Click here to show or hide the menubar.

No Agenda Episode 494 - Aid & Comfort

By Adam Curry. Posted Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 1:11 PM.

Aid & Comfort

A picture named NA-494-Art-SM.jpg

Direct [link] to the mp3 file

ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 494.nashownotes.com

New: Directory Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) nashownotes.com

The No Agenda News Network- noagendanewsnetwork.com

RSS Podcast Feed

Get the No Agenda News App for your iPhone and iPad

Torrents of each episode via BitLove

Cover Art

By Adam Curry. Posted Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 1:12 PM.

NA-494-Art-BIG

Art By: Nick the Rat

See All The Art in the Generator

Credits

By Adam Curry. Posted Sunday, March 10, 2013 at 1:12 PM.

Aid & Comfort

Executive Producers: Anonymous, Schmitty

Executive Producers: Simon Bennett, Sir Robert Frapples, Sir Joseph Ransom, Wade Demming, Si Rick (FinditClassifieds.com)

Special 31313 Executive Producers: Richard Gardiner, Sir Brad Dougherty, Paul RObberson, Sir Russell Williams, Kent Orourke, Kevin Thomas

Associate Executive Producers: Armand Guerra, Sir Timothy Tillman, The Incognegro, William Thrall

494 Club Members: Simon Bennett

Become a member of the 495 Club, support the show here

Knighthoods: Robert Frapples, Joseph Ransom, Rick, Ulrik Hansen, Mr Oil

Art By: Nick the Rat

ShowNotes Archive of links and Assets (clips etc) 494.nashownotes.com

New: Directory Archive of Shownotes (includes all audio and video assets used) nashownotes.com

The No Agenda News Network- noagendanewsnetwork.com

RSS Podcast Feed

Get the No Agenda News App for your iPhone and iPad

Torrents of each episode via BitLove

Search

Shut Up Slave!

TSA Travel Tip

Another Win!

ITM Crackpot and Buzzkill,

A quick report from SFO.

While I normally prefer Priority line with valet service, but I was in a hurry to get through the security screening recently. I employed No Agenda travel tip #2 and let them know that it was quite painful to raise my arm above my shoulder.

No opt-out protocol was invoked and I went right through the magnetometer with no massage nor small talk with a man servant.

Thanks guys,

Brian

Former Newark Airport TSA screener says the job does little to keep fliers safe

Link to Article

Source: Stuff Ain't Right åÈ Uncategorized

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 14:17

It is perhaps America's most unsafe airport. Despite being the launching point for one of the planes hijacked on 9/11 '-- Flight 93, which crashed in Pennsylvania '-- Newark Airport has had numerous security violations since. The latest: a fake bomb that made it past Transportation Security Administration officers. Here, a Newark TSA screener who recently left the agency tells how silly policies and lazy workers do little to stop real threats:A LOT of what we do is make-believe.I've had to screen small children and explain to their parents I had no choice but to ''check'' them. I would only place my hands on their arms and bottom half of their legs, and the entire ''pat-down'' lasted 10 seconds. This goes completely against TSA procedure.Because the cameras are recording our every move, we have to do something. If someone isn't checked or even screened properly, the entire terminal would shut down, as this constitutes a security breach.But since most TSA supervisors are too daft to actually supervise, bending the rules is easy to do.Did you know you don't need a high-school diploma or GED to work as a security screener? These are the same screeners that TSA chief John Pistole and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano refer to as a first-class first line of defense in the war on terror.These are the employees who could never keep a job in the private sector. I wouldn't trust them to walk my dog.An agent got through Newark last week with an improvised explosive device? That's not even news to anyone who works there. It happens all the time. The failure rate is pretty high, especially with federal investigators, and the pat-down itself is ridiculous. As invasive as it is, you still can't find anything using the back of your hand on certain areas.When there are internal tests, conducted by the Newark training department, it's easy to cheat because they use our co-workers. You could be working with someone all morning, and then they're gone. Word gets around the checkpoint. Someone will come over to you and say, ''Hey, it's Joe. He's got a blue duffel bag.''What are the chances of you being on a flight where something happens? We always said it's not a question of if terrorists get through '-- it's a question of when. Our feeling is nothing's happened because they haven't wanted it to happen. We're not any big deterrent. It's all for show.A real pat-down is when a police officer pulls you over, uses his hands to search, actually goes into your clothes. We have to use the back of our hands around certain areas. It just doesn't work. It's a really bad way to pat somebody down.If I had to guess, I'm sure lots of things get through. One screener told me about something he did going through security when he went on vacation. Let's just say the screeners did not catch something that was really obvious to anyone who was paying attention.Most TSA screeners know their job is a complete joke. Their goal is to use this as a stepping stone to another government agency.We work in a culture where common sense has no place. All but a very few TSA personnel know they're employed by a bottom-of-the-barrel agency.Our first question to anyone in a wheelchair is to ask if they're able to stand for a pat-down. If someone is in a wheelchair, he likely can't stand. Even when they're sitting, we're required to ask them to move so we can check under their buttocks.All I needed was for a passenger to fall over because I asked them to stand. And if that did happen, the screener would be vilified and the official p.r. spin would be that he needed ''additional training.''Every time you read about a TSA horror story, it's usually about a screener doing what he or she is instructed to do.Supervisors play absolutely no role in day-to-day functions except to tell you not to chew gum. Gum chewing is a huge issue with management. I once saw a supervisor make an officer open his mouth to prove he had a mint and not a piece of gum.Goofing off and half-hour-long bathroom breaks are the only way to break up the monotony. There is also a lot of ogling of female passengers by the male screeners. So, ladies, cover up when you get to the airport. These guys are checking you out constantly.A small number of screeners are delusional zealots who believe they're keeping America safe by taking your snow globe, your 2-inch pocket knife, your 4-ounce bottle of shampoo and performing invasive pat-downs on your kids.(Incidentally, the flap over the new rule allowing small pocketknives is overblown. Most of the public doesn't realize it, but you are already allowed to bring scissors, screwdrivers, tweezers, knitting needles and any number of sharp instruments on board.)The rest are only there for the paycheck and generous benefits. Screeners start at $15 per hour, and there is tons of overtime '-- mainly because they are filling in for the many screeners who don't bother coming to work. For every 40 hours you work, you receive four hours of vacation and four hours of sick time.One screener didn't come to work for four weeks. When he finally reappeared, he asked for another week off. The answer was no. So what did this brainiac decide to do? He took another week off '-- and didn't get terminated.People have been caught falling asleep on the job. They get written up, it's put in their file, and that's it.New hires see how bad it is working there, and, believe it or not, TSA does manage to hire some pretty decent people. They just don't last because they can get a normal job.It's the people who've been there a good number of years who could never find employment elsewhere. When you have a real job, it usually means you have to actually work and think, which a lot of them have a hard time doing.Anyone boarding an aircraft should feel maybe only a teeny tiny bit safer than if there were no TSA at all. http://m.nypost.com/p/news/local/confessions_of_tsa_agent_we_re_bunch_OhxHeGd0RR9UVGzfypjnLO/0

Like this:LikeLoading...

War on Food

Federal Register | Food Ingredients and Sources of Radiation Listed and Approved for Use in the Production of Meat and Poultry Products

Link to Article

Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:06

Charles Williams, Director, Policy Issuances Division, Office of Policy and Program Development, FSIS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Avenue SW., Washington, DC 20250-3700, (202) 720-5627.

On May 7, 2012, FSIS issued a proposed rule entitled ''Food Ingredients and Sources of Radiation Listed and Approved for Use in the Production of Meat and Poultry Products'' and requested comments on the document (77 FR 26706). FSIS proposed to remove sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid from the list of substances that the regulations prohibit for use in meat or poultry products.

As explained in the proposal, under the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act (FFDCA)(21 U.S.C. 301et seq.), FDA is responsible for determining the safety of ingredients and sources of irradiation used in the production of meat and poultry products, as well as prescribing safe conditions of use. Under the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 601, et seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA) (21 U.S.C. 451et seq.), FSIS is responsible for determining the suitability of FDA-approved substances in meat and poultry products. Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that was implemented in January 2000, FDA and FSIS work together to evaluate petitions requesting the approval of new substances, or new uses of previously approved substances, for use in or on meat and poultry products. The MOU is available for viewing by the public in the FSIS docket room and on the FSIS Web site at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/Regulations_&_Policies/Labeling_FDA_MOU/index.asp. Under this MOU, if FDA and FSIS approve an ingredient for use in meat or poultry products, FDA establishes the parameters of the approved use under its regulatory system. FSIS also lists the substance in FSIS Directive 7120.1, ''Safe and Suitable Ingredients Used in the Production of Meat, Poultry, and Egg Products,'' as part of a comprehensive listing of the substances that have been reviewed and that have been accepted as safe and suitable. (The Directive is available at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/OPPDE/rdad/FSISDirectives/7120.1.pdf.)

