Tagged: United States RSS Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • mazsa 19:03 on January 9, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , United States,   

    [...] USA is increasing its commitment to drone warfare without regard for the risks these weapons pose to our security and moral standing in the world. Drone technology is spreading rapidly, with dozens of countries and even nonstate actors such as Hezbollah now developing or purchasing these systems. Military planners are developing autonomous drones that could make their own decisions on when to unleash lethal force. If other nations follow our example as they often do, we will soon face the prospect of a world in which terror can rain down from the sky at any moment without warning. There is no long-term benefit to the United States in the unchecked proliferation of drone weapons or in the absence of agreed standards for limiting their use. [...]

    The United States should work through the United Nations to convene an international conference for developing legal standards on the use of unmanned weapons. The goal should be to ensure that any military use of these systems complies fully with the laws of war, including international humanitarian law and human rights law. This would enhance our moral standing and strengthen U.S. and international security.

    http://www.cato-unbound.org/2012/01/09/david-cortright/license-to-kill

     
  • mazsa 23:37 on January 2, 2012 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , United States   

    Hey Europe: sorry about my PM + The Unconstitutional Constitution 

    http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/01/02/the-unconstitutional-constitution/

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/03/world/europe/rare-opposition-protests-in-hungary.html

     
  • mazsa 15:29 on November 19, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , United States,   

    “tribal communities are the default system of human social nature. Humanity evolved that way for millennia after exiting the hunter-gatherer band stage of social life. Many of the planet’s diverse societies have since moved on toward becoming modern states, but not all of them have. And even for those that have, the shadowy emotional residues of the distant past remain; we never lose anything in evolution, but instead add new developments to older ones. That is Fox’s central idea and the theme running through The Tribal Imagination.

    It is also a truth, Fox believes, that we ignore at our peril as we go stumbling about in far-away strange places where tribes rule with an authority denied the more-or-less absent state. The pride and latent violence of groups of mutually suspicious kindred must be the starting point, Fox says, for anyone venturing into this political landscape. Such men and women are not the free individual citizens of a recognized territorial jurisdiction; nor are they people with clearly defined and defensible legal rights with respect to the state, whether in Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan.

    This truth, he says, sheds a harsh light on instances when “our leaders make claims about human nature and the natural state of human society as justifications for political action, armed intervention included.” These leaders, more often than not, suggests Fox, simply refuse to understand the essentially tribal nature of the lands they hope to remake. They are reluctant to grasp that

    there is no ‘Iraqi People’. The phrase should be banned as misleading and purely rhetorical. . . . What is not understood is that Iraq, like the other countries of the region, still stands at a level of social evolution where the family, clan, tribe and sect command major allegiance. The idea of the individual autonomous voter, necessary and commonplace in our own systems, is relatively foreign.

    Numerous unforeseen events during the Iraq occupation have illustrated the priority of tribal authority. When men came out and stole copper wire connecting hospitals to the electricity grid, indignant U.S. soldiers tried to make the thieves see that their actions would hurt “the Iraqi people.” True to form, the thieves responded just as Aouda had a hundred years before: Who were these “Iraqi people”, they wanted to know, whose claims outranked those of their own needy relatives? The thieving clansmen felt no responsibility for some mythical collectivity called “the people” that, as far as they knew, did not include them and that, in any case, foreigners had invented without their approval. In contrast, they were absolutely bound by customary law to help their kin” http://www.the-american-interest.com/article-bd.cfm?piece=990

     
  • mazsa 07:13 on November 13, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , United States   

    How litigation only spurred on P2P file sharing: “[...] the US Supreme Court in Grokster created a brand new legal doctrine, called inducement, that did not rely on either knowledge or control. That rule was aimed at capturing “bad actors” – those P2P providers who aimed to profit from their users’ infringement and whose nefarious intent was demonstrated by “smoking guns” in their marketing and other communications. But the inducement law failed to appreciate some of the other differences that make the software world special and thus led directly to the explosion in the number of P2P technologies. In understanding why, three other physical world assumptions come into play.

