Modi to unveil 112-ft tall Shiva idol in Coimbatore on February 24 – Hindustan Times

Posted on by

Prime Minister Narendra Modi will unveil a 112-ft tall face of Lord Shiva or Adiyogi at Isha Foundation in Coimbatore on Mahashivaratri, which is on February 24.

In a statement Isha Foundation said on Saturday that the face will be largest such on the planet, recognising the first yogis unparalleled contribution to humanity.

This iconic face symbolises liberation, representing the 112 ways in which one can attain the ultimate through the science of yoga, the statement said.

According to the Foundation, on Mahasivaratri (February 24) Modi will light the sacred fire to commence the Maha Yoga Yagna across the world when one million people will take oath to teach a simple form of yoga to at least 100 persons in the coming year.

For the first time in the history of humanity, Adiyogi introduced the idea that the simple laws of nature are not permanent restrictions. If one is willing to strive, one can go beyond all limitations and attain liberation, moving humanity from assumed stagnation to conscious evolution, Isha Foundation founder Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev said in the statement.

Describing the significance of Adiyogi, Vasudev said: It is essential that the coming generations on this planet are seekers, not believers. As philosophies, ideology, belief systems that dont stand the test of logic and the scientific verification will naturally collapse in coming decades, you will see the longing for liberation will rise. When that longing rises, Adiyogi and the science of Yoga will become very important.

Read this article:

Modi to unveil 112-ft tall Shiva idol in Coimbatore on February 24 - Hindustan Times

Zoltan Istvan, Nick Bostrom, and the Anti-Aging Quest – The Atlantic – The Atlantic

Posted on by

So, you dont want to die? I asked Zoltan Istvan, then the Transhumanist candidate for president, as we sat in the lobby of the University of Baltimore one day last fall.

No, he said, assuredly. Never.

Istvan, an atheist who physically resembles the pure-hearted hero of a Soviet childrens book, explained that his life is awesome. In the future, it will grow awesomer still, and he wants to be the one to decide when it ends. Defying aging was the point of his presidential campaign, the slogan of which could have been Make Death Optional for Once. To (literally) drive the point home, he circled the nation in the Immortality Bus, a brown bus spray-painted to look like a coffin.

He knew hed lose, of course, but he wanted his candidacy to promote the cause of transhumanismthe idea that technology will allow humans to break free of their physical and mental limitations. His platform included, in part, declaring aging a disease. He implanted a chip in his hand so he could wave himself through his front door, and he wants to get his kids chipped, too. Hed be surprised, he told me, if soon we dont start merging our children with machines. Hed like to replace his limbs with bionics so he can throw perfectly in water polo. Most of all, he wants to stick around for a couple centuries to see it all happen, perhaps joining a band or becoming a professional surfer, a long white beard trailing in his wake.

Istvan made his fortunes in the real-estate business, but in 2003, he was working as a reporter for National Geographic in Vietnam when he almost tripped a landmine. The experience shook him so badly he quit journalism and devoted his life to transhumanism. I thought, death is horrible, he told me. How can we get around it?

But his central goalpushing the human lifespan far beyond the record 122 years and possibly into eternityis one shared by many futurists in Silicon Valley and beyond. Investor Peter Thiel, who sees death as the great enemy of man, is writing checks to researchers like Cynthia Kenyon, who doubled the life-spans of worms through gene-hacking, as the Washington Post reported last April. Oracle founder Larry Ellison has thrown hundreds of millions toward anti-aging research, according to Inc magazine, and Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin launched the Google subsidiary Calico specifically with the goal of curing death. Under President Donald Trump, the quest for immortality might pick up steam: Among the candidates he is reportedly considering to head the Food and Drug Administration is Jim ONeill, who sits on the board of the anti-aging SENS Research Foundation.

Some life-extension endeavors are already here. Several companies already offer cryogenic freezing to people who wish to have their dead bodies cooled with liquid nitrogen and stored for centuries, with the hope that new medical technologies will by then be available to re-animate them. A British teenager who sued for the right to be cryogenically frozen after her death from cancer in October now floats in frosty slumber in a Michigan cryostat facility.

Meanwhile, scientists in California are expected to launch a clinical trial in which participants will have their blood cleaned of age-related proteins, the Guardian reported, with the goal of helping them live longer and healthier lives. A drug called rapamycin, which extended the lives of mice by a quarter, is also being tested. The thinking is, if we figure out what chemical event signals to the body that its time to wrap things up, said Sheldon Solomon, a psychology professor at Skidmore College, you could be at a certain age for a long time.

The billionaire technologists obsession with living forever can approach a sort of parody. Oracles Ellison once said, Death makes me very angry"suggesting this pillar of nature is just another consumer pain-point to be relieved with an app.

But lets assume, for the sake of argument, that it can be. Lets say human lives will soon get radically longeror even become unending. The billionaires will get their way, and death will become optional.

If we really are on the doorstep of radical longevity, its worth considering how it will change human society. With no deadline, will we still be motivated to finish things? (As a writer, I assure you this is difficult.) Or will we while away our endless days, amusing ourselves towell, the Process Formerly Known as Deathwhile we overpopulate the planet? Will Earth become a paradise of eternally youthful artists, or a hellish, depleted nursing home? The answers depend on, well, ones opinion about the meaning of life.

I didnt realize how much mainstream support there was for eternal life until I had dinner with a friend who, its worth noting, is even more traditional than I amhes not even on Twitter.

I interviewed this guy who wants to live forever, I said. Isnt that wild?

What do you mean? my friend asked. You dont want to live forever?

If he never died, he explained, he could finally pursue all the hobbies and dreams hes never had time for. Even alternate careers, like architecture. (Hes a lawyer.) Hes never quite understood calculus, but with all the time in the world, he could master it. He would take a sabbatical every four years to travel the world.

Ill admit, his passion for a long life of solving integrals and kayaking through rainforests did drag me closer to the immortality corner. Even if I extended my life by just a few years, I could finally get to the bottom of my Netflix and Pocket queues.

And I had been silently dismissing life-extension enthusiasts spiels about seeing their great-great-grandkids grow up, since I dont have kids and probably never will.

Butbutif I was certain I could stay sharp and energetic well into my 90s, maybe my stance on motherhood would change. I wouldnt worry so much about kids cutting into my productivity if my ability to produce was limitless. Sure, Id probably have a few sleepless nights and groggy days in the early years. (Unless, of course, Silicon Valley really gets cracking on those robot wet-nurses.) But once Olga Jr. was out of the house and working as a Martian News correspondent or whatever, I could more than make up for lost time.

This feeling of abundant possibility is one of the chief motivations of the pro-longevity crowd. Projects and ambitions like mastering every musical instrument in the orchestra, writing a book in each of all the major languages, planting a new garden and seeing it mature, teaching ones great-great-grandchildren how to fish, traveling to Alpha Centauri, or just seeing history unfold over a few hundred years are not realistic: there is simply not enough time to achieve them given current life expectancy, wrote Nick Bostrom, an Oxford philosopher and grand-daddy of life-extension (so to speak), with fellow philosopher Rebecca Roache in 2008. But, they continue, if we could reasonably expect from an early age to live indefinitely, we could embark on projects designed to keep us occupied for hundreds or thousands of years.

Among the many downsides of dying is the prospect of never reaching ones full potential. Right now, Im projected to die when Im about 82. But what if it takes me until I'm 209 to write the great American blog post?

Still, a common fear about life in our brave, new undying world is that it will just be really boring, says S. Matthew Liao, director of the Center for Bioethics at New York University. Life, Liao explained, is like a partyit has a start and end time. We get excited because the partys going on for an hour, and we dont want to miss it. We try to make the most of it while were there.

But imagine theres a party that doesnt end, he continued. It would be bad, because youd think, I could go there tomorrow, or a month from now. Theres no urgency to go to the party anymore.

The Epicureans of ancient Greece thought about it similarly, Solomon said. They saw life as a feast: If you were at a meal, youd be satiated, then stuffed, then repulsed, he said. Part of what makes each of us uniquely valuable is the great story. We have a plot, and ultimately it concludes.

Dan McAdams, a psychology professor at Northwestern University, explains that people make sense of their lives through narrative arcs. Without an ending, there cant be a story. How would we process life events differently, given infinite do-overs? For example, because we have a vague sense that people are supposed to die at roughly 80, we now grieve people who die at 20 more than those who die at 78. But if people began living to 500, that might change, McAdams pointed out. There might be far more tragedy in the world if were mourning the loss of every 90-year-old the way we now would a child. Were just so much trained by evolution and culture to know that our life is going to be relatively short and constrained, he said, and to be somewhat cautious so we dont screw it all up. (Of course, if technology also makes us smarter as it makes us live longer, who knows what types of new arcs well construct for ourselves.)