The proposed rule also explained that, under FSIS's regulations, certain antimicrobial substances are prohibited for use in meat or poultry products because these substances have the potential to conceal damage or inferiority when used at certain levels (9 CFR 424.23(a)(3)). Among these substances are potassium sorbate, propylparaben (propyl phydroxybenzoate), calcium propionate, sodium propionate, benzoic acid, and sodium benzoate.

In 2006, Kraft Foods Global, Inc. petitioned FSIS to amend the Federal meat and poultry products inspection regulations to permit the use of sodium benzoate and sodium propionate as acceptable antimicrobial agents that may be used in combination with other approved ingredients to inhibit the growth of Listeria monocytogenes (Lm) in ready-to-eat (RTE) meat and poultry products. On July 26, 2010, Kemin Food Technologies petitioned FSIS to amend the regulations to permit the use of liquid sodium propionate and liquid sodium benzoate as acceptable antimicrobial agents in meat and poultry products.

After receiving each petition, FSIS conducted an initial evaluation of the requested action to confirm that FDA had no objections to the safety of sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, or benzoic acid at the proposed levels of use. FSIS also considered each petitioner's supporting data on the suitability of these substances for use in meat and poultry products. FSIS concluded that the petitioners had established the safety of sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid at the proposed levels of use but that the Agency needed additional data to make a final suitability determination. Therefore, in July 2007, FSIS issued a waiver of provisions under 9 CFR 303.1(h) and 381.3(b) to enable Kraft to conduct various experimental trials involving the use of sodium benzoate and sodium propionate, in combination with other ingredients, to control the growth of Lm in RTE meat and poultry products. Additionally, from September 2010 through March 2011, FSIS issued waivers to Kemin and to various meat and poultry product processing establishments to conduct trials on the use of antimicrobial agents containing liquid sodium propionate and propionic acid supplied by Kemin for Lm control in RTE meat an poultry products.

While operating under the waivers, the Kemin and Kraft companies gathered sufficient data to support the use of sodium propionate, sodium benzoate, and benzoic acid as antimicrobial agents in RTE meat and poultry products. Kraft submitted data collected from its in-plant-trials and from scientific studies that show that these substances do not conceal damage or inferiority or make products appear better or of greater value than they are under the proposed conditions of use. Kraft submitted research findings to demonstrate that its proposed use of sodium benzoate and sodium propionate is effective in controlling the growth of Lm in RTE meat and poultry products. Kemin also submitted findings supporting the use of its sodium propionate and propionic acid formulations.

The Kemin petition and supporting materials are available for viewing by the public on the FSIS Web site at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Petition_Kemin.pdf. The Kraft petition is available at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/PDF/Petition_Kraft.pdf.

After considering the comments received and discussed below, FSIS has determined that sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid, under the conditions proposed in the petitions, are both safe and suitable for use as antimicrobial agents in certain RTE meat and poultry products. Therefore, FSIS is amending 9 CFR 424.23(a)(3) to remove these substances from the list of prohibited substances that may be used ''* * * in or on any product, only as provided in 9 CFR Chapter III.''

Under this final rule, use of these substances in or on meat or poultry products will continue to be approved by FDA for safety and by FSIS for suitability. FDA will continue to establish the parameters of the approved use under its regulatory system, and FSIS will list approved uses of these substances in the table of approved substances in Directive 7120.1. In that directive, FSIS will specify that sodium propionate (generally recognized as safe under 21 CFR 184.1784) can be used as an antimicrobial in various meat and poultry products in an amount not to exceed 0.5 percent (by weight of total formulation) when used alone. Sodium propionate is a direct food ingredient that must be labeled by its common or usual name in the ingredients statement of a product (21 CFR 101.4, 9 CFR 317.2(f), 381.118(a)).

The directive also will state that, when used as an antimicrobial, sodium benzoate can be used in various meat and poultry products at up to 0.1 percent when used alone (21 CFR 184.1733). Sodium benzoate is a direct food additive that must be labeled by its common or usual name in the ingredients statement of a product. Similarly, benzoic acid is a generally recognized as safe (GRAS) direct food ingredient that can be used in various meat and poultry products at up to 0.1 percent (21 184.1021 and similarly must be labeled (21 CFR 101.4, 9 CFR 317.2(f) and 381.118(a)).

The uses of these substances are consistent with FDA regulations and reflect the levels that the petitioners requested to use in meat and poultry products and that they provided supporting data. Also, the use of these substances enhances food safety by controlling Lm in RTE products.

The Kraft petition also addressed sodium diacetate (GRAS under 21 CFR 184.1754 when used as an antimicrobial agent under cGMP). The company intends to use this substance in combination with sodium benzoate and sodium propionate. Sodium diacetate is not one of the substances considered in this rulemaking because is not prohibited by FSIS regulations. When sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, or sodium diacetate are used in combination with each other, the overall maximum level for the combination cannot exceed 0.1 percent (in accordance with 21 CFR 184.1(d)). FSIS will include this information in the directive.

As a result of amending 9 CFR 424.23(a)(3), the procedures for listing approved uses of sodium propionate, benzoic acid, and sodium benzoate in the FSIS directive will be consistent with the procedures for listing approved uses in meat and poultry products of other safe and suitable substances. Approved new uses of potassium sorbate, propylparaben (propyl p-hydroxybenzoate), and calcium propionate will continue to be listed through rulemaking because the regulations (9 CFR 424.23(a)(3)) prohibit their use in meat and poultry products.

FSIS carefully considered all the comments received and developed the following responses.

FSIS received 20 comments in response to the proposed rule. Members of the public submitted twelve, organizations related to the food industry five, and a food safety consulting firm, a non-profit association, and a trade association each submitted one. Several commenters supported the proposal to remove sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid from the list of substances that the regulations prohibit for use in meat or poultry products. They stated that the additives are effective as anti-Listerial agents and are suitable for specified uses in meat and poultry products.

FSIS agrees that adding sodium propionate to the list of approved ingredients also provides meat and poultry processors greater flexibility in formulating new products while protecting the food supply against Listeria. Moreover, sodium propionate and propionic acid, which are GRAS (21 CFR 170.30, 21 CFR 184.1784) for use as antimicrobials under current good manufacturing practices, have been confirmed as safe and effective at inhibiting Lm. Sodium propionate does not mask spoilage or negatively affect sensory attributes. This ingredient provides the benefit of lowering sodium contribution in meat and poultry products, while extending shelf-life.

The following is a discussion of the relevant issues raised in the comments.

Comment: A commenter asked why there were no tests involving the human body after eating the substances. Another commenter expressed concern about the cumulative effects of combined dosages of sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid on children.

Response: FSIS and FDA do not conduct tests of the effects of food ingredients directly on humans. For a GRAS substance, such as the substances discussed in this rule, generally available data and information about the use of the substance are known and widely accepted and FDA has a basis for concluding that there is consensus among qualified experts that the data and information establish that the substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use (21 CFR 170.36(c)(4)(i)(C)). For a food additive, privately held data and information about the use of the substance are sent by the sponsor to FDA. FDA then evaluates the data and information to determine whether they establish that the substance is safe under the conditions of its intended use (21 CFR 171.1).

FSIS and FDA have evaluated all the data and determined that the uses of these substances considered in this rule are safe for individual consumers, including children.

Comment: A few commenters disapproved removing sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid from the list of substances prohibited from use in meat and poultry products because they stated that these ingredients would have harmful effects on human health. One commenter explained that, as a potential consumer of harmful additives, she found the evidence submitted by Kraft Foods and Kemin Food Technologies insufficient to prove that all three agents are safe for use in meat and poultry products. Specifically, the commenter stated that Kemin had relied on old research (a 1973 study conducted by the Select Committee on Generally Recognized as Safe Substances) to prove the safe use of sodium benzoate and benzoic acid and that new research must be performed to ensure the safety of benzoic acid for public use.

Another commenter expressed concern because Kraft stated that it used Lem-O-Fos in its meat and poultry products to ''enhance antimicrobial activity.'' The commenter stated that studies have shown that when benzoic acid is mixed with citric acid it forms benzene, which is a carcinogen. In the commenter's opinion, the substances should be kept separate from one another or concrete evidence must prove that the mixture does not constitute a hazard to consumers.

Another commenter stated that, in the early 1990s, the FDA urged companies not to use benzoate in products that also contain ascorbic acid. The commenter noted that a lawsuit filed in 2006 by private attorneys ultimately forced Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and other soft-drink makers in the United States to reformulate affected beverages'--typically fruit-flavored products. According to this commenter, soft-drink makers are now eliminating the use of benzoate in combination with vitamin C worldwide. This commenter stated that these developments should cause FDA and FSIS to reconsider whether benzoate should continue to be classified as GRAS. Another stated that the GRAS status of the sodium benzoate should be reviewed to take into account changes in consumer diets and advances in science and technology. The commenter also stated that FSIS should not expand its use until a safety assessment is done and noted that the European Union is in the process of reviewing its safety now.

