as itsdeputy director from January 2014 until his retirement last April. M&T said Ledgett has a total of four decades of experience in intelligence, cyber security and cyber operations experience.

Richard H. Ledgett Jr. (PRNewsfoto)

As the NSA's deputy director, Ledgett acted as the agency's chief operating officer, and he also led the NSA's 24/7 Threat Operations Center, which is responsible for identifying and countering cyber threats to the United States' national security systems.

Robert G. Wilmers, M&T's chairman and CEO, said Ledgett "will be an invaluable addition to our board, bringinga management, operational and technical perspective to cyber security and information assurance that will further strengthen M&T's commitment to information security and risk management."

With Ledgett's appointment, M&T now has 15 directors on its board.

Ledgett was also named to the board of M&T Bank, M&T's principal banking subsidiary.

UP To Invoke NSA, Goonda Act In Fight Against Power Theft – EnergyInfraPost

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Team EnergyInfraPost

Determined to curb power theft that is financially bleeding its power distribution companies (discoms), the BJP-ruled Uttar Pradesh has decided to invoke stringent laws like the National Security Act and Goonda Act to deal with electricity thieves.

UP energy minister Srikant Sharma has said the state government would slap the stringent NSA and Goonda Act on those obstructing power officials from discharging their duties to curb electricity theft.

Power theft is an infringement of the rights of honest consumers. Power saved through action against pilferers could be given to those who pay their bill regularly, Sharma told a newspaper

This came two days after an enforcement squad of Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd (UPPCL) was attacked in Rampur where it had gone to check power theft. Following the incident, Sharma directed the UPPCL brass to take strict action against the attackers.

UPPCL has been demanding adequate security during such drives.

The state government would follow the Gujarat model for power distribution and keep a check on pilferage, Sharma said, adding, UP government would also establish dedicated police stations in all 75 districts where cases of power theft would be taken up.

UP government officials said that imposing NSA would be at the discretion of the district magistrate.

DISCOMs, Goonda Act, National Security Act, power theft, UPPCL, Uttar Pradesh

Read the rest here:

UP To Invoke NSA, Goonda Act In Fight Against Power Theft - EnergyInfraPost

VerizonYes, VerizonJust Stood Up For Your Privacy – WIRED

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Roberto Machado Noa/Getty Images

Fourteen of the biggest US tech companies filed a brief with the Supreme Court on Monday supporting more rigorous warrant requirements for law enforcement seeking certain cell phone data, such as location information. In the statement, the signatoriesGoogle, Apple, Facebook, and Microsoft among themargue that the government leans on outdated laws from the 1970s to justify Fourth Amendment overreach. One perhaps surprising voice in the chorus of protesters? Verizon.

Verizon's support means that the largest wireless service provider in the US, and a powerful force in Silicon Valley, has bucked a longtime trend of telecom acquiescence. While carriers have generally been willing to comply with a broad range of government requestseven building out extensive infrastructure to aid surveillanceVerizon has this time joined with academics, analysts, and the companys more privacy-focused corporate peers.

Carpenter v. United States is one of the most important Fourth Amendment cases in recent memory, Craig Silliman, Verizons executive vice president for public policy and general counsel, wrote on Monday. Although the specific issue presented to the Court is about location information, the case presents a broader issue about a customers reasonable expectation of privacy for other types of sensitive data she shares with any third party. Our hope is that when it decides this case, the Court will help us better apply old Fourth Amendment doctrines to an evolving digital era.

From the early days of landlines, telecoms have complied with law enforcement requests for customer data such as call length, location, and who has called whom. As the variety of data customers generate has exponentially expanded and evolved, so has this information gathering by government officials, often under a general mandate and without a case-specific warrant. For its part, Verizon cooperated with the National Security Agency as part of broad bulk surveillance programs for years. Details of this coordination was revealed in NSA documents leaked by Edward Snowden in 2013, but some aspects of it had been publicly debated for years prior.

Carpenter v. United States, which the Supreme Court will hear this fall, relates to the acquisition, without a warrant, of months of individuals location records by law enforcement officials in 2011. Officials looked back on 12,898 location records, spanning a four-month period, of one of these individuals, Timothy Carpenter, to build their case; Carpenter was eventually convicted. His appeal argues that location-data collection by law enforcement without a warrant violates his Fourth Amendment rightsand Verizon agrees.

