Tag Archives: director

Cell Phone Carriers Are Fighting a Plan to Make It Easier to Locate 911 Callers

Mother Jones

The nation’s biggest cell phone carriers, including Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint, are opposing a government proposal that aims to save lives by making it easier for emergency responders to locate 911 callers. The companies say they lack the technology to implement the plan—which would require them to quickly find a way to deliver more accurate location information—and they’re working on a better, long-term solution. Emergency responders and activists say that the cell carriers are trying to stymie the proposal because they don’t want to pony up the money for the improvements.

Under current Federal Communications Commission (FCC) rules, carriers must provide a 911 caller’s latitude and longitude within 164 to 984 feet. But these rules, last revised in 2010, were never designed to apply to cellular calls placed inside buildings, where cell phone technologies, like GPS, are less likely to work. Now that many Americans don’t own landlines, emergency responders are finding that it’s increasingly difficult to track down 911 callers inside apartment and office buildings. “This spells a real potential disaster for the delivery of emergency services,” says Paul Linnee, who has over 40 years of experience designing and managing 911 systems, and now works as a consultant.

The FCC proposal, released in February, would mandate that, for 67 percent of 911 calls in the first few years, cell phone carriers provide the horizontal location of an indoor caller within 164 feet and the vertical location (i.e., the floor in an apartment building) within about 10 feet. The proposal would also require providers to demonstrate compliance and establish a channel for 911 administrators to raise complaints.

Last year, Steve Souder, the director of the department of public safety communications in Fairfax County, Virginia, demonstrated to a former FCC head that when he called 911 from his dispatch center, the location that came back was the meat department in a nearby Costco. In California, an organization that advocates on behalf of dispatchers looked at millions of wireless calls placed across the state, and found that more than half failed to transmit precise location data. In San Francisco, the failure rate was over 80 percent.

Cell phone carriers contend that recent studies give a misleading picture of their accuracy rates, because they don’t take into account cases in which 911 call centers don’t retrieve the data provided by the carriers, for any number of reasons. And in numerous comments submitted to the FCC—which the commission is currently reviewing—the companies argue that the plan is simply not feasible.

On July 14, Sprint wrote to the FCC that its proposal is “not achievable using current technology” and that there is little evidence “that the technology will be available in the near future.” AT&T called the FCC’s proposed timeline for improving location-finding technology “unrealistic” and wrote that forcing providers to “incrementally” improve their systems will “waste scarce resources (i.e., time, talent, and money),”

Don Brittingham, the vice president of national security and public safety policy at Verizon, tells Mother Jones that Verizon and other carriers are already implementing new technologies that will significantly improve accuracy. He says that even if the FCC’s requirements could be met at some point in time, the proposal would risk directing valuable resources away from the long-term goal—delivering a specific, accurate address to emergency dispatchers. “Instead of putting a lot of money and time and effort into a set of solutions that may not actually help, we would like to see more focus on things that provide some long-term benefits,” he says.

Jamie Barnett, former head of the FCC’s public safety and homeland security bureau, is directing a large coalition of emergency responders and activists—initially funded by True Position, a company that makes GPS technology—to rally support for the FCC proposal. He says that multiple technologies are currently available that fit the FCC’s criteria, but cell companies just don’t want to pay for them. “Carriers are currently negotiating to delay and weaken the implementation of this lifesaving rule. While it would save the carriers money, it could cost tens of thousands of additional lives,” he says.

Linnee recalls that in the late 1990s, cell phone carriers fought the FCC on providing any 911 location information at all. “The wireless carriers were kicking and screaming and squawking that this can’t be done,” He adds, “This is standard industry behavior. They fight you every inch of the way.”

Originally posted here – 

Cell Phone Carriers Are Fighting a Plan to Make It Easier to Locate 911 Callers

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Cell Phone Carriers Are Fighting a Plan to Make It Easier to Locate 911 Callers

Michael Bay: Hollywood’s Conservative Hero?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Director Michael Bay is one of the most successful—if critically detested—filmmakers of the past 30 years. He is worth $400 million. He lives the life of a consummate playboy. His explosion-heavy action films (The Rock, Armageddon, the Bad Boys movies, the Transformers flicks, etc.) have grossed over $4.5 billion worldwide. His new movie, Transformers: Age of Extinction (released on Friday), is also expected to make all the money.