Response: FDA and FSIS have considered the points made by the commenters and have determined that there are no human health hazards arising from the approved uses that will be listed in FSIS Directive 7120.1.

The conditions under which benzene is produced in soft drinks are different from the conditions under which benzene could be produced in ready-to-eat (RTE) meats. RTE meats have a pH close to neutral, are continuously refrigerated or stored at room temperature (canned RTE meats), and are protected from excessive exposure to light. Therefore, the use of sodium benzoate in RTE meats does not present a safety concern even if combined with Vitamin C or similar compounds.

Regarding the concern that the GRAS status of sodium benzoate should be reviewed, FDA has confirmed that the petitioner's intended use of sodium benzoate is covered under the GRAS regulations (at 21 CFR 184.1733) and that there are no safety issues with the intended use. FSIS accepts the conclusion of FDA. Further, FSIS is aware that the Codex Committee on Food Additives (1995) [1] has also approved the use of benzoates in cured (including salted) and dried non-heat treated processed (including comminuted) meat and poultry products, at a maximum level of 0.1 percent.

Regarding the European Union's evaluation, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) issued a data call June 1, 2012, on the occurrence in foods and beverages of certain food additives (sorbates, benzoates, and gallates) that were already permitted in the EU before January 20, 2009. Benzoic acid and sodium benzoate are among the ingredients on the list. The data are to be used to re-evaluate the ingredients. We understand from EFSA that the report on this re-evaluation will be available in late Spring 2013. When the re-evaluation is completed, experts in this Agency, and particularly in FDA, will consider the results and their possible implications. At this time, however, the available evidence supports the safety of the use of these ingredients.

Comment: One commenter supported the proposed rule but suggested that more studies be conducted on the effects of these three preservatives in higher dosages (higher than the use levels currently permitted under the FDA GRAS regulations), possible allergic reactions through contact or ingestion and the extent of those reactions, and potential alternatives to these preservatives that produce the same outcome without the use of preservatives.

Response: The levels that FSIS would allow to be used under this rule have not been shown to cause allergic reactions. Data on uses at higher levels would be evaluated under the joint FDA and FSIS ingredient approval system.

Data in the scientific literature on the amounts of these substances that are necessary to trigger or give rise to allergic reactions are not available. Food additives, such as benzoic acid and benzoates, have been known to cause hypersensitivity reactions. Such reactions are known to be very unusual in healthy individuals. However, in some cases, doses as low as 50 mg of benzoates have been shown to cause allergic reactions in individuals already suffering from allergic reactions. Information on the effects of these doses on healthy individuals is not currently available. Therefore, it is important that food additives or ingredients that may cause severe allergic or hypersensitivity reactions be appropriately declared in the ingredient statement on the product label.

Industry is likely to pursue research on the preservatives that are the subject of this rulemaking and on others. FSIS and FDA will continue to review new substances for safety and suitability under the MOU.

Comment: A commenter recommended not specifying a pH range of 4.8 to 5.2 percent for the use of sodium propionate as indicated in the Kemin petition, increasing the permissible use level of propionate when used in combination with other antimicrobial ingredients, and specifying that the substances are to be used in meat and poultry, including RTE products. The commenter explained that a higher pH provides several benefits including greater stability of the antimicrobial solution, better handling and shipping classifications, and improved sensory characteristics in finished meat products.

The commenter further stated that not including a pH specification in the approved ingredient listing in the FSIS Directive will provide room for innovation and fair competition in the market. Moreover, a permitted use level of sodium propionate in RTE meat and poultry products is necessary because the firm's testing results indicate that propionate, when combined with commonly used existing antimicrobials for meat and poultry (e.g., lactate, acetate, and diacetate), is required at higher levels to ensure safety of uncured high-moisture items.

Response: As noted above, sodium propionate that meets food grade standards as outlined in the Food Chemicals Codex, when used in accordance with 21 CFR 184.1784, is GRAS for use as an antimicrobial agent in meat products with no other limitations than cGMP. Therefore, FSIS will not specify a pH level in its Directive 7120.1. Also, since 21 CFR 184.1784 does not prescribe a maximum use level for sodium propionate, when the substance is used in combination with another antimicrobial agent, the maximum level for the combination is governed by the maximum use level of the other antimicrobial. For example, when sodium propionate is used in combination with sodium benzoate, the maximum level for the mixture is not to exceed 0.1 percent. When sodium propionate is used in combination with sodium diacetate, the maximum use level for the mixture is not to exceed 0.25 percent.

The directive will specify the uses of benzoic acid, sodium benzoate, and sodium propionate in meat and poultry products, including RTE meat and poultry products.

Executive Orders 13563 and 12866 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility. This final rule has been determined not to be significant and therefore has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) under E.O. 12866.

The rule will benefit companies that want to use these substances in the production of meat and poultry products by expediting the approval process. It will also benefit consumers by expediting the approved use of substances that enhance food safety by controlling the growth of Lm in RTE meat and poultry products. The rule also will make the approval process for new uses of sodium propionate, sodium benzoate, and benzoic acid in meat and poultry products consistent with the process for obtaining approval for other safe and suitable substances.

There are no expected costs associated with this final rule. All substances intended for use in the production of meat and poultry products will continue to be subject to FDA evaluation for safety and FSIS evaluation for suitability. Company costs and the agencies' costs associated with these evaluations will not be affected by this final rule.

Pursuant to section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the FSIS Administrator has determined that this final rule will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small entities. This determination is based primarily on the fact that the final rule will not affect the process for approving new uses of sodium benzoate, sodium propionate, and benzoic acid in meat or poultry products. This final rule will make the process of listing approved uses of these substances more efficient by eliminating the need for FSIS to conduct rulemaking each time a new use is approved.

This final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform. This rule: (1) has no retroactive effect; and (2) does not require administrative proceedings before parties may file suit in court challenging this rule. However, the administrative procedures specified in 9 CFR 306.5, 381.35, and 590.300 through 590.370, respectively, must be exhausted before any judicial challenge may be made of the application of the provisions of the final rule, if the challenge involves any decision of an FSIS employee relating to inspection services provided under the FMIA, PPIA, or EPIA.

This rule does not contain any new information collection or record keeping requirements that are subject to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501et seq.

FSIS and USDA are committed to achieving the purposes of the E-Government Act (44 U.S.C. 3601, et seq.) by, among other things, promoting the use of the Internet and other information technologies and providing increased opportunities for citizen access to Government information and services, and for other purposes.

FSIS will announce the availability of this final rule on-line through the FSIS Web page located at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/Interim_&_Final_Rules/index.asp.

FSIS also will make copies of this Federal Register publication available through the FSIS Constituent Update, which is used to provide information regarding FSIS policies, procedures, regulations, Federal Register notices, FSIS public meetings, and other types of information that could affect or would be of interest to our constituents and stakeholders. The Update is communicated via Listserv, a free email subscription service for industry, trade, and farm groups, consumer interest groups, allied health professionals, scientific professionals, and other individuals who have requested to be included. The Update also is available on the FSIS Web page. Through Listserv and the Web page, FSIS is able to provide information to a much broader, more diverse audience.

In addition, FSIS offers an email subscription service which provides automatic and customized access to selected food safety news and information. This service is available at http://www.fsis.usda.gov/news_and_events/email_subscription/. Options range from recalls to export information to regulations, directives and notices. Customers can add or delete subscriptions themselves, and have the option to password-protect their accounts.

For the reasons set forth in the preamble, FSIS is amending 9 CFR part 424 as follows:

begin regulatory text

1.The authority citation for part 424 continues to read as follows:

Authority:7 U.S.C. 450, 1901-1906; 21 U.S.C. 451-470, 601-695; 7 CFR 2.18, 2.53.

2.In ¤ 424.23, revise paragraph (a)(3) to read as follows:

(a) * * *

(3) Sorbic acid, calcium sorbate, sodium sorbate, and other salts of sorbic acid shall not be used in cooked sausages or any other meat; sulfurous acid and salts of sulfurous acid shall not be used in or on any meat; and niacin or nicotinamide shall not be used in or on fresh meat product; except that potassium sorbate, propylparaben (propyl p-hydroxybenzoate), and calcium propionate, may be used in or on any product, only as provided in 9 CFR Chapter III.

* * * * *

end regulatory text

Done at Washington, DC on: February 28, 2013.

Alfred V. Almanza,

Administrator.

[FR Doc. 2013-05341 Filed 3-6-13; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-DM-P

Sodium benzoate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What Is Sodium Propionate? | LIVESTRONG.COM

Hazards of Benzoic Acid | eHow.com

Elite$

Brennan takes oath on draft Constitution'--without Bill of Rights | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Link to Article

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 03:46

Vice President Joe Biden swears in CIA Director John Brennan at the White House, March 8, 2013. (David Lienemann/Official '...

Oh, dear. This is probably not the symbolism the White House wanted.

Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office'--behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America's top spy'--the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.

''There's one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,'' spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at their daily briefing. ''Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.''

Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.

"Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,'' Earnest said.

The Constitution itself went into effect in 1789. But troublemaking blogger Marcy Wheeler points out that what was missing from the Constitution in 1787 is also quite symbolic: The Bill of Rights, which did not officially go into effect until December 1791 after ratification by states. (Caution: Marcy's post has some strong language.)

That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on ''unreasonable searches and seizures,'' and no right to a jury trial.

How ... symbolic?

Brennan Sworn In On Draft Copy Of Constitution Without Bill of Rights

Link to Article

Source: Crooks and Liars

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:25

According to the White House, John Brennan was sworn in as CIA Director on a first draft of the Constitution including notations from George Washington, dating to 1787.

Vice President Joe Biden swears in CIA Director John Brennan in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, March 8, 2013. Members of Brennan's family stand with him. Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution, dating from 1787, which has George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it.

That means, when Brennan vowed to protect and defend the Constitution, he was swearing on one that did not include the First, Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendments '-- or any of the other Amendments now included in our Constitution. The Bill of Rights did not become part of our Constitution until 1791, 4 years after the Constitution that Brennan took his oath on.

I really don't mean to be an asshole about this. But these vows always carry a great deal of symbolism. And whether he meant to invoke this symbolism or not, the moment at which Brennan took over the CIA happened to exclude (in symbolic form, though presumably not legally) the key limits on governmental power that protect American citizens.

Update: Olivier Knox describes how the White House pushed the symbolism of this.

Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office '' behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America's top spy '' the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.

''There's one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,'' spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters gathered for their daily briefing. ''Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.''

Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.

''Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,'' Earnest said.

BTC

'Anonymous Hacker or Group-Satoshi Nakamoto

Satoshi Nakamoto was the pseudonymous person or group of people who designed and created the original bitcoin protocol and launched the bitcoin network. Beyond bitcoin, no other links to this identity have been found. His involvement in the original bitcoin protocol does not appear to extend past mid-2010.[10]

Nakamoto was active in making modifications to the bitcoin network and posting technical information on the BitcoinTalk Forum until his contact with bitcoin users began to fade in mid-2010. Until a few months before he left, he was responsible for most of bitcoins software, only rarely accepting contributions.[10]

In April 2011, Satoshi had communicated to a bitcoin contributor saying he Òmoved on to other things.

The 'transaction" fee

Transaction fees may be included with any transfer of bitcoins from one address to another. At the moment, many transactions are typically processed in a way where no fee is expected at all, but for transactions which draw coins from many bitcoin addresses and therefore have a large data size, a small transaction fee is usually expected.

The transaction fee is processed by and received by the bitcoin miner. When a new bitcoin block is generated with a successful hash, the information for all of the transactions is included with the block and all transaction fees are collected by that user creating the block, who is free to assign those fees to himself.

Transaction fees are voluntary on the part of the person making the bitcoin transaction, as the person attempting to make a transaction can include any fee or none at all in the transaction. On the other hand, nobody mining new bitcoins necessarily needs to accept the transactions and include them in the new block being created. The transaction fee is therefore an incentive on the part of the bitcoin user to make sure that a particular transaction will get included into the next block which is generated.

It is envisioned that over time the cumulative effect of collecting transaction fees will allow somebody creating new blocks to "earn" more bitcoins than will be mined from new bitcoins created by the new block itself. This is also an incentive to keep trying to create new blocks even if the value of the newly created block from the mining activity is zero in the far future.

The original guys are quiet, because they are in jail 1 may be dead

They have doe things like this before, but never so sophisticated

the system DOES work as a currncy, but has many drawbacks, mainly manipulation because it is so small

Mining and the algorythm

Specialty chips even being made for mining.

MASSIVE processing

What is a bit coin? It is a number, an answer to a question

It is possibly part of a 'Rainbow Table'

Used to crack the 'real' crypto, like visa/mastercard or launchcodes.

Rainbow table - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

==================

Hackers steal over $12,000 of Bitcoins from transaction broker Bitinstant | The Verge

Link to Article

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:24

Online institutions of all types are vulnerable to hacking, and Bitcoin is no exception: last week, hackers stole over $12,000 worth of Bitcoin currency from Bitinstant, one of the bigger Bitcoin transaction sites. As with many recent hacks, the Bitcoin theft was executed thanks to a bit of social engineering. According to the Bitinstant blog, the attacker went to the company's domain registrar posing as a Bitinstant employee '-- the attacker had a similar enough email address and knowledge of the employee's date of birth and mother's maiden name. From there, the attacker convinced the domain registrar to make the fake email address the default and to reset the account's password.

Once the attacker had access to the Bitinstant domain, he redirected the DNS to servers in Germany and then to the Ukraine, locking out the Bitinstant employees and gaining access to their email accounts. With control over the email accounts, they reset the login for a Bitcoin exchange and stole the $12,800 in three separate transactions. Getting access to the Bitcoin exchange proved simple because of a lack of two-factor authentication '-- all the thieves needed was a username and password.

Fortunately for Bitinstant and the company's customers, no personal information was obtained by the hacker '-- the company says it keeps all personal and transactional data offline to protect user privacy. Sadly, it wasn't as vigilant with other forms of security. Wired reports that Virwox, the Bitcoin exchange hackers raided, has supported multi-factor authentication since September of 2012. "Bitinstant was not using it (they learned and do now)," a Virwox representative told Wired.

Drone Nation

Two killed in US drone strike in NWA

Link to Article

Source: Dave says...

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:01

At least two militants were killed and several others reported injured when an unmanned US spy plane targeted a house with missiles here on early Sunday morning.According to details, the US drone fired missiles at a residential compound in Muhammad Khel village of Tehsil Boya in North Waziristan Agency (NWA) near Afghan border.The house was completely destroyed resulting in death of two militant suspects and leaving several others injured.The locals on self help basis dug out the bodies and injured from the rubble but the rescue work started with delay as people avoided taking part in relief work as the drones continued to hover over the area for a long time for more targets.It should be mentioned that Pakistan government and masses publicly denounce the US drone strikes in tribal belt and term them violation of its sovereignty. But Obama led US administration considers drone strikes vital to deal with terrorism, extremists and call them mandatory in US war against terrorism.

Aid and comfort legal definition of Aid and comfort. Aid and comfort synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

Britain's Drone Secrets

Link to Article

Source: Global Research

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:02

The lack of transparency surrounding the US use of drones has come under the spotlight over the past few weeks during the hearings to confirm John Brennan as head of the CIA. US politicians, journalists and campaigners have rightly criticised the secrecy that surrounds the US use of drones and called for greater openness from the Obama administration and more engagement with the public on the issue.

However it is not just the US that is keeping it use of drones under wraps. The UK's use of armed drones is swathed in secrecy too and there is much that we are not allowed to know. What we do know is that the UK launched 120 drone strikes in Afghanistan in 2012, bringing the total number of UK drone strikes to 363 since British forces began launching weapons from its Reaper drones in May 2008. Beyond this basic figure however we know precious little.

We have been asking the MoD for more details about its use of armed drones since 2009 but to little avail. Freedom of Information requests about drones are often refused on the grounds that to share such information with the public would ''prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces'' or ''prejudice relations between the United Kingdom and another State.''

This week we launched an appeal to the Information Tribunal challenging the refusal of the Information Commissioner to overturn the MoD's refusal to provide details of the date and province within Afghanistan of each UK drone strikes (we still don't know if UK drones operate throughout Afghanistan or just in Helmand province where British forces are located) as well as their refusal to tell us the number of weapons released from drones under daily tasking orders (i.e. pre-planned) and those released under dynamic targeting procedures (i.e. on the go). Details of the refusals can be found here and here.

The information we are seeking is extremely important. We know that drones operate in a different way from how manned aircraft traditionally operate. loitering for example over towns, villages and compounds looking for 'targets of opportunity'. Information about where and how weapons are being released by UK drones would be able to greatly inform the debate about whether drones are lowering the threshold when it comes to using lethal force.

Another key issue in the argument surrounding the use of drones is accuracy. Military spokespeople repeatedly describe drone strikes as being 'pin-point' or 'precise'. But questions about the whether such systems are really so accurate are also being refused. This week Tom Watson MP was again rebuffed when he asked in the House of Commons for details about the Hellfire missile fired from British reaper drones. This followed a refusal in January to answer a similar question about the accuracy of weapons fired by drones. The MoD has also refused in the past to confirm whether it is launching the thromobaric version of the Hellfire missile '' which we know the UK has in its arsenal '' from drones.

But perhaps the biggest secret surrounding the UK use of drones is the impact they are having on the ground. In May 2012 it was revealed following a NATO investigation that four Afghan civilians had been killed in a UK drone strike. The MoD insist that these are the only Afghan civilians that have been killed in UK drone strikes although they also insist at the very same time that they cannot know how many people have been killed in drone strikes. However the MoD have confirmed to me that they carry out a battle damage assessment after every single weapon release from Reaper drone and, of course, the video footage of the drone strike is recorded and available for review.