Verizon stands out because they actually hold the specific kind of location records that are directly at issue, says Nathan Freed Wessler, a staff attorney at the American Civil Liberties Union, which represents Carpenter. The telecoms have a long history in general of cooperating with law enforcement surveillance demands, but I think Verizons participation reflects a growing understanding of the importance of standing up for customers privacy rights."

As the general public becomes increasingly aware of the privacy risks associated with entrusting their data to corporate entities, a strong stance on data protection has been a boon to companies like Apple. This economic incentive may be even stronger for the numerous telecoms that now straddle the line between traditional utility and tech company. Verizon, for example, now owns Yahoo and AOL in addition to its role as a top-four wireless provider in the US.

"At the end of the day, a company like Verizon isnt going to stick its neck out if it doesnt think that theres a business rationale in addition to it being the right thing to do," Wessler says.

Verizon has laid the groundwork for this move for months. Silliman wrote publicly last year about potential Fourth Amendment concerns when telecoms comply with warrantless law enforcement data requests. The company's stand won't necessarily prompt peers to followno other telecoms joined this particular briefbut it still represents a turning point in the dialog between privacy advocates and monolithic telecoms. And in Carpenter v. United States, it's only one of the voices that matters in the larger discussion about data privacy.

"The other tech companies bring the perspective that this case is also about our emails and our smart devices and all the kinds of cloud-stored data that we create in the course of our daily lives now," Wessler says. "The Justices should not be under the misapprehension that they can just try to narrowly apply these outdated precedents from the 1970s in this case. The implications are really huge, and this is the chance to make sure that our understanding of the Fourth Amendment keeps up with digital technology.

The rest is here:

VerizonYes, VerizonJust Stood Up For Your Privacy - WIRED

LIVE LOCAL, LIVE SMALL: What freedoms and liberties do we stand to lose? – encore Online

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Aug 22 FEATURE MAIN, Live Local, NEWS & VIEWS No Comments on LIVE LOCAL, LIVE SMALL: What freedoms and liberties do we stand to lose?

The Guardian reported:

The warrant covers the people who own and operate the site, but also seeks to get the IP addresses of 1.3 million people who visited it, as well as the date and time of their visit, and information about what browser or operating system they used.

There are a variety of concerning aspects to this set of events. First, and most obviously, are those related to the First Amendment (freedom of speech and assembly) and the Fourth Amendment (protection from unreasonable search and seizure). The Department of Justice wants the IP addresses of every visitor to the siteand from that information the physical location of each visitor can be ascertained. It makes identification not all that difficult. Besides freedom of speech, there are questions about the scope of the warrant. The Fourth Amendment makes it clear a warrant must specify locations to be searched and probable cause. Orin Kerr noted in the Washington Post:

Courts have allowed the government to get a suspects entire email account, which the government can then search through for evidence. But is the collective set of records concerning a website itself so extensive that it goes beyond what the Fourth Amendment allows? In the physical world, the government can search only one apartment in an apartment building with a single warrant; it cant search the entire apartment building.

Additionally, one has to be concerned that one branch of government would use their power to collect private information about citizens it feels threatened by. It looks like a personal score to settle. People who disagree with the executive branch are to be identifiedand to what end specifically? Over 200 people have already been charged with felony rioting at the inauguration. Why does the Department of Justice need to identify 1.3 million people who might disagree with the executive branch? It is frightening not only for civil liberties but for what it can mean on the slippery slope of settling political scores with citizens. Ask the Mothers of the Disappeared in Argentina: This is dangerous.

At the end of June, the executive branch asked the states to turn over voter registration information for the voter fraud commission. The information requested voter rolls, dates of birth and the last four digits of social security numbers. North Carolinas bipartisan State Board of Elections and Ethics Enforcement announced it would turn over publicly available information to the commission, but not social security numbers and dates of birth. Some states have refused to comply. I have to admit: The possibility of finding oneself purged from the voter rolls is a scary idea.

About 10 years ago, I found myself dropped from the voter registration rolls. It was a bit of a surprise; I showed up on election day and was informed I was not registered to vote in New Hanover County. The poll worker asked if I had registered to vote?

Yes, I answered. I have voted at this precinct location for the past six years. I usually come in with one of my parents and we would take turns standing with the dog outside, because a family that votes together stays together.

After much hemming and hawing with the poll workers, I was given a provisional ballot. I sorted out my registration and, thankfully (fingers crossed), have not had a problem since.