    One is that it is expensive to create distribution technologies that are capable of vast amounts of infringement. Of course in the physical world, the creation of such technologies, like printing presses, photocopiers, and VCRs required large investment. Research and development, mass-manufacturing, marketing and delivery all require massive amounts of cash. Thus, the law came to assume that the creation of such technologies was expensive.

    That led directly to the next assumption – that distribution technologies are developed for profit. After all, nobody would be investing those massive sums without some prospect of a return.

    Finally comes the fourth assumption: that rational developers of distribution technologies won’t share their secrets with consumers or competitors. Since they needed to recoup those massive investments, they had no interest at all in giving them away.

    All of these assumptions certainly can hold up in the software development context. For example, those behind Kazaa spent a lot on its development, squeezed out the maximum possible profit and kept its source code a closely guarded secret. By creating a law that focused on profits, business models and marketing, the Supreme Court succeeded in shaking out Kazaa and its ilk from the market.

    But the Court failed to appreciate that none of these things are actually necessary to the creation of P2P file sharing software. [...]” http://www.itnews.com.au/News/279763,how-litigation-only-spurred-on-p2p-file-sharing.aspx

     
  • mazsa 17:45 on November 8, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , OECD, , United States   

    Cartelizing Taxes: Understanding OECD’s Campaign Against ‘Harmful Tax Competition’:

    Formed in 1961 to promote global economic and social well-being, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has become the collective voice of rich countries on international tax issues. After an initial focus on improving commerce through addressing double taxation issues, the organization shifted to a focus on restricting tax competition and increasing automatic exchanges of tax information. In this paper we analyze the reasons for this shift in policy focus. After describing the history of the OECD’s work on taxation, we examine the OECD’s project against “harmful tax competition” as it has played out since its launch in the 1990s. We analyze the mechanisms behind the project from a public choice perspective. While typical economic models portray tax competition as a prisoner’s dilemma between governments, a more powerful perspective is of the incentives of politicians and bureaucrats. We conclude that the project against tax competition is an example of the interplay between the interests of politicians and international bureaucrats, which illustrates the role international organizations play in competition among interest groups. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1950627

    Cf. Joining the Chorus for Tax Cooperation:

    [...] But international organizations aren’t the only ones that are destroying jobs and economic opportunity in the name of tax fairness. The U.S. Treasury and Internal Revenue Service are considering regulations that could cost Americans millions of jobs. One of the regulations being developed stems from the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), which was passed by Congress in 2010. FATCA would impose a 30 percent tax on the investment in the United States of any foreign financial institution, including a bank, if it had any unreported U.S. citizen or green card holder contributing to the pool of money invested. Furthermore, the foreign financial institution’s officers could be subject to civil and criminal charges for making such an investment. In an era of common dual citizenships, it is impossible for a foreign financial institution to know for certain whether any of its clients is a U.S. taxpayer (i.e., citizen, green card holder, etc.). Thus, foreign financial institutions in Switzerland, Taiwan and elsewhere are pulling their investments out of the United States right at the time when the U.S. needs all of the job-creating foreign investment it can get.

    Sen. Carl Levin, Michigan Democrat, and the other economic-know-nothings who proposed these measures claim — without any basis in fact — that the United States is losing $100 billion annually because of foreign account tax avoidance or evasion. Private foreign investment in the U.S. is about $14 trillion. So $100 billion is less than 1 percent of the private foreign investment, yet the mental midgets in Congress and the administration are willing to risk trillions of dollars in job-creating foreign investment in exchange for a phony $100 billion. Well over 10 million American jobs are at risk because of this foolishness.