But what about his politics?

When I talked to the 49-year-old director last year, he demurred on the question of whether he leans right or left: “Yes, I am a political person, and I have my views about America,” Bay told me. “I’m very proud of my country; obviously it’s going through a lot of turmoil, and we have a very ineffectual government… It doesn’t matter at all whether I’m liberal or conservative—it’s not a part of what I do. I don’t feel the need to go out and tell people what to believe politically.”

Bay is obviously more private about his politics than, say, mega-producer Jerry Bruckheimer, who worked with Bay on some of his biggest hits and is one of liberal Hollywood’s top conservatives. You won’t find much at all about Bay’s politics online or in his past statements, and a search of a public campaign finance records database turned up nothing.

However, Bay did tell me that, though he doesn’t receive a writing credit, he works closely with his screenwriters and will tweak the scripts as he sees fit. And there just so happen to be many hints of political conservatism in his movies. Out of the 11 movies Bay has directed, the one truly left-wing outlier is The Rock (1996), starring Nicolas Cage and Sean Connery. The action film depicts the blowback from illegal American covert operations overseas, and is critical of gun-toting “patriotism”; it was also co-written by West Wing creator (and diehard liberal) Aaron Sorkin, so there’s that.

But much of Bay’s filmography is loaded with political content and attitudes that your average (stereotypical?) American conservative can totally get behind. In Armageddon (1998), a NASA-recruited team of blue-collar oil-drillers agree to embark on a dangerous mission to blow up an asteroid and save mankind—on the condition that they never have to pay taxes again.

In Bad Boys II (2003), the film’s rowdy-cop heroes illegally invade (and destroy large chunks of) communist Cuba, in the name of fighting the international drug war. The subsequent car chase concludes in front of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, where a conveniently placed mine tears apart the body of the psychotic Cuban drug lord:

And Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen (2009), starring Shia LaBeouf and Megan Fox, easily doubles as a critique of the Obama administration’s foreign policy. Seriously. In this fictional Transformers universe, Barack Obama is identified as the president of the United States. (George W. Bush appears briefly in the first Transformers, where he orders some Ding Dongs on Air Force One.) President Obama orders the American armed forces to try to engage in diplomacy with the Decepticons (the bad-guy alien robots) and to suspend cooperation with the Autobots (the good-guy alien robots). The Obama administration also agrees to hand Sam Witwicky (LaBeouf) over to the Decepticons—the kind of act of shameful appeasement that the president’s real-life conservative critics so often accuse him of perpetrating.

Fortunately, brave members of the US military disobey these orders (a mutiny, essentially), and the day is saved! (Bay loves the US military, and also patriotism, very much so.)

Optimus Prime truly cares about the future of the human race, unlike the Obama administration, which Bay represents as so prissy and antiwar it just wants the alien robots off the planet,” Mary Pols wrote for Time in 2009. “Bay’s Obama would probably drive his Prius over Optimus if he had the chance.” According to Bay, the reason Obama is in the film is because he once bumped into him—back when he was 2008 presidential candidate Obama—in a Las Vegas airport. Upon meeting, Bay said a couple of nice things to the future president, and Obama in turn complimented Bay by calling him a “big-ass director.”

This exchange was apparently enough to make the director want to turn the Democratic politician into a movie character. Here’s video of Bay recalling their encounter:

And in the new Transformers installment, Mark Wahlberg‘s tough-talking character, whose family property is cluttered with bold American flags, warns despotic, anti-Autobot government agents about “messing with people from Texas.” To be fair, the film can also be interpreted as a shallow pro-immigration-reform robot movie.

Regardless of how Michael Bay views Obama, or Bush, or the Democratic Party, or the Republican Party, or the tea party, his patriotic views may have been best captured in a line delivered by Wahlberg in Bay’s 2013 crime film Pain & Gain: “When it started, America was just a handful of scrawny colonies. Now, it’s the most buff, pumped-up country on the planet. That’s pretty rad.”

As for making public political statements, again, don’t hold your breath. If Bay is going to make a stand, he is way more likely to do so out of his love for animals than any political conviction. In late 2010, Bay offered a $50,000 reward for information leading to the arrest and successful prosecution of a woman who threw puppies into a river. Bay is a dog lover who lives with two gigantic English mastiffs named Grace (after actress Liv Tyler’s Armageddon character) and Bonecrusher (after a Decepticon).

