Monthly Archives: March 2017

Christian atheism – Wikipedia

Posted: March 31, 2017 at 6:49 am

Christian atheism is a system of ethics which draws its beliefs and practices from the life and teachings of Jesus Christ, as recorded in the Gospels of the New Testament and other sources, while rejecting the supernatural claims of Christianity at large. Christian Atheism takes many forms - some Christian Atheists take a theological position, in which the belief in the transcendent or interventionist God is rejected or absent in favor of finding God totally in the world (Thomas J. J. Altizer), while others follow Jesus in a godless world (William Hamilton). Hamilton's Christian atheism is similar to Jesuism.

Thomas Ogletree, Frederick Marquand Professor of Ethics and Religious Studies at Yale Divinity School, lists these four common beliefs:[1][2]

According to Paul van Buren, a Death of God theologian, the word God itself is "either meaningless or misleading".[2] He contends that it is impossible to think about God. Van Buren says that

"We cannot identify anything which will count for or against the truth of our statements concerning 'God'".[2]

The inference from these claims to the "either meaningless or misleading" conclusion is implicitly premised on the verificationist theory of meaning. Most Christian atheists believe that God never existed, but there are a few who believe in the death of God literally.[3]Thomas J. J. Altizer is a well-known Christian atheist who is known for his literal approach to the death of God. He often speaks of God's death as a redemptive event. In his book The Gospel of Christian Atheism he speaks of how

"Every man today who is open to experience knows that God is absent, but only the Christian knows that God is dead, that the death of God is a final and irrevocable event, and that God's death has actualized in our history a new and liberated humanity".[4]

Theologians including Altizer and Lyas looked at the scientific, empirical culture of today and tried to find religion's place in it. In Altizer's words,

"No longer can faith and the world exist in mutual isolationthe radical Christian condemns all forms of faith that are disengaged with the world."[4]

He goes on to say that our response to atheism should be one of "acceptance and affirmation".[4] Colin Lyas, a Philosophy lecturer at Lancaster University, stated that

"Christian atheists are united also in the belief that any satisfactory answer to these problems must be an answer that will make life tolerable in this world, here and now and which will direct attention to the social and other problems of this life."[3]

Altizer has said that

"the radical Christian... believes that the ecclesiastical tradition has ceased to be Christian".[4]

He believed that orthodox Christianity no longer had any meaning to people because it did not discuss Christianity within the context of contemporary theology. Christian atheists want to be completely separated from most orthodox Christian beliefs and biblical traditions.[5] Altizer states that a faith will not be completely pure if it is open to modern culture. This faith "can never identify itself with an ecclesiastical tradition or with a given doctrinal or ritual form." He goes on to say that faith cannot "have any final assurance as to what it means to be a Christian".[4] Altizer said, "We must not, he says, seek for the sacred by saying 'no' to the radical profanity of our age, but by saying 'yes' to it".[5] They see religions which withdraw from the world as moving away from truth. This is part of the reason why they see the existence of God as counter-progressive. Altizer wrote of God as the enemy to man because mankind could never reach its fullest potential while God existed.[4] He went on to state that "to cling to the Christian God in our time is to evade the human situation of our century and to renounce the inevitable suffering which is its lot".[4]

Although Jesus is still a central feature of Christian atheism, Hamilton said that to the Christian atheist, Jesus is not really the foundation of faith; instead, he is a "place to be, a standpoint".[5] Christian atheists look to Jesus as an example of what a Christian should be, but they do not see him as God.

Hamilton wrote that following Jesus means being "alongside the neighbor, being for him",[5] and that to follow Jesus means to be human, to help other humans, and to further humankind.

Other Christian atheists such as Thomas Altizer preserve the divinity of Jesus, arguing that through him God negates God's transcendence of being.