    It gets worse. The Treasury and IRS have yet to do a cost-benefit study of FATCA, but final regulations are being developed. In the private sector, executives who so failed at their fiduciary responsibilities would be fired, perhaps fined or even sent to jail. But members of Congress and the executive branch are most unlikely to pay any penalty for risking perhaps 20 to 40 jobs for each job they might, theoretically, save. By the way, many of the senators and congressmen who brought you FATCA are the same ones who want to continue to fund the OECD. Mr. President, if you really care about jobs in the way you say you do, why are you not calling for the repeal of FATCA and reining in Mr. Levin, his colleagues and your own Treasury secretary, who are in the process of endangering far more existing jobs than any of your questionable jobs proposals could possibly create? http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=13832

     
  • mazsa 20:16 on June 29, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , United States,   

    National Strategy for Counterterrorism http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/counterterrorism_strategy.pdf

     
  • mazsa 18:23 on June 29, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , United States, Zimbabwe   

    “[...] the US government’s dollar position is short, not long — its dollar-denominated debts are greater than its dollar-denominated assets. In financial terms, a short position is a way to bet against the value of the underlying commodity. The US government is currently about $7 million million dollars “short”.

    An illustration may help to clarify. Suppose you are a private in the Zimbabwean military in September 2007. Suppose your monthly pay is about US$180, but you are paid in Zimbabwean dollars, so your pay packet is actually Z$5.4 million for the month. The Zimbabwean dollar has been hyperinflating, and you expect it to continue to lose value. You don’t currently need to pay any expenses. Consider the following options:

    A. Keep the Z$5.4 million in cash.

    B. Immediately buy other commodities with it; for example, buy 300 kilograms of rice and store it in Tupperware in the pantry.

    C. Immediately buy other commodities with it, and also borrow an additional Z$10 million some poor sucker is willing to lend you at an extortionate 20% APR, and use that to buy rice too.

    Option “A” is maintaining a “long” position in the Zimbabwean dollar. This amounts to a bet that the Z$ will retain its value. If you had taken this option, you would have lost 90% of your salary within a few weeks.

    Option “B” is maintaining no position in the Zimbabwean dollar. It doesn’t matter what the Zimbabwean dollar does thereafter; you still have the same amount of rice. (Practically speaking, in situations like this, there tend to be price controls on most things you can buy with the collapsing currency.)

    Option “C” is maintaining a “short” position in the Zimbabwean dollar. If you had somehow found such a sucker, then within a few weeks, you could have paid them back by selling off a tiny percentage of the rice you bought, as the Zimbabwean dollar continued to inflate.

    This is the position the US government has taken relative to the US dollar.”

     
  • mazsa 16:05 on June 29, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , United States   

    So What If Corporations Aren’t People? “Corporate participation in public discourse has long been a controversial issue, one that was reignited by the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. FEC, 130 S. Ct. 876 (2010). Much of the criticism of Citizens United stems from the claim that the Constitution does not protect corporations because they are not “real” people. While it’s true that corporations aren’t human beings, that truism is constitutionally irrelevant because corporations are formed by individuals as a means of exercising their constitutionally protected rights. When individuals pool their resources and speak under the legal fiction of a corporation, they do not lose their rights. It cannot be any other way; in a world where corporations are not entitled to constitutional protections, the police would be free to storm office buildings and seize computers or documents. The mayor of New York City could exercise eminent domain over Rockefeller Center by fiat and without compensation if he decides he’d like to move his office there. Moreover, the government would be able to censor all corporate speech, including that of so-called media corporations. In short, rights-bearing individuals do not forfeit those rights when they associate in groups. This essay will demonstrate why the common argument that corporations lack rights because they aren’t people demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of both the nature of corporations and the First Amendment.” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1873158

     
  • mazsa 16:48 on June 20, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , United States   

    Counterfeiting and piracy is a global crime, and it requires a global solution.

    Victoria Espinel, the U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator
     
  • mazsa 14:56 on June 20, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , United States   

    4strategies that American companies use 2reduce their taxes (Video 3:35) http://video.nytimes.com/video/2011/06/19/business/100000000870844/inside-the-accountants-playbook.html

     
  • mazsa 17:39 on June 16, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , United States   

    Yes, It Is a Police State – A line has been crossed http://www.thefreemanonline.org/headline/yes-this-is-a-police-state/

     
  • mazsa 06:52 on June 14, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , United States   

    “Internet in a Suitcase”: A Detour Around Censors http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/world/12internet.html?_r=2&pagewanted=all