Looking out for puppies. That enjoys bipartisan support, right?

Excerpt from: 

Michael Bay: Hollywood’s Conservative Hero?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Optimus, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Michael Bay: Hollywood’s Conservative Hero?

Watch Live: Can China Survive a Fracking Revolution? The United States Sure Hopes So.

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

China is on the brink of an energy revolution: fracking. And it’s enlisting American energy companies to help implement the technology that blasts shale rock formations deep underground to unlock natural gas. For this event at the Asia Society in New York City, my colleague Jaeah Lee and I are debuting field reporting from a month’s worth of exhilarating, exhausting travels deep into Sichuan province, to see China’s first fracking wells for ourselves.

Watch the livestream of the event above to catch Jaeah and me discussing the big business of fracking in China—and its potential health and environmental costs. The other panelists are Orville Schell, the great chronicler of modern Chinese politics and society; Josh Fox, the director of the anti-fracking documentary Gasland; and Ella Chou, an energy analyst who is trying to work out how China can break its deadly addiction to coal.

View article: 

Watch Live: Can China Survive a Fracking Revolution? The United States Sure Hopes So.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Watch Live: Can China Survive a Fracking Revolution? The United States Sure Hopes So.

Snowden’s Odd Email to the NSA Deepens the Mystery

Mother Jones

So you’re in the middle of the biggest secrets-blowing caper in the history of the known universe. You’re one of a small number of people who have access to the most classified information about the most classified spying programs of the most powerful superpower—and you’re swiping tens of thousands of pages of these secrets and preparing to hand them over to journalists. You’ve already made contact with your recipients—and it was harder than you thought to do so. You’ve switched jobs, moving from one contractor to another, in order to snatch more of the documents you want revealed to the unknowing public. You’re scraping NSA servers. You’re watching your back. Oh damn, you are certainly watching your back. You know the people you work for can monitor who gets in and out of the system, and though you are one of the few with the keys to the crypt, you have to be worried—scratch that, paranoid, and rightfully so—that someone’s going to wise up. You make a slip—they might be watching right now—and the alarms go off. And it’s no more Hawaiian paradise. It’s federal prison. But you’re committed. You have your plan. You’re about to send a security kit to an American reporter who lives in Brazil and works for a British outlet so you can communicate via a safe and encrypted mechanism. You’re keeping all of this secret from your live-in girlfriend. You’re thinking about your getaway. Iceland, maybe Iceland. You know that you are engaged in risky business. You could end up changing the world. You could end up dead. Yes, dead. On the run, some times things happens. It’s possible. Oh, what was that sound? Did something weird just happen with your laptop? Did a strange car drive past the house not once but twice? Man, this is intense.

And in the middle of this adrenalin-laced stretch—on April 5, 2013, a mere weeks before you start slipping that journalist top-secret docs exposing the USG’s biggest secrets and then head to Hong Kong to meet him and his compatriots—you send an email to the NSA’s general counsel’s office, posing a rather prosaic query. One question: Why?

Today the NSA released an email Edward Snowden sent its general counsel on that date. The spy agency was responding to NBC News reporting that it had confirmed that the NSA had received an email from Snowden before he leaked all those documents expressing “policy and legal” concerns. This report seemed to bolster Snowden’s claim that he had alerted intelligence officials of his profound concerns about the NSA’s extensive surveillance programs before taking matters into his own hand and becoming a whistleblower. But when the NSA put out the email—claiming it was the only communication of this sort it had received from Snowden—there was a surprise: Snowden had not contacted the NSA’s top lawyers about possible abuses within the NSA. He had asked questions regarding information in a training course. The course had covered the “Hierarchy of Governing Authorities” for federal action. At the top of the chain was the US Constitution. Right below were federal statutes and presidential executive orders. Snowden wanted to know which of the two ranked higher. “My understanding is that EOs may be superseded by federal statutes, but EOs may not override statute,” he wrote. ” Am I incorrect in this?” And he had a similar question about Pentagon regulations and Office of Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) rules.

That was it. A simple query about training material.

Someone in the general counsel’s office—the person’s name is redacted—replied quickly and informed Snowden that EOs cannot override a statute and that Defense Department and ODNI regs “are afforded similar precedence.” This NSA official helpfully added, “Please give me a call if you would like to discuss further.” Apparently, if the NSA is to be believed, Snowden was satisfied and did not follow up.

