Trump hails NAFTA progress, Mexico eyes general deal by end-2017 – Reuters

HAMBURG U.S. President Donald Trump hailed progress on trade after meeting his Mexican counterpart on Friday, as Mexico's government said it expected a general agreement on reworking the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) by the end of 2017.

For the first time since becoming president in January, Trump met Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto, whose foreign minister Luis Videgaray said he expected talks on renegotiating NAFTA to start on Aug. 16., the earliest possible date.

The meeting at the Hamburg leaders' summit of the Group of 20 economies was keenly anticipated in Mexico, and officials were quick to stress talks had been productive, despite Trump repeating that Mexico would pay for his planned border wall.

"We're negotiating NAFTA and some other things with Mexico and we'll see how it all turns out, but I think that we've made very good progress," Trump said after the meeting.

In response to a shouted question from a reporter about whether he still wants Mexico to pay for the border wall, which aims to keep out illegal immigrants, Trump said, "Absolutely."

Pena Nieto, whom Trump called his "friend," said the meeting would "help us continue a very strong dialogue" on NAFTA, while his aides emphasized that they had not discussed the wall.

NAFTA underpins more than $1 trillion worth of trilateral trade between the United States, Mexico and Canada. Videgaray, who was present at the talks, told reporters afterwards it had been a "big part of the conversation" with Trump.

"We expect to have a meaningful, constructive, modernization of the agreement that is good for the three nations," the minister said. "And we think there is a lot of room to make it a better agreement for the three nations."

Speaking on Mexican radio, Videgaray also said both governments agreed the renegotiation "should be a relatively quick process" that looks to "generate agreements, at least in general terms, by the end of the year."

Disputes over migration, Trump's border wall - which Mexico has repeatedly said it will not pay for - and his claim that free trade with Mexico costs jobs in the United States, have strained relations between the two neighbors.

Trump has threatened to impose punitive tariffs on Mexican goods to protect U.S. industry, and to pull out of NAFTA altogether if he cannot rework it in the United States' favor.

However, especially since Trump stepped back from initiating the process of withdrawal in April, Mexican officials say business leaders from the NAFTA nations have increasingly coalesced around a shared desire to keep the agreement alive.

Trump reiterated his aggressive stance on NAFTA in a weekly address published by the White House online after his meeting with Pena Nieto, but apparently recorded beforehand. In it, Trump said he was pursuing a "total renegotiation" of the pact.

"And if we don't get it, we will terminate, that is, end NAFTA forever," he said in the video.

There has been uncertainty about the process because the United States has yet to set out its negotiating objectives. That is due to happen on or about July 16.

In the meantime, issues such as Trump's border wall remain sensitive. Pena Nieto's spokesman Eduardo Sanchez called in to Mexican broadcaster Radio Formula from Hamburg, stating that the two presidents did not discuss the wall.

"That subject was not part of the conversation," he said.

The two presidents also explored a possible guest worker program for migrants in the agriculture sector as well as the importance of "modernizing" NAFTA, according to a statement from Mexico's government released after the meeting.

(Additional reporting by Dave Graham, Adriana Barrera, Anthony Esposito and David Alire Garcia in Mexico City; editing by Noah Barkin and Jonathan Oatis)

JAKARTA Indonesian state firms are courting foreign pension funds by offering a share in future revenue from toll roads, power stations and other infrastructure projects, as part of a presidential drive to secure $10 billion in additional inflows.

HAMBURG U.S. President Donald Trump shared the G20 spotlight on Saturday with his daughter and adviser Ivanka Trump, as she helped launch a loan program for women and caused a stir by briefly occupying her dad's seat at the table with world leaders.

Originally posted here:

Trump hails NAFTA progress, Mexico eyes general deal by end-2017 - Reuters

Data SheetSaturday, July 8, 2017 – Fortune

A great thing about hacking, if you're Vladimir Putin, is it's so hard to prove. Just look at the recent "NotPetya" attacks that fried computers in the Ukraine and around the world: It's two weeks later and still there's no consensus among security experts if responsibility lies with Russia, vigilante hackers, or someone else.

This attribution issue offers tactical advantages for the Kremlin such as letting Russia use hacking to make mischief in ways that are even more subtle than its assassins' signature polonium tea . But hacking also lets Russia further its strategic goal of spreading "dezinformatsiya."

As the New York Times explained last summer, "The fundamental purpose of dezinformatsiya, or Russian disinformation, experts said, is to undermine the official version of events even the very idea that there is a true version of events and foster a kind of policy paralysis."

Hacking is an ideal vehicle for "dezinformatsiya" because in many cases it really is hard to establish a "true version of events." And in a stroke of good fortune for the Russians, the U.S. has elected a President who seems to believe, when it comes to cyber attribution, that hard is the same as impossible.

"Nobody really knows," President Trump said in Poland this week, casting doubt on whether Russia had indeed meddled in the U.S. electoral process. He made the statement despite stacks of intelligence reports that the Kremlin did exactly that, and even though Congressional leaders from both parties don't dispute the meddling either.

Trump's behavior amounts to a kind of intellectual nihilism that holds that, if even a few people deny a fact, it's impossible to say it's true. By this logic, we should also respect those who say 9/11 was an inside job, the moon landing was staged and creationism is real. Except that those people are flat-out wrongand so is Trump when it comes to Russia's election hacking.

But for Putin, the former KGB man, Trump's eagerness to dive down Russia's rabbit holes of lies and doubt (on display again in the screwy statements that followed Trump and Putin's two-hour meeting) are a giant strategic success. Russia's dezinformatsiya campaign couldn't be going any better.

Jeff John Roberts

@jeffjohnroberts

jeff.roberts@fortune.com

Welcome to the Cyber Saturday edition of Data Sheet, Fortune' s daily tech newsletter. You may reach Robert Hackett via Twitter , Cryptocat , Jabber (see OTR fingerprint on my about.me ), PGP encrypted email (see public key on my Keybase.io ), Wickr , Signal , or however you (securely) prefer. Feedback welcome.

Apple's bug bounty a bust: It turns out $200,000 isn't enough. That's the top amount Apple offered to pay hackers to disclose critical iOS exploits under the iPhone maker's bug bounty program, yet no one is coming forward to claim the reward. The likely explanations are that iOS vulnerabilities can fetch more than $1 million on the black market, and that Apple is unwilling to provide white hat hackers with "developer devices" to tinker with. ( Motherboard )

Power plants in peril! A pair of reports suggest hackers from a nation state (likely Russia) have breached the computer systems of more than a dozen power stations, including nuclear facilities, across the U.S. The breaches are believed to have been carried out with malware that compromised engineers' passwords. All this raises the specter of a major attack that could shut down portions of the U.S. power grid and damage surrounding infrastructure. ( Bloomberg , New York Times )

Android ad scam alert : Why are bad guys so attracted to the online ad industry? Presumably because there's good money it. The latest example comes via reports of CopyCat, a form of malware that spread to 14 million Android devices last year. The criminals cashed out by installing the malware and then pocketing revenue tied to millions of ad displays and commissions for app installations. ( Fortune )

A cool scene & poor hygiene: That's a very short summary of an advice guide for women who plan to attend DEF CON in Vegas (the advice could apply to this month's other Vegas hacker convention, Black Hat). Key phrase: "How I, a woman, an engineer, and a hard introvert with a low tolerance for dickheads, recommend approaching DEF CON." (Breanne Boland blog)

Share today's Data Sheetwith a friend:

http://fortune.com/newsletter/datasheet/

Looking for previous Data Sheets? Click here .

So what exactly happened to all those computers during Petya/NotPetya's recent rampage? Fortune's Robert Hackett has a nice summary of a cartographer's video that shows just how the malware munches up the code of a victim machine and then injects others nearby. It's kinda like the Walking Dead - but with Windows machines.

Within minutes of setting the malware into motion on one of the machines, the infection spreads across the network and runs its destructive course. One by one, White's dummy files are encrypted, rendering them into inaccessible, alphanumeric gobbledygook. Read more on Fortune.com .

What School has the Best Cyber Security Program? Universities are revamping curriculums to reflect the growing importance of cyber skills in the world and the workplace. CSO has a nice rundown of what Carnegie Mellon, Johns Hopkins and others are offering. (CSO)

See the original post:

Data SheetSaturday, July 8, 2017 - Fortune

Dispelling myths through science – The Navhind Times

Founder of the Goa Science Forum, Somu Rao from Panaji will deliver a lecture on Superstition and the relevance of Article 51 A (h) today at Museum of Goa (MOG), Pilerne. NT BUZZ finds out the need to demystify myths and understand the scientific reasoning behind superstitions

VENITA GOMES | NT BUZZ

You must have quite often heard people saying: today is not going to be a good day because a black cat just crossed my path or today is Friday the 13 something bad is bound to happen or someone is talking bad about me as my left eye is constantly twitching since morning. Such beliefs are widely termed as superstitions. They are generally irrational beliefs in supernatural influences, especially leading to good or bad luck or a practice-based on such a belief. There is a need to understand the origin of such belief and its relevance in todays world.

Somu Rao from Panaji, for many years, has been working to provide scientific explanation to such beliefs by making people aware of Article 51 A (h)- that states that it is the fundamental duty of every citizen of the country to inculcate scientific temper, humanism and the spirit of inquiry and reform in everyday life. Rao says: Superstition is any belief or practise which is irrational; it may arise from ignorance, misunderstanding of science, blindly believing in fate or magic, or fear of that is unknown. Through our organisation The Goa Science Forum we try to demystify myths related to natural phenomena and explain superstations giving scientific explanation. We also address myths related to health problems to help people get rid of fear of the unknown and phobias. So, that they do not get exploited by people claiming to possess supernatural powers (defying laws of nature).

Sharing some of the most common superstitions believed by people, Rao says: Superstitions like cat crossing the path or hanging lemon and chillies, evil eye have existed since many years. The latest superstition right now that is going on in the South Indian states is the breaking of the red coral stone from the mangalsutra. Married ladies are breaking the red coral stone from the mangalsutra because rumours are that the lady will create health problems for her husband, so there is a mad rush to break it from mangalsutra.

