is...(breathing)
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
suns out and we're up to 40, really starting to come off the trees now......your better off without it lol
maybe it melts by then
its really not much compared to some others but hey, its oct for goodness sakes.......
its the weight of the snow and the trees full of leaves. they couldnt take the weight. im going to take some pictures here soon
lol....whoops!
Israeli Drone Strike Kills Militants in Southern GazaBy FARES AKRAM and ISABEL KERSHNER
Published: October 29, 2011
GAZA — Israeli airstrikes killed seven Palestinian members of Islamic Jihad’s armed wing in southern Gaza on Saturday, according to the militant group, and Gaza militants fired salvos of rockets at cities in southern Israel, killing one Israeli man and wounding at least two others in a sudden escalation of cross-border violence.
The Israeli military said that it had first hit a terrorist squad that was preparing to fire long-range rockets into Israel early Saturday, and that the same squad had been responsible for firing a rocket that struck late Wednesday near the Israeli port city of Ashdod.
Witnesses to the first raid said that an Israeli drone fired two missiles at a training site situated on sandy dunes in a former Jewish settlement near the city of Rafah, killing five. Islamic Jihad pledged that it would respond forcefully to the Israeli drone strike. Hours later, several rockets fired from Gaza slammed into the southern Israeli cities of Ashdod and Ashkelon, damaging buildings and setting fire to parked cars.
The Israeli death was in Ashkelon, about 10 miles north of Gaza on the coast, according to the Israeli police and hospital officials.
Israel’s military said it subsequently hit another squad preparing to fire rockets from Gaza and other sites. Two more Islamic Jihad militants were killed in those strikes, according to the group and Gaza medical officials.
Wednesday’s rocket fire interrupted weeks of relative quiet along the Israel-Gaza border and set off sirens as far north as Rishon LeZion, a Tel Aviv suburb. That rocket fell in an open area and caused no casualties or damage.
Hamas, the Islamic militant group that controls Gaza, has made efforts to enforce a cease-fire since the last round of cross-border airstrikes and rocket attacks in August, which claimed casualties on both sides. The August confrontation was precipitated by a deadly attack north of Eilat that killed eight Israelis. The attackers in that episode crossed the border into Israel from Egypt, but Israel said the attack was orchestrated by another militant group in Gaza, the Popular Resistance Committees, and immediately killed its senior commanders in an airstrike.
The latest flare-up came less than two weeks after the return of a captured Israeli soldier, Sgt. First Class Gilad Shalit, who had been held incommunicado in Gaza for more than five years by Hamas. Israel freed 477 Palestinian security prisoners in exchange for the soldier and is set to release 550 more prisoners in a deal that bolstered Hamas’s standing.
A spokesman for the armed wing of Islamic Jihad said Saturday that several of the dead were senior commanders of the organization. They included Ahmed al-Sheikh Khalil, a leader of one of the Islamic Jihad brigades. Mr. Khalil had four brothers who were activists in the movement; they were all killed in Israeli Army operations.
No Palestinian group claimed responsibility for Wednesday’s rocket attack on Israel, but there was speculation that Islamic Jihad carried it out to mark the 16th anniversary of the assassination in Malta of the group’s leader, Fathi Shikaki. The group may have also wanted to assert itself after the Shalit deal.
Hamas is largely committed to the fragile cease-fire that first came into effect after Israel’s three-week military offensive in Gaza that ended in January 2009. Smaller groups like Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees are not.
Fares Akram reported from Gaza, and Isabel Kershner from Jerusalem.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/30/world/middleeast/israeli-drone-strike-kills-militants-in-gaza.html?_r=2&hp
chain saw gets a workout today
i still have the mower attached to mine, i need it to cut the grass one more time. wound up with all but 10 inches and maybe 50 (!) trees down...... good luck when it comes your way
i think the p is giving us the finger!
Freed from Egypt jail, fan told Mets won Series
By Evan Brunell
Can being a Mets fan get any worse?
Imagine a Mets fan being released from an Egyptian jail after spending five months jailed, and being told the Mets won the World Series. Only to find out it's not true.
Ilan Grapel, from Queens, New York, was arrested on charges of spying on June 12. On that day, the Mets were 32-33, the club holding onto hope they could make it to October. That went nowhere, but Grapel wouldn't learn of his team's fate until being freed.
“There’s so many people to thank,” Grapel said at a news conference in Tel Aviv according to the New York Post, “and after being cut off for the past five months ...”
“We told him the Mets won the World Series," House representative Gary Ackerman, a Democrat from Queens, interrupted. Grapel smiled broadly, then figured out he had been pranked.
The 27-year-old had been in Egypt working in legal aid in the wake of the country's uprising against president Hosni Mubarak. The 27-year-old was freed from jail in a prisoner swap with Israel in exchange for 25 Egyptians. Ackerman helped in the process, and Grapel will fly back to New York on Saturday to be reunited with his father.
“My heart was broken for 4 1/2 months,” his mother said about Grapel's return. “There are not enough words in any language to say how thankful my husband and I are."
http://eye-on-baseball.blogs.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/22297882/32999248
its what that loser in the wh wants, eh walk, here too i imagine
6 inches on the ground and still coming down....along with the trees. more down than in the hurricane. i'll have my work cut out tommorow.... @ 17362
i'm smilin......
bout 6 inches
Welcome to the Islamist Middle East and It’s Not Going to Be Moderate
October 25, 2011 - 11:16 am - by Barry Rubin
Ladies and gentlemen, liberals and conservatives, Obama-lovers and Obama-haters, no matter what your race, creed, gender, national origin, or level of unpaid college loans, two things should be clear to all of you:
First, to describe the Obama administration’s Middle East policy as a disaster — I cannot think of a bigger, deadlier mess created by any U.S. foreign policy in the last century — is an understatement.