In the Netherlands, 42% of the members of the Protestant Church in the Netherlands (PKN) are nontheists.[6] Non-belief among clergymen is not always perceived as a problem. Some follow the tradition of Christian non-realism, most famously expounded in the UK by Don Cupitt in the 1980s, which holds that God is a symbol or metaphor and that religious language is not matched by a transcendent reality. According to an investigation of 860 pastors in seven Dutch Protestant denominations, 1 in 6 clergy are either agnostic or atheist. In one of those denominations, the Remonstrant Brotherhood, the number of doubters was 42 percent.[7][8] A minister of the PKN, Klaas Hendrikse has described God as "a word for experience, or human experience" and said that Jesus may have never existed. Hendrikse gained attention with his book published in November 2007, in which he said that it was not necessary to believe in God's existence in order to believe in 'God'. The Dutch title of the book translates as, 'Believing in a God who does not exist: manifesto of an atheist pastor'. Hendrikse writes in the book. 'God is for me not a being but a word for what can happen between people. Someone says to you, for example, 'I will not abandon you', and then makes those words come true. It would be perfectly alright to call that [relationship] God.' A General Synod found Klaas Hendrikse's views were widely shared among both clergy and church members. The February 3, 2010 decision to allow Hendrikse to continue working as a pastor followed the advice of a regional supervisory panel that the statements by Hendrikse, are not of sufficient weight to damage the foundations of the Church. The ideas of Hendrikse are theologically not new, and are in keeping with the liberal tradition that is an integral part of our church, the special panel concluded.[7]

A Harris Interactive survey from 2003 found that 90% of self-identified Protestants in the United States believe in God, and about 4% of American Protestants believe there is no God.[9]

Catholic atheism is a belief in which the culture, traditions, rituals, and norms of Catholicism are accepted, but the existence of God is rejected. It is illustrated in Miguel de Unamuno's novel San Manuel Bueno, Mrtir (1930). According to research in 2007, only 27% of Catholics in the Netherlands considered themselves theist, while 55% were ietsist or agnostic deist, and 17% were agnostic or atheist. Many Dutch people still affiliate with the term "Catholic", and use it within certain traditions as a basis of their cultural identity, rather than as a religious identity. The vast majority of the Catholic population in the Netherlands is now largely irreligious in practice.[6]

In his book Mere Christianity, the apologist C. S. Lewis would object to Hamilton's version of Christian Atheism and the claim that Jesus was merely a moral guide:

"I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: 'I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God.' That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunaticon the level with the man who says he is a poached eggor else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronising nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. ... Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God."

Lewis's argument, now known as Lewis's Trilemma, has been criticized for, among other things, constituting a false trilemma. As philosopher John Beversluis argues, Lewis "deprives his readers of numerous alternate interpretations of Jesus that carry with them no such odious implications."[10]

Visit link:
Christian atheism - Wikipedia

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off

Are You Afraid to Die? Researchers Reveal Surprising Ties … – CBN News

Posted: at 6:49 am

A new study has found that religious individuals and atheists might actuallyshare a shocking similarity: both are among the least afraid of dying,according to at least some of the surveys and articles included in the meta-analysis.

Researchers at the University of Oxford, among other colleges, explored some of the most intriguing international studies that have explored the relationship between the levels of peoples faith and their fear or anxiety associated withdying.

While the assumption has long been that the more religious one is the less likely he or she is to fear death, researchers came to a complicated conclusion after analyzing 100 articles from between 1961-2014 thatrepresented a total of26,000 people.

READ: Princeton Rescinds Award From Tim Keller, Despite Having the SAME Views as the Awards Namesake

It shows that the very religious and atheists are the groups who do not fear death as much as much as those in-between, the University of Oxfordsaid in a press release, noting that the results were published in the journalReligion, Brain and Behavior.

While religious people were found to haveless anxiety about dying in some of the associated studies, atheists too at least in some investigations are apparently not too worried about what happens in the afterlife.The press releasehas more:

The meta-analysis showed that while people who were intrinsically religious enjoyed lower levels of death anxiety, those who were extrinsically religious revealed higher levels of death anxiety.

The findings were mixed across the studies, with only 30% of the effects showing this finding. Surprisingly, perhaps, 18% of the studies found that religious people were more afraid of death than non-religious people; and over half the research showed no link at all between the fear of death and religiosity. This mixed picture shows that the relationship between religiosity and death anxiety may not be fixed, but may differ from context to context. Most of the studies were conducted in the United States, with a small number carried out in the Middle East and East Asia. This makes it difficult to estimate how the pattern varies from culture to culture, or religion to religion, says the paper.

In the end, theres a complex paradigm at work, with researchers wondering whether theres an upside-down U dynamic in which religious people and nonbelievers have lower anxiety about death, with others in between having increased fears.

More research is needed to more firmly understand the issues at hand, expertssaid.

This definitely complicates the old view, that religious people are less afraid of death than nonreligious people, saidDr. Jonathan Jong,a research associateat Coventry UniversitysInstitute of Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology. It may well be that atheism also provides comfort from death, or that people who are just not afraid of death arent compelled to seek religion.