Across the border in Pakistan, according to figures compiled by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, there have been 364 drone strikes, (a remarkably similar number to the UK's 363 strikes in Afghanistan although US strikes often involve multiple weapon launches). According to BIJ between 2,500 and 3,500 have been killed in the 364 US strikes with between 400 and 800 being reliably identified as civilians of whom between 150 '' 200 being children. Given this, information the MoD's insistence that only four civilians have been killed in UK drone strikes is very hard to believe.

Over the past few years we have seen disastrous consequences when institutions claim the privilege of exemption from public scrutiny and accountability '' MPs expenses and bankers manipulating the Libor rate being just two recent examples. While it may be necessary to keep some information secret, it is simply not legitimate or appropriate for the MoD to refuse to disclose virtually all information about the use of British Reaper drones over the past five years. There is, at the very least, the sense that public discussion about drones is being manipulated and curtailed.

This week we have written to the Defence Select Committee urging that the remit for their forthcoming inquiry into the use of drones is as wide as possible. With the use of armed drones only set to increase, we need a serious, public, and fully informed debate on all these issues and that must include greater information about the day-to-day use of armed Reaper drones by British forces.

Brennan takes oath on draft Constitution'--without Bill of Rights | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

Link to Article

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 03:46

Vice President Joe Biden swears in CIA Director John Brennan at the White House, March 8, 2013. (David Lienemann/Official '...

Oh, dear. This is probably not the symbolism the White House wanted.

Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office'--behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America's top spy'--the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.

''There's one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,'' spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at their daily briefing. ''Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.''

Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.

"Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,'' Earnest said.

The Constitution itself went into effect in 1789. But troublemaking blogger Marcy Wheeler points out that what was missing from the Constitution in 1787 is also quite symbolic: The Bill of Rights, which did not officially go into effect until December 1791 after ratification by states. (Caution: Marcy's post has some strong language.)

That means: No freedom of speech and of the press, no right to bear arms, no Fourth Amendment ban on ''unreasonable searches and seizures,'' and no right to a jury trial.

How ... symbolic?

Brennan Sworn In On Draft Copy Of Constitution Without Bill of Rights

Link to Article

Source: Crooks and Liars

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 04:25

According to the White House, John Brennan was sworn in as CIA Director on a first draft of the Constitution including notations from George Washington, dating to 1787.

Vice President Joe Biden swears in CIA Director John Brennan in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, March 8, 2013. Members of Brennan's family stand with him. Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution, dating from 1787, which has George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it.

That means, when Brennan vowed to protect and defend the Constitution, he was swearing on one that did not include the First, Fourth, Fifth, or Sixth Amendments '-- or any of the other Amendments now included in our Constitution. The Bill of Rights did not become part of our Constitution until 1791, 4 years after the Constitution that Brennan took his oath on.

I really don't mean to be an asshole about this. But these vows always carry a great deal of symbolism. And whether he meant to invoke this symbolism or not, the moment at which Brennan took over the CIA happened to exclude (in symbolic form, though presumably not legally) the key limits on governmental power that protect American citizens.

Update: Olivier Knox describes how the White House pushed the symbolism of this.

Hours after CIA Director John Brennan took the oath of office '' behind closed doors, far away from the press, perhaps befitting his status as America's top spy '' the White House took pains to emphasize the symbolism of the ceremony.

''There's one piece of this that I wanted to note for you,'' spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters gathered for their daily briefing. ''Director Brennan was sworn in with his hand on an original draft of the Constitution that had George Washington's personal handwriting and annotations on it, dating from 1787.''

Earnest said Brennan had asked for a document from the National Archives that would demonstrate the U.S. is a nation of laws.

''Director Brennan told the president that he made the request to the archives because he wanted to reaffirm his commitment to the rule of law as he took the oath of office as director of the CIA,'' Earnest said.

IED

Is that an IED in your pants?

Link to Article

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:34

An undercover TSA inspector with an improvised explosive device stuffed in his pants got past two security screenings at Newark Airport '-- including a pat-down '-- and was cleared to get on board a commercial flight, sources told The Post yesterday.

The breach took place Feb. 25, when the Transportation Security Administration's special operations team '-- the agency's version of internal affairs '-- staged a mock intrusion at the airport.

''This episode once again demonstrates how Newark Airport is the Ground Zero of TSA failures,'' a source said.

The ''bomber'' was part of the four-person ''Red Team'' that posed as ticketed passengers and filed through the B1 checkpoint of Terminal B '-- home of American Airlines, JetBlue and Delta, sources said.

With the inert ''bomb'' stashed somewhere in his pants, he got through the magnetometer undetected at around 11 a.m. He was then pulled aside for a physical screening, and a TSA agent failed to discover the IED and allowed the ''bomber'' to go to his gate.

''He did have a simulated IED in his pants,'' the source said. ''They did not find it.''

The exact makeup of the mock IED was not available, but even devices small enough to be stashed in a passenger's pants could blow a hole through a plane's fuselage.

TSA inspectors have previously used mock bombs modeled after devices used by 2009 ''underwear bomber'' Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and 2001 ''shoe bomber'' Richard Reid.

Only one member of the TSA's terror team was stopped at the checkpoint '-- a female agent ''carrying a simulated IED inside her carry-on that was inside a child's doll,'' the source said.

It had ''wires sticking out'' and was obviously suspicious and she was pulled aside, sources say.

The Red Team also targeted Terminal C the same day, although results from that test were unclear.

The TSA said in a statement that it would not provide details of any of its undercover operations.

''TSA regularly conducts covert testing of security layers. Regardless of the tests' outcome, TSA officers are provided with immediate on-the-spot feedback so they receive the maximum training value that the drills offer,'' the statement said.

''Due to the security-sensitive nature of the tests, TSA does not publicly share details about how they are conducted, what specifically is tested or the outcomes.''

Newark Airport, which has 1,400 screeners and supervisors, has long struggled with security.

Last year, 52 baggage and traveler screeners were fired and another 19 disciplined for major security lapses and thefts.

Newark Airport was where a screener left a note saying, ''Get your freak on, girl,'' after finding a vibrator in the bag of a Manhattan attorney in 2011.

And it was where, in 2010, an airport ''Romeo'' was able to walk unticketed and unscreened into a secure area so he could kiss his girlfriend goodbye.

Despite the security woes, the TSA this week declared it would soon allow travelers to carry non-locking knives up to 2.36 inches in length and a half-inch width onto airplanes.

philip.messing@nypost.com

MIC

Special Forces soldiers drop plan to 'infiltrate' Utah | Robin Sage exercise

Fact Sheet: Implementation of Export Control Reform

Link to Article

Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:14

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

March 08, 2013

Today, the Administration announced two key steps to further the goals of President Obama's Export Control Reform Initiative, which is a common sense approach to overhauling the nation's export control system. President Obama signed an Executive Order today to update delegated presidential authorities over the administration of certain export and import controls under the Arms Export Control Act of 1976, and yesterday the Administration notified Congress of the first in a series of changes to the U.S. Munitions List.

Executive Order

Executive Order 11958 delegated authority to control exports of defense articles and services to the Secretary of State and delegated the comparable authority to control imports to the Secretary of the Treasury. The Department of State controls the export of defense articles and services on its U.S. Munitions List (USML); the Department of Justice controls their import pursuant to the U.S. Munitions Import List (USMIL) administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). The USMIL was previously a subset of State's USML. The most recent comprehensive delegation of these authorities was in Executive Order 11958 of January 18, 1977. The President's new Executive Order updates delegated authorities consistent with the upcoming changes to our export control lists. It supersedes and replaces Executive Order 11958 and amends Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, that pertains to the Department of Commerce-administered controls. The new Executive Order makes the following changes:

Consolidation of All Brokering Responsibilities with the Department of State: The Arms Export Control Act requires the registration and licensing of brokering activities for defense articles and services for both exports and imports. A broker is a person who acts as an agent for others in negotiating or arranging contracts, purchases, sales or transfers of defense articles or services. The Executive Order consolidates and delegates to the Secretary of State all statutory responsibility for maintaining registration and licensing requirements for brokering of defense articles and services on either the State or ATF lists which both control defense articles and services under the Arms Export Control Act. This one-stop approach provides better clarity for the defense trade community and makes it easier for industry to comply and for the U.S. Government to enforce.

Elimination of Possible ''Double Licensing'' Requirements: Today the Department of State licenses entire systems, including any accompanying spare parts, accessories, and attachments, yet many of these items will be moved to the Commerce list which may mean that an exporter would need two licenses instead of one. The President's delegation, via an amendment to Executive Order 13222, will allow the Department of State to authorize those accompanying items that may have moved to the Commerce list and prevent any potential double-licensing requirement. This ensures that the prioritization of our controls, in which we facilitate secure trade with Allies and partners, does not add new red tape. Items licensed or otherwise approved by the Secretary of State under this delegation remain subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce, including for enforcement purposes.