Bostrom dismisses the thought that theres something about impending death that adds meaning or motivation to our days. It often seems the young are most energetically pursuing different kinds of activities, and the closer you get to death, the more people lean back, he told me. Partly its due to their reduced energy and health.

Which, of course, he hopes we can fix.

Once living longer becomes possible, who will get to do it? Istvan believes life-extension technology should be available to everyone, not just the wealthy. He supports a universal health-care system with life extension as one of its core benefits. (Health-care costs wouldnt spiral out of control, he and some others think, because the longer-living humans would also be healthier. Istvan plans to pay for this universal Zoltancare by selling government land in the western United States.)

Others believe that soon after life-extending technology becomes available, the price will drop rapidly and it will become attainable by mostjust as occurred with personal computers.

But the worry in the short-term, is what happens? The rich could get richer and the poor could get poorer, Liao said. Because the rich could afford to extend their lives first, and life-extenders could amass more resources over the course of their long lives, income inequality could grow even more profound.

Then again, thats how things work now. If someone comes up with a new cancer drug, we dont say lets not use it until every person has access to it, Bostrom told me. By that logic, we should stop kidney transplants.

Even if eternal life gets equitably distributed, theres still the problem of what to do with all the excess centenarians running around. Eventually, were going to run out of room here on Earth. One solution would be to dramatically curtail reproduction, focusing instead on the health and longevity of those already here. As the philosopher Jan Narveson put it, we are in favor of making people happy, but neutral about making happy people. That might mean, though, that you wont have a great-great-great-grandkid to attend the dance-recitals of.

There is a chance that worrying less about death might short-circuit our naturally tribalist natures, easing resource-allocation issues in the process. Solomon, the Skidmore psychologist, researches terror management theory, which suggests the knowledge of our eventual demise makes people psychologically retrench. Being reminded of death causes study subjects to adhere more firmly to their existing worldview, mistrust outsiders more, and even to, ahem, support charismatic leaders who may not be very qualified. So in some ways, eliminating the prospect of death might make us want to ratify all the climate treaties and equitably divvy up the worlds food supply.

... That is, of course, unless immortality has the opposite effect, making us paranoid that well die too soon for no reason. After all, even if we can eliminate aging, we cant eliminate chance. Lets say you expected to live to 5,000 and your heads being frozen, theres a power outage, and it turns into a pile of mush, Solomon said. We might become even more hyper-vigilant.

Liao and others think one answer to the overcrowding problem might be interstellar space travelwhich, they assume, will be invented by then. When Earth turns into an overpopulated dump, Liao says, the immortal can just hop between planets.

I told him an eternity spent on Venus among youthful billionaires does not appeal to me.

What if all your friends go to Venus? he asked. He offered an earthly comparison: Youll be here while everyones in Brooklyn?

(Everyones already in Brooklyn, though, and Im still here in Northern Virginia.)

Space travel is also how Liao envisions us overcoming the boredom problem. Right now, the journey between solar systems is too long for a human to accomplish in a normal lifespan, but with life extension, that wont be a concern anymore. We wont run out of things to do, the thinking goes, because there will always be another planet to explore. Well all cheerfully grow old aboard our interstellar minivan.

And in general, Liao explained, humans engage in lots of pleasures that arent repetitive, like forming new relationships, making music, learning things, and experiencing natural wonders.

If thats what human existence is about, and you can continue to do that, why not be able to live longer? he asked me.

I guess I do like hiking, I said.

You might even enjoy hiking on Mars, he said.

Eh, dont push it.

* * *

The somber side to the debate is whether life extension will cause us to lose our appreciation for natural human vulnerability. In other words, society might begin to preference those who have swallowed anti-aging drugs, making un-enhanced humans a sort of rotting underclass.

Parents who have babies with mild disabilities might be blamed for not doing Gattaca, as Liao puts it. (Istvans platform reads, Develop science and technology to be able to eliminate all disabilities in humans who have them.) Well have to wrestle with whether those who dont take fountain-of-youth pills should be charged more for health insurance. Worse yet, by jetting off to a new planet, the enhanced and immortal could abandon Earth to mere mortals, the cruelest and most extreme form of segregation.

Life-extensionists zeal for perfect cells does, to some, sound like an invective against uniqueness. Thats what Melinda Hall, a philosophy professor at Stetson University and author of a recent book about transhumanism, takes issue with. People with disability are saying, this is a primary part of my identity, she told me, so when youre saying you want to get rid of disability, it sounds genocidal.

Istvan dismisses disability-rights advocates as a fringe minority, saying I would bet my arm that the great majority of disabled people will be very happy when transhumanist technology gives them the opportunity to fulfill their potential. (Betting your arm is, of course, no biggie when you can just get a bionic one.)

In general, Hall said, the transhumanists have the wrong idea about the problems facing humanity. People are going to be starving and dying, but were going to build a colony on Mars? she said, Thats going to cost billions of dollars, and I think that should be spent somewhere else.

Of course, that wont stop the billionaires from following their dreams. Perhaps our best hope is that on the path to immortality, theyll discover something useful to broader swathes of society. Metformin, an old diabetes drug recently shown to extend the life of animals, is now being tested as an anti-aging pill. If it really does allow people to stay healthy in old age, some would regard it a public health revolutioneven if it fails to help Peter Thiel meet his cyborg-descendants in 2450.

In that way, todays life extensionists might follow the proud tradition of other explorers who shot for another galaxy and ended up straddling the moon. The alchemists write about trying to find elixirs of gold and immortality. They never find that, but they discovered chemistry, Solomon said. Ponce de Leon never found the fountain of youth, but he found Florida.

Read the original here:

Zoltan Istvan, Nick Bostrom, and the Anti-Aging Quest - The Atlantic - The Atlantic

Hubble Telescope’s successor, the James Webb Space Telescope, being built in Maryland – Fox Baltimore

Posted on by

The most advanced space telescope in the world --and beyond -- is being built in our own backyard. (Photo courtesy NASA)

BALTIMORE (WBFF) -- The most advanced space telescope in the world --and beyond -- is being built in our own backyard.

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), an international collaboration between NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA), is slated for launch from French Guiana in October of 2018.

Dr. John Mather is the Senior Project Scientist and is one of thousands working on the infrared telescope, which will be a successor to the Hubble Telescope.

The technology is undergoing extensive tests to ensure it will survive the launch.

When this telescope is a million miles away there's no way to fix it, so potential problems are solved at Goddard's facility in Maryland.

"We have the capability here and we might be the only place in the entire universe that can do this," Dr. Mather said. "We are certainly the only place in NASA that can lead this project."

Next, parts will ship to California where the observatory is being built but once the telescope is in space, it will be monitored right from Baltimore.

"The operations of the observatory are going to be in Baltimore," Dr. Mather said. "At the Space Telescope Science Institute where they also run the operations for the Hubble Telescope."

Scientists are eagerly awaiting the launch. There's no telling what the findings will reveal about the universe.

"We think we will be able to see the first galaxies being born,the first black holes being born," Dr. Mather said, adding, "if we guess right about how they actually do. How the galaxies grow."

He is confident about the team in place preparing the advanced technology for its deep space mission.

"We have a wonderful team here," Dr. Mather said. "The engineers are are some of the best I've met. They make things happen you could only wish for. Eventually we will point the telescope at the sky and discover things you've never knew about."

More:

Hubble Telescope's successor, the James Webb Space Telescope, being built in Maryland - Fox Baltimore

Pence and Merkel embrace NATO but differ on transatlantic partnership – Washington Post

Posted on by

MUNICH Vice President Pence and German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Saturday offered dueling assessments of the troubled transatlantic relationship, as both praised NATO but Pence made no mention of the European Union, the key economic and political pact that binds Europe together.

In back-to-back speeches at the Munich Security Conference, Merkel and Pence appeared to find common ground about NATO, whose members have been urged by President Trumpto spend more on defense. But while Merkel praised the broader international organizations that have been a key part of the post-Cold War global order, Pences silence on the E.U. may only fuel fears among European allies that the new leadership in the White House will embrace only some aspects of European unity, while rejecting others.

On Sunday, Pence will travel to Brussels, where the E.U. will command more of his attention. On Monday, he will meet with senior E.U. leaders before returning home.

Pence offered a robust embrace of U.S. security commitments to Europe, seeking to tamp down speculation that Trump would pursue a new path that would abandon guarantees that European nations seem to feel they need to keep them safe from Russia.

Today, tomorrow and every day hence, be confident that the United States is now and will always be your greatest ally, Pence said. Be assured: President Trump and the American people are fully devoted to our transatlantic union.

Trump has repeatedly called NATO obsolete, butU.S. officialsin Europe this week, including Pence and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, appear to be concentrating more on pushing allies to meet NATO defense spending commitments rather than focusing on Trumps desire for a new relationship with the Kremlin, a major fear in Europe. Many European allies see Russia as a security threat following its 2014 annexation of Ukraines Crimean Peninsula.