I come from a family that makes voting a priority. I am comfortable advocating for that right with people in positions of authority.

Recently, my household went through the citizenship process and one of the recurring themes in the process was voting is one of the most important ways to participate in a democracy and preform a civic duty. At the Naturalization Ceremony, the League of Women Voters were standing by with voter registration forms for each of the newly sworn-in citizens.

It doesnt take a giant leap of imagination to see those two lists overlap: Who visited a website the executive branch dislikes and who voted against the candidate in the last election? Where there is a match, how hard would it be to drop a name from the rolls? As far-fetched as this would have sounded 18 months ago, it is just not hard to imagine right now. If they control who can vote, they can control who wins an election. The timing of demanding these two sets of data is startling and frightening.

Dreamhost is challenging in the warrant and a hearing is scheduled on August 18. What is possibly more frightening than the above scenario is the possibility this is just a litmus test. If successful, where does it stop? What speech and assembly freedoms could we lose?

In the wake of the events at Charlottesville and escalating concern regarding North Koreawhich strike a primal and emotional chordit is hard to focus on something as dry as a justice department warrant. But that is exactly why it is important. The events surrounding the warrant and what happens with the information gathered will directly impact the publics ability to talk back to power and speak freely.

Allowing one branch of the government to target citizens who disagree is dangerous The possibilities of the internet are a fascinating double-edged sword. Never before in history have we had the ability to share information, opinions and ideas with such immediacy. Social media and web tools can allow for assemblies with short notice on a scale not previously imaginedand the documentation of the assemblies can be shared and made available around the world as they unfold. But the footprint and trackability of online activity is the other side of the coin. Potentially targeting someones voting rights based upon political opinions is not what the constitution intends.

Its important: protecting citizens rights to vote, speak and participate in democracy. It is essential to our future.

CharlottesvilleDepartment of Justiceencore magazineFourth AmendmentGwenyfar RohlerLeague of Women VotersMothers of the Disappeared in ArgentinaNaturalization Ceremonynew hanover countyNorth KoreaOrin KerrState Board of Elections and Ethics EnforcementUnited States ConstitutionWashington PostWilmington NC

FUZZY FOLK: Stray Owls pick up a drummer, drop a record and head to ILM NEWS OF THE WEIRD

Follow this link:

LIVE LOCAL, LIVE SMALL: What freedoms and liberties do we stand to lose? - encore Online

Plan would designate sheriffs as ICE contractors in bid to bypass Fourth Amendment court decisions – ABA Journal

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

Immigration Law

Posted August 21, 2017, 11:44 am CDT

By Debra Cassens Weiss

Several sheriffs told the New York Times about the legal maneuver in which sheriffs would become ICE contractors, and the jails would be paid a daily fee to hold immigrants believed to be in the country illegally until ICE takes custody.

ICE spokeswoman Sarah Rodriguez told the Times that the agency was exploring a number of options to address sheriffs concerns, and no final decision has been made.

The Times explains the Fourth Amendment issue. Sheriffs enforce criminal law, and they cant make immigration arrests because they are civil in nature. Because of that difference, judges have found that holding immigrants who have paid bail or served their sentence is an unlawful seizure under the Fourth Amendment.

Sheriff Bob Gualtieri of Pinellas County, Florida, told the newspaper that he came up with the reasoning supporting the idea and presented it to ICE. Its a seamless transition, said Gualtieri, who is also a lawyer.

Gualtieri said he was told that the plan would be rolled out through a pilot program in Florida before it is expanded nationwide.

Omar Jadwat, the director of the American Civil Liberties Unions immigrants rights project, didnt think the plan would satisfy judges. Its a kind of window dressing on the same practice, he told the Times. It doesnt really change the legal analysis.

Plan would designate sheriffs as ICE contractors in bid to bypass Fourth Amendment court decisions - ABA Journal

First Amendment Center

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

The First Amendment separates church from state, but not religion from public life and it doesnt require equal time or balanced treatment for all faiths and beliefs.

Freedom to report the news necessarily means the freedom to gather it, and police in Ferguson, Mo., have blatantly tried to stop journalists from doing their jobs.

Federal appeals panel finds quotes lauding attorneys ability are truthful and not misleading.

Amid persecutions of Christians, Muslims and other faiths around the globe, Face to Faith is a beacon of hope.