Second, the dominant analysis used by the media, academia, and the talking heads on television has proven dangerously wrong. This includes the ideas that revolutionary Islamism doesn’t exist, cannot be talked about, is not a threat, and that extreme radicals are really moderates.
I won’t review all the evidence here, but it amounts to a retreat for moderates, allies of the West, and American interests coupled with an advance for revolutionary Islamists.
On the morning of July 23, 1952, the Middle East entered a new era. The Free Officers Movement took over Egypt and there followed more than a half-century of war, anti-Western hysteria, terrorism, repression, social stagnation, and the basic Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse type stuff in the Middle East. That was the Era of Arab Nationalism.
On February 11, or October 23, or November 28, 2011, the Middle East entered a new era. Whether you date it to the fall of Mubarak, the Tunisian election, or the Egyptian election, what do you think is going to happen in the next half-century in the region? This is now — I call it officially — the Era of Revolutionary Islamism.
There is a great deal that will ensure the Islamists aren’t triumphant in the end, but there’s nothing that can stop them now from being dominant ideologically in the region and politically in the majority of countries between Tunisia and Iran, probably Afghanistan, and possibly Pakistan.
As early as the 1980s these trends were visible but the outcome was not inevitable.
There were four key elements in this victory for the Islamists.
First, the long, failed reign of Arab nationalist regimes went on in a downward spiral of increasingly less effective demagoguery, losing wars, and poor economic development performance as a demographic explosion took place.
Yet as late as 2000 the prospects for the Islamists looked poor. Almost a quarter-century after Iran’s revolution, they had not taken over in any other country except remote Afghanistan.
Then, second, the September 11 attacks revitalized the movement. Osama bin Laden lies moldering in the sea, but his movement goes marching on.
But while bin Laden lacked strategic flexibility, other Islamists were more effective.
And so, third, from Turkey came the idea of what might be called “stealth Islamism”: just pretend to be moderate and the suckers will buy it. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood guru, also contributed here: bin Laden is a fool, he said in effect, of course we should run in elections. We’ll win.
Reinforcing this, and fourth, came the idea of adapting Western rhetoric and public relations methods. After decades of bragging about how they would conquer and murder all their enemies, nothing changed in Arabic. In English, however, they spoke about being pitiable victims of imperialism, Zionism, Western racism, and so on. A key pioneer here was Edward Said, a man who hated the Islamists. They proved to be his best students.
And finally, there were disastrous Western policies and misconceptions, with the presidency of Barack Obama being the crowning catastrophe. For whatever reason, the Obama administration has empowered America’s enemies and the new oppressors of the local people. Appeasement is one thing; giving those who hate you most a boost into power goes far beyond that.
To summarize, I will merely say:
Egypt, Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Tunisia, and Turkey.
Six countries or entities listed above have come — or are likely to come — under Islamist rule. Each is different.
But in all but the case of Turkey (where the administration ignored State Department reporting and has continually honored and excused an Islamist regime) and the Gaza Strip (where the administration helped entrench Hamas’s rule by forcing Israel to slash sanctions) they happened almost completely on Obama’s watch. Turkey and the Gaza Strip have become far worse on Obama’s watch.
The seventh, Syria, might merely remain under a repressive, pro-Iran, anti-American regime. And while there is a chance for a moderate democratic revolution, the White House is supporting the Islamists. If the State Department hadn’t revolted and the Saudis acted decisively, Bahrain would probably have been added to the above list.
There is no way to conceal this situation in October 2011, although it has been largely hidden, lied about, and misunderstood until this moment.
Even now, the nonsense continues. The article you are reading at this moment probably could not have been published in a single mass media newspaper. Libya’s new regime calls for Sharia to be “the main” source of law. That is what the Muslim Brotherhood has been seeking in Egypt for decades. Yet we are being told that this isn’t really so bad after all.
The title of the Washington Post‘s editorial, “Tunisia again points the way for Arab democracy,” can be considered merely ironic. It certainly points the way… toward Islamist dictatorship. And then there are the New York Times and BBC headlines on the Tunisian elections telling us it is a victory for “moderate Islamists.”
They aren’t moderate. They’re just pretending to be. And you who fall for it aren’t Middle East experts, competent policymakers, or serious journalists. You’re just pretending to be.
I’m putting those headlines in my file alongside Moderate Islamists Take Power in Iran; Moderate Islamists Take Power in the Gaza Strip, Moderate Islamists Take Power in Lebanon; and Moderate Islamists Take Power in Turkey.
Without taking any position on climate issues, let me put it this way: Why are people frantic about the possibility that the earth’s temperature might rise slightly in 50 years but see no problem in hundreds of millions of people and vast amounts of wealth and resources becoming totally controlled by people who think like those who carried out the September 11 attacks?
And that brings us to the Tunisian elections. In the words of the song “New York, New York,” if the Islamists in Tunisia can be “top of the list, king of the hill” in Tunisia, they can say, “If I can make it there, I’ll make it anywhere.”