Rao explains that there is a need to question everything in order to avoid ignorance which leads to belief in myths and superstitions. He says: Scientific temper is a way of life. An individual needs to go through the social process of thinking and acting. He can adopt scientific methods which may include questioning, observing physical reality, testing, hypothesising, analysing, and communicating. This means that we should question everything by using science in order to find the truth.

In order to promote Article 51 A (h) Rao has started a voluntary organisation The Goa Science Forum. He has conducted several programmes on scientific temper and has conducted more than 1500 lectures, demonstrations and training workshops on scientific temper in Goa and other states of India. He has even participated in many international, national seminar/conferences on science communication, humanism, etc. He is currently conducting advance training workshops on scientific temper which is a residential programme of five days.

Rao is also the secretary of Federation of Indian Rationalist Association (FIRA) which is a federation of around 87 organisations in India, which works to promote rationalism, humanism in society. The organisation also holds awareness programmes to promote inter-religious and inter-cast marriages; awareness programmes to eradicate superstitions and promote organ donation, etc.

Since the age of 12 Rao has been interested in understanding the basis of such superstitions, he says: Reading different types of books right from childhood gave me lot of information on different subjects. Some of the information I had turned out to be irrational later. Like the information that saints performed miracles, evidence for the existence of ghosts, especially eye witness account of seeing ghost, supernatural claims of so called god men, etc. Scientific evidence to demystify myths and superstitions I learnt gradually. The learning process that started at the age of 12 is still on. I am still learning.

Rao is also associated with the Indian Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal (CSICOP). Speaking about the work carried out by (CSICOP), he says: The organisation was formed by B Premanand to study and investigate claims of paranormal. Some of the cases investigated so far are related to claims of rebirth, claims of supernatural powers of god man and other pseudoscience claims.

(Lecture on Superstition and the relevance of Article 51 A (h) will be held today at 11 a.m. at MOG, Pilerne.)

See the original post:

Dispelling myths through science - The Navhind Times

The Italian architecture that shaped new world heritage site Asmara – The Guardian

Asmaras Catholic Cathedral, an example of the citys Italian heritage Photograph: Ed Harris/Reuters

Standing as a startling collection of futuristic Italian architecture from the 1930s, perched on a desert mountaintop high above the Red Sea, the Eritrean capital of Asmara has been listed as a Unesco world heritage site.

Announced as one of a series of new inscriptions, which are expected to include German caves with ice-age art and the English Lake District, Asmara is the first modernist city in the world to be listed in its entirety.

First planned in the 1910s by the Italian architect-engineer Odoardo Cavagnari, Asmara was lavishly furnished with new buildings after Mussolinis invasion of Ethiopia in 1935, when the sleepy colonial town was transformed into Africas most modern metropolis. As the little Rome at the centre of Italys planned African empire, it became a playground for Italian architects to experiment.

It has an unparalleled collection of buildings that show the variety of styles of the period, said Edward Denison, a lecturer at UCLs Bartlett School of Architecture, who has been working as an adviser to the Asmara Heritage Project, helping to put together the 1,300-page bid document, the result of two decades of research. You get a sense that the architects were getting away with things here that they certainly wouldnt have been able to do in Rome.

From the daring cantilevered wings of the Fiat Tagliero service station, modelled on a soaring aeroplane, to the sumptuous surrounds of the Impero cinema, the city is full of buildings that combine Italian futurist motifs with local methods of construction.

Behind the sharp cubic facades stand walls of large laterite stone blocks, carefully rendered to look like modernist concrete constructions, finished in shades of ochre, brown, pale blue and green much more colourful than their European counterparts.

Some buildings, such as the Orthodox cathedral, have a bold hybrid style, with African monkey head details of wooden dowels poking through the facade, originally used to to bind horizontal layers of wood together between the blocks of stone.

Elsewhere, there are handsome villas, stylish shops and heroic factory complexes, sampling from modernisms broad palette, including novecento, rationalism and futurism, most of which remain in an unusually well-preserved state.

While other countries like Libya and Somalia were understandably keen to trash their colonial heritage, said Denison, Eritrea was subject to a decade of British rule and 40 years of Ethiopian rule, so the process was more gradual.

When independence finally came in the 1990s, a sudden rash of modern buildings made many realise the value of their colonial heritage.

A moratorium on building in the city was established in 2001, which is now planned to be lifted with the introduction of a new conservation management plan, updating the regulations for the first time since the 1930s.

The inscription of Asmara along with historical centre of Mbanza Kongo in Angola goes some way to addressing the under-representation of Africa on the Unesco world heritage list. Of 814 cultural sites worldwide, only 48 are in the African continent, fewer than in Italy alone.

Read the original:

The Italian architecture that shaped new world heritage site Asmara - The Guardian

Setting the record straight on Martin Luther – Washington Post

July 7

The assertion in the June 25 Travel article Where Luther is a name brand that Martin Luther propelled Europe from Middle-Ages darkness to Renaissance humanism, inspired the Enlightenment and ... gave birth to the modern Western world was absolutely wrong on three counts and partially wrong on a fourth.The High Middle Ages were not dark.Renaissance humanism had begun at least 150 years earlier in Italy.What inspired the Enlightenment more than anything else was the publication of Isaac Newtons Principia Mathematica in 1687. Thus, Luthers Reformation is only partially responsible for giving birth to the modern Western world.

Donald L. Ross, Bethesda

I very much enjoyed and appreciated the June 25 Travel article about Wittenberg, Germany. However, I would challenge the description of Martin Luther as an anti-Semite. True, Luther said some horrible things about Jews in his later writings, but he said even worse things about others, including the pope, Turks and peasants who rose up against their masters.For Luther, the criterion for criticism wasnt a persons race but rather if he put them in the category of enemies of the gospel. In 1523, much earlier than the essay the Travel article quoted, Luther wrote a wonderful piece called That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew, a very enlightened treatise for a man of his time and one in which he glowingly praised the Jewish people.(At that time, Luther hoped that after reading his works, they would suddenly all convert. When they didnt, he turned against them and put them in the same category as the pope: enemies of the gospel, in his opinion.)

So, while Luther was a man of his time, he was no anti-Semite as we would understand the term today. Also, the global Lutheran communion has officially repudiated Luthers harsh comments about Jews in the essay that is cited in the otherwise very informative article.

James B. Vigen, Orangeburg, S.C.

The rest is here:

Setting the record straight on Martin Luther - Washington Post

How anti-choice zealots cry censorship whenever they are … – Salon – Salon

If youve made a habit of either watching Fox News Tucker Carlson Tonight or following the anti-abortion groups that frequently appear on the program, then youve heard allegations that these organizations and the anti-choice misinformation they spread are being censored by any number of media platforms.

Most recently, Lila Rose, founder of the anti-abortion group Live Action, appeared on the June 26 edition of Tucker Carlson Tonight and claimed that Twitter was censoring Live Actions ads. Beyond alleging that Twitter was biased against the anti-abortion group, Rose also conveniently mentioned that Live Action had a $40,000 fundraising goal to meet within the week. Mere hours after Roses appearance, Live Actions homepage carried alarge addecrying Twitters censorship and begging for donations to meet the fundraising deadline. By June 30, the organization had reached its fundraising goal and wasaskingsupporters to continue donating in order to guarantee it could continue working to expose the abortion industry.

Rose is merely the latest person in a long list of anti-abortion extremists to baselessly allege censorship as a tactic in order to raise support and rile up right-wing media allies. When viewed as part of a larger pattern of behavior, it becomes clear that for these anti-abortion groups, crying censorshipto any perceived slight functions as a strategy to gain attention and support for their anti-choice misinformation.

Live Action ads and Twitter

During her June 26appearanceon Tucker Carlson Tonight, Rose claimed that Twitter was refusing to promote ads from either her or Live Actions Twitter accounts. Rose alleged that a Twitter bot had been telling them for months, that this is banned, we wont let you put this out. According to Rose, It took over a year for us to finally get from Twitter whats wrong with these tweets. and finally they said that any tweet that shows an ultrasound, that shows a prenatal life and affirms it, that exposes Planned Parenthood, violates the hate and sensitive policy. Carlson echoed Roses allegations and called Twitters policy an atrocity.

In a blog post, Live Actionpointedto Twitters advertising policies against inflammatory content andalleged that Twitter told them to delete tweets calling for the end of taxpayer funding for Planned Parenthood, tweets of our undercover investigations into Planned Parenthood, and tweets including ultrasound images of fetuses. Live Action includedemailsfrom Twitter support staff in the blog post, in which a Twitter representative citedtweets mentioninginfanticideand anotherincluding abirth videoas examples of content that violatedthe platforms sensitive advertising content policy.

The hate and sensitive policy Rose cited is in actuality the platformsad policyon hate content, sensitive topics, and violence. In a statement to Carlson, the social media platformsaid, Twitter has clear, transparent rules that every advertiser is required to follow, and the political viewpoints of an organization do not impact how these rules are applied. Twitters hate content policy also covershate speech or advocacy; violence or threats of violence against people or animals; glorification of self-harm or related content; organizations associated with promoting hate; and offensive, vulgar, abusive or obscene content.

Despite this, Live Actionhas continued to assert that Twitter is playing politics,citinga few tweets by Planned Parenthood to demonstrate the perceived imbalance. These Planned Parenthood tweets mention extremists and talk about Trump defunding the non-profit but without pointing an accusatory finger at a specific group. Many of Live Actions tweets which Twitter did not accept as ads target Planned Parenthood specifically.

Letsnot forgot Live Action is still free to tweet and keep such content on its Twitter account, as Roseclarifiedduring an interview onEWTN News Nightly. The content merely does not meet clear and non-ideological standards for promotion or sponsorship, as dictated by Twitters easily locatedadvertising policies.

Given these facts, it appears that Roses appearance on Tucker Carlson Tonight and claims of censorship werepart of a fundraising strategy for Live Action. As RosetoldCarlson, Were actually doing a campaign right now to get people to fund Live Action and to get out the information that Twitter is trying to block using other platforms using Facebook, using YouTube, using the blogosphere, obviously coming on here and talking with you.