Sen. Rand Paul: Montenegro Joining NATO Is Against US Interests – TIME

Posted: at 6:47 am

Sen. Rand Paul speaks in Washington on Feb. 15, 2017. Bill ClarkCQ-Roll Call,Inc.

Paul is the junior U.S. Senator for Kentucky

President Donald Trump said in his inaugural address : Weve defended other nations borders, while refusing to defend our own.

I couldnt agree more.

Today, the question is: Will we add yet another commitment to defend yet another foreign country?

For decades, NATO has been an organization where the U.S. disproportionately spends our blood and treasure. The other NATO countries have largely hitched a ride to the U.S. train that subsidizes their defenses and allows them to direct their revenues to domestic pursuits.

Adding a country with fewer than 2,000 soldiers to NATO is not in our self-interest. There is no national security interest that an alliance with Montenegro will advance. If we invite Montenegro into NATO, it will be a one-way street with the U.S. committing to defend yet another country.

Advocates of allowing Montenegro to join NATO admit as much. The Senate hearing on admitting Montenegro to NATO was really just a Russia-bashing session. Not one word was said of how allowing Montenegro into NATO would advance our national security. Even the citizens of Montenegro are divided on entry into NATO. Fewer than 40% favor joining NATO and approximately the same percentage of Montenegrins oppose joining NATO.

Those who want to allow Montenegro into NATO believe that unless the whole world joins NATO, Russia will conquer the world. The truth is, as always, more complicated.

During the Cold War , the myth of Russian might was endlessly circulated here at home and the effect was the production of endless munitions and ever-expanding debt. The Cold War ended and the Soviet Union failed, not because our military might overcame them but because their economic system was fundamentally flawed and our economic system outlasted them.

Now, we are told we must fear the Russian Bear once again. But if you look closely you will see that Russian aggression around the world, particularly among the former Soviet satellites, is an attempt to mask a weak economy that runs the same risk of over-extension. Without question, Russia is an adversary, a country that ignores international norms and does not respect the territorial integrity of its neighbors. But Russia is weak because of corruption, oligarchy and human rights abuses. If Russia continues on this path, they may well encounter the same cataclysm that brought down the Soviet empire.

This debate today is not just about Montenegro but about NATO expansion in general. The same cheerleaders for admitting Montenegro also recklessly pushed to admit Ukraine and Georgia; if they were still members, we could right now be at war with Russia.

From the very beginning, our republic was founded with a deep suspicion of entangling alliances. Our founders wanted to do everything possible to avoid the chronic wars of Europe, where, for centuries, kings from one nation fought their brothers or cousins in other nations. The endless, meaningless wars of fratricide continued even into the 20th century.

Washington wrote that our true policy is to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world. Jefferson famously wrote, peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.

In modern times, such military heroes as President Eisenhower opposed intervention in Hungary, even when the naked aggression of the Soviets was appalling. Eisenhower likely had no real opportunity to militarily intervene before 200,000 Soviet troops with 4000 tanks rolled into Hungary. But at least part of the decision was a realpolitick decision that risking a nuclear confrontation with Russia did not justify war.

Fast forward to today. For 16 years the US has been at war in the Middle East. Our justified response to the attacks of 9/11 has dragged on and on. The vote Congress made to authorize military force against the planners and attackers of the World Trade Centers is now used to justify all military action anywhere around the world.

That vote is now used to justify war around the globe in dozens of countries. It is a lie and a disservice to our young men and women in uniform to have them fight under false pretenses. No active war involving the U.S. anywhere around the globe has been approved by Congress.

Our unrestricted, un-voted upon involvement in war everywhere informs my opposition to expanding NATO. Everyone likes to talk of NATOs Article 5 obligation to come to the defense of any NATO ally that is attacked. Many in Congress believe that Article 5 of the NATO alliance farms out the power to declare war to an international body.

David Fromkin put it this way: If it is now agreed by treaty that an attack on a... NATO ally is deemed an attack on the United states, then it can be argued that the President is empowered without Congressional authorization to send us war.

This is the crux of the debate: Congress abdicating its role in declaring war.

So, NATO. Should we expand it? Perhaps what we should do is make it clear that the NATO treaty is not a blind, open-ended promise to go to war anywhere and everywhere.

I continue to believe and will advocate for always having an official vote in Congress before we declare war.