Next stop, Egypt.
http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2011/10/25/welcome-to-the-islamist-middle-east-and-its-not-going-to-be-moderate/?singlepage=true
Iceland Loses Its Banks, Finds Its Wealth
The most important question about Iceland these days (after “How come Iceland is green and Greenland is icy?”) is what we can learn from its economic recovery. In 2008, the tiny island nation in the North Atlantic became a byword for both boom-time excess and recessionary disaster. After inflating its financial service sector with a pile of foreign-currency debt and risky combinations of short-term debt instruments with long-term loans, Iceland, which is not a member of the European Union, endured one of the most unpleasant recessions in recent memory.
The country’s three largest banks, whose total assets were 11 times larger than Iceland’s GDP, proved too big to fail and then too big to rescue, bankrupting the central bank that took them over and leaving foreign creditors empty-handed. Inflation in the import-heavy economy reached 18 percent, while the stock market plunged by 90 percent. Between 2007 and 2009, according to the World Bank, GDP dropped by 40 percent. The Icelandic króna turned into a pariah currency, and even the country’s durable fishing and aluminum businesses were crippled by heavy leverage.
A collapse of this size needs a villain, and it will surprise nobody to learn that libertarians, who exert an iron grip on political and economic practice throughout the world, took the blame. In a 2008 story for Fortune, Peter Gumble blamed deregulation and putatively free market reforms for destroying the banking system. New York Times economic poetaster Paul Krugman said the small nation had been “hijacked by a combination of free-market ideology and crony capitalism.” Huffington Post columnist Iris Erlingsdottir blamed the late Milton Friedman (who had once praised 10th-century Iceland’s approach to government) for failing to “take into account the predictably irrational character of human nature,” and concluded, “It is time for the grownups to take over again.”
As always, we had to look to the legendary Icelandic songstress Björk for real wisdom. In a London Times essay blasting the country’s ruling conservatives, Björk lamented the way the boom/bust cycle had wiped out small entrepreneurs as big money pursued an oversupply of aluminum smelters—which was not an excrescence of the free market but a product of public industrial policy. Former Reykjavik mayor and Prime Minister Davíð Oddsson did indeed pepper his tenure as head of Iceland’s central bank with free market rhetoric. But that’s about as far as it went. In their new study of the crisis, Deep Freeze: Iceland’s Economic Collapse, economists Philipp Bagus and David Howden illustrate how thoroughly Iceland’s financial boom combined a Scandinavian nanny state—which consumes 41.1 percent of GDP and features unemployment insurance that provides three years of benefits—with the worst practices of boom-happy central bankers and government agencies everywhere.
For every government-driven bad improvement you can find in the west, you’ll find boom-era Iceland taking it to the next level. Where the U.S. Federal Reserve’s promise to backstop financial institutions was merely implicit, the Central Bank of Iceland in 2001 gave an explicit guarantee to big banks, making it inevitable that they would become bloated with risky and ultimately toxic assets. Our own government-sponsored—and as of 2008, government-owned—entities Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac made a hash of responsible lending by buying mortgages in the secondary market (and as we now know, lying about the poor quality of debt on their books). But Iceland’s government-run Housing Financing Fund managed to do even worse, lending directly to borrowers and competing with private lenders on both interest rates and loan quality. By mid-decade 90 percent of Icelandic households had government loans, and no-money-down home purchases were as common in Iceland as they were in Florida.
When the predictable emergency hit, neither the government nor the private financial institutions had cash to redeem the large number of foreign-denominated loans. While the International Monetary Fund eventually cobbled together a small bailout package, for the most part Iceland was alone. U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown invoked anti-terrorism legislation against the charter member of NATO, trying to force Icelandic banks to repay British lenders. Russia promised a bailout but failed to deliver. The E.U. was, and remains, too preoccupied with its own profligate states to give attention to remote Iceland.
This international neglect turned out to be Iceland’s saving grace. The crisis ended almost as quickly as it had begun. The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development expects Iceland’s economy to grow by 2 percent this year and next. That’s not enough to replace the post-2007 loss, but it’s more than enough to return to the pre-boom trend line, and it’s much stronger than the performance of Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain, affectionately know as the PIIGS economies. Iceland’s long-term interest rate, a not-inconsiderable 8 percent, compares well with a rate of over 13 percent for Greece, which is astounding when you consider that Iceland endured a default that Greece, in name at least, has so far avoided. The difference in unemployment—5.8 percent for Iceland against 16 percent for Greece—is even more striking. Iceland expects to have a balanced budget in 2013.
Paul Krugman naturally draws the wrong conclusion, contending that Iceland saved itself through rapid inflation and capital controls. This is like saying the March tsunami gave the people of Tohoku a nice chance to go swimming: Iceland’s central bank tried desperately to control the króna’s collapse before giving up. Nevertheless, Erlingsdottir is right: The “grownups”—a center-left coalition led by Social Democrat Johanna Sigurdardottir—are back in charge and have done their best to double down on the bad policies of the past, including reducing fish quotas when local fishermen most need to be producing and selling. The government is also, in the face of strong popular opposition, moving toward E.U. membership, which has worked out so beautifully for other troubled European economies.
So what’s causing the recovery? The plain-sight answer is the one nobody will consider. Iceland is coming back specifically because its banks went out of business. That happened in spite of strenuous public efforts, but the removal of the tiny nation’s colossally bloated financial sector turns out not to have eliminated all that much value.