     
  • mazsa 00:16 on June 10, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , United States   

    SCOTUS Affirms High Standard of Proving Patents Invalid “Today the Supreme Court upheld the Federal Circuit’s rule that, in litigation, a patent may only be proved invalid by clear and convincing evidence. EFF filed an amicus brief in the case – Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership – supporting Microsoft’s request that the standard for proving invalidity merely be by a preponderance of the evidence (more likely than not) rather than clear and convincing evidence (a high probability). [...]” https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/06/supreme-court-affirms-high-standard-proving

     
  • mazsa 10:36 on June 9, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , United States   

    Forget piracy, US government is going after Bitcoin http://venturebeat.com/2011/06/08/government-crackdown-on-bitcoin/ Cf. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2636078

     
  • mazsa 09:59 on June 4, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , United States,   

    LulzSec versus FBI: “It has come to our unfortunate attention that NATO and [...] Obama have recently upped the stakes with regard to hacking. They now treat hacking as an act of war. So, we just hacked an FBI affiliated website (Infragard, specifically the Atlanta chapter) and leaked its user base. We also took complete control over the site and defaced it [...]” http://pastebin.com/MQG0a130 Cf. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2618562

    Update: http://www.unveillance.com/latest-news/unveillance-official-statement/

    Update2: “####[CRIMINALS OF LULZSEC]####
    After being invited to the lulzsec private channel after social engineering parr0t
    I was able to learn a few interesting things about their group! Alot them have
    previous cyber crime and are involved in some heavy shit!” http://pastebin.com/RBjzDQbS
    But cf. “Uh, yeah. Adrian Lamo is the guy who ratted out Bradley Manning to the feds.” http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2619898 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adrian_Lamo#WikiLeaks_and_Bradley_Manning

     
  • mazsa 11:26 on June 3, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , United States,   

    U.S. Congressman Ron Paul:

    The last nail is being driven into the coffin of the American Republic. Yet, Congress remains in total denial as our liberties are rapidly fading before our eyes.

    The process is propelled by unwarranted fear and ignorance as to the true meaning of liberty. It is driven by economic myths, fallacies and irrational good intentions.

    The rule of law is constantly rejected and authoritarian answers are offered as panaceas for all our problems. Runaway welfarism is used to benefit the rich at the expense of the middle class.

    Who would have ever thought that the current generation and Congress would stand idly by and watch such a rapid disintegration of the American Republic?

    Characteristic of this epic event is the casual acceptance by the people and political leaders of the unitary presidency, which is equivalent to granting dictatorial powers to the President. Our Presidents can now, on their own:

    1. Order assassinations, including American citizens,
    2. Operate secret military tribunals,
    3. Engage in torture,
    4. Enforce indefinite imprisonment without due process,
    5. Order searches and seizures without proper warrants, gutting the 4th Amendment,
    6. Ignore the 60 day rule for reporting to the Congress the nature of any military operations as required by the War Power Resolution,
    7. Continue the Patriot Act abuses without oversight,
    8. Wage war at will,
    9. Treat all Americans as suspected terrorists at airports with TSA groping and nude x-raying.

    And the Federal Reserve accommodates by counterfeiting the funds needed and not paid for by taxation and borrowing, permitting runaway spending, endless debt, and special interest bail-outs.

    And all of this is not enough. The abuses and usurpations of the war power are soon to be codified in the National Defense Authorization Act now rapidly moving its way through the Congress. Instead of repealing the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force (AUMF), as we should, now that bin Laden is dead and gone, Congress is planning to massively increase the war power of the President.

    Though an opportunity presents itself to end the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, Congress, with bipartisan support, obsesses on how to expand the unconstitutional war power the President already holds. The current proposal would allow a President to pursue war any time, any place, for any reason, without Congressional approval. Many believe this would even permit military activity against American suspects here at home.

    The proposed authority does not reference the 9/11 attacks. It would be expanded to include the Taliban and “associated” forces—a dangerously vague and expansive definition of our potential enemies. There is no denial that the changes in S.1034 totally eliminate the hard-fought-for restraint on Presidential authority to go to war without Congressional approval achieved at the Constitutional Convention.