More:
Sen. Rand Paul: Montenegro Joining NATO Is Against US Interests - TIME

Posted in NATO | Comments Off

For Tillerson, Showing Up at NATO Isn’t Enough | Foreign Policy – Foreign Policy (blog)

Posted: at 6:47 am

Bowing to outside pressure, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson is set to attend his first meeting with NATOs foreign ministers on Friday. But that was not his initial plan. Scheduling problems originally gave the secretary of state two bad options: go to NATO and miss Chinese President Xi Jinpings visit to the United States (not good, given criticism that he is already turning into a no-show secretary) or stay home and send acting Deputy Secretary of State Thomas Shannon (sending the signal, I see enough of you guys and NATO is a second tier priority).

These scheduling conflicts happen all the time and usually get worked out. But heres the kicker NATO offered new dates and the State Department initially said no thanks. That message from Tillerson essentially, Ill see you after my trip to Moscow got everyone riled up. The Swamp rose up as one in protest and sent Tillerson a strong counter message: You dont see allies only after youve seen the Russians!

A few hours later State backed down. And so Tillerson will be in Brussels this Friday, no doubt miffed and with hat in hand. The lesson here is that leadership means showing up. While other ministers can opt out, that is not an option for the United States.

But Tillerson must do more than just show up. Now that he will attend the NATO Ministerial NATOs last big meeting before its summit on May 25 the question is whether he will lead the alliance or just go through the motions, doing crossword puzzles as allies drone on? If he plans to lead, he will need to arrive armed with new ideas and fresh energy to take the alliance forward, and away from supposed obsolescence. But if he arrives just to fill the seat, that would be the worst of all it would be better if he had not shown up at all.

At a minimum, Tillerson should lay the intellectual and policy foundation for President Donald Trumps attendance at the NATO summit in May. Tillerson could provide the strategic underpinnings for the administrations worldview especially the role of the United States in Europe. Weve heard the criticism, but whats the positive outlook from the transatlantic leader? That could set up Trump to announce in May the specific plans he has in regard for NATO and in tackling burden sharing. Tillerson could also lift the veil a bit on the U.S. relationship with Russia, especially as it relates to deterrence in Europe. He has to say something about Russia, given his upcoming trip there. And its probably easier for Tillerson to talk with allies about Russia than for Trump to do so.

In addition to talking about Russia, foreign ministers will talk about ongoing NATO missions, such as NATO troops in the Baltics and Poland, NATO trainers in Iraq helping fight the Islamic State, NATO naval forces dealing with the worsening migrant tragedy in the Mediterranean, and NATO experts helping to establish governance in Libya. These missions show that NATO is not obsolete but yes, NATO could certainly do more.

This is the area for a new push led by the United States. For instance, NATO could convene and host the counter-Islamic State coalition meetings currently being managed by the United States there is no reason that the Defense Department and State Department have to run those meetings out of their back pockets. But NATO could especially do more in the post-conflict stage both in Iraq and in Syria. The rebuilding of those two nations will be a huge undertaking that cannot be done by the U.N. or any nation or coalition alone. NATO could take the initiative to work with the U.N. and the EU to begin sketching out how to help Iraq and Syria deal with the humanitarian needs born of years at war.

But most importantly, Tillerson can help Trumps first NATO summit be a success by taking off the table any lingering doubt or suspicion about U.S. leadership of the transatlantic community. This is a leadership role important for the United States and a priority for presidents going back to Harry Truman. The United States leads the transatlantic community because America derives important benefits from its partnership with Europe. Perhaps the most important benefit for the United States is that Europe and America see the world in a similar way and share an understanding that at a time when these common values are increasingly threatened we need a strong and cooperative community to see our way through. The United States does not have to face these challenges by itself; unless it willfully drives partners away, or allows the transatlantic community to atrophy through benign neglect.

Photo credit:OLIVER BERG/AFP/Getty Images

Twitter Facebook Google + Reddit

More here:
For Tillerson, Showing Up at NATO Isn't Enough | Foreign Policy - Foreign Policy (blog)

Posted in NATO | Comments Off

General Dynamics gets potential $140M NATO IT contract – Washington Technology

Posted: at 6:47 am

NATO

Alliance plans $3B in tech services contracts over two years

General Dynamics information technology business unit has won a potential five-year, $140 million contract to install a new private cloud computing infrastructure for NATOs Communications and Information Agency.

NATO said Thursday General Dynamics project represents the start of the alliances largest information technology infrastructure modernization in recent years.