It bears repeating that banks are not creators of wealth. They are places where you store the surplus value generated by productive enterprise. In very narrow circumstances that surplus value can be loaned out at a profit, but a financial sector is the icing, not the cake. This should be common sense, but apparently it is wisdom so rare it can only be learned in countries small and remote enough to avoid the deadly medicine of the global financial markets.
http://reason.com/archives/2011/10/27/iceland-loses-its-banks-finds
coming down pretty hard.....
excellent....
SUICIDE OF A SUPERPOWER: WILL AMERICA SURVIVE TO 2025?
By Patrick J. Buchanan
Thomas Dunne, 488 pages, $27.99
Reviewed by Brett M. Decker
I went to a dealership last weekend to check out an All-American muscle car, but it didn’t turn out to be all-American at all. As listed on the window sticker, the domestic content was only 55 percent. The transmission, one of the most important components on the vehicle - especially for a performance machine - was manufactured in China. On the same day, I dropped into a hardware store to pick up a box of nails, and they were all made in the People’s Republic, too. After a long day of trying to avoid purchasing products made by the communist Chinese, I settled down at home to eat a refreshing fruit cup. When I flipped the plastic container over to check out the nutritional information, there it was in black and white and all capital letters: PRODUCT OF CHINA. The reds had invaded my refrigerator.
Book Cover: Patrick J. Buchanan, Suicide of a SuperpowerIt doesn’t matter what you want; almost every consumer product on U.S. store shelves is made overseas, especially in China. It doesn’t matter how much you want to find it; almost nothing you need is made in the USA. From expensive manufactured equipment to swank plasma TVs to the simplest munchies for a kid’s lunchbox, that “Product of China” label is stamped on it all. Try taking the China Test for a month or two - maybe even a year. Any time you buy anything, flip it over and read the label to see if it was made in the Middle Kingdom. The results of a thorough China Test can be startling: Americans are dependent on the Maoist state for the necessities of life. Obviously, this dynamic cannot work forever. Eventually, a nation needs to produce something it can sell to have the revenue to consume anything - and America is making less all the time.
In his new blockbuster book, “Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2025?” Patrick J. Buchanan chronicles the demise of American manufacturing. “From 2000 to 2010, America saw 50,000 factories close and 6 million manufacturing jobs disappear,” he writes. “Manufacturing, 27 percent of the U.S. economy in 1950, is down to 11 percent and accounts for only 9 percent of the non-farm labor force.” This is not only bad for the working class because service jobs pay half as much on average as manufacturing jobs, it is dangerous for national security as well. Military contractors are dependent on parts made abroad, which means America’s ability to project force is tied to foreign suppliers whose interests might not always coincide with our own. “The defense industry has been off-shored,” warned former South Carolina Sen. Fritz Hollings. “Today, we can’t go to war except for the favor of a foreign country.”
There are countless national policies that put U.S. manufacturers at a disadvantage in their own land and chase jobs overseas. Onerous federal taxes on income made abroad mean companies don’t bring cash home which could be invested in creating jobs. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp, Michigan Republican, estimates $1 trillion in U.S. corporate money is sitting in foreign bank accounts to avoid tax penalties here. That’s treasure not going to domestic research-and-development or facilities expansion. Backward labor laws also make it more expensive for the Big Three domestic automobile manufacturers to produce cars in America than foreign firms, which are free to set up in cheaper nonunion southern states without fear of a national strike. On top of all this is the fact that China can break every trade law on the books and nothing is done about it. These are policies of a nation that’s no longer serious about being competitive.
Meanwhile, as millions upon millions of private-sector jobs disappear, the government leviathan continues to grow unabated. In 1960, 8.7 million people worked for the government; today that number has ballooned to 22.5 million. “Between the passage of Obama’s stimulus bill in 2009 and September 2010, millions of private-sector jobs disappeared but 416,000 new government jobs were created,” Mr. Buchanan reports. On average, federal employees earn about $62,000 more per year than workers in the private sector. The burgeoning bureaucracy and all its big-government programs don’t come cheap and have brought the world’s most productive economy to the brink of bankruptcy.
Once the world’s largest creditor, now America is the biggest debtor nation in history. We are running trillion-plus-dollar deficits every year that add to a national debt closing in fast on $15 trillion. A nation is not free when it owes so much because there are strings attached when a foreign power maintains such a large financial stake in another state. Beijing, for example, owns over $1.2 trillion in U.S. debt, which gives it sway over U.S. affairs. The debt jam leads to worry that Washington will either go into default or inflate like crazy to be able to pay off debt with dollars worth much less. Both are options of a seriously diminished economy and will lead to punishing consequences for taxpayers. If liberal Democrats had their way and used revenue increases to balance the budget, taxes on everybody would have to go up by 67 percent.
America’s national crisis is a failure of leadership. Although the country is about to drive over the cliff, our elected representatives have proven incapable of taking action to change directions. We see the problems and understand the crisis but no longer have the will to do what’s right. President Obama has admitted that “At no time in human history has a nation of diminished economic vitality maintained its military and political primacy,” yet his policies have gutted the U.S. economy to its worst condition since the Great Depression. Clare Booth Luce quipped that, “The difference between an optimist and a pessimist is that the pessimist is usually better informed.” Pat Buchanan’s new book provides all the information anyone needs to be pessimistic about the future.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/28/buchanan-take-the-china-test/
take the lirr woo woo.....to the bank lol
yes!
no breaks needed
break out the snow shovels!