Congressional Notification Process: The President has directed that the Department of Commerce establish procedures for notifying Congress of approved export licenses for a certain subset of items that are moved or that may move from the State list to the Commerce list. A key feature of the President's reform initiative is to enhance transparency with Congress and the public in the administration of our export control system. This Executive Order ensures that, going forward, the Executive Branch will continue this transparency and notify Congress about export licenses for those certain items that, while no longer subject to the statutory notification requirements of the Arms Export Control Act, warrant continued transparency and notification to Congress.

Other Administrative Updates: The Executive Order delegates to the Attorney General the functions previously assigned by Executive Order 11958 to the Secretary of the Treasury, reflecting the 2003 move of ATF to the Department of Justice from the Treasury (accommodated by Executive Order 13284). It also makes a number of other necessary updates to ensure that the authorities to administer our export control system are current.

Changes to the U.S. Munitions List

The cornerstone of the President's Export Control Reform Initiative is the rebuilding of the two primary export controls lists, State's USML and the Department of Commerce's Commerce Control List (CCL) which primarily controls dual-use items, i.e., commercial items with possible military applications, and some military items of lesser sensitivity. By law, everything on the USML is controlled equally, whether an F-18 fighter or a bolt that has been modified for use on that F-18, and each of these items requires an individual license. This system has created significant obstacles and delays in providing equipment to Allies and partners for interoperability with U.S. forces in places like Afghanistan, and harms the health and competitiveness of the U.S. industrial base. Rebuilding our export control lists and moving less sensitive items from the State to the Commerce list will provide us the flexibility to more efficiently equip and maintain our partner's capabilities while allowing us to focus on preventing potential adversaries from acquiring military items that they could use against us.

The Administration notified Congress yesterday of the first in a series of changes to the USML, as required by Section 38(f) of the Arms Export Control Act. Once the Congressional notification period concludes, these changes -- to current Department of State- administered controls on Aircraft and Gas Turbine Engines -- will be published, with an effective date of 180 days after publication. The revised USML will enable the United States to better focus its resources on items that deserve the highest levels of export protection and on destinations of concern, while providing American companies with a streamlined export authorization process for thousands of parts and components. The remaining USML changes will be published on a rolling basis throughout 2013, and ultimately will update every category of defense articles to better meet current national security and economic challenges. These actions will improve our national security by better utilizing our export licensing and enforcement resources to focus on those items, destinations, and end-uses of greatest concern, improve interoperability with Allies and partners, and bolster the U.S. defense industrial base. To follow developments in the President's Export Control Reform Initiative, visit www.export.gov/ecr/.

Executive Order -- Export Control Reform

Link to Article

Source: White House.gov Press Office Feed

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:10

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release

March 08, 2013

EXECUTIVE ORDER

- - - - - - -

ADMINISTRATION OF REFORMED EXPORT CONTROLS

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Arms Export Control Act, as amended (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.) (the "Act"), and section 301 of title 3, United States Code, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section1. Delegation of Functions. The following functions conferred upon the President by the Act, and related laws, are delegated as follows:

(a) Those under section 3 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2753), with the exception of subsections (a)(1), (b), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (f) (22 U.S.C. 2753(a)(1), (b), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (f)), to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State, in the implementation of the delegated functions under sections 3(a) and (d) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2753(a) and (d)), is authorized to find, in the case of a proposed transfer of a defense article or related training or other defense service by a foreign country or international organization not otherwise eligible under section 3(a)(1) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2753(a)(1)), whether the proposed transfer will strengthen the security of the United States and promote world peace.

(b) Those under section 5 (22 U.S.C. 2755) to the Secretary of State.

(c) Those under section 21 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2761), with the exception of the last sentence of subsection (d) and all of subsection (i) (22 U.S.C. 2761(d) and (i)), to the Secretary of Defense.

(d) Those under sections 22(a), 29, 30, and 30A of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2762(a), 2769, 2770, and 2770a) to the Secretary of Defense.

(e) Those under section 23 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2763), and under section 7069 of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2012 (Public Law 112-74, Division I) and any subsequently enacted provision of law that is the same or substantially the same, to the Secretary of Defense to be exercised in consultation with the Secretary of State and, other than the last sentence of section 23(a) (22 U.S.C. 2763(a)), in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, except that the President shall determine any rate of interest to be charged that is less than the market rate of interest.

(f) Those under sections 24 and 27 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2764 and 2767) to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury in implementing the delegated functions under section 24 (22 U.S.C. 2764) and with the Secretary of State in implementing the delegated functions under section 27 (22 U.S.C. 2767).

(g) Those under section 25 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2765) to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of Defense shall assist the Secretary of State in the preparation of materials for presentation to the Congress under that section.(h) Those under section 34 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2774) to the Secretary of State. To the extent the standards and criteria for credit and guaranty transactions are based upon national security or financial policies, the Secretary of State shall obtain the prior concurrence of the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of the Treasury, respectively.

(i) Those under section 35(a) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2775(a)) to the Secretary of State.

(j) Those under sections 36(a) and 36(b)(1) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(a) and (b)(1)), except with respect to the certification of an emergency as provided by subsection (b)(1) (22 U.S.C. 2776(b)(1)), to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense, in the implementation of the delegated functions under sections 36(a) and (b)(1) (22 U.S.C. 2776(a) and (b)(1)), shall consult with the Secretary of State. With respect to those functions under sections 36(a)(5) and (6) (22 U.S.C. 2776(a)(5) and (6)), the Secretary of Defense shall consult with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

(k) Those under section 36(b)(1) with respect to the certification of an emergency as provided by subsection (b)(1) and under sections 36(c) and (d) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(b)(1), (c), and (d)) to the Secretary of State.

(l) Those under section 36(f)(1) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(f)(1)) to the Secretary of Defense.

(m) Those under sections 36(f)(2) and (f)(3) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2776(f)(2) and (f)(3)) to the Secretary of State.

(n) Those under section 38 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) to:

(i) the Secretary of State, except as otherwise provided in this subsection. Designations, including changes in designations, by the Secretary of State of items or categories of items that shall be considered as defense articles and defense services subject to export control under section 38 (22 U.S.C. 2778) shall have the concurrence of the Secretary of Defense. The authority to undertake activities to ensure compliance with established export conditions may be redelegated to the Secretary of Defense, or to the head of another executive department or agency as appropriate, who shall exercise such functions in consultation with the Secretary of State;

(ii) the Attorney General, to the extent they relate to the control of the permanent import of defense articles and defense services. In carrying out such functions, the Attorney General shall be guided by the views of the Secretary of State on matters affecting world peace, and the external security and foreign policy of the United States. Designations, including changes in designations, by the Attorney General of items or categories of items that shall be considered as defense articles and defense services subject to permanent import control under section 38 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2778) shall be made with the concurrence of the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense and with notice to the Secretary of Commerce; and

(iii) the Department of State for the registration and licensing of those persons who engage in the business of brokering activities with respect to defense articles or defense services controlled either for purposes of export by the Department of State or for purposes of permanent import by the Department of Justice.

(o) Those under section 39(b) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2779(b)) to the Secretary of State. In carrying out such functions, the Secretary of State shall consult with the Secretary of Defense as may be necessary to avoid interference in the application of Department of Defense regulations to sales made under section 22 of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2762).

(p) Those under the portion of section 40A of the Act added by Public Law 104-164 (22 U.S.C. 2785), to the Secretary of State insofar as they relate to commercial exports licensed under the Act, and to the Secretary of Defense insofar as they relate to defense articles and defense services sold, leased, or transferred under the Foreign Military Sales Program.

(q) Those under the portion of section 40A of the Act added by the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-132) (22 U.S.C. 2781), to the Secretary of State.

(r) Those under sections 42(c) and (f) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2791(c) and (f)) to the Secretary of Defense. The Secretary of Defense shall obtain the concurrence of the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Commerce on any determination considered under the authority of section 42(c) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2791(c)).

(s) Those under section 52(b) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2795a(b)) to the Secretary of Defense.

(t) Those under sections 61 and 62(a) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2796 and 2796a(a)) to the Secretary of Defense.

(u) Those under section 2(b)(6) of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended (12 U.S.C. 635(b)(6)) to the Secretary of State.

Sec. 2. Coordination. (a) In addition to the specific provisions of section 1 of this order, the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense, in carrying out the functions delegated to them under this order, shall consult with each other and with the heads of other executive departments and agencies on matters pertaining to their responsibilities.