Why would a fellow currently mounting a significant penetration of an intelligence agency choose on his own to contact the lawyers for that agency and ask these questions? Why did he care about this? Why would he want to be on their radar screen at all at this time? Was he trying to establish some sort of paper trail? Was he worried that he had left a clue somewhere about his ongoing operation and thought such a note would divert attention?

This is a puzzler. Snowden comes across as a smart and thorough fellow who sure knows how to plan well. But how does this email fit into the plan? Marcy Wheeler suggests that Snowden was trying to get the NSA lawyers to admit that the agency saw EOs as top dogs (to prove, in a way, that the NSA was using one particular EO to trump laws that might limit its surveillance activities). Until Snowden explains this email himself, it’s hard to know if this is correct. If so, Snowden would be even a cooler cucumber. It’s hard to imagine a fellow who’s about to sabotage an entire intelligence community deciding that this is a good time to play mind games with the lawyers at the NSA and possibly draw notice. In all his interviews, Snowden hasn’t mentioned that he sought to squeeze this kind of secret out of the NSA as he was filling up disk drives with its most sensitive documents.

So here is a new question about Snowden. And the question remains: whether (and how) Snowden tried to go through channels before going to Greenwald and the Washington Post.

The ACLU, which represents Snowden, says of this email controversy, “This whole issue is a red herring. The problem was not some unknown and isolated instance of misconduct. The problem was that an entire system of mass surveillance had been deployed—and deemed legal—without the knowledge or consent of the public. Snowden raised many complaints over many channels. The NSA is releasing a single part of a single exchange after previously claiming that no evidence existed.” (Mother Jones asked the ACLU if it could share more of this email exchange, and it said it didn’t “have any other info.”)

Yes, the big picture is still there: How far over the line did the NSA go with its surveillance programs, and what ought to be done about that? But Snowden’s tale is also captivating, and the release of this email today adds to the mystery.

UPDATE: Several hours after the NSA released the Snowden email, Snowden told the Washington Post, “Today’s release is incomplete, and does not include my correspondence with the Signals Intelligence Directorate’s Office of Compliance, which believed that a classified executive order could take precedence over an act of Congress, contradicting what was just published. It also did not include concerns about how indefensible collection activities—such as breaking into the back-haul communications of major US internet companies—are sometimes concealed under EO 12333 to avoid Congressional reporting requirements and regulations.”

Snowden insisted that he had tried to work within the system: “If the White House is interested in the whole truth, rather than the NSA’s clearly tailored and incomplete leak today for a political advantage, it will require the NSA to ask my former colleagues, management, and the senior leadership team about whether I, at any time, raised concerns about the NSA’s improper and at times unconstitutional surveillance activities. It will not take long to receive an answer.”

Snowden said there were other relevant emails (presumably sent to the NSA) “not just on this topic. I’m glad they’ve shown they have access to records they claimed just a few months ago did not exist, and I hope we’ll see the rest of them very soon.” He maintained, “I showed numerous colleagues direct evidence of programs that those colleagues considered unconstitutional or otherwise concerning. Today’s strangely tailored and incomplete leak only shows the NSA feels it has something to hide.”

If Snowden did have more extensive correspondence with the NSA, he and/or the agency should be able to resolve the question of what he sought to do before revealing the NSA’s most important secrets..

See original:

Snowden’s Odd Email to the NSA Deepens the Mystery

Posted in Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Paradise, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Snowden’s Odd Email to the NSA Deepens the Mystery

Why Is This Transgender Teen in Solitary?

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

There is a 16-year-old transgender girl in an adult prison in Connecticut right now. She isn’t there to serve a sentence. There are no charges against her. Still, she has been there for more than six weeks, with no indication of when she might be released.

Until last week, the girl, whom I’ll call Jane Doe because she is a juvenile, was in solitary confinement in the mental health unit where, according to a letter she wrote, she cried in bed every night. She heard adult inmates crying, screaming, and banging on the walls. A guard observed her day and night, even when she showered or used the toilet. When other inmates caught sight of her, they yelled and made fun of her.

“I feel forgotten and thrown away,” she wrote to the governor of Connecticut from her solitary cell. “As you probably know, these feeling are not new for me. This is the way my life has been going since I was a little kid.”