After Roses June 26 appearance, Live Action sent afundraisingemailabout the segment, claiming that Live Action is being suppressed and asking supporters to help us strengthen our efforts against the abortion industry. Live Actions censorship allegations also animated other right-wing media outlets.The Washington Timespromoteditsfundraising appeal, stating, Looking to take their business elsewhere, Live Action started a campaign to raise money to inundate other social media platforms with the pro-life message. On June 29, Christian Broadcasting Network published an article on Live Actions claims about Twitters ad policy, at the end of which itstatedthat Live Action has launched a campaign to compensate for their losses due to Twitters censoring, and directed readers to Live Actions fundraising page.RoseandLive ActionalsopushedthenarrativeonTwitter, using the hashtag #DontDeleteMe despite all content remainingpubliclyavailable on the platform.

Center for Medical Progress videos

In May 2017, the anti-abortion group Center for Medical Progress (CMP)circulateddeceptive video footage that had been barred from release by a federal judge. The videoquickly spreadthrough social media accounts of anti-abortion leaders and groups before Judge William Orrick ordered all copies of the video be taken down as there was aheightened concernfor the safety of abortion providers identified in the footage.

As copiesof the video were removed following Orricks order, anti-choice activists claimedcensorship had occurred and pointed a finger at almost every social media platform as potential culprits. During a May 31appearanceon Fox News Tucker Carlson Tonight, Rose accused both YouTube and Twitter of participating in the chilling effect right now on journalism that is the opposing viewpoint on abortion by complying with the court order to remove the video. Live Action alsoclaimedthat YouTube had caved to the abortion industrys censorship pressure while LifeSiteNewsarguedthat video hosting websites such as Facebook, YouTube, and Vimeo were on a witch hunt against the latest undercover Planned Parenthood video, deleting instances of it wherever they find it.

The anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony ListaccusedYouTube of partnering with Planned Parenthood to cover up the truth that #PPSellsBabyParts a common social media hashtag among staunch anti-choice activists. Liz Wheeler of right-wing news outlet One America News Network (OANN) took personal offense when YouTube removed a clip of her show, Tipping Point, in which she played some of the barred footage. In a follow-up clip, amusinglyavailable on OANNs YouTube channel, Wheeler said YouTube was trying to silence me and asked, What are liberals so afraid people will see that theyll censor me to ensure nobody sees [footage from the barred video].

Although anti-choice groups and right-wing media outlets alike cried censorshipwhen various platforms removed the video, the fact remains that itwas legally barred from release giving these platforms little choice even if they agreed with CMPs highlydiscreditedclaims. Undeterred, these groups and outlets evenextendedtheir criticisms to attack Orrick andattemptedto have him removed from CMPs case an effort that another federal judge ultimatelydismissedas lacking merit.Despite claiming the video was being censored, anti-choice groups still (somehow!)continuedto re-post andspreadthe video across the internet after Orricks order.

Operation Rescues Google ranking

The extremistanti-choice groupOperation Rescueclaimedthat Google was engaged in censorship after its page views decreased for when internet users searched forabortions in US orabortion statistics. The group alleged that Googles search engine has manipulated search parameters to dramatically reduce exposure to Operation Rescues webpages containing misleading abortion statistics.

In April, Googleannounceda policy change regarding how sites containing misleading or false information would be ranked. If Google is censoring anti-abortion pages as Operation Rescue argued it isnot doing a great job with it. Although the page rankings fluctuate,search results for abortions in US and abortion statistic still yield anti-choice sites, includingFox News, National Right to Life Committee, abortion73, and American Life League.

By alleging it wasbeing censored, Operation Rescue effectively sounded the alarm for other anti-abortion groups to use their own rankings on Googles search results to claim discrimination and promote their content. Within a day of OperationRescues initial post, similar stories were running onLifeNewsand the right-wing outletOneNewsNow. Operation Rescue also sent a fundraisingemailasking for support to launch a massive campaign to ensure our critical abortion research and pro-life content is available, and no longer pushed down by the pro-abortion radicals at Google.

March for Life coverage

Every January, anti-abortion groups andmediaoutletsallegethatmainstreammedia are censoring their protest, called the March for Life, againsttheRoe v. Wadedecision. The supposed lack of coverage has galled anti-abortion groups to such an extent that they started anumbrella groupcalled Alliance for Fair Coverage of Life Issues, which primarily focuses on the March for Life Media Censorship. Many members of the group havecomplainedabout the media blackout of the March for Life on major media platforms. Rep. Alex Mooney R-W.Va., who is one of the two politicians in the Alliance, stated, The liberal medias consistent censorship of the annual March for Life is nothing short of shameful.

However, as some right-wing media outlets have themselves suggested, describing coverage of the March for Life as suffering from consistent censorship is inaccurate.After the most recent March for Life, the extreme right-wing outlet Church Militantpraisedthe media because the 2017 March for Life is receiving more media coverage than ever. Church Militant pointed out thatC-SPANandCNNlivestreamed the march, whileNPRfeatured stories from attendees. In addition,The New York Times,The Washington Post, andABC Newsall ran stories about the march.

The March for Life also benefited from the attention garnered by the Womens March in January 2017. Several anti-abortion groups and individuals tried toco-optthe message of the Womens March to push a so-called feminist anti-choice message. The Womens March ultimatelyadopteda pro-choice message, but the anti-abortion groups stillgainedsubstantialmediacoveragefrombeingsupposedlybannedfrom being sponsors ofthe Womens March.

Anti-abortion messages at schools

In March,anti-choicegroupsandmediaoutletsbegan crying censorship when anti-abortion chalk messages scrawled by a chapter of Students for Life of America (SFLA) were scrubbed from sidewalks at Kutztown University in Pennsylvania. Thehate groupAlliance Defending Freedom (ADF) came to SFLAs defensedeclaring, University officials cant chalk up their censorship to following orders to enforce an unconstitutional campus policy on sidewalk chalking. SFLA President Kristan Hawkinsagreed, saying, Too frequently we see that public colleges and universities feel they can engage in censorship of a student group just because officials dont agree with the viewpoint of those students.

In reality, the messages had beenremovedovernight during a regular cleaning process, and had nothing to do with the content of the chalking.

Hawkins also usedTucker Carlson Tonights right-wing platform toraiseanother issue of censorship in schools. During the June 2 appearance on the show, Hawkins supported a high school student whoclaimedher school had denied her permission to form a SFLA chapterbecause it was too controversial. According to school officials, the studentssimplydidnt followthe requirements for club formation and would be approved once they did.

Buffer zones

In 2014, ADF successfully arguedMcCullen v. Coakleybefore the Supreme Court,striking downa Massachusetts buffer zone law that banned anti-choice protestors inside a 35-feet parameter around abortion clinics. ADFclaimedthat this buffer zone in which anti-abortion extremists were not allowed to protest created a censorship zone where the First Amendment doesnt apply. Equating buffer zones with censorship has been a common tactic of anti-choice groups when challenging laws that mandate them. For example, ADF alsousedthe censorship zone argument when arguing against a Pittsburghordinance. Similarly, the anti-abortion group Created EqualclaimedOhios 15-feet buffer zone constituted a censorship zone that infringed on its right to protest outside abortion clinics.

Despite censorshipclaims from anti-abortion groups, buffer zones are essential for abortion access and to deter threats of violence against patients, providers, and clinics. The Massachusetts ordinance that was struck down inMcCullen v. Coakleywasoriginally introducedbecause of a 1994 shooting at a Brookline, MA clinic that killed two people. While anti-abortion protesters complain about the ability to spout their hateful rhetoric,violenceat abortion clinics has not only continued but increased in recent years; in 2015, ashootingat a Colorado Planned Parenthood clinic killed three people and injured nine more. Data from the National Abortion Federation (NAF)showsthat protests outside abortion clinics rose in 2016 to the highest level since NAF began tracking them in 1977. There wasalsoan increase in a wide range of intimidation tactics meant to disrupt the provision of health care at facilities, including vandalism, picketing, obstruction, invasion, trespassing, burglary, stalking, assault and battery, and bomb threats.

As recent cases in Kentucky and Missouri have shown, someanti-choicegroupsintentionally harass abortion providers or engage in civil disobedience outside clinics. When these groups face backlash or legal pushback, they invokecensorshipas a tactic in order to continue their campaigns of harassment.

Crying censorship: An anti-choice tactic

These examples are wide-ranging, reaching from social media platforms, to news coverage, to sidewalk access, but the common thread and indeed, the underlying tactic at play is anti-abortion groups labeling a perceived injustice against them as censorship.These groups have much to gain and very little to lose by employing this tactic. By claiming theyve been unjustly censored, anti-abortion groups not only elevate their lies and misinformation, they are also able to incite followers and raise funds by claiming they are being persecuted.

Crying censorship is a win-win tactic for anti-abortion extremists. Meanwhile, clinic intimidation andviolencecontinues to rise asright-wing mediaagitate their increasingly polarized base to support anti-abortion causes,and an increasing number oflawsare being implemented to limit abortion rights. Anti-choice organizations also have thebenefitof PresidentDonald Trumpsadministrationbeing filled withanti-choiceextremistsalreadyon arampageagainstabortionandcontraception access.

But please, thoughyou have an overtlyanti-choice administration that relies on a direct pipeline of information from anti-abortion extremists, continue to feign outrage about being unable to place ads on Twitter.

Read the original here:

How anti-choice zealots cry censorship whenever they are ... - Salon - Salon

China’s Newest Censorship Methods on Display – The Diplomat

July, more than most other months, is loaded with politically sensitive anniversaries that keep Communist Party of China (CPC) censors and security forces on their toes.

First comes the July 1 anniversary of Hong Kongs transfer from British to Chinese rule. Then there is July 5, marking the 2009 ethnic violence in the Xinjiang region that sparked an unprecedented crackdown on its mostly Muslim Uyghur population. The very next day, July 6, is the Dalai Lamas birthday, andJuly 9is the second anniversary of a sweeping repressive action against Chinas human rights lawyers.Finally there isJuly 20, the date in 1999 when the CPC banned the popular spiritual practice Falun Gong and began a massive and often violent campaign to eradicate it.