Pence was critical of what he called the Russian efforts to redraw international borders by force. He called for quelling the conflict in Ukraine by adhering to the Minsk II agreement, a 2015 plan that sets out a road map for peace.

But underscoring the beliefs of his boss, who many in Washington and Europe say has been too cozy toward Russia Pence also sought to strike a balance, hinting at signs of a possible partnership between the two nations.

And know this: The United States will continue to hold Russia accountable, even as we search for new common ground, which as you know, President Trump believes can be found, Pence said.

The thorny issue of Russia has clouded Trumps young presidency, amid reports that Michael Flynn, his national security adviser who resigned Monday, improperly discussed sanctions with the Russian ambassador to the United States before Trump took office, and that Trump staffers and associates repeatedly communicated with senior Russian intelligence officials during the 2016 presidential campaign.

In a bid to reach out to the countries with the most at stake for any U.S.-Russian rapprochement, Pence is expected to meet Saturday with the leaders of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, as well as Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko.

In the 20-minute speech to the Munich gathering, Pence echoed Trumps call for NATO countries to meet their full financial commitments to the alliance.

(Claritza Jimenez/The Washington Post)

Let me be clear on this point: The president of the United States expects our allies to keep their word, to fulfill this commitment, and for most, that means the time has come to do more, Pence said a line that was met with only light applause.

Only four NATO nations apart from the United States meet alliance guidelines to spend 2percent of their GDP on defense, a trend Pence said was problematic.

The promise to share the burden of our defense has gone unfulfilled for too many for too long and it erodes the very foundation of our alliance, he said. When even one ally fails to do their part, it undermines all of our ability to come to each others aid.

Speaking immediately before Pence, Merkel sought to quiet rising voices in Europe that say that the continent should prepare to turn away from Trumps United States and embrace partners such as China. She said that even as Europe strengthens its own defense capabilities, it will never be able to fight terrorism without the United States.

The challenges of this world today cannot be mastered by one state alone. It needs a cooperative effort. We need to forge ahead with multilateral structures. We have to strengthen them, Merkel said. Let me address this very openly. The Europeans alone cannot cope with fighting international Islamist terrorism. We also need the support of the United States.

But she also pushed for an approach that does not alienate Muslim allies, a fear that has spiked following Trumps rhetoric about Muslims and his attempts to impose a travel ban on nationals from seven Muslim-majority countries.

Cooperation with the United States is very important to us. But whats also important to us is that Islamic states have been incorporated into this coalition, she said, referring to efforts to combat the Islamic State.

Only this way will we be able to convince people that it is not Islam that is the problem but a falsely understood Islam, she said.

With Pence sitting in the audience, Merkel also reiterated her respect for a free, independent press, in response to a question from a German reporter, who asked her opinion on the quality of newspaper reporting in the United States.

While she did not address Trump directly, her comments offered a stark contrast to a recent tweet from Trump, in which he accused the fake news media of being the enemy of the American people.

Merkel said she supports a free, independent press and has high respect for journalists, adding that, in Germany, the relationship has always been one of mutual respect.

Later Saturday, Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly said that the Trump administration is contemplating a new version of the travel ban that would allow in travelers who were onboard airplanes bound for the United States into the country, but would bar those who had not yet gotten on planes.

If theyre in motion from some distant land to the United States, when they arrive, they will be allowed in, Kelly told the Munich Security Conference. That being said, we will have a short phase-in period to make sure that they dont get on the airplane.

That would spare U.S. airports some of the chaos in the days after the travel ban on citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries was imposed last month but it may simply export the confusion to foreign airports.

The change would also create fewer plaintiffs with grounds to take legal action to overturn the travel ban.

Read more:

Todays coverage from Post correspondents around the world

Like Washington Post World on Facebook and stay updated on foreign news

Read the original here:

Pence and Merkel embrace NATO but differ on transatlantic partnership - Washington Post

Defense Secretary Mattis issues new ultimatum to NATO allies …

Posted on by

U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis says the NATO military alliance is central to ties between America and Europe and remains of importance to the United States. (Reuters)

BRUSSELS Defense Secretary Jim Mattis issued an ultimatum Wednesday to allies in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, warning that if they do not boost their defense spending to goals set by the alliance, the United States may alter its relationship with them.

I owe it to you all to give you clarity on the political reality in the United States and to state the fair demand from my countrys people in concrete terms, Mattis said. America will meet its responsibilities, but if your nations do not want to see America moderate its commitment to the alliance, each of your capitals needs to show its support for our common defense.

The statements came during a closed-doors meeting with defense ministers from other NATO countries and were provided to reporters traveling with the defense secretary to Brussels. It marks an escalation in Washingtons long-running frustration that many NATO countries do not spend at least 2 percent of their gross domestic product as they have pledged. President Trump often made that point during his upstart run for the White House, at various times calling the alliance obsolete while grousing that its 28 members need to pay their fair share.

[Trumps calls for Europe to increase defense spending could force other upheaval]

Mattis, a retired Marine general, recalled Wednesday that when he was NATOs supreme allied commander of transformation from November 2007 to September 2009, he watched as then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates warned NATO nations that Congress and the American people would lose their patience for carrying a disproportionate burden of the defense of allies.

That impatience, Mattis said, is now a governmental reality.

No longer can the American taxpayer carry a disproportionate share of the defense of Western values, Mattis said. Americans cannot care more for your childrens security than you do. Disregard for military readiness demonstrates a lack of respect for ourselves, for the alliance and for the freedoms we inherited, which are now clearly threatened.

Currently, just five of NATOs 28 countries spend at least 2 percent on defense: the United Kingdom, Estonia, Poland, Greece and the United States. Major members of the alliance that do not include France (1.78 percent), Turkey (1.56), Germany (1.19), Italy (1.11) and Canada (.99), according to NATO figures. Others have pledged to do so but not until 2024.

[Flynn departure erupts into a full-blown crisis for the Trump White House]

Mattis said Washington needs the help of other nations already spending 2 percent to urge the others to do so. Those already with a plan to boost spending must accelerate it, and countries without one must establish one soon, he said.

The remarks come as NATO nations confront how to handle Russia following its 2014 annexation of Ukraines Crimean Peninsula and U.S. intelligence assessments that Russia hacked Democratic Party officials during the presidential campaign last year. Retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, resigned under pressure Monday night as Trumps national security adviser after revelations that he misled Vice President Pence about secret communications with Sergey Kislyak, the Russian ambassador to the United States, regarding sanctions imposed by the Obama administration in response to the alleged hacking.

[In first under Trump, Russian jets buzzed a U.S. destroyer at close range]

Fellow ministers, when the Cold War ended, we all had hopes, Mattis said. The year 2014 awakened us to a new reality: Russia used force to alter the borders of one of its sovereign neighbors, and on Turkeys border [the Islamic State] emerged and introduced a ruthless breed of terror, intent on seizing territory and establishing a caliphate. While these events have unfolded before our eyes, some in this alliance have looked away in denial of what was happening.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg sought to downplay any suggestion that Mattiss message constituted a threat, saying that the United States was simply pressing its allies to live up to their own commitments.

This is not the U.S. telling Europe to increase defense spending, Stoltenberg said at a news conference after the tough meeting. This is 28 allies, heads of state, that all were sitting around the same table in 2014, and looking into each others eyes and agreeing that we shall increase defense spending.

I welcome all pressure, all support to make sure that happens, Stoltenberg said, adding that Lithuania and Romania have pledged to reach 2 percent soon.

Others in the room when Mattis spoke saw his message differently.

If you pardon my French, we got the message. Pay up or be pushed, one European diplomat said, using a more vulgar term for what the United States might do to its allies. If you take him literally, then the message is indeed that theres no unconditional guarantee of security any more, the diplomat said, speaking on condition of anonymity to speak openly about the reaction.

But not every leader felt that the message was a major departure from longtime U.S. policy to ratchet up its allies defense spending.

Its nothing new, to be honest, Dutch Defense Minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert said in an interview. Mattis asked for milestones, so all of us will go home and work on them.

Public opinion in the Netherlands which currently spends 1.17 percent of its annual economic output on defense is in favor of spending increases, she said.

Public support has increased because its a rough world out there and people have noticed, she said. Europe and also the Netherlands for way too long were accustomed to peace and American leadership.

Mattiss ultimatum could have the largest effect for Germany. If it were to meet the 2 percent bar, it would boost its defense spending to about $75 billion per year, resulting in a military larger than Britains. That would bea profound shift for a country that has long had a pacifist tradition that held it back from embracing a global defense presence as greatas its economic might.

Mattiss demands were echoed by British Defense Secretary Michael Fallon, who met head-to-head with the U.S. defense chief before the main NATO conclave. Fallon said that Britain which spends the second-largest amount on defense in the alliance is proposing that countries that spend less than NATO guidelines commit to an annual defense budget increase.