    Congress’ war authority has been severely undermined since World War II beginning with the advent of the Korean War which was fought solely under a UN Resolution. Even today, we’re waging war in Libya without even consulting with the Congress, similar to how we went to war in Bosnia in the 1990s under President Clinton. The three major reasons for our Constitutional Convention were to:

    1. Guarantee free trade and travel among the states.
    2. Make gold and silver legal tender [cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_tender ] and abolish paper money.
    3. Strictly limit the Executive Branch’s authority to pursue war without Congressional approval.

    But today:

    1. Federal Reserve notes are legal tender, gold and silver are illegal.
    2. The Interstate Commerce Clause is used to regulate all commerce at the expense of free trade among the states.
    3. And now the final nail is placed in the coffin of Congressional responsibility for the war power, delivering this power completely to the President—a sharp and huge blow to the concept of our Republic.

    In my view, it appears that the fate of the American Republic is now sealed—unless these recent trends are quickly reversed.

    The saddest part of this tragedy is that all these horrible changes are being done in the name of patriotism and protecting freedom. They are justified by good intentions while believing the sacrifice of liberty is required for our safety. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    More sadly is the conviction that our enemies are driven to attack us for our freedoms and prosperity, and not because of our deeply flawed foreign policy that has generated justifiable grievances and has inspired the radical violence against us.

    Without this understanding our endless, unnamed, and undeclared wars will continue and our wonderful experience with liberty will end.

    http://www.ronpaul.com/2011-05-25/ron-paul-is-this-the-end-of-the-american-republic/

     
  • mazsa 20:16 on June 2, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , United States,   

    A military response to cyberattacks is preposterous: “The real obstacle to making sensible cybersecurity policy is hysteria, which drowns out common sense.” http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/06/02/a-military-response-to-cyberattacks-is-preposterous/

     
  • mazsa 18:30 on May 31, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , United States,   

    U.S. to Respond to Computer Sabotage With Missile Strike http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304563104576355623135782718.html

     
  • mazsa 18:38 on May 24, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , United States   

    Monitoring the OECD’s Campaign Against Tax Competition, Fiscal Sovereignty, and Financial Privacy: Strategies for Low-Tax Jurisdictions “The Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has an ongoing anti-tax competition project. This effort is designed to prop up inefficient welfare states in the industrialized world, thus enabling those governments to impose heavier tax burdens without having to fear that labor and capital will migrate to jurisdictions with better tax law. This project received a boost a few years ago when the Obama Administration joined forces with countries such as France and Germany, which resulted in all low-tax jurisdictions agreeing to erode their human rights policies regarding financial privacy. The tide is now turning against high-tax nations – particularly as more people understand that ever-increasing fiscal burdens inevitably lead to Greek-style fiscal collapse. Political changes in the United States further complicate the OECD’s ability to impose bad policy. Because of these developments, lowtax jurisdictions should be especially resistant to new anti-tax competition initiatives at the Bermuda Global Forum.” http://freedomandprosperity.org/files/OECD-Bermuda.pdf

     
  • mazsa 08:28 on May 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , United States   

    US Bill To Update Key Digital Privacy Law – Summary: http://leahy.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=b6d1f687-f2f7-48a4-80bc-29e3c5f758f2#Summary

    “[...] The upshot? If the government wants to track your cell phone or seize your email or read your private IMs or social network messages, the bill would require that it first go to court and get a search warrant based on probable cause. [...]

    The bill isn’t absolutely free of problems: although it clearly would require a warrant for ongoing tracking of your cell phone, it would also and unfortunately preserve the current statutory rule allowing the government to get historical records of your location without probable cause. It also expands the government’s authority to use National Security Letters https://www.eff.org/issues/national-security-letters to obtain rich transactional data about who you communicate with online and when, without probable cause or court oversight. You can count on EFF to press for these problems to be fixed, and for all of the DDP principles to be addressed, as the bill proceeds through Congress.