This award comes in the same week that NATO announced plans to award up to $3 billion in contracts over the next 18-24 months for technology services to update the alliances cyber defenses, command-and-control environment and communications network.

All 28 member countries are financing the contracts through NATOs common funding structure.

For its part, General Dynamics will update IT infrastructure, implement alliance-wide continuity and disaster recovery processes and implement new service operations centers to monitor and control IT services.

NATO has targeted the delivery of seven new sites for data center, service operation and other IT services by September 2018 for the contracts first phase and eventually 44 locations for the entire program.

General Dynamics will perform the work in many NATO member countries and out of Belgium. NATO's headquarters are located in Belgium's capital of Brussels.

About the Author

Ross Wilkers is a senior staff writer for Washington Technology. He can be reached at rwilkers@washingtontechnology.com.

The rest is here:
General Dynamics gets potential $140M NATO IT contract - Washington Technology

Posted in NATO | Comments Off

US troops, hardware depart for NATO sites in Eastern Europe build-up (VIDEO) – RT

Posted: at 6:47 am

US troops and vehicles have departed from the Polish port of Gdansk towards their deployment sites in Poland and Lithuania to take part in NATO's Atlantic Resolve operation in Eastern Europe.

The third deployment of US troops in 90 days is aimed at building readiness, improving our interoperability with our NATO allies, training alongside our NATO allies, and deterring aggression against the NATO alliance, Major General Duane Gamble, Commander of the 21st Theater Sustainment Command of the US Army Europe, said as cited by RTs Ruptly news video agency.

When asked to characterize the level of threat NATO is facing, Gamble replied:I don't know, frankly.

According to the commander, the NATO military buildup in Eastern Europe is not about provocation. It's not about countering Russians or any other potential threats."

NATO has repeatedly stated that the buildup near Russia's borders is required to reassure the blocs eastern European allies in view of Russias reunification with Crimea, Moscows alleged involvement in the Ukrainian conflict and what NATO calls overall aggressive behavior by Russia.

Russia, in turn, has repeatedly criticized NATOs buildup in Eastern Europe, as a threat to its national security.

Moscow responded by staging large scale-drills near the border but stressed that, unlike NATOs activity, those exercises were being conducted inside Russian territory.

Military equipment for the 497th Combat Sustainment Support Battalion (CSSB) arrived at the Polish Black Sea port of Gdansk on Tuesday.

The Green Ridge cargo vessel delivered 644 pieces of military equipment, including 311 vehicles and 155 containers, which will be used for the 9-month rotation for the CSSB, the US military said in a statement.

The battalion will conduct combat sustainment support to rotating US units in Poland and Lithuania as part of the Atlantic Resolve operation, including ammunition handling, military police, postal and other logistical services.

READ MORe: NATO troops head for Poland to deter Russian offensive actions (VIDEO)

The US forces are being deployed to Eastern Europe in line with the decision to place four multinational battalions in the Baltics as agreed by NATO last year.

Operation Atlantic Resolve will see around 4,000 NATO troops with tanks, armored vehicles, air support and high-tech intelligence centers stationed in Poland, Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia.

READ MORE: Over 100 NATO military vehicles arrive in Estonia as part of biggest deployment since Cold War

The four battle groups will be headed by the US, Britain, Canada and Germany, with other NATO members, including France, also contributing.

Read the original post:
US troops, hardware depart for NATO sites in Eastern Europe build-up (VIDEO) - RT

Posted in NATO | Comments Off

Stars Describe How They Lost It At The Movies As NATO Hands Out Big Screen Achievement Awards CinemaCon – Deadline

Posted: at 6:47 am

With Cinemacon coming to a close tonight with their annual Big Screen Achievement Awards, many attendees were finding it difficult to get out of town as a major sand storm grounded planes and caused Las Vegas city officials to send out Do Not Travel advisories on cell phones. For those driving, visibility in some areas was almost non-existent. At tonights awards, the closing act of Cinemacon 2017, there was one star casuality asGet Outdirector Jordan Peele literally could not GET OUT of Los Angeles to get to Vegas due to grounded planes because of the weather. Organizers quickly arranged a live satellite appearance so he could accept his Director Of The Year honor.

The other 13 honorees did manage to get to Vegas, or at least stay in Vegas from earlier appearances either today or this week. The prevailing tone of the show and the acceptance speeches was a love of cinema and movie theaters as recipient after recipient recounted their first experiences at the movies.