China suspect in US satellite interference: report
Oct 27 04:29 PM US/Eastern
NASA satellites were interfered with four separate times in 2007 and 2008, possibly by the Chinese military, according to a draft of an upcoming report for the US Congress.
The latest draft of the report by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission said the computer hackers behind the interference gained the ability to issue commands to one of the satellites on two occasions.
The targeted satellites are used for observation of the earth's climate and terrain, according to the report to be submitted to Congress on November 16. A copy of the latest draft of the report was obtained by AFP on Thursday.
It said the account of the interference with the satellites came from a May 2011 briefing for the Commission by the US Air Force.
The hackers appear to have exploited the information systems of the Svalbard Satellite Station (SvalSat), a commercially operated satellite ground station in Spitsbergen, Norway, to gain access to the satellites, the report said.
SvalSat relies on the Internet for data access and file transfers, it said, citing a recent National Aeronautics and Space Administration report.
On October 20, 2007, Landsat-7, a US earth observation satellite jointly managed by NASA and the US Geological Survey, experienced 12 or more minutes of interference, the report said.
Landsat-7 experienced another 12 or more minutes of interference on July 23, 2008, the report said.
It said that on June 20, 2008, Terra EOS AM-1, a NASA-managed program for earth observation, experienced two or more minutes of interference, it said.
It said the hackers behind the interference with Terra EOS AM-1 "achieved all steps required to command the satellite but did not issue commands."
On October 22, 2008, Terra EOS AM-1 experienced nine or more minutes of interference, the report said, and "the responsible party" again "achieved all steps required to command the satellite but did not issue commands."
"Such interference poses numerous potential threats, particularly if achieved against satellites with more sensitive functions," the report said.
"For example, access to a satellite's controls could allow an attacker to damage or destroy the satellite," the commission said.
"The attacker could also deny or degrade as well as forge or otherwise manipulate the satellite's transmission," it said. "A high level of access could reveal the satellite's capabilities or information, such as imagery, gained through its sensors."
The report stressed that it was not recounting the incidents "on the basis of specific attribution information" but rather "because the techniques appear consistent with authoritative Chinese military writings."
"Authoritative Chinese military writings advocate for such activities, particularly as they relate to ground-based space infrastructure, such as satellite control facilities," the report said.
The draft report also accused China of being behind a "range of malicious cyber activities" including state-level involvement in cyberattacks, industrial espionage and the compromise of US and foreign government computer systems.
"In 2011, US and foreign government organizations, defense contractors, commercial entities, and various nongovernmental organizations experienced a substantial volume of network intrusions and attempts with various ties to China," the report said.
China has repeatedly denied any state involvement in cyberattacks against government agencies and firms, including well-publicized attacks on Internet giant Google that sparked a row between Washington and Beijing.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a81c4d237c34121ec07166c0bfa37900.921&show_article=1
China suspect in US satellite interference: report
Oct 27 04:29 PM US/Eastern
NASA satellites were interfered with four separate times in 2007 and 2008, possibly by the Chinese military, according to a draft of an upcoming report for the US Congress.
The latest draft of the report by the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission said the computer hackers behind the interference gained the ability to issue commands to one of the satellites on two occasions.
The targeted satellites are used for observation of the earth's climate and terrain, according to the report to be submitted to Congress on November 16. A copy of the latest draft of the report was obtained by AFP on Thursday.
It said the account of the interference with the satellites came from a May 2011 briefing for the Commission by the US Air Force.
The hackers appear to have exploited the information systems of the Svalbard Satellite Station (SvalSat), a commercially operated satellite ground station in Spitsbergen, Norway, to gain access to the satellites, the report said.
SvalSat relies on the Internet for data access and file transfers, it said, citing a recent National Aeronautics and Space Administration report.
On October 20, 2007, Landsat-7, a US earth observation satellite jointly managed by NASA and the US Geological Survey, experienced 12 or more minutes of interference, the report said.
Landsat-7 experienced another 12 or more minutes of interference on July 23, 2008, the report said.
It said that on June 20, 2008, Terra EOS AM-1, a NASA-managed program for earth observation, experienced two or more minutes of interference, it said.
It said the hackers behind the interference with Terra EOS AM-1 "achieved all steps required to command the satellite but did not issue commands."
On October 22, 2008, Terra EOS AM-1 experienced nine or more minutes of interference, the report said, and "the responsible party" again "achieved all steps required to command the satellite but did not issue commands."
"Such interference poses numerous potential threats, particularly if achieved against satellites with more sensitive functions," the report said.
"For example, access to a satellite's controls could allow an attacker to damage or destroy the satellite," the commission said.
"The attacker could also deny or degrade as well as forge or otherwise manipulate the satellite's transmission," it said. "A high level of access could reveal the satellite's capabilities or information, such as imagery, gained through its sensors."
The report stressed that it was not recounting the incidents "on the basis of specific attribution information" but rather "because the techniques appear consistent with authoritative Chinese military writings."
"Authoritative Chinese military writings advocate for such activities, particularly as they relate to ground-based space infrastructure, such as satellite control facilities," the report said.
The draft report also accused China of being behind a "range of malicious cyber activities" including state-level involvement in cyberattacks, industrial espionage and the compromise of US and foreign government computer systems.
"In 2011, US and foreign government organizations, defense contractors, commercial entities, and various nongovernmental organizations experienced a substantial volume of network intrusions and attempts with various ties to China," the report said.