An annual increase would at least demonstrate good faith, Fallon told a small group of reporters in Brussels. Fallon said that Mattis had underlined a 100 percent commitment to NATO.

Britain has generally triedto ally itself with the Trump administration as London negotiates an exit from the European Union. But British leaders have urged Trump to maintain his military commitment to NATO and to Europe.

Related stories:

Mattis attempts to reassure NATO allies as the Trump administration deals with fallout from Flynns ouster

Placing Russia first among threats, Mattis warns of Kremlin attempts to break NATO

Mattis makes first trip to Europe as Pentagon chief while mulling changes in Afghanistan and anti-ISIS fight

Originally posted here:

Defense Secretary Mattis issues new ultimatum to NATO allies ...

Pence says US ‘strongly supports NATO,’ will hold Russia ‘accountable’ for Ukraine actions – ABC News

Posted on by

Mike Pence affirmed U.S. support for NATO and urged Russia to deescalate violence in eastern Ukraine while speaking Saturday at the Munich Security Conference in Germany. It was Pence's first overseas trip as vice president.

"Today, on behalf of President Trump, I bring you this assurance: The United States of America strongly supports NATO and will be unwavering in its commitment to our trans-Atlantic alliance," Pence said at the international security gathering, which was also attended by Defense Secretary James Mattis and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly.

"This is President Trump's promise: We will stand with Europe, today and every day, because we are bound together by the same noble ideals -- freedom, democracy, justice, and the rule of law," he said.

As for Russia, Pence took a defiant position, saying, "In the wake of Russian efforts to redraw international borders by force rest assured, the United States, along with the United Kingdom, Canada, and Germany, will continue its leadership role as a framework nation in the Enhanced Forward Presence Initiative and support other critical joint actions to support our alliance."

In specifically addressing Ukraine, Pence said "we must hold Russia accountable and demand that they honor the Minsk Agreements, beginning by de-escalating the violence in eastern Ukraine."

He reiterated, "Know this: The United States will continue to hold Russia accountable, even as we search for new common ground, which as you know, President Trump believes can be found."

Pence also spoke about quashing Iran's attempts to obtain a nuclear weapon while slamming the lifting of sanctions against the country, saying Iran "continues to destabilize the Middle East, and thanks to the end of nuclear-related sanctions under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Iran now has additional resources to devotwe to these efforts."

He continued, "Let me be clear: Under President Trump, the United States will remain fully committed to ensuring that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon capable of threatening our countries or our allies in the region, especially Israel."

Pence also described ISIS as "perhaps the greatest evil of them all. It shows a savagery unseen in the Middle East since the Middle Ages ... the United States will fight tirelessly to crush these enemies -- especially ISIS and its so-called caliphate -- and consign them to the ash heap of history, where they belong."

Pence also met briefly with U2 frontman Bono, who was another speaker at the conference. Pence and Bono spoke about their meeting previously when Pence, then a congressman on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, helped in passing an emergency plan for international AIDS relief.

Go here to read the rest:

Pence says US 'strongly supports NATO,' will hold Russia 'accountable' for Ukraine actions - ABC News

Sharing the NATO Burden – New York Times

Posted on by

New York Times
Sharing the NATO Burden
New York Times
For many years now, successive American administrations have made no secret of their frustration with how little most NATO allies spend on their militaries, leaving the United States with a disproportionately large share of the bill for the joint defense.
Trump 'unwavering' in commitment to NATO alliance, says PenceFRANCE 24
Trump confronts NATO's free ridersChicago Tribune
Mattis's NATO WarningWall Street Journal (subscription)
NATO HQ (press release) -Foreign Policy (blog) -Minneapolis Star Tribune
all 1,318 news articles »

Here is the original post:

Sharing the NATO Burden - New York Times

Interview: NATO increasing its ‘readiness’ to meet world challenges – Deutsche Welle

Posted on by

DW: General Petr Pavel, you are the Chair of the Military Committee at NATO, the highest military authority at the alliance. How would you gauge NATOs combat readiness in Europe?

Pavel: It is improving, increasing. After two decades of partnership, no conflict, no major crisis - with the exception of the distant crisis in Afghanistan Europe was living in a peaceful environment. Unfortunately, this has changed significantly in 2014. Since the Wales Summit, NATO is increasing the readiness of the troops in all member nations, as well as the assets that are owned by the alliance. We believe that this is a natural reaction to the situation in Europe that developed after the annexation of Crimea. Since we are aware of our primary task - the protection of our allies' territory and populations - we have to take the measures that correspond to the security situation.

Yesterday, NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg spoke of NATO trying to de-escalate the situation with Russia. Would you say that Russia is less a threat today than it was two years ago?

I don't think so. It is how we perceive the threat. A threat is always a combination of capability and intent. If we are not so sure about Russian intent - I believe that Russia doesn't have a serious intent to attack NATO - we have to be realistic. But there are significant capabilities and military build-up and modernization that make it necessary for us to be ready for any contingency. And of course, Russia has been using its military assets to promote its national interests. Russia frequently talks about the protection of minorities wherever they are. When we look at Baltic countries, they have significant Russian minorities, so,naturally, these countries are concerned about the statements of Russian leaders, as well as about growing Russian military capabilities. We have to be ready for any threat, even potential ones. That's why we have to consider Russia as a source of concern.

I would like to raise a point from yesterday: British Foreign Minister Boris Johnson said NATO should consider whether cyberwarfare constituted grounds for triggering Article Five. How would you react to that?

NATO designated cyberwarfare an operational domain

This is not a new argument. We have been discussing the cyberthreat for a long time. The summit in Warsaw brought an agreement of heads of states and governments that cyberwarfare was recognized as another operational domain. There are implications that result from that recognition. It means that even a massive or focused cyberattack can be considered an act of aggression that can trigger an Article Five response. We have to be realistic in terms of the damaging effects of cyberwarfare. It does not just disrupt networks; it does not just create an annoying effect. A cyberattack can cause deaths like a conventional attack by disrupting the networks of traffic control, disrupting the networks maintaining the systems in hospitals or in air traffic control. It may cause significant damage to lives, so we have to really take it seriously. That is why we take it as another operational domain, and we are taking measures to be able to address all the challenges coming through cyberwarfare.

From your perspective, what is the biggest challenge facing NATO going forward?

Speed of adaptation is an internal challenge for NATO

I would take it from two sides. Internally, it is the pace of adaptation. That is the challenge that is discussed widely today due to statements of the, at that time, presidential nominee and now American president about NATO being obsolete or not fit for purpose. So internally, it is the pace and speed and depth of adaptation. Externally, the most urgent challenge for NATO is terrorism. We have to deal with terrorism in a more efficient way. And not only this physical element - that means the destruction of fighting forces in the terrorist groups - but also increasingly addressing the broader scope of terrorism, the feeding grounds and the conditions from which terrorism and extremism arise. I believe we have now adopted a broad framework in Warsaw, called the Projecting Stability initiative, in which we can address the needs of most countries affected by terrorism in our neighborhood. We can bring them the assistance they need, starting from hard fighting capabilities up to very soft tools, such as assistance in training, institution building, equipment, know-how, intelligence-sharing, and other areas that can create a broader framework for addressing terrorism as a phenomenon.

Originally posted here:

Interview: NATO increasing its 'readiness' to meet world challenges - Deutsche Welle

Four NATO powers prefer Russia to the US, Gallup poll shows – RT

Posted on by

A Gallup poll has revealed that citizens of four NATO nations would sooner count on Russia to defend them rather than the United States, Bloomberg reported on Friday, reflecting the changing perceptions of the US's role in global security.

Between October and December 2016, WIN/Gallup International asked around a thousand people in 66 countries who would be their go-to ally if attacked. While the military might of the US was still the first choice for most of the respondents polled, people from Greece, Turkey, Bulgaria and Slovenia - all members of the transatlantic NATO alliance - opted for Russia when asked whom they felt they could count on if they felt under threat.

Read more

Other countries which preferred Russian over American protection included China, Iran, and Serbia. Russia itself chose China as their main ally, while Americans voted for the UK. Iraq, Bosnia, and Ukraine, countries with deep ethnic, religious and political divides, were split roughly evenly between Russia and the US.

It isnt surprising that Russians and Chinese chose each other, but it is new, WIN/Gallup vice president Kancho Stoychev told Bloomberg. It shows us something very important - that US policy over the last 20 years has driven Russia into the arms of China, which is quite strange because Russia is fundamentally a part of Europe.

Stoychev suggested that the sentiments towards in Russia in Greece and Bulgaria could be driven by a fear of Turkey. While all three are NATO members, Turkeys intervention in Cyprus in 1974 may have undermined trust in the alliance.