Although these awards are negotiated with CinemaCon and its chief honcho Mitch Neuhauser and the studios, usually for stars in movies expected in the next few weeks, it was a warm and entertaining affair led off by the irrepressible Goldie Hawn, star of 20th Century Foxs Mothers Day

REX/Shutterstock

After recounting her adventures in Vegas as a dancer some 50 years ago, Hawn flashed forward to tell what this all means at this point. I think when you look at what makes an icon, you look back on this journey. And this journey was one of uncertainty, of tenacity, of fearlessness, and a journey that taught me you cant always go it alone. There are people if your are open and trusting that can help you get exactly where you need to go. And that is exactly what we do. And thats why the people that put us in front of the cameras, the directors, the writers, and also those who see movies like you that have movie houses that allow us to be other people, to be able to play in a field and everyone who is lucky enough to be blessed enough to express ourselves in our greatest way. So I say that if you are fearless, you are trusting, that you have tenacity, and if you like people and if you work in unison with others you too can be an icon.

REX/Shutterstock

And with that another CinemaCon is over and these theater owners are ready for Summer.

HERE ARE THE WINNERS:

Cinema Icon Award: Goldie Hawn

Breakthrough Performer Of The Year: Brenton Thwaites

Producer of the Year: Chris Meledandri

Rising Star Of The Year: Isabela Moner

Director Of the Year: Jordan Peele

Distinguished Decade of Achievement Of Film: Naomi Watts

International Achievement In Comedy: Eugenio Derbrez

Action Star of the Year: Jon Cena

Male Star Of Tomorrow: Ansel Elgort

Female Star Of Tomorrow:Sofia Boutella

Comedy Star of the Year: Kumail Nanjiani

CinemaCon Vanguard Award: Salma Hayek

Male Star Of the Year: Charlie Hunnam

Female Star Of The Year: Jessica Chastain

Posted in NATO | Comments Off

Former NSA director says Russia was involved in 2016 election – CBS News

Posted: at 6:47 am

Former National Security Director Gen. Keith Alexander told members of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in a Thursday afternoon hearing on Russian meddling in the 2016 election cycle that he believes the country indeed interfered.

Thats one area where experts in the hearing on Russian interference and seemingly, members on both sides of the aisle were in agreement. Virginia Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, the intelligence committees vice chairman, asked the witnesses if they had any doubt that Russians interfered in the 2016 election cycle.

I believe they were involved, Gen. Alexander said.

Fellow witnesses Kevin Mandia, chief executive officer of cybersecurity company FireEye, and Thomas Rid, professor at the Department of War Studies at Kings College in London, answered along similar lines. Mandia said it absolutely stretches credulity to think they were not involved. Rid said Russia seized an opportunity in 2016 when the U.S. was extremely polarized, politically speaking.

The more polarized a society, the more vulnerable it is, Rid said.

Democrats for monthshave called for a Capitol Hill probe into any Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, but the Republican-controlled intelligence committees are just now beginning to hold public hearings.

Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio revealed in the hearing that would-be hackers with IP addresses in Russia attempted to sabotage his former presidential campaign staff as recently as Wednesday, giving weight to cybersecurity experts remarks in a hearing earlier Thursdayon the same topic that Russia isnt done intervening in U.S. politics.

Play Video

The Senate Intelligence Committee will hear from experts on Russian interference in the 2016 election. CBS News' Jeff Pegues reports from Washing...

The afternoon hearing came on the heels of a New York Times report that a pair of White House officials helped provide Rep. Devin Nunes, a California Republican and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, with intelligence reports showing President Donald Trump and his associates were included in foreign surveillance sweeps by American spy agencies. Some critics fear Nunes is too close to Mr. Trump to handle investigations into any Russian interference into the presidential election.

During an earlier hearing on the same subject Thursday, cybersecurityexperts told the Senate panelthat Russia had every ability to create fake social media accounts by mimicking profiles of voters in key election states and precincts in the 2016 election, and use a mix of bots and real people to push propaganda from state-controlled media outlets like Russia Today (RT) and Sputnik.

Mandia said its tough to differentiate between bots and humans as bots become smarter, and the U.S. cant fight Russia with cyber tactics alone.

It just feels like were in a glass house throwing rocks at a mud hut, he said.

FBI Director James Comey revealed last week the FBI is investigating any possible ties between President Donald Trump and Russia.

Heres our live-blog from earlier, below.