China has repeatedly denied any state involvement in cyberattacks against government agencies and firms, including well-publicized attacks on Internet giant Google that sparked a row between Washington and Beijing.
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.a81c4d237c34121ec07166c0bfa37900.921&show_article=1
what a tool....gm k[]
dam......
looks like maybe a bounce coming......
Is the bubble finally bursting? Shanghai developers slash home prices, owners revolt
Hundreds of angry homeowners gathered last weekend to protest what could become a growing trend of price slashing in housing markets around China. Developers of a Pudong apartment complex started offering discounts of up to 30%, enraging buyers who had already invested in the development, as they essentially watched a chunk of their money evaporate. Hundreds gathered in the face of riot police to trample the developers' offices and show their general discontent.
The protest blew up on Weibo and was forwarded over 50,000 times, but that doesn't exactly mean observers are sympathetic. As plenty of commenters pointed out, investment in property is a risk like any other, and many of these buyers are likely property speculators who've been riding China's housing bubble as if it would never burst.
But burst it might, and burst it will if the government has anything to say about it. Beijing has been trying to cool housing prices in the face of growing discontent over un-affordable prices driven up by rampant speculation. And according to numbers this month, their tightening measures may finally be having an effect:
In Shanghai, a total of 204,000 square meters of new homes, excluding affordable housing, were sold during the first 16 days of this month, the lowest for the same period in six years and a drop of nearly 73 percent from same period of last year, according to Shanghai Uwin Real Estate Information Services Co.
Recent interest rate hikes by some commercial banks on mortgages for first homes will further dampen sentiment among home buyers and therefore raise pressure on developers for larger price cuts, analysts said.
Other cities might also begin taking their cue from Shanghai, as it becomes clear that Beijing is unlikely to loosen its grip. Housing price averages dipped 10-20% last week in Hangzhou and Tianjin.
But as the protests in Pudong demonstrate, the government may find themselves facing a much louder-than-anticipated backlash from the other end of the market: those who can and have afforded to purchase property at such astronomical prices. If Beijing isn't careful, there won't be a housing complex model left un-smashed in Chinese real estate offices.
http://shanghaiist.com/2011/10/26/is_the_bubble_finally_bursting_shan.php
150 years ago, a primitive Internet united the USA
By JOHN ROGERS
Associated Press
LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Long before there was an Internet or an iPad, before people were social networking and instant messaging, Americans had already gotten wired.
Monday marks the 150th anniversary of the completion of the transcontinental telegraph. From sea to sea, it electronically knitted together a nation that was simultaneously tearing itself apart, North and South, in the Civil War.
Americans soon saw that a breakthrough in the spread of technology could enhance national identity and, just as today, that it could vastly change lives.
"It was huge," says Amy Fischer, archivist for Western Union, which strung the line across mountains, canyons and tribal lands to make the final connection. "... With the Civil War just a few months old, the idea that California, the growing cities of California, could talk to Washington and the East Coast in real time was huge. It's hard to overstate the impact of that."
On Oct. 24, 1861, with the push of a button, California's chief justice, Stephen J. Field, wired a message from San Francisco to President Abraham Lincoln in Washington, congratulating him on the transcontinental telegraph's completion that day. He added the wish that it would be a "means of strengthening the attachment which binds both the East and the West to the Union."
A rudimentary version of the Internet - not much more advanced than two tin cans and a string - had been born. But it worked, and it grew.
Just a few years after the nation was wired, telegraph technology would be extended to the rest of North America, and soon cylindrical wires from Mexico to Canada would jangle with little bursts of electromagnetic juice, sending messages of every kind and redefining how communication can mean business.
As the United States rebuilt itself following the devastating Civil War, it did so in no small part with money wired from Washington. In 1869, when the final piece of track connecting the transcontinental railroad was laid in Promontory, Utah, a young news organization called The Associated Press sent a story about it out on the wire.
"I really see the telegraph as the original technology, the grandfather of all these other technologies that came out of it: the telephone, the teletype, the fax, the Internet," said telegraph historian Thomas Jepsen, author of "My Sisters Telegraphic: Women In Telegraph Office 1846-1950."
In its time, the telegraph was in some ways an even greater influence on the way people communicate than the Internet is today.
"The transcontinental telegraph put the Pony Express out of business in the literal click of a telegrapher's key. That's not an exaggeration," says Christopher Corbett, author of "Orphans Preferred: The Twisted Truth and Lasting Legend of the Pony Express."
Indeed, the Pony Express, which boasted it could deliver a letter from Sacramento to St. Joseph, Mo., in the unheard of time of 10 days when it began operations on April 3, 1860, shut down 19 months later - on the same day the transcontinental telegraph went live.
Though dramatic, that was a short-term effect. "But the longer-term effect was we connected the nation in real time. ...," says Fischer. "For the first time, businesses could do business nationally. The government could communicate nationally in almost real time."
Just as the iPad, the iPod and the personal computer had a visionary genius behind them in Steve Jobs, the telegraph had one in Samuel F.B. Morse.
A painter and part-time inventor who twice ran unsuccessfully for mayor of New York, Morse was in his early 40s in 1831 when he came up with the idea for the telegraph. He said in his papers at the Library of Congress that it was inspired by a discussion about electromagnetics with a fellow passenger on an ocean liner.
By the mid-1830s he'd developed Morse Code, the series of dots and dashes that telegraph key operators would tap out on their little contraptions. The result would flash across the country, and later around the world, where it would be translated back into words on the other end.