    However, as the start of the process of updating ECPA for the always-on, location-enabled technology of the 21st century, Senator Leahy’s bill represents an incredibly important step in the right direction, and we at EFF look forward to working with Senator Leahy and others in Congress as they work to create new laws to better protect your online and mobile privacy. [...]” https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2011/05/eff-applauds-new-electronic-privacy-bill-tells

     
  • mazsa 05:37 on May 17, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , United States   

    “The U.S. International Strategy for Cyberspace outlines our vision for the future of cyberspace, and sets an agenda for partnering with other nations and peoples to realize it.” http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/International_Strategy_Cyberspace_Factsheet.pdf

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/international_strategy_for_cyberspace.pdf

     
  • mazsa 05:50 on May 14, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , , , , United States   

    Tax havens: the heart of the global economy “[...] tax havens have grown so fast in the era of globalization, since kind of the 1970s, that they have now become right—they are now right at the heart of the global economy and are absolutely huge. I mean, there are 10—anywhere between 10 and 20 trillion U.S. dollars sitting offshore at the moment. Half of world trade is processed in one way or another through tax havens. It’s all around us, and it’s absolutely huge. [...]” http://www.australia-offshore.com/offshore-banking-and-tax-havens-have-become-the-heart-of-global-economy/

     
  • mazsa 07:00 on May 2, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , United States,   

    Video+full text: President Obama on Osama Bin Laden

    Good evening. Tonight, I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who’s responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

    It was nearly 10 years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history. The images of 9/11 are seared into our national memory — hijacked planes cutting through a cloudless September sky; the Twin Towers collapsing to the ground; black smoke billowing up from the Pentagon; the wreckage of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the actions of heroic citizens saved even more heartbreak and destruction.

    And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world. The empty seat at the dinner table. Children who were forced to grow up without their mother or their father. Parents who would never know the feeling of their child’s embrace. Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts.

    On September 11, 2001, in our time of grief, the American people came together. We offered our neighbors a hand, and we offered the wounded our blood. We reaffirmed our ties to each other, and our love of community and country. On that day, no matter where we came from, what God we prayed to, or what race or ethnicity we were, we were united as one American family.

    We were also united in our resolve to protect our nation and to bring those who committed this vicious attack to justice. We quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda — an organization headed by Osama bin Laden, which had openly declared war on the United States and was committed to killing innocents in our country and around the globe. And so we went to war against al Qaeda to protect our citizens, our friends, and our allies.

    Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we’ve made great strides in that effort. We’ve disrupted terrorist attacks and strengthened our homeland defense. In Afghanistan, we removed the Taliban government, which had given bin Laden and al Qaeda safe haven and support. And around the globe, we worked with our friends and allies to capture or kill scores of al Qaeda terrorists, including several who were a part of the 9/11 plot.

    Yet Osama bin Laden avoided capture and escaped across the Afghan border into Pakistan. Meanwhile, al Qaeda continued to operate from along that border and operate through its affiliates across the world.

    And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

    Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden. It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground. I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan. And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

    Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability. No Americans were harmed. They took care to avoid civilian casualties. After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.

    For over two decades, bin Laden has been al Qaeda’s leader and symbol, and has continued to plot attacks against our country and our friends and allies. The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al Qaeda.

    Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort. There’s no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us. We must –- and we will — remain vigilant at home and abroad.

    As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not –- and never will be -– at war with Islam. I’ve made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam. Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims. Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own. So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

    Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where bin Laden was. That is what we’ve done. But it’s important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding. Indeed, bin Laden had declared war against Pakistan as well, and ordered attacks against the Pakistani people.

    Tonight, I called President Zardari, and my team has also spoken with their Pakistani counterparts. They agree that this is a good and historic day for both of our nations. And going forward, it is essential that Pakistan continue to join us in the fight against al Qaeda and its affiliates.

    The American people did not choose this fight. It came to our shores, and started with the senseless slaughter of our citizens. After nearly 10 years of service, struggle, and sacrifice, we know well the costs of war. These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief, have to sign a letter to a family that has lost a loved one, or look into the eyes of a service member who’s been gravely wounded.