This year, the anniversaries overlap with other news stories that Beijing likely wants to quash, including an international uproar surrounding democracy activistLiu Xiaobos belated release on medical parole with terminal cancer, and a campaign by exiled tycoonGuo Wenguito publicize corruption allegations involving top Chinese leaders.

It is not surprising in these circumstances that the CPC hastightened information controls. But the party has not simply intensified its efforts in the short term. It has also gradually adapted its methods to a changing technological environment, one in which mobile phones, social media applications, and digital surveillance are critical features.

The result is a new level of intrusiveness and sophistication, as well as danger for populations that are already at risk of severe human rights violations.

Cutting off Access to Circumvention Tools

One of the escalating restrictions that may have the widest reach is a crackdown on virtual private networks (VPNs), which allow users to bypass official censorship. Several VPN applications have beendisabledor removed fromonline storessince July 1. In a June 22 message to customers,prominent VPN provider Greensaid that after receiving a notice from the higher authorities, it planned to cease operations on July 1, causing a ripple of conversations on social media about what circumvention tools could still be used. The latest initiative builds onincreasing official effortsto stop the dissemination of such tools, including some that the authorities had long tolerated.

The applications removal will have the secondary effect of cutting off software updates for users, leaving their devices more vulnerable to hacking. And while many use VPNs to access uncensored news or blocked social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, the tools are also used for security purposes, to protect businesses and activists from pervasive state surveillance.

Inspecting the Personal Communications of Minorities

Other recent controls have focused on ethnic and religious minorities. In Xinjiang, authorities in a district of the regional capitalUrumqiissued a notice on June 27 instructing all residents and business owners to submit their personal ID cards, cell phones, external drives, portable hard drives, notebook computers, and media storage cards to the local police post for registration and scanning byAugust 1. One district employee toldRadio Free Asiathat the campaign was taking place throughout the city. The goal is ostensibly to identify and purge any terrorist videos, but the action violates the privacy rights of Urumqis three million residents and exposes them to punishment for a host of other possible offenses, including those related to peaceful religious or political expression.

In Tibet, the instant-messaging application WeChat has become increasingly popular in recent years, as it has across China. But using it to communicate about the Dalai Lama or his birthday is difficult and dangerous. A test conducted in January by the Canada-based Citizen Lab found that the Tibetan spelling for Dalai Lama was automatically deleted in WeChat messages. Meanwhile, at leasttwo Tibetansare known to have been jailed for participating in a WeChat group commemorating the spiritual leaders 80th birthday in 2015. After a new spate of self-immolation protests took place in early 2017, Tibetans in Sichuan Province report that police aremonitoring communicationon the platform more closely and detaining those suspected of sharing information about self-immolations with overseas contacts.

New Tactics and New Targets

These developments reflect a broader trend identified in a recentFreedom House reporton religion in China. The study found that Chinese government tactics of religious control and persecution have been changing to incorporate new technologies and match the evolving communication habits of the public. Even in the absence of sensitive anniversaries, various modes of electronic surveillance have expanded dramatically at sites of worship and public spaces frequented by religious believers.

The CPCs information controls also appear to be spreading to traditionally less persecuted groups, like state-sanctioned churches and non-Uyghur residents of Xinjiang. Since March, authorities inZhejianghave reportedly been implementing a campaign to installsurveillance cameras in churches and possibly Buddhist temples, in some cases sparking altercations with police and violence against congregants. In Urumqi, the order to turn in digital devices forinspectionapplies to ethnic Han and Kazakh residents as well as Uyghurs, while localKazakhshave reported increased monitoring and some prosecutions related to expressions of their Muslim faith in recent months.

The Information Arms Race

The Chinese governments actions are partly a response to creative initiatives by minority activists to share their stories and perspectives in a heavily restrictive information environment.

It is a nonstop game of cat-and-mouse, journalist Nithin Coca wrote in a June 27articleabout Chinas high-tech war on Tibetan communication. As the Tibet movements digital-security abilities and training improve, the Chinese government implements more sophisticated hacking techniques.

Similarly, asFalun Gongpractitioners devise new means of disseminating information to debunk vilifying state propaganda and expose abuses they have suffered, security forces have adapted by increasing electronic surveillance and deploying geolocation technology to find and arrest them. Local authorities in places likeJiangsu provincehave also upgraded anti-Falun Gong propaganda efforts, deploying LED rolling screens, cartoons, microblogs, and QQ messaging including in schools last month to demonize Falun Gong and other banned religious groups.

A Vicious Circle

The result of the escalating controls is that there are even fewer avenues for persecuted groups and individuals to defend themselves, offer alternatives to the party line, or expose violence committed by officials. Meanwhile, other Chinese interested in knowing more about these and other censored topics find it increasingly difficult and risky to obtain information.

There is also a cost to the CPC. Such aggressive stability maintenance methods ultimately increase tensions with key populations, intensify resentment of the partys heavy-handed rule, and inspire anti-government activism and even violence, including among otherwise apolitical citizens.

From that perspective, while the CPCs efforts may successfully silence some critics this year, party leaders may face an even more daunting challenge next July.

Sarah Cook is a senior research analyst for East Asia at Freedom House, director of itsChina Media Bulletin,and author ofThe Battle for Chinas Spirit: Religious Revival, Repression, and Resistance under Xi Jinping.

Originally posted here:

China's Newest Censorship Methods on Display - The Diplomat

Glenn Greenwald: CNN Engaged In ‘Corporate Bullying And Creepy Censorship’ On Pro-Trump Reddit Story – Townhall

CNN is still licking their wounds after a rather disastrous couple of weeks, where a shoddy Russia-Trump story led to three staffers resigning, a Project Veritas investigation exposed that the network's producers peddled the Russia story for ratings, and what came off as a wholly inappropriate veiled threat against an anonymous Reddit user who created a Trump WWE video, which the president tweeted before the Fourth of July Holiday. The video shows Trump beating up WWEs Vince McMahon, whose face has been superimposed with the CNN logo. The media went apoplectic as an attack against the press; it wasnt. This spurred the network's reporters to find the user and pretty much threaten to dox him if he continues to post things CNN doesnt like. Yet, before we get to that, lets revisit the Russia-Trump story that had to be retracted, along with The Intercepts Glenn Greenwald torching the media for their repeated trip ups in covering this story.

Three prominent CNN journalists resigned Monday night after the network was forced to retract and apologize for a story linking Trump ally Anthony Scaramucci to a Russian investment fund under congressional investigation. That article like so much Russia reporting from the U.S. media was based on a single anonymous source, and now, the network cannot vouch for the accuracy of its central claims.

[]

Several factors compound CNNs embarrassment here. To begin with, CNNs story was first debunked by an article in Sputnik News, which explained that the investment fund documented several factual inaccuracies in the report (including that the fund is not even part of the Russian bank, Vnesheconombank, that is under investigation), and by Breitbart, which cited numerous other factual inaccuracies.

And this episode follows an embarrassing correction CNN was forced to issue earlier this month when several of its highest-profile on-air personalities asserted based on anonymous sources that James Comey, in his congressional testimony, was going to deny Trumps claim that the FBI director assured him he was not the target of any investigation.

Greenwald then lays into other outlets for peddling shoddy stories, like the Russian hacking into the Vermont power grid, the piece about an anonymous group identifying sites that peddled disinformation stories planted by Russia, the server in Trump Tower thats used to communicate with a Russian bank, and the claim that Wikileaks Julian Assange and Vladimir Putin are best friendsall of which fell apart. Yet, the media wonders why conservatives are using them for punching bags; its because theyre on a witch-hunt against this president. Not only that, theyre sucking at it. It only gives the Trump administration more ammunition and more for his supporters to relish when he delivers an uppercut to the liberal news media, who for months could not contain their outrage that he beat her majesty, Hillary Rodham Clinton. He noted that no one is perfect, and that we all make mistakes. Townhall (and by Townhall, I mean myselfmea culpa) posted about the Vermont grid story, albeit a short blurb that really didnt go into a deep dive, but it was not correct and we added a correction. At the same time, were not in the same mold as other outlets concerning the Russian threat. To this day, there is zero evidence that Trump campaign officials colluded with the Russians to tilt the election.

What is most notable about these episodes is that they all go in the same direction: hyping and exaggerating the threat posed by the Kremlin. All media outlets will make mistakes; that is to be expected. But when all of the mistakes are devoted to the same rhetorical theme, and when they all end up advancing the same narrative goal, it seems clear that they are not the byproduct of mere garden-variety journalistic mistakes.

[]

The importance of this journalistic malfeasance when it comes to Russia, a nuclear-armed power, cannot be overstated. This is the story that has dominated U.S. politics for more than a year. Ratcheting up tensions between these two historically hostile powers is incredibly inflammatory and dangerous. All kinds of claims, no matter how little evidence there is to support them, have flooded U.S. political discourse and have been treated as proven fact.

And thats all independent of how journalistic recklessness fuels, and gives credence to, the Trump administrations campaign to discredit journalism generally.

That story was posted on June 27. It took less than a week for CNN to get another face full of buckshot when they decided to search for the Reddit user that created the video of Trump beating up CNN right before the Fourth of July holiday. The user is not someone to be defended aggressively. Hes admitted to posting racist and anti-Semitic material on the site. Hes apologized, but heres where things got controversial [emphasis mine]:

CNN is not publishing "HanA**holeSolo's" name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again. In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same.

CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change.

And of course, Greenwald had a response:

There is something self-evidently creepy, bullying, and heavy-handed about a large news organization publicly announcing that it will expose someones identity if he ever again publishes content on the internet that the network deems inappropriate or objectionable. Whether it was CNNs intent or not, the article makes it appear as if CNN will be monitoring this citizens online writing, and will punish him with exposure if he writes something the network dislikes.

[]

Moreover, if this persons name is newsworthy on the ground that racists or others who post inflammatory content should be publicly exposed and vilified does it matter if he expressed what CNN executives regard as sufficient remorse? And if his name is not newsworthy, then why should CNN be threatening to reveal it in the event that he makes future utterances that the network dislikes?

If youre someone who believes that media corporations should expose the identity even of random, anonymous internet users who express anti-Semitic or racist views, then you should be prepared to identify the full list of views that merit similar treatment. Should anyone who supports Trump have their identity exposed? Those who oppose marriage equality? Those with views deemed sexist? Those who advocate communism? Are you comfortable with having corporate media executives decide which views merit public exposure?