The state became involved in Jane Doe’s life when she was five, according to her affidavit, because her father was incarcerated and her mom was using crack and heroin. She was born a boy; after she was placed in the care of her extended family, she said, one relative caught her playing with dolls and bashed her head into the wall. She said another relative raped her at age eight, as did others as she grew older. Doe would only allow herself to look like a girl in secret. Around age 11, a relative caught her in the bathroom wearing her dress and lipstick and slapped her, shouting, “You are a boy! What the fuck is wrong with you?”

At 12, the Connecticut Department of Children and Families (DCF) became her legal guardian. While in group homes, she says she was sexually assaulted by staffers, and at 15, she became a sex worker and was once locked up for weeks and forced to have sex with “customers” until she escaped. “I wanted to be a little kid again in my mother’s arms and all I wanted was someone to tell me they loved me, that everything would be alright, and that I will never have to live the way I was again.”

Here is how Jane Doe ended up in prison. On January 28, while living at a juvenile facility in Massachusetts—where she was serving a sentence for assault—she allegedly attacked a staff member, biting her, pulling her hair and kicking her in the head. This kind of behavior wasn’t new for Doe. The director of the Connecticut Juvenile Training School, a correctional facility for boys, later testified in court that, since Doe was nine, police have been called 11 times while she was in state facilities. He said she sometimes smeared feces on herself. Another supervisor claimed Doe regularly “exhibited assaultive behaviors,” targeting female staff and other juveniles.

According to Jane Doe’s lawyer, Aaron Romano, the most recent incident was sparked when a male staffer at the Massachusetts facility put Doe in a bear hug restraint from behind. “This is a girl who has been sexually abused,” Romano says. “She is inclined to interpret actions with that view.” DCF declined to comment on the incident, but the female staff member Doe allegedly attacked did not press charges. The male staffer has since been dismissed.

In order to move Doe to an adult prison, DCF cited an obscure statute that allows doing so when it is in the “best interest” of the child. Initially, the state sought to place Doe in a men’s prison, but her lawyers objected and she was sent to a women’s facility. There, she was placed in solitary confinement because under federal law, juveniles cannot be detained “in any institution in which they have contact with adult inmates.”

Continue Reading »

Link to original: 

Why Is This Transgender Teen in Solitary?

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, Good Sense, LAI, LG, ONA, Oster, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why Is This Transgender Teen in Solitary?

How the Iraq War Influenced the "Godzilla" Reboot

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

You might have already heard that the images of destruction in the new Godzilla movie (starring Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Elizabeth Olsen, Ken Watanabe, and Bryan Cranston) were largely inspired by real-world disasters. “As we were writing the film, the horrible events in Fukushima where a tsunami caused a nuclear meltdown happened and we had to make the decision: Do we stay away from that or do we acknowledge that you’ve opened this Pandora’s box of nuclear power, and when it goes wrong, it really does go wrong?” director Gareth Edwards told the Daily News. (The original Godzilla film, Gojira, was cleverly critical of US nuclear testing, and the critically maligned 1998 Godzilla, directed by Roland Emmerich, blamed Godzilla’s wrath on nuclear tests in French Polynesia.)

The 9/11 attacks and Hurricane Katrina are also given visual nods in Edwards’ version of Godzilla. Furthermore, the director drew on the horrors and devastation of modern warfare. Edwards says that he and his crew revisited images from Iraq, Afghanistan, World War II, and other conflicts.

“You sit down on Day One with all of the different heads of department and you say, ‘OK, let’s take this seriously, let’s do this realistically,'” Edwards tells Mother Jones. “There’s never really going to be giant monsters that come out of the ocean and smash a city and cause a tsunami and things like this. But, there are events that smash cities and cause tsunamis within nature and war, and so you don’t have to think very hard to recall that imagery. It’s so scarred in our minds that as we are creating the movie, we are getting all of those reference images and it’s nearly impossible not to be influenced by them.”

One of the first things Edwards did when he started this project was he went out and bought photography and history books and then studied them closely with his team. “We literally sat down and had a hundred different books,” Edwards says. “A lot of war books, a lot of aftermath, whether it be terrorist or natural disasters; just because people are so familiar with that imagery that…now we have a reference for what it’s supposed to look like when a giant monster comes…Science fiction is not really about the future. It’s about the time today when it was made and it’s reflecting the things of the moment.”