    So Americans understand the costs of war. Yet as a country, we will never tolerate our security being threatened, nor stand idly by when our people have been killed. We will be relentless in defense of our citizens and our friends and allies. We will be true to the values that make us who we are. And on nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to al Qaeda’s terror: Justice has been done.

    Tonight, we give thanks to the countless intelligence and counterterrorism professionals who’ve worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome. The American people do not see their work, nor know their names. But tonight, they feel the satisfaction of their work and the result of their pursuit of justice.

    We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country. And they are part of a generation that has borne the heaviest share of the burden since that September day.

    Finally, let me say to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11 that we have never forgotten your loss, nor wavered in our commitment to see that we do whatever it takes to prevent another attack on our shores.

    And tonight, let us think back to the sense of unity that prevailed on 9/11. I know that it has, at times, frayed. Yet today’s achievement is a testament to the greatness of our country and the determination of the American people.

    The cause of securing our country is not complete. But tonight, we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to. That is the story of our history, whether it’s the pursuit of prosperity for our people, or the struggle for equality for all our citizens; our commitment to stand up for our values abroad, and our sacrifices to make the world a safer place.

    Let us remember that we can do these things not just because of wealth or power, but because of who we are: one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

    Thank you. May God bless you. And may God bless the United States of America.

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/05/02/remarks-president-osama-bin-laden

     
  • mazsa 04:14 on April 29, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , United States,   

    The perils of extreme democracy – California offers a warning to voters all over the world http://www.economist.com/node/18586520?story_id=18586520

     
  • mazsa 15:14 on April 28, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , , United States   

    Netflix Is Killing BitTorrent in the United States http://torrentfreak.com/netflix-is-killing-bittorrent-in-the-us-110427/

    Competing with free: anime site treats piracy as a market failure http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/04/competing-with-free-anime-site-treats-piracy-as-a-market-failure.ars

    Cf. http://theunitedpersons.org/blog/the-only-way-to-stop-piracy-is-to-cut-prices

     
  • mazsa 20:13 on April 20, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , United States   

    Surveillance Self-Defense: “The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has created this Surveillance Self-Defense site to educate the American public about the law and technology of government surveillance in the United States, providing the information and tools necessary to evaluate the threat of surveillance and take appropriate steps to defend against it.
    Surveillance Self-Defense (SSD) exists to answer two main questions: What can the government legally do to spy on your computer data and communications? And what can you legally do to protect yourself against such spying?” https://ssd.eff.org/

     
  • mazsa 19:20 on April 18, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Brazil, , , , , South Africa, United States   

    BRICS make move to shove dollar aside “Leading high-growth economies [BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa] have taken landmark steps toward lowering the importance of the dollar in international financial transactions — part of a seminal shift in the move towards a multicurrency reserve and trading system. [...]” http://www.marketwatch.com/story/brics-make-move-to-shove-dollar-aside-2011-04-17

     
  • mazsa 21:54 on April 17, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , United States   

    White House releases new trusted Internet ID plan http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/383473/white_house_releases_trusted_internet_id_plan/

    http://www.nist.gov/nstic/

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/NSTICstrategy_041511.pdf

    http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/04/17/1747215/White-House-Releases-Trusted-Internet-ID-Plan

     
  • mazsa 17:23 on April 16, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , United States   

    Patently Obvious “ON Monday the Supreme Court will consider whether to fundamentally alter the way American patent law is litigated. Specifically, in the context of an otherwise unremarkable patent dispute, the Court has promised to decide the degree to which juries should be allowed to question whether a patent should have been issued at all. [...]” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/16/opinion/16Lichtman.html

     
  • mazsa 12:57 on April 12, 2011 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: Australia, , , , , , United States,   

    How did the CIA and FBI Know that Australian Government Computers were Hacked? https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2011/04/how_did_the_cia.html

     
c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
e
edit
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
shift + esc
cancel

This site is protected with Urban Giraffe's plugin 'HTML Purified' and Edward Z. Yang's Powered by HTML Purifier. 67377 items have been purified.