Whatever else is true, CNN is a massive media corporation that is owned by an even larger corporation. It has virtually unlimited resources. We should cheer when those resources are brought to bear to investigate those who exercise great political and economic power. But when they are used to threaten and punish a random, obscure citizen who has criticized the network no matter how objectionable his views might be it resembles corporate bullying and creepy censorship more than actual journalism.

The point with all of this is that its not just conservative media that are complaining about CNN and others tripping up. Greenwald is no fan of Donald Trump, conservatives, or our intelligence community - specifically the CIA - but hes also known for keeping both sides honest. In February, he criticized the media for forgetting that the Obama administration was heavy handed with the press, especially when it came to whistleblowers. He also said what the Deep State is doing to the Trump White House by intentionally leaking highly sensitive information is a prescription for the destruction of democracy."

The Intercept is a site where leakers to come forward with information that exposes government corruption or malfeasance. Its the safe space for leakers, but its another thing to leak classified material in the hopes of hamstringing an administration from governing because youre upset about an election result. Earlier this year, he told Amy Goodman of the left wing Democracy Now that the actions of the Deep State are akin to a soft coup as well:

Even if youre somebody who believes that both the CIA and the deep state, on the one hand, and the Trump presidency, on the other, are extremely dangerous, as I do, theres a huge difference between the two, which is that Trump was democratically elected and is subject to democratic controls, as these courts just demonstrated and as the media is showing, as citizens are proving. But on the other hand, the CIA was elected by nobody. Theyre barely subject to democratic controls at all. And so, to urge that the CIA and the intelligence community empower itself to undermine the elected branches of government is insanity. That is a prescription for destroying democracy overnight in the name of saving it.

Vox Media, which isnt a right wing rag either, also were appalled by CNNs apparent threat are highly unethical:

A plain reading of CNNs article, however, contradicts what the network and Kaczynski are saying. If CNN really intended to withhold HanA**holeSolos information regardless of what he did, then why didnt the news organization say it was withholding his private information simply because hes a private citizen? Why did it go on to add all the conditions about his behavior? And why did it say it could release the private information with an explicit condition tied to his behavior?

Personally, if I reported this story, it would have been pretty straightforward: CNN is not publishing HanA**holeSolos name because he is a private citizen. Period. The rest of the information in that paragraph is unnecessary, because a media organization simply shouldnt release a private citizens personal information. He shouldnt have his private information threatened just because the president picked up one of his Reddit sh**posts, which he made with the expectation that he would be kept anonymous. (Though it is a truly bizarre turn of events that its even possible to write this sentence.)

In journalism, there is a clear line between public and private figures. Public figures are held to a higher standard since they represent not just themselves but their offices, their industries, and so on. But private figures are given a veil of privacy, since its not really in the public interest to get some random persons private information.

The month isnt over yet; CNN could step on the rake once more. Stay tuned.

The rest is here:

Glenn Greenwald: CNN Engaged In 'Corporate Bullying And Creepy Censorship' On Pro-Trump Reddit Story - Townhall

Twitter can proceed with free speech case against DOJ, federal judge rules – Washington Times

A federal judge has given Twitter permission to proceed with a First Amendment lawsuit brought against the Department of Justice over restrictions limiting how tech companies can disclose details about government surveillance requests.

Twitter sued the government in 2014 after the Justice Department barred the company from revealing the exact number of requests for user data its received from federal authorities, but the government countered by claiming disclosing that data would be detrimental to national security.

U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers ruled against the governments bid for summary judgement Thursday and said its restrictions constitute a prior restraint on Twitters freedom of speech and subject to the highest level of scrutiny under the First Amendment.

The government has not presented evidence, beyond a generalized explanation, to demonstrate that disclosure of the information in the draft transparency report would present such a grave and serious threat of damage to national security as to meet the applicable strict-scrutiny standard, the judge ordered.

Even where courts have hesitated to apply the highest level of scrutiny due to competing secrecy and national security concerns, they have nevertheless held that heightened or rigorous scrutiny of such restrictions on speech is required, she added.

The judge dismissed the governments argument and instead ordered the Justice Department to expedite the process of granting security clearances for Twitters attorneys so they can review any classified documents subsequently filed in Washingtons defense.

This is an important issue for anyone who believes in a strong First Amendment, and we will continue with our efforts to share our complete transparency report, Twitter said in a statement welcoming the ruling.

Existing rules allow Twitter and other tech companies to disclose the number of government surveillance requests theyve received in wide bands, such as 0-999. Twitter has argued the restrictions are unconstitutional and prevent the company from being transparent with its customers.

Read the original post:

Twitter can proceed with free speech case against DOJ, federal judge rules - Washington Times

How Free Speech on Campus Protects Disadvantaged Groups – The … – The Atlantic

Harvard President Drew Faust gave a ringing endorsement of free speech in her recent commencement address. There was, however, one passage where Faust asserted that the price of Harvards commitment to free speech is paid disproportionately by those students who dont fit the traditional profile of being white, male, Protestant, and upper class. That point has been illustrated by a few recent controversies over speakers whose words were deemed offensive by some members of those non-traditional groups of students. But focusing solely on those controversies, and on a handful of elite campuses, risks obscuring a larger point: Disadvantaged groups are also among the primary beneficiaries of vigorous free-speech protections.

The Department of Justice Stands by Texas's Voter ID Law

Universities have often served as springboards for progressive social movements and helped to consolidate their gains. They have been able to fulfill these functions largely by serving as spaces where ideasincluding radical and contrarian ideascould be voiced and engaged with.

Today, many universities seem to be faltering in their commitment to this ideal, and it is the vulnerable and disenfranchised who stand to lose the most as a result. Thats particularly true beyond the world of elite private universities such as Harvard. The reality is that, as compared to white Americans, blacks and Latinos are much more likely to attend public universities and community colleges than elite private institutions. The same goes with those from low-income backgrounds as compared to the wealthy. This dynamic holds with regard to faculty as well: Female professors and professors of color are more likely than their white male counterparts to end up teaching at public universities as opposed to elite institutions like Harvard.

Heres why this matters: In virtue of their heavy reliance on taxpayer funding and major donors, public colleges are much more receptive to calls from outside the university to punish faculty and staff for espousing controversial speech or ideas. Groups like Professor Watchlist, Campus Reform, or Campus Watch exploit this vulnerability, launching populist campaigns to get professors fired, or to prevent them from being hired, on the basis of something they said. The primary targets of these efforts end up being mostly women, people of color, and religious minorities (especially Muslims and the irreligious) when they too forcefully or bluntly condemn systems, institutions, policies, practices, and ideologies they view as corrupt, exploitative, oppressive, or otherwise intolerable.

Those most vulnerable to being fired for expressing controversial views are the ever-growing numbers of contingent facultywho also tend to be disproportionately women and minorities. Meanwhile, the better-insulated tenured faculty tend to be white men.

As a result, if progressives are concerned with ensuring a more representative faculty, if they are committed to protecting freedom of conscience and freedom of expression for women and minorities, then they need to be committed to protecting free speech across the board. Every attempt to censor Charles Murray or Milo Yiannopoulos makes it easier to mount a campaign to fire someone like Lisa Durden (who made controversial comments about holding an all black Memorial Day celebration that excluded whites). Progressives lose the moral high ground they would need to defend radical and provocative speechwhich is unfortunate because they are arguably the ones who need free-speech protections most.

Americans tend to be politically to the right of most university faculty and studentsand as a result the public is more likely to be shocked and offended by views expressed by progressive scholars than by academic conservatives, who are few in number, generally rather moderate politically, and usually cautious about what they say publicly. Politicians are also more likely to throw their weight behind campaigns against left-leaning scholars, given that Republicans control most state governments, and thereby the purse strings of most public universities.

And if progressive scholars face a constant threat from the right coming from off-campus, they also face a threat from the left on campus. Many of the student-led campaigns that have made national news in the last two years have targeted professors who, themselves, identify as liberal or progressivebut who managed to challenge or violate some tenet of the prevailing activist orthodoxy.

Progressives, therefore, have reason to celebrate the fact that conservatives and their allies seem to be rallying behind the cause of free speech on campus. They can take advantage of this moment to institutionalize more robust protections, clearer standards and policies, and a healthier civic culture that turns disagreements into opportunities for learning. If progressives fail to embrace free speech, and if they cede this basic American value to the right, then, as Harvards President Faust warned in her commencement address, any effort to limit some speech opens the dangerous possibility that the speech that is ultimately censored may be our own.

Read the original post:

How Free Speech on Campus Protects Disadvantaged Groups - The ... - The Atlantic

Podcast: The future of digital free speech – Constitution Daily (blog)

On June 7in Los Angeles, California, theNational Constitution Center hosted a program on the future of digital free speech, in partnership with the American Constitution Society and the Federalist Society.

The first half of the program is a one-on-one conversation between Constitution Center president and CEO Jeffrey Rosenand Judge Alex Kozinski of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Listeners can find it right now on the Constitution Centers YouTube channel and in the coming weeks onLive at Americas Town Hall.

This week's episode ofWe the Peoplepicks up with the second half of the program, when Judge Kozinski was joined by Cindy Cohn, executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Eugene Volokh, the Gary T. Schwartz Professor of Law at UCLA, for a wide-ranging discussion.

Todays show wasedited byJason Gregoryand produced byNicandro Iannacci. Research was provided byLana UlrichandTom Donnelly. The host ofWe the PeopleisJeffrey Rosen.

Continue todays conversation onFacebookandTwitterusing@ConstitutionCtr.

We want to know what you think of the podcast! Email us at[emailprotected].

Sign up to receiveConstitution Weekly, our email roundup of constitutional news and debate.

Please subscribe toWe the Peopleand our companion podcast,Live at Americas Town Hall, on iTunes, Stitcher, or your favorite podcast app.

We the Peopleis a member ofSlatesPanoplynetwork. Check outthe full roster of podcasts atPanoply.fm.