In other European countries, more people looked across the continent for their defensive partners. For example, 29 percent of Swedes looked to the UK for protection, almost as many as to the US (31 percent). This could partly be due to comments made by US President Donald Trump, who has referred to NATO as "obsolete" and has called for a stronger relationship with Russia, worrying some European countries, particularly, Poland and the Baltics.

However, under President Trump, the US and NATO has continued to amass troops and equipment in Eastern Europe, close to Russias borders. In an interview shortly after a bilateral meeting in January, British Prime Minister Theresa May told reporters that Trump had confirmed hes 100 percent behind NATO.

The results of the Gallup survey coincides with the annual Munich Security Conference in Germany, attended by senior security policymakers from around the world.

NATO was founded in 1949 in the early years of the Cold War, bringing together the US, Canada and mainly Westen European powers to act as a counterweight to the Soviet-led Eastern bloc. The alliance has continued to grow and has expanded eastwards over the last few decades, despite the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991.

Go here to see the original:

Four NATO powers prefer Russia to the US, Gallup poll shows - RT

Lavrov calls for ‘post-West’ world order; dismisses NATO as Cold War relic – Deutsche Welle

Posted on by

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov's comments came during a speech at the annual Munich Security Conference, where US Vice President Mike Pence spoke earlier in the day, vowing that the United States would "hold Russia accountable," even as the White House seeks common ground with the Kremlin.

The annual gathering of diplomats and defense officials has been marked by Western concerns about US President Donald Trump's approach to foreign policy and attitude toward Russia.

"What kind of relations do we want with the US? Pragmatic relations, mutual respect, understanding our special responsibility for global stability," Lavrov said. "We have immense potential that has yet to be tapped into, and we're open for that inasmuch as the USis open for that as well."

More broadly, Lavrov said NATO "remained a Cold War institution." His claim was in sharp contrast to Pence's earlier statement that Washington "strongly supports" the military alliance, the latest in a string of USleaders to give similar commitments after Trump in the past called it "obsolete."

"Responsible leaders should make a choice; I hope that the choice will be done in favor a creating a democratic and just world order," Lavrov said, speaking through an interpreter.

The post-West world

"If you want, you can call it a post-West world order when each country, based on its sovereignty within the rules of international law, will strive to find a balance between its own national interests and the national interests of partners."

The Russian foreign minister said Moscow wanted to build relations with Washington that would be "pragmatic with mutual respect and anacknowledgment of our responsibility for global stability."

The two countries had never been in direct conflict, he noted, adding that they were actually close neighbors across the Baring Straits.

Russia wanted to see a "common space of good neighborly relations from Vancouver to Vladivostok," he added.

Pence was in Europe along with US secretaries of state and defense,Rex Tillersonand James Mattis, as part of efforts to reassure allies unnerved by Trump's "America First" rhetoric and his calls for improved ties with Russia despite the ongoing crisis in Ukraine.

The US vice president told the security forum that Washington will stay loyal to its old friends.

"The United States is and will always be your greatest ally," Pence said. "Be assured that President Trump and our people are truly devoted to our transatlantic union."

He added that the US would not relent in pushing Russia to honor the Minsk ceasefire accords with Ukraine.

bik/sms (AP, AFP, Reuters)

Read more from the original source:

Lavrov calls for 'post-West' world order; dismisses NATO as Cold War relic - Deutsche Welle

Rash Report: At Camp Ripley training, ‘NATO is standing together’ – Minneapolis Star Tribune

Posted on by

On Tuesday, under crisp blue skies at Camp Ripley in Little Falls, Minn., two bald eagles eased above the trees. But abruptly, they flew off. It wasnt the persistent wind that scattered them, but intermittent gunfire from a line of Minnesota National Guard and Norwegian Home Guard soldiers.

The troops training on a range were part of an exchange now in its 44th year, the most enduring engagement between a U.S. state and a NATO nation.

Its an experience of a lifetime, said visiting Home Guard soldier Torsten Bjornes, one of about 100 taking part alongside an equal contingent from the Minnesota Guard. Bjornes, who has a North Dakota-born grandmother, was eager for Minnesota troops to traipse to Norway for reciprocal training. Come on over were ready for you! Bjornes said, smiling.

Norway was also ready when the U.S. called on the transatlantic alliance to fight in Afghanistan. Bjornes himself served there after the one and only time that NATOs Article 5 has been invoked. Whether that call for collective defense will ever be triggered again is unknown. But like many members of the 28-nation pact, Norway is wary about Russian revanchism under President Vladimir Putin.

The threat is evolving, according to Maj. Gen. Finn Kristian Hannestad, the Norwegian defense attache in Washington, Maj. Gen. Tor Rune Raabye, commander of the Norwegian Home Guard, and Maj. Gen. Richard C. Nash, the adjutant general of Minnesota who oversees the Minnesota National Guard, all of whom flew to Camp Ripley in a Black Hawk helicopter that like the eagles seemed unfazed by the wind.

Raabye spoke of hybrid warfare, in which all the tools of the state could be used in operations against other nations everything from political information, economic, diplomatic and military pressure.

Increasingly, the military pressure is itself asymmetrical. Raabye referred to the so-called little green men Russian forces in unmarked army uniforms menacing eastern Ukraine, and added that the Baltics, Poland and non-NATO, Western-friendly Finland and Georgia share similar concerns.

Thats due to revisionists in Russia commanded by Putin, who knows how to work the fringes and seams, said Nash, adding: I think hes taken advantage of that asymmetrical warfare; he tries to test NATOs resolve.

Thats what seems to be transpiring, although the news is being blurred by the whirlwind in Washington including allegations regarding Russias role in the U.S. presidential election and reportedly with President Trumps campaign itself.

On Feb. 14 came news of this valentine from Putin: Russia secretly deployed a new cruise missile in violation of an arms-control treaty. A day later, the U.S. Coast Guard confirmed that a Russian spy ship slipped within 30 miles of the Naval Submarine Base in Groton, Conn. While it was within international waters, it reflects Russian provocations in Europe.

The same day, Defense Secretary James Mattis addressed his NATO colleagues. While he did not reprise the presidents uncertain trumpet on the alliance itself Trump once labeled NATO obsolete he warned about U.S. impatience on uneven levels of defense spending by member nations. No longer can the American taxpayer carry a disproportionate share of the defense of western values, Mattis said.

The political uncertainty isnt the only dynamic different from the Cold War era, which however perilous presented certainties on both sides of the divide.

Were having a completely different political environment in Europe today and a different Middle East and a different environment with the media, the financial system, the stock market, everything is playing a completely different role than they did 40 years ago, said Hannestad.

Raabye agreed: For me the Cold War in a certain cynical way was stability, while the age we are in today is instability and everybody is insecure of what is going on.

Added Nash: When we had the Cold War, it was pretty simple. We lined up here, Warsaw [Pact nations] lined up there all was pretty well laid out.

Todays geopolitical complexity doesnt mean that fundamentals of military preparedness arent still essential. The Minnesota National Guard will take part in multiple joint exercises in Europe this year, including in June when a contingent of about 700 personnel and 500 pieces of equipment deploy to Baltic countries during an annual exercise called Saber Strike.

Any kind of training exercising is all part of signaling power, cohesion and that NATO is standing together and that Article 5 is real, Hannestad said.

Making Article 5 real requires civilian and military leadership, but also and especially troops training together, just like this week in Camp Ripley and in Camp Vrnes in Norway. Unlike Camp Ripleys raptors, the proverbial U.S. eagle and its transatlantic allies wont flee under fire, but coordination is essential.

You cant do it from an office with a bunch of generals sitting around, Nash said. You have to put soldiers on the ground to be able to use those skill sets, be able to practice those skill sets, and understand each others culture, language and capabilities and the common defense we all bring to NATO, because thats the power the common defense.

John Rash is a Star Tribune editorial writer and columnist. The Rash Report can be heard at 8:20 a.m. Fridays on WCCO Radio, 830-AM. On Twitter: @rashreport.

Continue reading here:

Rash Report: At Camp Ripley training, 'NATO is standing together' - Minneapolis Star Tribune

Is Canada really doing the heavy lifting at NATO like Trudeau claims? – Ottawa Citizen

Posted on by

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau answers a question during Question Period in the House of Commons in Ottawa, Tuesday, February 7, 2017. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Fred Chartrand ORG XMIT: FXC112

In response to concerns from the U.S. that other nations in NATO are not doing enough, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau stated that German and Canada are the nations (besides the U.S.) who are doing the heavy lifting in NATO.

But is that true on Canadas part? Does the assignment of a warship or two and a small land contingent for training and other activities constitute heavy lifting. Does taking part in NATO exercises, which other nations do as well, show Canada as leading the other members of the alliance in contributions?

In defending Canada on the issue of military spending, Trudeau also said the country is in the midst of significant procurement projects. But then, of course, so are many other nations.