(b) Under the direction of the President and in accordance with section 2(b) of the Act (22 U.S.C. 2752(b)), the Secretary of State, taking into account other United States activities abroad, shall be responsible for the continuous supervision and general direction of sales and exports under the Act, including the negotiation, conclusion, and termination of international agreements, and determining whether there shall be a sale to a country and the amount thereof, and whether there shall be delivery or other performance under such sale or export, to the end that sales and exports are integrated with other United States activities and the foreign policy of the United States is best served thereby.

Sec. 3. Allocation of Funds. Funds appropriated to the President for carrying out the Act shall be deemed to be allocated to the Secretary of Defense without any further action of the President.

Sec. 4. Revocation. Executive Order 11958 of January 18, 1977, as amended, is revoked; except that, to the extent consistent with this order, all determinations, authorizations, regulations, rulings, certificates, orders, directives, contracts, agreements, and other actions made, issued, taken, or entered into under the provisions of Executive Order 11958, as amended, and not revoked, superseded, or otherwise made inapplicable, shall continue in full force and effect until amended, modified, or terminated by appropriate authority.

Sec. 5. Delegation of Functions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. Executive Order 13222 of August 17, 2001, is amended as follows:

(a) Redesignate section 4 as section 6.

(b) Insert the following new sections 4 and 5 after section 3:

"Sec. 4. The Secretary of Commerce shall, to the extent required as a matter of statute or regulation, establish appropriate procedures for when Congress is to be notified of the export of firearms that are subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce under the Export Administration Regulations and that are controlled for purposes of permanent import by the Attorney General under section 38(a) of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2778(a)) and appropriate procedures for when Congress is to be notified of the export of Major Defense Equipment controlled for purposes of permanent export under the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce.

Sec. 5. (a) The Secretary of State is hereby authorized to take such actions and to employ those powers granted to the President by the Act as may be necessary to license or otherwise approve the export, reexport, or transfer of items subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce as agreed to by the Secretary of State and the Secretary of Commerce.

(b) Notwithstanding subsection (a) of this section, items licensed or otherwise approved by the Secretary of State pursuant to this section remain subject to the jurisdiction of the Department of Commerce."

Sec. 6. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

BARACK OBAMA

Federal Register | 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification - Australia

Link to Article

Fri, 08 Mar 2013 14:51

Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act, as Amended(i) Prospective Purchaser: Commonwealth of Australia.

(ii) Total Estimated Value:

Major Defense Equipment*$2.6 billionOther$1.1 billionTOTAL$3.7 billion(iii) Description and Quantity or Quantities of Articles or Services under Consideration for Purchase: up to 12 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft, 12 EA-18G Growler aircraft, 54 F414-GE-402 engines (48 installed and 6 spares), 2 engine inlet devices, 35 AN/APG-79 Radar Systems, 70 AN/USQ-140 Multifunctional Informational Distribution System Low Volume Terminals (MIDS-LVT) or RT-1957(C)/USQ-190(V) Joint Tactical Radio Systems, 40 AN/ALQ-214 Integrated Countermeasures Systems, 24 AN/ALR-67(V)3 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Receiving Sets, 72 LAU-127 Guided Missile Launchers, 15 M61A2 Vulcan Cannons, 32 AN/AVS-9 Night Vision Goggles or Night Vision Cueing Device Systems, 40 AN/APX-111 Combined Interrogator Transponders, 80 AN/ARC-210/RT-1990A(C) Communication Systems, 100 Digital Management Devices with KG-60's, 36 Accurate Navigation Systems, 30 AN/AYK-29(V) Distributed Targeting Systems (DTS), 4 AN/PYQ-21 DTS Mission Planning Transit Cases, 24 AN/ ASQ-228 Advance Targeting Forward Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pods, 40 AN/PYQ-10 Simple Key Loaders (SKL), 80 KIV-78 Mode4/5Modules, 48 COMSEC Management Workstations (CMWS), 24 AN/ALE-47 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Systems, 80 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS), and 400 AN/ALE-55 Fiber Optic Towed Decoys. Also included are system integration and testing, tools and test equipment, support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documents, personnel training and training equipment, aircraft ferry and refueling support, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related elements of logistics and program support.

(iv) Military Department: Navy (SCI).

(v) Prior Related Cases, if any:

FMS Case SAF'--$2.2B'--02May07

FMS case GQY'--$358M'--6May11

FMS case LEN'-- $992M'--13September12

(vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None.

(vii) Sensitivity of Technology Contained in the Defense Article or Defense Services Proposed to be Sold: None.

(viii) Date Report Delivered to Congress: 27 February 2013.

[*] As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.

Australia'--F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and EA-18G Growler Aircraft

The Government of Australia has requested a possible sale of up to 12 F/A-18E/F Super Hornet aircraft, 12 EA-18G Growler aircraft, 54 F414-GE-402 engines (48 installed and 6 spares) 2 engine inlet devices, 35 AN/APG-79 Radar Systems, 70 AN/USQ-140 Multifunctional Informational Distribution System Low Volume Terminals (MIDS-LVT) or RT-1957(C)/USQ-190(V) Joint Tactical Radio Systems, 40 AN/ALQ-214 Integrated Countermeasures Systems, 24 AN/ALR-67(V)3 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Receiving Sets, 72 LAU-127 Guided Missile Launchers, 15 M61A2 Vulcan Cannons, 32 AN/AVS-9 Night Vision Goggles or Night Vision Cueing Device System, 40 AN/APX-111 Combined Interrogator Transponders, 80 AN/ARC-210/RT-1990A(C) Communication Systems, 100 Digital Management Devices with KG-60's, 36 Accurate Navigation Systems, 30 AN/AYK-29(V) Distributed Targeting Systems (DTS), 4 AN/PYQ-21 DTS Mission Planning Transit Cases, 24 AN/ASQ-228 Advance Targeting Forward Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pods, 40 AN/PYQ-10 Simple Key Loaders (SKL), 80 KIV-78 Mode4/5Module, 48 COMSEC Management Workstations (CMWS), 24 AN/ALE-47 Electronic Warfare Countermeasures Systems, 80 Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing Systems (JHMCS), and 400 AN/ALE-55 Fiber Optic Towed Decoys. Also included are system integration and testing, tools and test equipment, support equipment, spare and repair parts, publications and technical documents, personnel training and training equipment, aircraft ferry and refueling support, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related elements of logistics and program support. The estimated cost is $3.7 billion.

Australia is an important ally in the Western Pacific that contributes significantly to ensuring peace and economic stability in the region. Australia's efforts in peacekeeping and humanitarian operations have made a significant impact on regional political and economic stability and have served U.S. national security interests. This proposed sale is consistent with those objectives and facilitates burden sharing with our allies.

The proposed sale will improve Australia's capability in current and future coalition efforts. Australia will use the enhanced capability as a deterrent to regional threats and to strengthen its homeland defense. Australia will have no difficulty absorbing these additional aircraft into its armed forces.

The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.

The prime contractor will be The Boeing Corporation in St. Louis, Missouri; General Electric Aircraft Engines in Lynn, Massachusetts; Data Link Solutions in Chesterfield, Missouri; BAE Systems in Rockville, Maryland; Northrop Grumman Corporation in Falls Church, VA; Raytheon Corporation in Waltham, MA; and Visions Systems International in San Jose, California. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.

Implementation of this proposed sale may require the assignment of additional U.S. Government or contractor representatives to Australia.

There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.

Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control ActAnnex Item No. vii(vii) Sensitivity of Technology

1. The F/A-18E/FSuper Hornet is a single- and two-seat, twin engine, multi-mission fighter/attack aircraft that can operate from either aircraft carriers or land bases. The F/A-18 fills a variety of roles: Air superiority, fighter escort, suppression of enemy air defenses, reconnaissance, forward air control, close and deep air support, and day and night strike missions. The F/A-18E/F Weapon System is considered Secret.

2. The EA-18GGrowler is a two-seat, twin engine, multi-mission Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) aircraft that can operate from either aircraft carriers or land bases. It provides a capability to detect, identify, locate, and suppress hostile emitters. The EA-18G provides organic accurate emitter targeting for employment of onboard suppression weapons, such as High-Speed Anti-Radiation Missile (HARM). The EA-18G Weapon System is considered Secret.

3. The AN/APG-79Active Electronically Scanned Array Radar System is classified Secret. The radar provides the F/A-18 aircraft with all-weather, multimission capability for performing air-to-air and air-to-ground targeting and attack. Air-to-air modes provide the capability for all-aspect target detection, long-range search and track, automatic target acquisition, and tracking of multiple targets. Air-to-surface attack modes provide high-resolution ground mapping navigation, weapon delivery, and sensor cueing. The system component hardware (Antenna, Transmitter, Radar Data Processor, and Power Supply) is Unclassified. The Receiver-Exciter hardware is Confidential. The radar Operational Flight Program (OFP) is classified Secret. Documentation provided with the AN/APG-79 radar set is classified Secret.