Despite our congressional charter, the National Constitution Center is aprivate nonprofit; we receive little government support, and we rely on the generosity of people around the country who are inspired by our nonpartisan mission of constitutional debate and education. Please consider becoming a member to support our work, including this podcast. Visitconstitutioncenter.orgto learn more.

Recent Stories on Constitution Daily

John McCain to be awarded 2017 Liberty Medal

Trump team may go back to Supreme Court on immigration

Anticipation already begins for Courts next term

Filed Under: First Amendment, Freedom of Speech, Podcasts

Visit link:

Podcast: The future of digital free speech - Constitution Daily (blog)

Freedom of speech and the press protected – Grand Island Independent

Amendment 1 of The Constitution of the United States says, Congress Shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The statement, The press is the enemy of the people, is an attack on the Constitution of the United States and Amendment 1 of the Bill of Rights not hyperbole or exaggeration but an attack. This encompassing statement includes television, radio and print media.

The term fake news is also an attack on the Constitution of The United States and Amendment 1 of the Bill of Rights. Fake news is a response a child would use for something he/she doesnt want to hear. Fake news has no merit just as saying, The sky is falling, the sky is falling! has no merit. Not only does it erode Amendment 1 of the Bill of Rights, it is also allows the opportunity to avoid proving the statement. This broad brush attack on the Constitution of the United States of America is convenient to the user because it allows the user to hide behind the Fake news statement and not prove the assertion.

To use another perspective, what if the statements were the following attacks:

Religion is the enemy of the people or fake religion

Freedom of speech is the enemy of the people or fake speech

The right to peacefully assemble is the enemy of the people or fake assembly

As citizens of The United States, protect Your Bill of Rights and your Constitution of the United States of America.

More:

Freedom of speech and the press protected - Grand Island Independent

20 Options on God (Find Yours Here) – Patheos (blog)

There are at least twenty distinct options on God, found throughout history and afoot right now.

We can say there is considerable variety in the approach to God as long as we admit that variety is just a pretty word for disagreement.

What does disagreement show?

Theological disagreement shows us that humanity has never ever agreed about Who or What or Whether God is. Your own view of God (find it in the list below) will always be a minority opinion, outnumbered by all the other opinions combined.

Here are the twenty:

Polytheists say there are many Gods, as many as you like, into the millions if you prefer, perhaps billions, one for every pair of human eyes. You may worship and adore all the Gods.

Henotheists admit many Gods too, but you may only have time to devote yourself to one, and thats okay because these are not self-doubting, jealous Gods.

Kat-henotheists also acknowledge many Gods, but you should dedicate yourself to a single God at a time, moving from one God to another God at different phases of your life, perhaps the phases offered in As You Like It by Shakespeares intellectualist idler, Jaques, who espies seven stages of life, beginning with infancy and ending in the second childishness of old-aged senilitysans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything. There are Gods aplenty for each stage.

Trinitarians affirm one God but this God is to be worshiped and adored in three persons: Father, Son (Jesus), and Holy Ghost. To other monotheists like Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, Bahais and Caodais, and to polytheists and atheists too, Trinitarian math is elusive (1+1+1=1?) and susceptible to being labelled a petite polytheism of three distinct Gods. Trinitarians vigorously defend the oneness of three.

Dualists acknowledge two Gods, one very very Good and the other one very very Evil. The need for two rests upon the worlds oscillation between beauty and ugliness, delight and dread, kindness and cruelty, irises and ebola viruses. In a family of Dualists you may hear the following dialogue: Child: Mommy, did our good, loving and compassionate God create the talon, the fang and the claw? Mom: No, sweetie, the other God, the God of cruelty, made those. As if you needed to be told, you should adore the very very Good God.

Monotheists declare there has only ever been one good God to worship and adore. Several distinct and opposing monotheistic religions claim this God and define him in many different ways, with many different hues.

Dystheists say theres one God who is not really all that good, given conspicuous evidence from our bloody red in tooth and claw, predator-prey natural world. Adore with caution.

Pantheists state that God is identical to the many things of the physical, material world, and when you adore the many things of the material world you adore God.

Pan-en-theists claim that God is within the many things of the material world but distinct from the many things of the material world. You may adore this God in your esteem for the material world, or adore this God as something above the material world.

Deists insist there is one God who created the universe but thereafter took no interest in it. You do not adore this God because this God cares nothing about you, either because he doesnt know you exist, or because he cares about you as much as he cares about the life of an oyster or a gnat (with due apologies to The World Parliament of Insects, Mollusks, & Affiliated Clam Culture).

Daoists maintain that God is not a person at all but an Impersonal Force that pervades the universe and may be tapped-into by humans but requires no adoration. (Cf. Yoda, Obi-Wan Kenobi, and Rey of the Star Wars mythos.)

Extra-Terrrestrialists say that what humans have been calling Gods are actually space-visiting galactic beings who used modest ingredients and measuring spoons to un-miraculously originate life on Earth and thereafter vacationed in rural New Mexico.

Monists proclaim there is only one item in existence: God. God is everything, everything is God, and everything is only one thing, God. Variety is a delusion, and all the words we have for the many existent things are superfluous. Thin the dictionary to the letter g and the word God. (Pantheism is different in that it admits the existence of many things).

Anatheists say God cannot be rendered into any image or concept, because the God that can be imagined is not the real God. Our mystics proffer this deity and claim to adore God immediately; that is, without the mediation of holy saints, holy buildings, holy worship services, bells, books, candles, or even thoughts and words. Mystics often claim an ineffable experience and then write inch-thick books describing it.

Euhemerists say all Gods were once humans who at some point achieved apotheosis, elevation to divinity. Adore the worthy ones. (Some Buddhists may be here.)

Misotheists follow Prometheus and hate all Gods because Gods are completely overbearing, pompous, fat-witted despots. Adoration is inapt.

Skeptics doubt not only avowals about God but also all claims to all knowledge. A Skeptic might say, You you claim to know God exists and you dont even know if Charlemagne existed.

Atheists find no persuasive arguments for God, no convincing idea of God on offer in six thousand years, and therefore say there must be no Gods. (Some Buddhists may be here).

Agnostics remain unconvinced by every argument for Gods existence but prefer to withhold judgment as to whether God exists by saying I dont know if theres a God. Agnostics are no kind of believer in God and do not hedge their bet by attending religious services or by prayingjust in case theres a God.

Ignostics advise us to give up the word God and rub it from the worlds lexicons and never utter it again. Why? Because it has been proved over many thousands of years that humans are utterly ignorant about what the word God signifies, as established by our extensive disagreements concerning God, evinced in this very roster of twenty.

Featured image Confusion by lisa-skorpion via Flickr

.

Read more here:

20 Options on God (Find Yours Here) - Patheos (blog)

Nelsons Leads Tanglewood Resurrection – The Boston Musical … – The Boston Musical Intelligencer

July 8, 2017 by Jeffrey Gantz

One hundred and fifty-seven years after Gustav Mahlers birth on July 7, 1860, he could hardly have imagined a better birthday present than the performance of his Second Symphony, the Resurrection, that Andris Nelsons and the Boston Symphony Orchestra gave to open Tanglewoods 2017 season.

Mahler premiered the Resurrection in Berlin in 1895, to a mixed reception. The certainty of its redemptive Finale would give way to the pantheism of his Third Symphony, the mortal humor of the Fourth and Fifth, the mortal tragedy of the Sixth, the mundane humor of the Seventh, and the death struggle that is Das Lied von der Erde and the Ninth and Tenth. But Mahler never outgrew the hope of the Resurrection. It was the piece he conducted at his Vienna farewell concert, after he had resigned as director of the Vienna Hofoper. It was the first of his symphonies that he conducted in New York (1908), and the first that he conducted in Paris (1910).

The Resurrection symphony also prompted the late New York businessman and financier Gilbert Kaplan to acquire the autograph manuscript of Mahlers score and take up the baton. Kaplan conducted Mahlers Second on more than 100 occasions, and he recorded it twice, with the London Symphony in 1987 and the Vienna Philharmonic in 2004. Kaplans philosophy of the Resurrection was that the angels are in the details, but theres more to the heaven of this symphony than his literal readings dream of. On a rainy Friday, Nelsons took it by the devils horns, so to speak.

You dont need Mahlers program to understand that the opening Allegro maestoso is a funeral march, or that its the hero of his First Symphony whos in the coffin. But that opening outburst in the cellos and basses can be calm and resigned or big and angry. Nelsons went for big and angry. Recorded timings for this movement range from 17-1/2 minutes (Otto Klemperer in 1951) to 25-1/2 minutes (Otto Klemperer in 1971); Nelsons took 25. He gave the initial theme drama, space, and articulation, making palpable those bars where the cellos and basses, now downward slipping, recall the passage in the first act of Wagners Die Walkre when Hunding orders Sieglinde to prepare food and drink for Siegmund. The wistful, yearning E-major second theme was fraught, almost self-consciously so, but on its second appearance, in the development, Nelsons conjured what T. S. Eliot called the agony in stony places. He was ferocious where Mahler introduces the plainsong Dies Irae (Day of Wrath) to the march, then tender when the yearning theme rises to a hopeful F-sharp, a moment many conductors gloss over. The coda was measured but never sagged.

Mahler marked a five-minute pause to follow the Allegro maestoso. Perhaps he thought his audience would need that much of a break to recover from the gravity of the first movement; perhaps he thought that the Andante moderato would be jarring if it followed immediately. Contemporary audiences hardly need five minutes; conductors these days usually take a brief pause. Nelsons took three minutes, which seemed just right.

The Andante moderato flashes back to happy time in the heros life; Mahlers program describes it as a memory, a ray of sunlight, pure and cloudless. The movement has been described as both a minuet and a Lndler; Nelsons gave it the courtly delicacy of the one and the rustic sway of the other. One could have asked for more animation in the stately first trio, but the transition from the second trio back into the main subject was seductive, and the drawn-out conclusion was a benediction.