Morse obtained a patent for his telegraph in 1840, and four years later he sent his famous first message - "What hath God wrought?" - over a line he'd strung from Washington to Baltimore with $30,000 in federal money.
The technology took off. In 1845, more than a century before the TV show "America's Most Wanted," a man named John Tawell was arrested in England for the murder of his mistress after police received a telegraphed tip, telling them where he was.
A year later, the AP was formed and began relaying news of the Mexican-American War through a combination of telegraph wires and horseback riders, which demonstrated a limitation in the new technology.
"The early days of the telegraph were a lot like the early days of the Internet," says Fischer. "There were a lot of little one-off companies that would connect one or maybe two cities, but no big networks."
Thus the need for the guys on horseback, to get the information to the next telegraph station.
By 1860, the telegraph was a lot like an early cell-phone system. Only instead of losing the connection when you stepped behind a big building, you lost it if you traveled west of Omaha, Neb. From the West coast, a message could be sent only as far east as Nevada.
The Pacific Telegraph Act would change that, becoming one of the first instances of the federal government setting telecommunications policy. Passed in 1860, it called for the government to hire a company that would extend the line across Nebraska, through Utah and Nevada, linking the West with the rest of the country.
With subsidiaries of Western Union building the system from both directions, they would meet in Salt Lake City.
To get there, the construction crews had to reassure wary Indian tribes whose land they were trespassing on. They did so by giving some gifts and by hiring others to build the thing.
They needed lumber, especially in the treeless desert terrain of Nevada, and it took more than 200 oxen more than a month to haul it across the Sierra Nevada, according to an account by James Gamble, who was in charge on the western end of the project.
Once they got the lumber in place, work crews hired guards, sometimes Indians, specifically to keep it from being stolen, just as at modern construction sites. There were homesteaders heading West, needing materials to build houses.
Along the eastern flank, there was a different problem, Jepsen noted. Crews initially fashioned some of the telegraph poles so small that buffalo, using them as scratching posts, knocked them over. Despite the obstacles, the line was completed in a matter of months.
"It's a very American story," said Corbett, adding that not only was the project brought in with amazing speed but that it "completely changed everything in a flash," from the introduction of groundbreaking technology to the country's own self-image.
"California was almost like a satellite, if you think about it," he said. "It was almost 2,000 miles between the Missouri River and the California slope. But something like the telegraph made it seem closer."
Completing the project so quickly also infused the country with a kind of can-do spirit that he and other historians say it may not have had in quite as much abundance when the project was initiated.
Telegraphers, hired by the thousands to relay every kind of information, created a new language, one of strange abbreviations that only they, and perhaps some wire service journalists, understood. Seventy-three, for example, meant goodbye; 30 was the number placed at the end of a news story to signify the end.
"It had a Twitter-like feel to it," said historian Bill Deverell, director of the USC-Huntington Institute on California and the West.
But unlike terms like LOL and BTW that cell-phone users created to save wear and tear on their thumbs, and later adapted to Twitter to stay under its 140-character count, telegraph abbreviations were done to keep from jamming up and slowing down the wire with needless words.
"Time was money," Deverell noted.
These days, telegrapher talk and even Morse Code, once used to keep track of ships at sea and prevent trains that shared main lines from running into each other, have been all but abandoned, made obsolete by the technological revolution the telegraph created.
The telephone was invented in 1876. In time, cell phones and personal computers came along, and in 2006, Western Union, the company that had made a name for itself by charging sweethearts to wire singing telegrams and chocolates to one another, stopped sending telegrams all together. (Wiring money remains a main business for the Denver-based company.)
Historian Jepsen sees value in reflecting on a milestone for Morse's invention.
"It really gives one a good understanding of how we got where we are and how the Internet evolved," he said. "The telegraph is really where it all started."
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TELEGRAPH_AT_150?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-10-23-12-09-40
ROTC programs return to Ivy League universities
By MICHAEL MELIA
Associated Press
NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) -- Yale sophomore Andrew Hendricks has gotten used to receiving strange looks when he crosses the Ivy League campus in his Air Force uniform.
Hendricks, the only Air Force cadet at Yale, wears the uniform on days he drives to the University of Connecticut to train with the Reserve Officers' Training Corps, a program that had been barred from his university until faculty agreed to welcome it back beginning next fall. Judging from the reaction of Yale students, he does not expect much of a stir when cadets start conducting drills amid the Gothic buildings in New Haven.
"I never get anything negative," said Hendricks, 19, of Fairfax Station, Va. "I think it's mainly that people are really curious because they don't see a lot of military influence on campus."
Four decades after Vietnam War protesters cheered the departure of ROTC programs from some Ivy League universities, their return is bringing little more than a symbolic change to campuses where a new generation of students is neither organizing against them nor lining up to enlist.
Yale, Harvard and Columbia all signed agreements this year to bring back ROTC. The antagonism with elite universities faded with the end of the draft, and much of the lingering opposition to the military dissolved with last year's repeal of "don't ask, don't tell," the policy that banned gays from serving openly in the armed services. The universities said the policy violated non-discrimination rules for campus organizations.
A tiny number of students at these schools pursue ROTC - a total of three at Yale and five at Columbia do so through off-campus arrangements - and those numbers are not expected to rise dramatically anytime soon. But the agreements to revive ROTC are important to the schools, which once produced many of America's most decorated military officers, and the armed services, which are regaining a presence at some of the country's best-known universities.