4:03 p.m. The hearing is adjourned.

4:01 p.m. Guccifer 2.0 is definitely not just one human being, Rid said, because of the differences in writing, but he said he is confident Guccifer 2.0 is an agent of the Russian government.

3:57 p.m. Rid said Congress may be more susceptible to hacking than others, as ethics rules sometimes require members to have multiple devices, and thus, they have more to secure.

3:41 p.m.Mandia said merely fighting Russia with cyber-on-cyber warfare wont work.

It just feels like were in a glass house throwing rocks at a mud hud, he said.

3:34 p.m. West Virginia Democrat Sen. Joe Manchin asked about the extent of Russias ability to meddle the 2016 election.

Could they have drastically changed the outcome of the election? Manchin said.

I have no idea, Mandia responded.

3:29 p.m.: Oklahoma Republican Sen. James Lankford asked witnesses if mysterious hacker Guccifer 2.0 is definitely linked to Russia.

I think its remarkably consistent, Mandia said.

3:10 p.m. New Mexico Democratic Sen. Martin Heinrich said members of his family and staff have also been victims of phishing attempts to sabotage their personal information.

3:07 p.m.Sen. John Cornyn, the Senate majority whip from Texas, asked Gen. Alexander how important the somewhat-controversial Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) is, given that its coming up for reauthorization in Congress. The law is controversial because it allows for physical and electronic surveillance measures.

I think thats the most important program thats out there, especially in counterterrorism, Gen. Alexander said.

2:40 p.m.Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio said he will not address claims that he was the target of a Russian cyberattack, but said members of his former campaign staff were targeted both during the campaign, and as recently as Wednesday. Wednesdays attempt, which came from an IP in Russia, failed, he said.

2:31 p.m.Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, the committees vice chairman, asked if any of the witnesses had any doubt that Russians interfered in the 2016 election cycle.

You cant always connect the dots, Mandia said, but added, It absolutely stretches credulity to think they were not involved.

I believe they were involved, Gen. Alexander said.

I believe they were involved as well, Rid added.

Warner next asked if it was possible for the Russians to target voters at the precinct level with a network of bots.

Possible to target precinct levels with a botnet network for specific precincts?

Alexander: I think its technically possible, Gen. Alexander said, adding he couldnt confirm how much that happened.

2:24 p.m. Russia seized an opportunity in 2016 when the U.S. was very polarized politically, said Thomas Rid, a professor at the Department of War Studies at Kings College in London.

The more polarized a society, the more vulnerable it is, Thomas Rid said.

Russian intelligence operations by 2015 began combining the tools of hacking and leaking, targeting defense and diplomatic entities, Rid said.

Russia likes to use unwitting agents, Rid said, adding that Wikileaks, Twitter and over-eager journalists contributed to Russias efforts in 2016.

2:18 p.m.Retired Gen. Keith Alexander, former director of the National Security Agency, said the U.S. needs to determine Russias motives for interfering in elections or politics.

Whats Russia trying to do, and why are they trying to do it? he said.

Gen. Alexander said the U.S. cant shy away from or ignore Russia.

I believe we have to engage and confront, he said.

2:14p.m. Witness and cybersecurity expert Kevin Mandia said Russians began changing their rules of engagement for cyber warfare in August or September 2014. Also in 2014, a group they attributed to the Russian government began compromising organizations and leaking data, something experts hadnt seen before, he said.

It is our view that the United States is going to continue to see these things happen, Mandia said.

Mandia said the U.S. needs to know who is behind the hacking, which requires international cooperation. Only then can the U.S. determine a proportional response, he said.

2:06 p.m.Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Burr opens the hearing.

Read the original here:
Former NSA director says Russia was involved in 2016 election - CBS News

Posted in NSA | Comments Off

NSA technical director: Sharing hacker information isn’t enough, we need a shared response – CyberScoop

Posted: at 6:47 am

The nature of cyberthreats aimed at both the U.S. government and private American companies calls for a dramatic shift in how the larger cybersecurity community shares information about hackers and collectively responds to attacks, said Neal Ziring, technical director for the NSAs Capabilities Directorate.

While raising the awareness of what different hackers and foreign intelligence agencies are doing in cyberspace remains essential, Ziring said, its simply not enough based on the level of danger and activities occurring today.