Here is what the Department of National Defence noted that Canada is contributing to NATO:

OPERATION REASSURANCE

Maritime Task Force

The periodic deployment of a Canadian frigate to conduct patrols and assurance measures as part of Standing NATO maritime forces; The deployment of HMCS Charlottetown and HMCS St. Johns to conduct patrols and assurance measures as part of Standing NATO maritime forces.

Land Task Force

From January 19 to February 9, 2017, about 40 members of the Operation REASSURANCE Land Task Force participated in Exercise BISON DRAWSKO. The Royal Netherlands Army led this exercise, which included participants from Canada, Estonia, Germany, the Netherlands, and Poland. This key multinational exercise took place in the Drawsko Pomorskie Training Area, Poland, and in the Jagerbruck Training Area, Germany. It trained participants in full spectrum defensive and offensive joint land operations at the brigade level. This, along with the professional and cultural exchanges between the participating nations, helped to further integrate each others military forces.

From November 20, 2016 to December 2, 2016, approximately 140 members of the Operation REASSURANCE Land Task Force participated in Exercise IRON SWORD. This important multinational exercise took place in the Rukla and Pabrade Training Areas in Lithuania under the command of the Iron Wolf Infantry Brigade. The exercise developed Canadian and Lithuanian interoperability capabilities through realistic tactical and operational scenarios. This, along with the professional and cultural exchanges between the two nations, served to further enhance the integration of each others military forces.

From October 24 to November 3, 2016, Approximately 30 members of the Land Task Force participated in Exercise SCORPION FURY 16.2 . This multinational exercise in Cincu, Romania took place under the Command of the Romanian Second Infantry Brigade. This exercise enhanced interoperability through realistic tactical and operational scenarios.

-From September 26 to October 15, 2016, approximately 190 members of the Operation REASSURANCE Land Task Force participated in the multi-national Exercise ALLIED SPIRIT V. The goal of the exercise was to enhance the ability of forces in Europe, including CAF personnel, to work together. LTF members at the brigade and battalion levels exercised tactical soldier skills and tested secure communications between nations.

-In August 2016, approximately 220 Canadian Armed Forces members deployed to Poland in support of Operation REASSURANCE. The soldiers are predominantly from 1st Battalion, Princess Patricias Canadian Light Infantry, based at Canadian Forces Base Edmonton, Alberta. Several other units from 1 Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group and from the Reserve Force are also contributing soldiers to the contingent.

Other NATO activities

o It is expected that Canada will start deploying its troops to Latvia in Spring 2017, and be in place by end of June 2017 at the Adai Military Base.

Go here to read the rest:

Is Canada really doing the heavy lifting at NATO like Trudeau claims? - Ottawa Citizen

UK minister: ‘Defense is for NATO and not the EU’ – Deutsche Welle

Posted on by

Britain's impending departure from the European Union has created additionaluncertainty surrounding the issue of European defense. The remaining 27 EU member states are asking themselves whether London will seek a stronger relationship with Washington at the expense of its geographically closer European partners. On the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference,DW's Michaela Kfner asked Britain's defense secretary, Sir Michael Fallon, what effect the Brexit could have on European security.

DW: Sir Michael, you've reiterated that the new UK defense policy will put NATO at its core. How much does talk about NATO, talk about how much it is still a stable structure, damage the alliance itself?

Sir Michael Fallon: The alliance needs to stick together now. The alliance is being tested. It is being tested by Russia;it is being tested by terrorism in the Middle East. There has never been a time when Europeand NATO really needed to stick together more - and Britain is going to be a part of that. We are leading the Very High Readiness Task Force, the response unit of NATO,all this year. We are deploying troops to Estonia. We are deploying RAF aircraft to Romania for southern air policing. We will continue to lead in NATO to help bring thatreassurance that the alliance needs.

There was a lot of talk here of strengthening alliances to avoid a fall back into spheres of influence. Now you are about to leave a very strong alliance: the European Union. How much are you becoming a sphere of influence of the United States?

We are leaving the political European Union. But we are not leaving the continent. Europe remains our continent. We are going to go on contributing to the security of our continent. We also have this transatlantic relationship. Our oldest and strongest ally was the United States. It is a very strong defense relationship. So we see that benefiting both.We see that benefiting the United States, where we will be a bridge between Europe and the United States. But it also benefits the alliance as a whole that Britain is able to link with the US in that way.

Britain has always been skeptical of EU ambitions to build up its own force. You are hinging your defense even more on NATO, even more on your US partner in the future. How is that going to work?

Defense is for NATO and not the European Union. We are not alone in trying to encourage the EU to avoid duplicating what is being done in NATO. NATO has to be our primary defense. Atour last NATO summit, we agreed that the European Union and NATO need to work more closely together, need to avoid duplication. So, with other members of the European Union, we have been resisting calls for a European headquarters or a European army. We don't need that. We have NATO. We need to make NATO work properly for everybody.

RAF planes are involved in air policing in eastern Europe

The EU will no doubt go ahead without you on that, though. Will you still be a stakeholder in that process at all?

It is not just Britain that has been pointing to the need not to set up new unnecessary structures. When we discussed this in Bratislava in September, many other European countries joined with us in saying that we already have NATO. We don't need an EU army. We don't need EU headquarters. They have different roles. Europehas the political role. It can impose sanctions, for example on Putin. It has the diplomatic clout. But it is NATO that is the military power, and it is very important that we don't have two competing organizations.

The interview was conducted by Michaela Kfner.

You can watch the interview here.

The rest is here:

UK minister: 'Defense is for NATO and not the EU' - Deutsche Welle

NSA Split From Cyberwar Command Inevitable, Says Former Official – The Intercept

Posted on by

A former senior official at the National Security Agency says the planned split between the nations digital spying outfit and its offensive cyber military arm will happen, though likely not for a while.

Prior to the election in November, the outgoing Obama administration had moved to split the NSA, which is focused on espionage and intelligence gathering, from U.S. Cyber Command, which can conduct offensive military operations in cyberspace. Since assuming office in January, however, President Donald Trump has struggled to fill key government positions, like the national security adviser, making any immediate bureaucratic overhauls unlikely.

I think everybody says its inevitable, John Chris Inglis, the former deputy director of NSA, told The Intercept during an interview in San Francisco.

The question is whether you do that now or you do that in a year or two, he continued.

Inglis spoke to The Intercept following a speech he gave on combatting insider threats, entitled How to Catch A Snowden, at the RSA Conference, one of the largest annual cybersecurity events. Inglis was at the NSA in 2013 when Edward Snowden leaked a massive trove of documents to journalists on the surveillance programs.

Currently, the two agencies are under one roof and one dual-hatted director: Adm. Michael Rogers, who has also suggested an eventual split between his agencies. Theres been a heated debate about the benefits and downsides of separating the two entities as Cyber Command grows and develops its parallel mission. Figures like Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., are vehemently against separating resources between espionage and attack in the digital space at least in the absence of clear policies from the White House.

Though Inglis tells The Intercept he believes the split is bound to occur, he says that President Trump and his White House have other fish to fry right now.

A separation in the coming months, especially with NSA Deputy Director Richard Ledgett retiring in the spring, might induce instability, Inglis said. And while Adm. Rogers has reportedly been no stranger to controversy and bad reviews facing sinking morale during a major NSA reorganization he doesnt appear to be going anywhere anytime soon.

In the meantime, Cyber Command is still maturing. It was first formed under Gen. Keith Alexander and Ingliss leadership in 2009. Cyber Command in still early days needed the NSA, Inglis said. But the split makes sense in the long run, he argued.

The more they stay in that relationship, the less Cyber Command will need NSA, the more theyll be held back by NSA, and the less NSA will need Cyber Command, Inglis said. Its for both of their benefit to essentially give them on scene leadership that can focus entirely on what theyre supposed to do as agencies that are nominally independent but complimentary.

If that split were to happen, it might open the job of NSA director up to a civilian leader.At one point during the Obama administration, Inglis was regarded as a top candidate for the NSA job under the restructuring, though theres no indication hes currently under consideration.

Inglis tells The Intercept he would, if asked, accept a job in the Trump administration in a heartbeat.

Inglis is currently a managing director at Paladin Capital Group, a private equity firm that invests in companies around the world. He started as a computer scientist in the NSA, then worked in signals intelligence, and rose to become deputy director. He spent 41 years in the Department of Defense, nearly 30 of them at NSA.

Inglis would be a superb selection and it is no surprise that he would be willing to serve his country regardless of who was in office, Susan Hennessy, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former attorney at NSA, wrote in an email to The Intercept. He is trusted and respected both at NSA and within the government generally.

Describing the current situation as a tumultuous period, Hennessey said that the number of people qualified to lead the NSA is small. Inglis is one of the few people who would top anyones list for that role, Republican or Democrat, she added.