Officials are excited about ROTC because it offers students another path to national leadership, the dean of Yale College, Mary Miller, said in an interview. She said the administration was influenced by appeals from President Barack Obama, who used his State of the Union address to call on universities to engage more directly with the military, and a survey by Yale's student government that found support for ROTC.
"We hope by making a path to military leadership available on campus, that students will pursue it in part because the opportunities for that leadership come so early in military careers. It has a strong youth culture component, which has been quite striking to me," Miller said.
The ROTC program, which was founded in 1916, has 490 host units, most of them concentrated in the South and Midwest. Students receive scholarship money in return for agreeing to military service after graduation.
In the years surrounding World War II, thousands of soldiers and sailors trained on Ivy League campuses. But last year, only 53 students from the conference's eight universities were commissioned through ROTC programs.
Yale has agreed to host Naval and Air Force ROTC detachments next fall. Air Force officials say it is too early to assess how many might enroll, and Navy officials say they are hoping at least 15 freshmen, from an incoming class of about 1,300, will attend Yale next year on Naval ROTC scholarships.
The change is likely to be even less visible at Harvard and Columbia, where Naval ROTC gained formal recognition but students are expected to continue training at nearby campuses. At Harvard, which has nine midshipmen training at other Boston area schools, the Naval ROTC director said it would not make sense to create a new detachment.
"You need some type of sufficient numbers to be able to have a battalion and meaningful leadership roles, and nine does not cut it," Capt. Curtis Stevens said. "You can barely man a color guard with nine."
Regardless of the numbers, he and other advocates said it is important to the military to be represented on elite campuses.
"Symbols matter, and the symbolism of America's leading universities declaring or even implying that there is something illegitimate about serving your nation in uniform was shameful. Fortunately, we've now gotten over it," said Graham Allison, director of Harvard's Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs and a former U.S. assistant secretary of defense.
Stanford University's faculty also voted this year to invite ROTC back to campus, but it has not reached agreements with any of the service branches. Other prominent schools including Princeton, Cornell and the University of Pennsylvania already host units.
But there is still some resistance in the Ivy League. Brown University's president, Ruth Simmons, said this week that she continues to back the school's policy of denying ROTC recognition as an academic program.
A music professor at Brown, Jeff Todd Titon, said many on the faculty feel there is no place for the military at a liberal arts college.
"The military is a chain of command organization where obedience is required, and that's just antithetical to our ideals and goals," he said.
Susanna Kotter, a Yale junior from Boston, has concerns about sexual violence in the military, but she said having future officers on campus could help her learn about an institution that is not part of her daily life.
"If that will elicit more conversation about the Army, I'm OK with it," she said.
The bans' reversal marks a renewal of long military traditions at Yale, which had 25 graduates serve as generals for the Union Army during the Civil War, and Harvard, which has produced more Medal of Honor recipients than any institution outside the service academies.
Hendricks is looking forward to dropping the three-hour weekly commute to Storrs when ROTC comes to New Haven, and he also thinks it will make him feel more at home on his own campus.
"Knowing that I'll be doing this for Yale, I'll feel more school pride," he said.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_ROTC_IVY_LEAGUE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2011-10-23-12-26-09
i love it!
Subject: Conservative or Liberal
You decide yourself...
A rather gentle explanation of the difference in thinking between people with opposite outlooks.
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be very liberal, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, in other words redistribution of wealth.
She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch conservative, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.
One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs.
The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.
Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"
She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."
Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."
The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That's a crazy idea, how would that be fair! I've worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"
The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, "Welcome to the conservative side of the fence."
If you ever wondered what side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his situation.
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and Jesus silenced.
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a good laugh.
A liberal will delete it because he's "offended."
Well, I forwarded it to you.
As Defense Experts Worry Over Aggressive China, U.S. Military Plans for Guam Pivotal but Constrained
Written by SHARLA TORRE MONTVEL-COHEN
Thursday, October 20, 2011
GUAM – China's "breathtaking boldness" in its designs to project power across the South China Sea and beyond the Mariana Islands paints a picture of a giant "feeling its oats" at a time when domestic politics and fiscal crises have stunted a U.S.-Japan troop realignment plan to secure the region.
U.S. military expansion in Guam, some think, is aimed in part at China, which has grown increasingly aggressive in recent years.
Washington and Tokyo, meanwhile, are swimming upstream against pressing fiscal and political resistance to implement their regional security plan. The pricey strategy, which would redistribute 30,000 U.S. troops across the region, calls for Guam to play a central role in regional defense and deterrence.
The current U.S. deficit and economic troubles have some in Congress pushing for up to a trillion dollars in cuts over 10 years to defense spending. This has clouded the outlook for the Guam military buildup.
Japan's failure to make tangible progress on building a controversial new air base on Okinawa's eastern coast has also held up the realignment plan. The Pentagon has said that without that new base, Okinawa Marines cannot be moved to Guam. U.S. Defense Secretary Panetta is meeting with his Japan counterpart Oct. 25 in Tokyo with the Marine relocation high on their agenda.
As The Marine Corps Times reports in their story at the link here, the Chinese are watching carefully the U.S. buildup of Air Force, Navy and Marine capabilities in Guam.
http://guambuildupnews.com/Buildup-News-Politics/As-Defense-Experts-Worry-Over-Aggressive-China-U.S.-Military-Plans-for-Guam-Pivotal-but-Constrained.html
thanks for the links