Here are a couple shots from the film that have a wartime or natural-disaster vibe:

Images courtesy of Warner Bros.

The Department of Defense cooperated with the filmmakers, which gave Edwards and his crew access to aircraft carriers and US soldiers, some of whom appear in the movie as extras.

If you’d like to check out a full transcript of the roundtable discussion a few critics and I had with Edwards, click here. Now, here’s the trailer for the latest Godzilla:

Visit site – 

How the Iraq War Influenced the "Godzilla" Reboot

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Safer, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on How the Iraq War Influenced the "Godzilla" Reboot

There’s No Good Reason for Keeping OLC Opinions Confidential

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

President Obama’s nomination of David Barron to the First Circuit Court of Appeals has reopened a fight over whether the White House should release Barron’s memo (written when he worked at the Office of Legal Counsel) justifying drone strikes against Anwar al-Awlaki. Time reports:

Under pressure from liberals and libertarians that threatens to sink a judicial nomination, the Obama Administration is moving closer to releasing a classified legal justification for the use of drone strikes against Americans fighting for al-Qaeda, Administration officials tell TIME.

….The U.S. intelligence community and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence want the Administration not to release the memo. Also against release is the Office of Legal Counsel, which serves as the in-house legal expert on executive branch powers and which vigorously guards its opinions.

Greg Sargent comments:

The case for more transparency was spelled out recently by the New York Times, which argued: “the government has the right to secrets about its operations, but not secrets about its legal reasoning.”

If there is a convincing rebuttal to that argument, I haven’t heard it. Indeed, one person who may agree with it is President Obama, given that in his big national security speech last May, he said he’d tasked his administration to “extend oversight of lethal actions outside of war zones that go beyond our reporting to Congress.” What is the rationale for keeping the legal justification secret?

I’d go further. I’ve never really understood the rationale for any OLC opinions to stay confidential. In some sense, yes, there’s a case to be made for executive privilege: this is advice from one of the president’s aides to the president himself, and courts have ruled that presidents have a legitimate interest in keeping internal advice confidential in order to ensure that they get candid judgments. But that’s a helluva stretch in this case because OLC opinions go beyond mere advice. For all practical purposes, they have the force of law, since presidents use OLC opinions as the basis for determining what they can and can’t do.

Should the United States have secret laws? As it happens, the United States does have secret laws. That is, actual congressional statutes that you and I aren’t allowed to read. So this isn’t quite as unprecedented as it seems. Still, that’s a rare occurrence, while OLC opinions are routinely kept secret. Why? If specific bits and pieces need to be redacted, fine. But in a democracy, the legal reasoning justifying the enforcement of our laws should be a matter of public record. We should all know what the laws of the land are and how the executive branch is allowed to act on them. There’s really no compelling argument on the other side.

View original article:  

There’s No Good Reason for Keeping OLC Opinions Confidential

Posted in alo, FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on There’s No Good Reason for Keeping OLC Opinions Confidential

Department of Education: Title IX Prohibits Discrimination Against Transgender Students

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Tuesday, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) issued explicit guidance barring schools that receive federal Title IX funds from discriminating against transgender and gender-nonconforming students.

“Title IX’s sex discrimination prohibition extends to claims of discrimination based on gender identity or failure to conform to stereotypical notions of masculinity or femininity and OCR accepts such complaints for investigation. Similarly, the actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity of the parties does not change a school’s obligations,” the guidance reads.

Human rights advocates are praising the new policy: “We hear from hundreds of students each year who simply want to be themselves and learn at school,” Masen Davis, Executive Director of Transgender Law Center, said in a statement. “Sadly, many schools continue to exclude transgender students from being able to fully participate. Now, every school in the nation should know they are required to give all students, including transgender students, a fair chance at success.”

“This guidance is crystal clear and leaves no room for uncertainty on the part of schools regarding their legal obligation to protect transgender students from discrimination,” said Ian Thompson, ACLU legislative representative, in a statement. The ACLU notes that the guidance builds upon the 2012 ruling from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission protecting transgender employees from workplace discrimination.