Having not been offered something, it would be inappropriate for me to say I want a job, especially if that job is now held by somebody, Inglis said, laughing.

View post:

NSA Split From Cyberwar Command Inevitable, Says Former Official - The Intercept

Posted in NSA

First Read’s Morning Clips: Harward Turns Down NSA Job – NBCNews.com

Posted on by

TRUMP AGENDA: Harward turns down NSA job

Retired Navy Vice Adm. Robert Harward has turned down an offer to become President Donald Trump's national security adviser.

From the Washington Post last night: "Former national security adviser Michael Flynn denied to FBI agents in an interview last month that he had discussed U.S. sanctions against Russia with that country's ambassador to the United States before President Trump took office, contradicting the contents of intercepted communications collected by intelligence agencies, current and former U.S. officials said. The Jan. 24 interview potentially puts Flynn in legal jeopardy. Lying to the FBI is a felony offense. But several officials said it is unclear whether prosecutors would attempt to bring a case, in part because Flynn may parse the definition of the word "sanctions." He also followed his denial to the FBI by saying he couldn't recall all of the conversation, officials said."

NBC: "The creation of a 9/11-style commission to investigate Russian interference in the presidential election has won bipartisan support, according to a senior Democratic lawmaker. In an interview with MSNBC's Chris Hayes, Rep. Elijah Cummings said that such a committee was necessary 'to really get into how all of this happened, what was the relationship between the Trump campaign and the Russians, and try to figure out how to make sure that this does not happen again.'"

NBC News confirms that Mike Dubke, the founder of Crossroads Media, will be the White House communications head.

NBC's Ali Vitali wraps yesterday's press conference.

The New York Times: "[H]is 77-minute news conference was dominated by an extraordinarily raw and angry defense of both his administration and his character. At times abrupt, often rambling, characteristically boastful yet seemingly pained at the portrayals of him, Mr. Trump kept summoning the spirit of his successful campaign after a month of grinding governance to remind his audience, again, that he won."

The Wall Street Journal reports that Trump told aides Thursday morning that he wanted to have the press conference because "my message is being filtered."

The AP goes there on historical comparisons, with this headline: "Remember Nixon? There's history behind Trump's press attacks"

The Washington Post reports on the "logistical nightmare" and high costs of the Trump family lifestyle.

"Donald J. Trump redrew the electoral map with his rousing economic nationalism and evocation of a lost industrial age. It was a message that drew many union members to his cause. And now it is upending the alliances and tactics of the labor movement itself," writes the New York Times.

Trump is planning a new immigration order next week, writes the Wall Street Journal.

Don't miss POLITICO's interview with Mark Sanford, who is not holding back about the president of his own party.

The Washington Post asks: "If Trump can't arrange his own meeting with the Congressional Black Caucus, how does he unite the country?"

No, Trump's election victory was not "the biggest electoral college win since Ronald Reagan."

CONGRESS: Paul Ryan's tough tax-reform sell

POLITICO writes that Paul Ryan is having a tough time selling his tax reform plan to fellow Republicans.

Read the original here:

First Read's Morning Clips: Harward Turns Down NSA Job - NBCNews.com

Posted in NSA

Trump Today: Retired Lt. Gen. Kellogg 1 of 4 candidates for NSA – SFGate

Posted on by

By Bill Hutchinson, San Francisco Chronicle

President Trump is considering reaching back into a pool of retired military generals to replace Michael Flynn as national security adviser.

Trump tweeted Friday that retired Army Lt. Gen. Keith Kellogg is among four candidates for the to take over for Flynn, who resigned Monday after giving a briefing to Vice President Mike Pence on his pre-election conversation with Russias U.S. ambassador that the president considered unsatisfactory.

Photo: Susan Walsh, Associated Press

Acting National Security Adviser Keith Kellogg waits for the arrival of President Trump at the top of the steps of Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base in Md., Friday, Feb. 17, 2017.

Acting National Security Adviser Keith Kellogg waits for the arrival of President Trump at the top of the steps of Air Force One at Andrews Air Force Base in Md., Friday, Feb. 17, 2017.

Trump Today: Retired Lt. Gen. Kellogg 1 of 4 candidates for NSA

Leaked information on the phone call between Flynn and Ambassador Sergey Kislyak indicates they discussed U.S. sanctions on Russia, the Washington Post reported.

General Keith Kellogg, who I have known for a long time, is very much in play for NSA - as are three others, Trump tweeted.

Kellogg joined Trump on Air Force One Friday as the president traveled to Charleston, S.C., for an event at a Boeing plant.

Following the resignation of Flynn, a retired Army lieutenant general, Trump named Kellogg his acting national security adviser. Kellogg has been serving as chief of staff on the National Security Council.

Kellogg, 72, served more than 30 years in the Army and was director of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq following 2003 invasion of the country.

Kelloggs name emerged as Flynns replacement a day after former Vice Admiral Robert Harward turned down Trumps offer take on the post, which does not require a Senate confirmation hearing.

The Chronicle has published several articles on Flynns resignation. Here are some links:

Trump Today: President says Russian phone call leaks un-American

Trump Today: President says Flynn resigning not the real story

Trump knew Flynn misled WH weeks before ouster: officials

Bill Hutchinson is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. Email: bhutchinson@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @bill_hutchinson

Read the original here:

Trump Today: Retired Lt. Gen. Kellogg 1 of 4 candidates for NSA - SFGate

Posted in NSA

Life imitates Akira: the NSA’s fear of psychic nukes – MuckRock

Posted on by

February 17, 2017

Agency wondered if ten psychics could cause a chain reaction that would cause a city to become lost in time and space

A classified government document opens with an odd sequence of events relating to parapsychology has occurred within the last month and concluded with an alarming question about psychics nuking cities so that they became lost in time and space. If this sounds like a plot out of science fiction, it is - but its also a NSA memo from 1977.

The first event raised by the NSA note is a CIA report which mentioned KGB research into parapsychology. According to this, the KGB used hobbyists and non-governmental researchers to talk to western scientists. This allowed the KGB to collect useful information without putting themselves into a position to accidentally leak confidential information to westerners. According to the NSA note, this tactic yielded high grade western scientific data.

The next event described by the NSA note was what appeared to be a Russian provocation, though exactly what sort was a matter of some debate. In June 1977, an American journalist was detained in Russia for receiving a Soviet paper on parapsychology. The paper allegedly documented PSI (i.e. psychic) particles within the living cell, allegedly providing a physical basis for parapsychology.

This struck American intelligence as being a form of entrapment, though the goal was uncertain. Some thought it was an effort to provoke radio chatter which the Soviets could trace to get a better idea of the U.S.s interest and activities. Another theory was that it was simply a warning to the West to stay away from sensitive Soviet research. A third theory was that it was a double-think ploy to pretend interest in a clumsy manner to make us think that this was really just a deception to trick the West into believing there was interest when there really was none. While this last theory might sound paranoid, this is how denial and deception operate - and its something that Russian counterintelligence has long excelled at.

The section concluded with a note that there had supposedly been a successful demonstration of telekinetic power in a Soviet military sponsored research lab, and the alleged discovery of a new type of energy perhaps even more important than that of Atomic energy.

The third event was the apparent postulation by some physicists along with the famous evolutionist, Teilhard de Chardin that the universe was more of a great thought than a great machine. According to this view, the unified field on ground of reality is awareness. The note cited telekinetic experiments and postulated that awareness focusing could produce a new form of energy that moves or perhaps alters matter.

The report cited British scientists experiencing poltergeist phenomena after testing Uri Geller. Objects allegedly left the room, some of which apparently reappeared later. Supposedly, this didnt surprise unnamed scientists who found it no harder to believe that objects could disappear and reappear than it was to believe in the detected particles emerging from energy and dissolving or disappearing back into energy.

From these premises, two types of telekinetic weapons were hypothesized: a telekinetic time bomb and the equivalent of a psychic nuke that could dislodge a city in time and space.

The first involved a member of the command and control staff being kidnapped and subjected to trauma that would allow him to be suggestively programmed to develop telekinetic effects under stress at work. The theory was that when an emergency situation arose and the officer was subjected to stress, objects would begin to move and disappear independently and communications would become impossible.

The second hypothetical weapon was even more elaborate and potentially terrifying. Citing a prediction of a massive change which will alter the direction, time, space and energy-matter relationship of our world, the note wondered what would happen if a group of psychics were brought together. If ten people who were evidencing disruptive telekinetic phenomena were brought into one area, would it cause a chain reaction, causing much matter to reverse direction and sink back into a sea of energy or be displaced in time and space? The memo concluded by wondering if such an event reach a critical mass and affect an entire city.