In the third movement, I lost Nelsonss thread. Titled In ruhig flieender Bewegung (In Peacefully Flowing Movement), its Mahlers remodeling of his Des Knaben Wunderhorn song Des Antonius von Padua Fischpredigt, wherein St. Anthony, finding his church empty, goes to preach to the fishes, who listen attentively before resuming their venal ways. Mahler describes the movement as a return to this tangled life of ours after awaking from the blissful dream of the Andante moderato. Peacefully flowing describes what Nelsons gave us, but at his moderate tempo the movement was mild-mannered, with no hint of mincing sarcasm, and the climaxes didnt have room to register. Even the moment when the ocean seems to open up and reveal Wagners Rhinemaidens wanted magic.

Mahler was, he tells us, at a loss as to how to redeem this distorted and crazy world until, in 1894, he attended the funeral of conductor Hans von Blow and heard a choir sing a setting of Friedrich Klopstocks poem Auferstehen (Rise Again). In short order, he fashioned the final two movements. The fourth, Urlicht (Primal Light), adapts another of the composers Knaben Wunderhorn songs. Nelsonss mezzo, Bernarda Fink, sang without a score and with admirable purity and gravity she never sounded operatic. She also conveyed meaning without overenunciating. What she didnt do was project.

Mahler concludes the Resurrection with his own version of the Klopstock chorale, but not until the Day of Wrath arrives and the dead rise, march, and stand for Judgment though as Mahler advises us, There is no Judgment, only A feeling of overwhelming love. This fifth and final movement sprawls and is hard to hold together. It begins in chaos before we hear the Resurrection theme, which, it turns out, is a rhythmic variation on the Ewig motif from Wagners Siegfried: Ewig war ich, ewig bin ich (Eternal I was, eternal I am) is what Brnnhilde sings to Siegfried after hes braved her ring of fire. You can hear a foreshadowing of the Resurrection theme as early as bar 48 of the Allegro maestoso which makes you wonder whether Mahler didnt know where he was going with this symphony from the outset.

Andris Nelsons conducts BSO, TFC, Bernardam Fink, and Malin Christensson (Hilary Scott photo)

I wasnt always sure where Nelsons was going either. This movement was mighty Mahler at the decibel level but some sections were hustled and others went so slackly that the phrasing flatlined. The soprano, Malin Christensson, had sung previously with Nelsons and the BSO in Februarys Bach B-minor Mass; she was pleasing then and pleasing Friday, but she rarely rose above the tumult.

What Mahler called Der groe Appell (The Great Call), however, was perfectly calibrated antiphonal offstage brass fanfares set against an onstage flutes nightingale, which Mahler called the bird of death. And it was gratifying to see the Tanglewood Festival Chorus, all in white, off book. The choruss first word, Auferstehen, was hushed (which is the norm in a good performance) but also gentle (a pleasant surprise). Bereite dich, so often barked, was a full-throated cheer. Nelsons integrated the tempos of Sterben werd ich, um zu leben and the slightly faster Was du geschlagen in a way that few conductors do, and the climax was fervent.

The reading overall was expansive at 87 minutes (excluding that three-minute pause). As a live performance (real or imagined shortcomings aside), it measured up to Claudio Abbados legendary 1979 BSO guesting and, yes, Benjamin Zanders offering this past April with the Boston Philharmonic. Next to more compact, natural recordings by the likes of Otto Klemperer and William Steinberg, Nelsonss interpretation could sound studied, but for every perplexing moment, came two or three breathtaking ones. The clarity of the orchestra was remarkable throughout; the counterpoint between the upper and lower strings felt palpable, and the winds and the brass executed with ravishing beauty. A CD of this night would be among the best in the catalog. Happy birthday Gustav!

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Excerpt from:

Nelsons Leads Tanglewood Resurrection - The Boston Musical ... - The Boston Musical Intelligencer

‘Fireworks’ Images from Hubble Telescope Capture Stars Forming Just After the Big Bang – Space.com

The Hubble Space Telescope captured this view of the galaxy cluster SDSS J1110+6459, which lies 6 billion light-years from Earth and contains hundreds of galaxies.

A natural magnifying glass has sharpened images captured by NASA's Hubble Space Telescope, revealing a distant galaxy that contradicts existing theories about early star formation. By pairing Hubble with a massive galaxy cluster, scientists captured images 10 times sharper than the space telescope could snap on its own.

The resulting images reveal star-forming knots of newborn stars only 200 to 300 light-years across, in a galaxy that formed only 2.7 billion years after the Big Bang. Previous theories suggested that star-forming regions in the early universe were much larger at least 3,000 light-years across. [Hubble Space Telescope's Latest Cosmic Views]

"There are star-forming knots as far down in size as we can see," Traci Johnson, a doctoral student in astronomy at the University of Michigan, said in a statement. Johnson is the lead author on two of the three research papers describing Hubble's new results, which were published July 6 in the The Astrophysical Journal and the The Astrophysical Journal Letters.

In this Hubble photograph of a distant galaxy cluster, a spotty blue arc stands out against a background of red galaxies. The arc consists of three separate images of a galaxy in the background called SGAS J111020.0+645950.8, which has been magnified and distorted through a process known as gravitational lensing.

Though Hubble was built to peer into the early universe, even the legendary space telescope can sometimes use a boost. In this case, astronomers paired the instrument with a gravitational lens, a massive structure in space that bends and distorts light to allow glimpses at greater distances.

Gravitational lenses can be any type of object, ranging from a single massive galaxy to an entire cluster. As light from the more distant galaxy passes the massive object, it is bent and distorted into an arc. For the newfound cluster, this magnified the object almost 30 times. Scientists had to develop a special computer code to remove the distortions and reveal the galaxy as it would normally appear.

Gravitational lenses occur when the light from a more distant galaxy or quasar is warped by the gravity of a nearer object in the line of sight from Earth, as shown in this diagram.

Without the boost of the gravitational lens, the disk galaxy would appear smooth and unremarkable through the Hubble telescope, Johnson said. With it, however, scientists could catch an amazing glimpse of the early universe.

"When we saw the reconstructed image, we said, 'Wow, it looks like fireworks are going off everywhere,'" said Jane Rigby, an astronomer at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, and lead author of the third paper.

The newly spotted galaxy lies about 11 billion light-years from the sun. Because of the connection between distance and time, that means astronomers can see it as it looked 11 billion years ago, only a few billion years after the Big Bang that kick-started the universe about 13.8 billion years ago.

Whereas Hubble revealed newborn stars, NASA's upcoming James Webb Space Telescope will reveal older, redder stars. Scheduled to launch in October 2018, Webb will also be able to peer through the dust around the galaxy.

"With the Webb Telescope, we'll be able to tell you what happened in this galaxy in the past, and what we missed with Hubble because of dust," Rigby said.

Follow Nola Taylor Redd on Twitter @NolaTRedd Facebook or Google+. Follow us at @Spacedotcom, Facebook or Google+. Originally published on Space.com.

See original here:

'Fireworks' Images from Hubble Telescope Capture Stars Forming Just After the Big Bang - Space.com

NATO allies look for reassurance from Trump in Warsaw – CNBC

EMMANUEL DUNAND | AFP | Getty Images

US President Donald Trump listens to NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg's speech during the unveiling ceremony of the Berlin Wall monument, during the NATO summit

U.S. President Donald Trump meets eastern NATO allies in Warsaw on Thursday amid expectations he will reaffirm Washington's commitment to counter threats from Russia after unnerving them in May by failing to endorse the principle of collective defense.

En route to a potentially fractious G-20 summit in Germany, Trump will take part in a gathering of leaders from central Europe, Baltic states and the Balkans, an event convened by Poland and Croatia to boost regional trade and infrastructure.

The White House has said Trump will use the stopover in Warsaw to showcase his commitment to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, which he once called "obsolete", a likely effort to patch up relations after the tense alliance summit in May.

Poland's conservative and euroskeptic government, which shares views with Trump on issues such climate change, migration and coal mining, has hailed the U.S. president's visit as a recognition of its role as a leading voice in central Europe.

The west Europeans, critical of Poland's democratic record, will be watchful as to whether Trump, who will give a major policy speech on a Warsaw square, may encourage its government in its defiance of Brussels.

Some west European governments are worried over a deepening divide between east and west within the European Union and some diplomats see Thursday's regional summit as a Polish bid to carve out influence outside EU structures.

Poland also wants to buy liquefied natural gas from U.S. companies to counterbalance Russian gas supplies in the region.

"We are simply an important country in this part of the world," Polish President Andrzej Duda said in an interview with the PAP news agency.

"We are among the biggest countries in Europe, we are a leader of central Europe, and President Trump ... understands this."

Follow this link:

NATO allies look for reassurance from Trump in Warsaw - CNBC

US names former ambassador to NATO as Ukraine crisis envoy – POLITICO.eu

Kurt Volker will take responsibility for advancing U.S. efforts to achieve the objectives set out in the Minsk agreements | Flickr via Creative Commons

The announcement comes on the eve of Rex Tillersons trip to Kiev.

By Connor Murphy

7/7/17, 7:11 PM CET

Updated 7/7/17, 7:16 PM CET

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson appointed Kurt Volker, a former U.S. ambassador to NATO, as special representative to Ukraine, the State Department saidFriday.

In a statement, the department said Volker will take responsibility for advancing U.S. efforts to achieve the objectives set out in the Minsk agreements, and accompany the secretary of state on a trip to Kiev on Sunday.

Kurts wealth of experience makes him uniquely qualified to move this conflict in the direction of peace, Tillerson said. The United States remains fully committed to the objectives of the Minsk agreements, and I have complete confidence in Kurt to continue our efforts to achieve peace in Ukraine.

Secretary Tillerson appoints Ambassador Kurt Volker as the U.S. Special Representative for #Ukraine Negotiations. https://t.co/p5H2uRVtdq

Department of State (@StateDept) July 7, 2017

Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 and has been accused of supporting pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine. More than 10,000 people have been killed in the conflict in eastern Ukraine since April 2014, according to theUnited Nations, though Moscow denies direct involvement.

Germany, France, Ukraine and Russia brokered a package of measures in Minsk in 2015 intended to end the conflict, but thisfailed to stop the fighting.

Volker is a career diplomat who served as the U.S. envoy to NATO under both the Bush and Obama administrations.

He is currently an expert in U.S. foreign and national security policy atthe McCain Institute,an American think tank affiliated with Senator John McCain and Arizona State University.