The Title IX program is a Nixon-era law that bans schools that receive federal funding from engaging in sex discrimination. But the requirement hasn’t always extended to transgender students. The Transgender Law Center is currently representing a transgender man who filed a federal lawsuit alleging that the University of Pittsburgh violated his rights under Title IX, among other laws. While he was a student, the university allegedly banned him from using the men’s restrooms and later expelled him after he continued using the men’s facilities.

Original article: 

Department of Education: Title IX Prohibits Discrimination Against Transgender Students

Posted in Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Sterling, Uncategorized, Venta, Vintage | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Department of Education: Title IX Prohibits Discrimination Against Transgender Students

Heartbleed is a Sucking Chest Wound in the NSA’s Reputation

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Friday, Bloomberg’s Michael Riley reported that the NSA was aware of the Heartbleed bug from nearly the day it was introduced:

The U.S. National Security Agency knew for at least two years about a flaw in the way that many websites send sensitive information, now dubbed the Heartbleed bug, and regularly used it to gather critical intelligence, two people familiar with the matter said….Putting the Heartbleed bug in its arsenal, the NSA was able to obtain passwords and other basic data that are the building blocks of the sophisticated hacking operations at the core of its mission, but at a cost. Millions of ordinary users were left vulnerable to attack from other nations’ intelligence arms and criminal hackers.

Henry Farrell explains just how bad this is here. But later in the day, the NSA denied everything:

“NSA was not aware of the recently identified vulnerability in OpenSSL, the so-called Heartbleed vulnerability, until it was made public in a private-sector cybersecurity report,” NSA spokesperson Vanee Vines told The Post. “Reports that say otherwise are wrong.”

The White House and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence echoed that statement Friday, saying neither the NSA nor any other part of the U.S. government knew about Heartbleed before April 2014….The denials are unusually forceful for an agency that has historically deployed evasive language when referring to its intelligence programs.

You know, I’m honestly not sure which would be worse. That the NSA knew about this massive bug that threatened havoc for millions of Americans and did nothing about it for two years. Or that the NSA’s vaunted—and lavishly funded—cybersecurity team was completely in the dark about a gaping and highly-exploitable hole in the operational security of the internet for two years. It’s frankly hard to see any way the NSA comes out of this episode looking good.

Excerpt from:  

Heartbleed is a Sucking Chest Wound in the NSA’s Reputation

Posted in Cyber, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Heartbleed is a Sucking Chest Wound in the NSA’s Reputation

Proposed Bill Seeks to Boost Clean Energy Curriculum in Public Schools

Photo: Flickr/calmenda

A proposed Senate bill seeks to expand “green” energy curriculum to public middle and high schools across the country.

Proposed by Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), the bill would provide grant funding to colleges with green energy curriculum to expand their programs to middle and high schools, reports local Wisconsin paper Manitowoc Herald Times. The goal, the paper reported, is to get students interested in green jobs earlier in their educational careers.

Speaking in favor of the legislation, the paper asserted: “That is a good idea, regardless of where one stands on the controversial issue of expanding green energy in the future. It is not a given that wind, solar and other forms of alternative energy are the panacea advocates claim.

“Baldwin’s legislation, however,” the reporter goes on, “will help broaden educational opportunities for middle school and high school students, which is what those schools are supposed to do.”

Dubbed the Grants for Renewable Energy Education for the Nation (GREEN) Act, the bill asks for $100 million in federal funding for grants, which would be administered by the U.S. Department of Education. The bill is a companion to the House GREEN Act, sponsored by Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.).

Introduced to the Senate floor in late January, the bill has already been endorsed by the Association for Career and Technical Education (ACTE).

ACTE Deputy Executive Director Steve DeWitt said the bill, “offers students exposure to the range of sustainable energy career options available today, while providing the education and training necessary to ensure that our nation’s workforce is prepared for the green jobs of the future.”

The fate of the bill is still to be decided, but Baldwin rightfully notes that jobs created in the clean energy field pay better than the average American job, with compensation rates 13 percent higher than the national average, meaning its passage may mean good things for the next generation.

earth911

Read this article:  

Proposed Bill Seeks to Boost Clean Energy Curriculum in Public Schools

Posted in alo, alternative energy, FF, G & F, GE, green energy, LAI, ONA, solar, solar power, sustainable energy, Uncategorized, wind power | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Proposed Bill Seeks to Boost Clean Energy Curriculum in Public Schools