By an interesting coincidence, the Philadelphia Experiment hoax bears some superficial resemblance to the theorized weapon in the NSA note. According various versions of the hoax, the USS Eldridge was temporarily rendered invisible or transported through time and space. The incident is even listed on NSAs webpage of paranormal topics that they dont have records on. However, there were other papers prepared on the perceived potential of weaponizing psychic abilities, some of which will be explored later. For now, you can read the NSA note below:

Like Mike Bests work? Support him on Patreon.

Image via Somethings Out There

The rest is here:

Life imitates Akira: the NSA's fear of psychic nukes - MuckRock

Posted in NSA

The Supreme Court fights for the weary black interstate traveler … – 11alive.com

Posted on by

Black History encapsulates more than a month. This new daily series will take a look at some lesser known events and people in the world.

The story of Shirley Chisholm.

As the Civil Rights movement dispersed around the nation, Georgia had its fair share of history. Take the Heart of Atlanta Motel Incorporateds case against the United States. The Supreme Court had recently passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which says racial discrimination in public places was unconstitutional.

But the motel refused to rent rooms to black customers.

Moreton Rolleston, the owner, took the case to court citing the Fifth Amendment (he said it went against his right to choose patrons for his business), the Thirteenth Amendment (involuntary servitude), and he added that Congress was going over their control over the interstate commerce (now known as the Commerce Clause).

Congress immediately came back with their own case. They referenced his Fifth Amendment right saying that it does not hinder regulation of interstate commerce. It countered the Thirteenth Amendment with the explanation that it was specifically for slavery and the negative effects of it. And, finally, Congress said its power under the Commerce Clause related to proper sleeping circumstances for blacks traveling on the interstate.

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia took Congresss side in December 1964. The court won; Congress could use power granted to it by the Constitutions Commerce Clause to force privately owned businesses to follow the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The nation successfully fought against discrimination.

WXIA

Bessie Coleman takes to the skies | Black History Moment of the Day

WXIA

Ace pilots fly for freedom and become top shooters | Black History Moment of the Day

WXIA

Dancing through the Harlem Renaissance | Black History Moment of the Day

WXIA

Betty Boop: Historical Black Icon? | Black History Moment of the Day

WXIA

Cicely Tyson breaks down the television barrier | Black History Moment of the Day

Go here to read the rest:

The Supreme Court fights for the weary black interstate traveler ... - 11alive.com

StingRay is why the 4th Amendment was written – Richmond County Daily Journal

Posted on by

Imagine you are in the middle of your typical day-to-day activities. Maybe you are driving, spending time with family, or working. If you are like most people, your phone is at your side on a daily basis. Little do you know that, at any time, police and law enforcement could be looking at information stored on your phone. You havent done anything wrong. You havent been asked for permission. You arent suspected of any crime.

The StingRay

Police have the power to collect your location along with the numbers of your incoming and outgoing calls and intercept the content of call and text communication. They can do all of this without you ever knowing about it.

How? They use a shoebox-sized device called a StingRay. This device (also called an IMSI catcher) mimics cell phone towers, prompting all the phones in the area to connect to it even if the phones arent in use.

The police use StingRays to track down and implicate perpetrators of mainly domestic crimes. The devices can be mounted in vehicles, drones, helicopters, and airplanes, allowing police to gain highly specific information on the location of any particular phone, down to a particular apartment complex or hotel room.

Quietly, StingRay use is growing throughout local and federal law enforcement with little to no oversight. The ACLU has discovered that at least 68 agencies in 23 different states own StingRays, but says that this dramatically underrepresents the actual use of StingRays by law enforcement agencies nationwide.

The Violation

Information from potentially thousands of phones is being collected every time a StingRay is used. Signals are sent into the homes, bags, and pockets of innocent individuals. The Electronic Frontier Foundation likens this to the Pre-Revolutionary War practice of soldiers going door-to-door, searching without suspicion.

Richard Tynan, a technologist with Privacy International notes that, there really isnt any place for innocent people to hide from a device such as this.

The Fourth Amendment of the Constitution states that, the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

The StingRay clearly violates these standards. The drafters of the Constitution recognized that restricting the government from violating privacy is essential for a free society. Thats why the Fourth Amendment exists. The StingRay is creating a dangerous precedent that tells the government that its okay for them to violate our rights. Because of this, freedom is quietly slipping out the window.

Little Regulation

Law Enforcement is using StingRays without a warrant in most cases. For example, the San Bernardino Police Department used their StingRay 300 times without a warrant in a little over a year.

A handful of states have passed laws requiring police and federal agents to get a warrant before using a StingRay. They must show probable cause for one of the thousands of phones that they are actually searching. This is far from enough.

Additionally, there are many concerns that agents are withholding information from federal judges to monitor subjects without approval bypassing the probable cause standard laid out in the Constitution. They even go as far as to let criminals go to avoid disclosing information about these devices to the courts.

If the public doesnt become aware of this issue, the police will continue to use StingRays to infringe on our rights in secret and with impunity.

Olivia Donaldson is a recent high school graduate that is currently opting out of college and participating in an entrepreneurial program called Praxis. Originally published at fee.org.

http://yourdailyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/web1_oliviadonaldsonjpg.jpg

.

The rest is here:

StingRay is why the 4th Amendment was written - Richmond County Daily Journal

First Amendment survives challenge from Florida gun law – Minnesota Public Radio News (blog)

Posted on by

If youre at all a fan of the First Amendment, there was plenty to like about todays decision by the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals striking down a Florida law that prohibited doctors from asking whether there are guns in the home (heres the full law in question).

But lets focus on the concurring opinion of William Pryor, who was on the short list to replace Justice Antonin Scalia on the U.S. Supreme Court.

Pryor is a conservative, so he took great pains to point out that the decision is not about the Second Amendment; its about the First.

And much of his opinion was aimed strictly at conservatives, apparently anticipating their criticism.

Heres some examples.

If we upheld the Act, we could set a precedent for many other restrictions of potentially unpopular speech. Think of everything the government might seek to ban between doctor and patient as supposedly irrelevant to the practice of medicine. Without the protection of free speech, the government might seek to ban discussion of religion between doctor and patient. The state could stop a surgeon from praying with his patient before surgery or punish a Christian doctor for asking patients if they have accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior or punish an atheist for telling his patient that religious belief is delusional.

Without the protection of free speech, the government might seek to censor political speech by doctors. The state might prevent doctors from encouraging their patients to vote in favor of universal health care or prohibit a physician from criticizing the Affordable Care Act. Some might argue that such topics are irrelevant to a particular patients immediate medical needs, but the First Amendment ensures that doctors cannot be threatened with state punishment for speech even if it goes beyond diagnosis and treatment.

Pryor said doctors already discuss highly controversial topics with patients. Whether to play football, or telling teenagers to abstain from sex, and recommending organ donation.

He called the very idea a thought experiment and then lowered the boom with this beautiful piece of prose:

If today the majority can censor so-called heresy, then tomorrow a new majority can censor what was yesterday so-called orthodoxy.

If there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion . . . . Our decision applies this timeless principle to speech between doctors and patients, regardless of the content. The First Amendment requires the protection of ideas that some people might find distasteful because tomorrow the tables might be turned.

Todays decision was not close. The vote was 10-to-1.

The one belonged to Gerald Bard Tjoflat, who is 87 years old and is the longest-service justice in the U.S. Court of Appeals system.

He does see the case as a Second Amendment question:

The majority and I agree that Florida possesses a substantial interest in protecting both Floridians reasonable expectation of privacy during medical treatment and the full exercise of their Second Amendment rights. If that is so, then it is hard to imagine a law more precisely tailored to advance those substantial state interests than the one presently before us. The Act does not categorically restrict the speech of medical professionals on the subject of firearms. Instead, it simply requires an individualized, good faith judgment of the necessity of speech related to firearm ownership to provide competent medical care to a patient.

a constitutional right is a right to be free of governmental restrictions on the exercise of the right it is not a right to be free of private criticism for the exercise of the right, much less private questions about the exercise of the right, law professor Eugene Volokh in his Washington Post column analyzing todays decision. A doctor no more violates your Second Amendment rights by asking you about whether you own a gun than the doctor violates your First Amendment rights by asking you how much TV your children watch, or your Lawrence v. Texas sexual autonomy rights by asking you whether youve been having sex with multiple partners.

Heres the courts full opinion:

Bob Collins has been with Minnesota Public Radio since 1992, emigrating to Minnesota from Massachusetts. He was senior editor of news in the 90s, ran MPRs political unit, created the MPR News regional website, invented the popular Select A Candidate, started the two most popular blogs in the history of MPR and every day laments that his Minnesota Fantasy Legislature project never caught on.

NewsCut is a blog featuring observations about the news. It provides a forum for an online discussion and debate about events that might not typically make the front page. NewsCut posts are not news stories but reflections , observations, and debate.

Visit link:

First Amendment survives challenge from Florida gun law - Minnesota Public Radio News (blog)