The next and necessary step is the development of a shared, public-private framework in the U.S. that can roll out software patches and other system updates at machine speed to individual researchers, industry and the government as soon as new intelligence become available, according to Ziring and Thomas Donahue, director of research at the Cyber Threat Intelligence Integration Center. They bothspoke Thursday at a cybersecurity conference in D.C.

The big thing for me is that information sharing by itself is not enough. We need to start establishing the infrastructures, the standards, the practices for shared response, Ziring said. Todays actors can be really successful because they develop this tradecraft and they get to use it over and over and over again and they advertise the investment in this tradecraft as monetizing it against lots of targets. Thats what we need to take away from them. And the only way to do that is to have a response that can be shared amongst all of us.

Zirings plan is to essentially democratize cyberthreat intelligence and make it actionable for a myriad of different U.S. partners. The market today leans on a model inwhichprivate companies acquire and sell proprietary research only to clients, keeping much of what they find accessible only to customers.

While the Homeland Security Department has helped pioneer the development of several different cyberthreat information sharing programs, a response framework like the one described by Ziring does not exist today.

With

as the new normal setting for decision making, we must improve our awareness of the infrastructure and activities of our adversaries because it is poor, our ability to respond to specific incidents is way too slow and our strategic response to that kind of behavior is at best nascent and weak, said Donahue.

At the moment, a private, nonprofit organization named the Cyber Threat Alliance, or CTA , offers perhaps the closest model to what Ziring is proposing.

The CTAs move to an incorporated entity signifies the commitment by industry leaders to work together to determine the most effective methods for sharing automated, rich threat data and to make united progress in the fight against sophisticated cyber attacks, the organizations website reads.

Founded in 2014, the CTA is exclusively comprises prominent, private sector cybersecurity firms, including Fortinet, Intel Security, Palo Alto Networks, Symantec, Check Point and Cisco, whocollectively pool threat intelligence and code-based countermeasures. Companies provide this information at-will and in good faith.

Zirings comments come nearly one month after former NSA Director Keith Alexander told senators that the U.S. government would be wise to reorganize current cybersecurity responsibilities, which are split between the FBI, Homeland Security Department, Defense Department and intelligenceagencies, into a single entity. Alexander said that this new organization would lead the efforts to develop constructive relationships with private digital security companies.

More:
NSA technical director: Sharing hacker information isn't enough, we need a shared response - CyberScoop

Posted in NSA | Comments Off

Uber Executive Invokes Fifth Amendment, Seeking to Avoid Potential Charges – New York Times

Posted: at 6:47 am

New York Times

Uber Executive Invokes Fifth Amendment, Seeking to Avoid Potential Charges
New York Times
The lawyers for Anthony Levandowski, the former head of Google's self-driving car project who is now leading a similar effort at Uber, said he was broadly asserting his Fifth Amendment rights because there was potential for criminal action in the ...
Uber's Anthony Levandowski invokes Fifth Amendment rights in Waymo suitTechCrunch
Otto co-founder Anthony Levandowski asserts fifth amendment rights in Uber Vs Waymo lawsuitThe Tech Portal
Uber Exec Accused Of Stealing IP From Google Will Plead The FifthForbes
Reuters -Business Insider
all 46 news articles »

Go here to read the rest:
Uber Executive Invokes Fifth Amendment, Seeking to Avoid Potential Charges - New York Times

Posted in Fifth Amendment | Comments Off

Monthly Archives: March 2017

Christian atheism – Wikipedia

Are You Afraid to Die? Researchers Reveal Surprising Ties … – CBN News

Sen. Rand Paul: Montenegro Joining NATO Is Against US Interests – TIME

For Tillerson, Showing Up at NATO Isn’t Enough | Foreign Policy – Foreign Policy (blog)

General Dynamics gets potential $140M NATO IT contract – Washington Technology

US troops, hardware depart for NATO sites in Eastern Europe build-up (VIDEO) – RT

Stars Describe How They Lost It At The Movies As NATO Hands Out Big Screen Achievement Awards CinemaCon – Deadline

Former NSA director says Russia was involved in 2016 election – CBS News

NSA technical director: Sharing hacker information isn’t enough, we need a shared response – CyberScoop

Uber Executive Invokes Fifth Amendment, Seeking to Avoid Potential Charges – New York Times

The Prometheus League

Breaking News and Updates

Prometheism

Forbidden Fruit

The Evolutionary Perspective

Transtopia Menu

Library Updates

Library Books

Future Euvolution

Lucid Dreams from Childhood

Genetic Revolution

Speciation + Self-Directed Evolution