Supreme Court will look at question of whether threats made in social media can be considered true threats.

Supreme Court ruling is neither the all-out assault on womens rights alleged by some on the left nor the major expansion of religious freedom trumpeted by many on the right.

But increasingly narrow holdings, exceptions for national security, rights for corporations leave questions about what direction Courts First Amendment jurisprudence will go.

Although some courts have protected some obscene rants directed at cops, you still might want to be careful if you get pulled over.

Crusading journalist never retired from his passion for the First Amendment, the sense that every voice has value.

Statement from James C. Duff, CEO of Freedom Forum, Newseum and Newseum Institute, on the death of John Seigenthaler.

A great man, a great journalist, a great lover of freedom has died, leaving a lasting legacy.

Justices reject argument that 2006 decision sharply curtailing public employees free speech applied in a case involving court testimony.

By Clay Calvert Ruling that throws out conviction of police officer for conspiracy to commit kidnapping on basis of grisly online posts strikes blow against dangerous notion of thought crimes.

State of the First Amendment survey finds majorities support same-sex health benefits and requiring wedding businesses to serve gay couples, religious beliefs notwithstanding.

Go here to read the rest:

First Amendment Center

Court: Day laborers have 1st Amendment right to solicit jobs – Newsday

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

A Town of Oyster Bay ordinance restricting day laborers from soliciting work on the streets is unconstitutional, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.

The decision upheld a lower court ruling that found the towns 2009 ordinance violated the First Amendment rights of workers by restricting legally protected commercial speech.

The suit was brought against Oyster Bay by Centro de la Comunidad Hispana de Locust Valley and The Workplace Project, a Hempstead-based nonprofit that advocates for Latino rights, in 2010. In 2015, U.S. District Judge Denis Hurley ruled against the town, which appealed.

The ordinance restricts speech based on its content and is therefore subject to the First Amendment, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Manhattan held.

Two of the three judges ruled that the ordinance is an overbroad commercial speech prohibition.

The ordinance was enacted in response to concerns over day laborers who sought work on Forest Avenue in Locust Valley.

Oyster Bay enacted an unconstitutional law directed specifically at hard-working day laborers and Latinos in particular, New York Civil Liberties Union legal director and plaintiffs attorney Arthur Eisenberg said in a statement. It was designed to prevent such workers from entering the town and seeking employment within the town, and the court properly invalidated it.

The plaintiffs were also represented by Manhattan-based Latino Justice.

The court rejected the towns argument that the ordinance was concerned with public safety that could arise from cars stopping in the road.

The ordinance does not require any connection between the prohibited speech solicitation of employment and the asserted interest traffic and pedestrian safety, the court wrote, noting the lower court had said the ordinance would also apply to children selling lemonade at the end of a neighbors driveway.

Oyster Bay Town Supervisor Joseph Saladino said Tuesday the town will ask the Supreme Court to consider reviewing the case.

I cannot understand why any court in this nation would allow illegal aliens to gather on residential streets seeking illegal working while avoiding paying taxes, Saladino said in a statement. This is a quality of life issue and I have always been on the side of protecting the safety of our residents, the integrity of our communities and protecting jobs for our citizens.

Asked how Saladino knew the workers affected by the ordinance did not have legal status, town spokesman Brian Nevin said, Thats obviously who it is.

See the rest here:

Court: Day laborers have 1st Amendment right to solicit jobs - Newsday

Letter First Amendment is a fundamental building block of our society – Petoskey News-Review

Posted on August 22, 2017 by Danzig

First Amendment is a fundamental building block of our society

Editor:

In a letter recently published in your paper, a writer indicates that she wont lose sleep if a Christian must bake a cake or a church is denied participation in a government grant program. I disagree. Both examples are taken from court cases focused on religious liberty and First Amendment freedoms in this country. In addition to affirming the free exercise of religion, the rights outlined in the First Amendment serve as fundamental building blocks of our society and a protection against government censorship and punishment. Combined with other ideals contained in our countrys founding documents, such as the truth that we are all created equal, the rights contained in the First Amendment provide protections for minority groups and demand that we reject racial bigotry, anti-Semitism and hatred in all forms. In the current state of our country, I cant think of anything more important.

Jon Terry

Petoskey

The rest is here:

Letter First Amendment is a fundamental building block of our society - Petoskey News-Review

Select Page ::