Tillreson will make his first official visit to Kiev following the G20 summit in Hamburg. The U.S. secretary of state will meet with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on Sunday and reaffirm Americas commitment to Ukraines sovereignty and territorial integrity, the State Department said.

Secretary Tillerson will focus on two core pillars while in #Ukraine: sovereignty and supporting reform efforts.

Heather Nauert (@statedeptspox) July 5, 2017

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg and the North Atlantic Council areholding a meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission in Kiev on July 9-10.

The appointment comes as the administrations views toward Russia remain in flux. Speaking yesterday in Warsaw, Trump sent mixed signals on his Russia policy. He reaffirmed Americas commitment to NATOs mutual defense provisions and the importance of Eastern Europe to his administration.

And Trump discussedre-energizing implementation of the Minsk agreements in a meeting with German Chancellor Angela Merkel Thursday in Hamburg.

But in a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, Trump told the Russian leader its an honor to be with you. He added: But we look forward to a lot of very positive things happening for Russia, for the United States and for everybody concerned, and Its an honor to be with you.

It was unclear if Trump and Putin discussed the crisis in Ukraine in their much anticipated bilateral meeting, which lasted for almost two and a half hours (it was scheduled to last for 30 minutes).

In June the U.S. Senate voted 98-2 for new sanctions on Iran and Russia, including fresh powers for Congress to block Trump from rolling back any penalties against Vladimir Putins government, but the legislation has been blocked in the House of Representatives.

EU leaders extended sanctions against Russia through January 2018 after Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron updated the European Council on the lack of progress in implementing the Minsk agreements. The EU initially imposed sanctions against Russia in 2014 after its annexation of Crimea.

The rest is here:

US names former ambassador to NATO as Ukraine crisis envoy - POLITICO.eu

NATO Secretary General to visit Ukraine – euronews

Ukraine is set to welcome Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on July 10th. The visit coincides with the 20th anniversary of the distinctive partnership between NATO and Ukraine and high ranked officials hope it will provide an opportunity to discuss Ukraines prospects of joining the Alliance.

In an exclusive interview for Euronews, the Head of the Ukrainian Parliament Andriy Parubiy stressed that in June Ukrainian MPs adopted a draft law that sets membership of the Alliance as a priority for the country. On the July 6th, the bill was signed by Petro Poroshenko. Now Ukraine needs to step-up its reforms to comply with NATO standards

The Ukrainian army is becoming one of the most powerful armies in the region, he explains. Moreover, the army has real combat experience, the experience of modern warfare which means the Ukrainian army is capable of defending not only the Ukrainian border, but also the eastern border of NATO, and the eastern border of the entire free world.

But experts are not so optimistic about prospects of joining Nato. Oleksandr Sushko, Research Director of the Institute for Euro-Atlantic ooperation, says even receiving a Membership Action Plan is a long-term outlook for Ukraine mainly because of the ongoing military conflict with Russia.

Although there is no direct ban on the accession of a belligerent country, there is a logic which means granting NATO membership to a country must add stability and security to the Alliance and the world as a whole,,explains Oleksandr Sushko. There is a large group of NATO members who would not like to increase tensions in relations with Russia. And it is clear that any move towards Ukraines accession will mean additional tension.

In February, President Poroshenko said he would put Nato membership to a referendum. Recent polls show strong support for membership among Ukrainians.

If a NATO membership referendum was held this year, almost 70% of voters would say yes according to recent surveys. What is remarkable is that since 2012 the number of the North Atlantic Alliance supporters has tripled in the country. The main reason for this is the armed conflict in Ukrainian Donbass. says Euronews journalist Maria Korenyuk.

Read this article:

NATO Secretary General to visit Ukraine - euronews

Maddow warns other media of fake NSA documents – The Hill

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow warned other media outletson Thursdaythat she believes she was provided forged National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between a Trump campaign official andRussia's efforts to influence last year's presidential election.

I feel like I need to send this up like a flare for other news organizations in particular, Maddow said on her programThursday night.

Somebody, for some reason, appears to be shopping a fairly convincing fake NSA document that purports to directly implicate somebody from the Trump campaign in working with the Russians in their attack in the election, she said.

Maddow explained that she and her producers compared the document they received with a leaked NSA document published last month by The Intercept. That document quickly resulted in the arrest of a 26-year-old federal contractor, Reality Winner.

Maddow said she thinks the document she received was created by copying elements of the document published by The Intercept.

The MSNBC host made a similar allegation back in March when she suggested Trump himself may have leaked his 2005 tax documents.

He's the only person who could leak it without concern of being sued by Trump or anyone else, she said at the time. They're trying to threaten us for publishing them which is complete bull.

David Cay Johnston, the reporter who obtained the tax documents, also said while discussing the documents on The Rachel Maddow ShowTuesdaythat Trump could have been behind the leak, as did MSNBC "Morning Joe"co-host Joe Scarborough.

View post:

Maddow warns other media of fake NSA documents - The Hill

Posted in NSA

GOP Lawmakers Aim to Continue NSA Foreign Surveillance Through New Bill – Truthdig

Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., speaking during a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing last month about the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. (Alex Brandon / AP Photo)

A controversial surveillance measure set to expire at the end of 2017 could be made permanent through a new piece of GOP legislation. Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton proposed Senate Bill 1297 last month, which addresses a critical component of the National Security Agencys warrantless surveillance program.

At stake is Section 702 of the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Act (amended in 2008), which allows U.S. surveillance of foreign communications. The Electronic Frontier Foundation explained:

Section 702 surveillance violates the privacy rights of millions of people. This warrantless spying should not be allowed to continue, let alone be made permanent as is.

As originally enacted, Section 702 expires every few years, giving lawmakers the chance to reexamine the broad spying powers that impact their constituents. This is especially crucial as technology evolves and as more information about how the surveillance authority is actually used comes to light, whether through government publication or in the press.

If Congress were to approve Cottons bill, lawmakers would not only be ignoring their constituents privacy concerns, but they would also be ceding their obligation to regularly review, debate, and update the law.

Cottons bill is receiving support from fellow Republican senators, although criticism of the bill does not fall neatly along partisan lines. On June 7, lawmakers discussed the legislation during a hearing in Washington. The New York Times reported:

This is a tool that is essential to the safety of this country, the F.B.I. director, James B. Comey, told Congress at a hearing on Wednesday. I did not say the same thing about the collection of telephone dialing information by the N.S.A. I think thats a useful tool; 702 is an essential tool, and if it goes away, well be less safe as a country. And I mean that.

Mr. Comey also warned that one of the proposed changes a new requirement that a warrant be obtained to search for Americans information in the surveillance repository risked a failure to connect dots about potential threats.

But Representative Ted Poe, Republican of Texas, sought to warn other lawmakers that Congress needed to impose a warrant requirement.

Privacy is being betrayed in the name of national security, Mr. Poe told congressional aides at an event to discuss Fourth Amendment issues and legislation late last month.

Cotton argued during the hearing that to allow this program to expire on December 31 would hurt both our national security and our privacy rights. He also used the London terror attack of early June as evidence for the need for increased surveillance. Cotton said:

The attacks in London last weekend exposed in a matter of minutes just how vulnerable our free societies truly are. All it takes is a van or a knife and an unsuspecting bystander to turn a fun night out on the town into a horrific nightmare. Course, we shouldnt need any reminders, but let me give one yet again: We are at war with Islamic extremists. We have been for years, and, Im sorry to say, theres no end in sight. Its easy to forget this as we go about our daily lives, but our enemies have not-and they will not. Theyve never taken their eyes off the ultimate target either: the United States.

Yes, were at war with a vicious and unyielding foe. And just as our enemy can attack us with the simplest of everyday tools, the strongest shield we have in our defense is just as basic: It is the intelligence information of knowing who is talking to whom about what, where, when, and why. After the 9/11 attacks, our national-security agencies developed cutting-edge programs that allowed us to figure out what the bad guys were up to and stop them before they could perpetrate such heinous attacks. Very often the intelligence theyve collected has made the difference between life and death for American citizens.

He concluded by noting the bill has the support of every Republican senator on the Intelligence Committee. Other members of the intelligence community have expressed support for the legislation as well. Tech Crunch provided further analysis of the June 7 hearing:

NSA Director Michael Rogers broke down two scenarios in which the core controversy, namely the incidental violation of the right to privacy for U.S. citizens, comes up. He claimed that in 90 percent of cases, that form of collection is a result of two foreign targets who talk about a third person who is in the U.S. As Rogers tells it, 10 percent of the time a foreign target ends up talking to an American citizen. Because American citizens have Fourth Amendment rights, running into Americans in the course of foreign surveillance creates the sticky situation known as incidental collection, a major focus for privacy advocates seeking reform.

In the course of justifying Section 702 as an invaluable tool for counterterrorism and counterproliferation efforts, Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats claimed that agencies have made herculean efforts to get a count on how many Americans have been affected, but in spite of those efforts it remains impossible. He went on to undermine his argument by implying that it probably would be possible, but that he chooses not to allocate resources to the task when the intelligence community could be focusing on imminent concerns in countries like Iran and North Korea. I cant justify such a diversion of critical resources, Coats said.

He went on to note that without Section 702, intelligence agencies would have to obtain a court order issued due to probable cause ostensibly the bar that needs to be cleared in order to surveil U.S. citizens. Thats a relatively higher threshold than we require to foreign intelligence information, Coats said, noting that hed prefer not to need to clear the Fourth Amendment bar when investigating foreign targets.

In a broad appeal on 702s utility, Rogers went so far as to claim that 702 [created] insights on the Russian involvement in 2016 election, providing intelligence that would otherwise not have been possible.

There is, however, growing opposition to the bill. The American Civil Liberties Union has argued against it, as has California Democrat Dianne Feinstein.

Sen. Dianne Feinsteinwho has historically been sympathetic to the intelligence communitysaid she could not support a bill that makes Section 702 permanent, according to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. We cannot accept lawmakers ignoring our privacy concerns and their responsibility to review surveillance law, and our lawmakers need to hear that.

Posted by Emma Niles.

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

Original post:

GOP Lawmakers Aim to Continue NSA Foreign Surveillance Through New Bill - Truthdig

Posted in NSA