4. The AN/ALR-67(V)3Electric Warfare Countermeasures Receiving Set is classified Confidential. The AN/ALR-67(V)3 provides the F/A-18F aircrew with radar threat warnings by detecting and evaluating friendly and hostile radar frequency threat emitters and providing identification and status information about the emitters to on-board Electronic Warfare (EW) equipment and the aircrew. The OFP and User Data Files (UDF) used in the AN/ALR-67(V)3 are classified Secret. Those software programs contain threat parametric data used to identify and establish priority of detected radar emitters.

5. The AN/ALE-47Countermeasures Dispensing Systems is classified Secret. The AN/ALE-47 is a threat-adaptive dispensing system that dispenses chaff, flares, and expendable jammers for self-protection against airborne and ground-based Radio Frequency and Infrared threats. The AN/ALE-47 Programmer is classified Confidential. The OFP and Mission Data Files used in the AN/ALE-47 are classified Secret. Those software programs contain algorithms used to calculate the best defense against specific threats.

6. The APX-111Combined Interrogator/Transponder (CIT) with the Conformal Antenna System (CAS) is classified Secret. The CIT is a complete MARKXII identification system compatible with Identification Friend or Foe (IFF) Modes 1, 2, 3/A, C, 4, and 5 (secure). A single slide-in module that can be customized to the unique cryptographic functions for a specific country provides the systems secure mode capabilities. The Mode S Beacon System is a combined data link and Secondary Surveillance Radar (SSR) system that was standardized in 1985 by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). Mode S provides air surveillance using a data link with a permanent unique aircraft address.

7. The Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) is a modified HGU-55/P helmet that incorporates a visor-projected Heads-Up Display (HUD) to cue weapons and aircraft sensors to air and ground targets. In close combat, a pilot must currently align the aircraft to shoot at a target. JHMCS allows the pilot to simply look at a target to shoot. This system projects visual targeting and aircraft performance information on the back of the helmet's visor, enabling the pilot to monitor this information without interrupting his field of view through the cockpit canopy, the system uses a magnetic transmitter unit fixed to the pilot's seat and a magnetic field probe mounted on the helmet to define helmet pointing positioning. A Helmet Vehicle Interface (HVI) interacts with the aircraft system bus to provide signal generation for the helmet display. This provides significant improvement for close combat targeting and engagement. Hardware is Unclassified; technical data and documents are classified up to Secret.

8. The AN/AVS-9Night Vision Goggles provide imagery sufficient for an aviator to complete night time missions down to starlight and extreme low light conditions. The AN/AVS-9 is designed to satisfy the F/A-18 mission requirements for covert night combat, engagement, and support. The third generation light amplification tubes provide a high-performance, image-intensification system for optimized F/A-18 night flying at terrain-masking altitudes. The AN/AVS-9 night vision goggles are classified as Unclassified but with restrictions on release of technologies.

9. The AN/USQ-140Multifunctional Informational Distribution System (MIDS) Low Volume Terminal (LVT) is classified Confidential. The MIDS LVT is a secure data and voice communication network using the Link-16 architecture. The systems provides enhanced situational awareness, positive identification of participants within the network, secure fighter-to-fighter connectivity, and secure voice capability and ARN-118 TACAN functionality. It provides three major functions: Air Control, Wide Area Surveillance, and Fighter-to-Fighter. The MIDS LVT can be used to transfer data in Air to-Air, Air-to-Surface, and Air-to-Ground scenarios. The MIDS enhanced Interference Blanking Unit (EIBU) provides validation and verification of equipment and concept. EIBU enhances input/output signal capacity of the MIDS LVT and addresses parts obsolescence.

10. The RT-1957(C)/USQ-190(V)Multifunctional Informational Distribution System (MIDS) Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS) is classified Confidential. It is a 4-channel radio designed to run the complex Link 16 waveform and up to three additional communication protocols, including Airborne Networking Waveform (ANW). The terminal can host and provide the necessary computer processing to run routing and platform specific applications.

11. The ALE-55Fiber Optic Towed Decoys is radio frequency countermeasure designed to protect an aircraft from radar guided missiles. It consists of an aircraft-towed decoy and onboard electronics. It works together with the aircraft's electronic warfare system to provide radar jamming. In addition, it can also be used in a backup mode as a signal repeater, which allows it to lure incoming missiles away from their actual target.

12. The AN/ARC-210, RT-1990A(C) Communication System has been designed to better meet software defined radio tenets, and architectures, provides superior performance in the transfer of networked and point to point data and voice imagery.

13. The Accurate Navigation Systems (ANAV) with country specific Selective Availability Anti-Spoofing Module (SASSM) including Advance Digital Antenna Production/Antenna Electronics (ADAP/AE) and Conformal-Controlled Reception Patterned Antenna (C-CRPA) provide full accuracy and P/Y-Code GPS. The ANAV can accommodate many interfaces to various sensors through a number of available options including Selective Availability and Anti-spoofing Module (SASSM), and can be integrated with existing Inertial Navigation System (INS) and Doppler systems. The system also incorporates Air Navigation Warfare (NAVWAR) protection designed to counter GPS Electronic Warfare threats due to intentional and unintentional interference by providing the warfighter continued access to GPS through the use of Anti-jam (AJ) Antenna Systems consisting of the Conformal'--Controlled Reception Pattern Antenna, (C-CRPA), and the Advanced Digital Antenna Production/Antenna Electronics, (ADAP/AE).

14. The AN/AYK-29(V)Distributed Targeting Systems (DTS) and AN/PYQ-21 DTS Mission Planning Transit Case uses onboard hardware and software processing to produce precise targeting solutions for Super Hornet aircrews. The system compares synthetic-aperture radar (SAR) maps from the aircraft's active-array radar with stored geo-registered SAR maps and generates precise target coordinates for GPS-guided weapons. DTS enhances Super Hornet aircrews' situational awareness when engaging air-to-ground targets.

15. The AN/ALQ-214(V)4Jammer is the next generation integrated countermeasures system that blends sensitive receivers and active countermeasures to form an electronic shield for the F/A-18 fighter aircraft. The RF countermeasure system responds to threats autonomously with a specific series of measures designed to protect the aircraft from detection and engages any fired threats to the aircraft, to ensure mission success.

16. The AN/ASQ-228Advance Targeting Forward Looking Infrared (ATFLIR) Pod is a multi-sensor, electro-optical targeting pod incorporating infrared, low-light television camera, laser rangefinder/target designator, and laser spot tracker developed and manufactured by Raytheon. It is used to provide navigation and targeting for military aircraft in adverse weather and using precision-guided weapons.

17. The LAU-127Guided Missile Launchers is a rail launcher designed to carry and launch AMRAAM. It provides the electrical and mechanical interface between the missile and launch aircraft as well as the two-way data transfer between missile and cockpit controls and displays to support preflight orientation and control circuits to prepare and launch the missile. The launcher will also be capable of carrying and launching the AIM-9L/M SIDEWINDER missile.

18. If a technologically advanced adversary were to obtain knowledge of the specific hardware and software elements, the information could be used to develop countermeasures that might reduce weapon system effectiveness or be used in the development of a system with similar or advanced capabilities.

Federal Register | 36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification -Iraq

Link to Article

Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:03

Ms. B. English, DSCA/DBO/CFM, (703) 601-3740.

The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Transmittals 12-60 with attached transmittal, policy justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

Dated: March 4, 2013.

Aaron Siegel,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P

BILLING CODE 5001-06-C

Notice of Proposed Issuance of Letter of Offer Pursuant to Section 36(b)(1) of the Arms Export Control Act, as Amended(i) Prospective Purchaser: Iraq.

(ii) Total Estimated Value:

* As defined in Section 47(6) of the Arms Export Control Act.Major Defense Equipment*$0 millionOther$600 millionTOTAL$600 million(iii) Description and Quantity or Quantities of Articles or Services under Consideration for Purchase: 90 M45 RAPISCAN Mobile Eagle High Energy Mobile System Vehicles, 40 M60 RAPISCAN Mobile Eagle High Energy Mobile System Vehicles, 70 American Science and Engineering brand Z Backscatter Vans, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, Quality Assurance Team, tools and test equipment, publications and technical data, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related logistical support.

(iv) Military Department: Army (WAN).

(v) Prior Related Cases, if any: None.

(vi) Sales Commission, Fee, etc., Paid, Offered, or Agreed to be Paid: None.

(vii) Sensitivity of Technology Contained in the Defense Article or Defense

Services Proposed to be Sold: None.

(viii) Date Report Delivered to Congress: 27 February 2013.

Iraq'--RAPISCAN System VehiclesThe Government of Iraq has requested a possible sale of 90 M45 RAPISCAN Mobile Eagle High Energy Mobile System Vehicles, 40 M60 RAPISCAN Mobile Eagle High Energy Mobile System Vehicles, 70 American Science and Engineering brand Z Backscatter Vans, spare and repair parts, support equipment, personnel training and training equipment, Quality Assurance Teams, tools and test equipment, publications and technical data, U.S. Government and contractor technical assistance, and other related logistical support. The estimated cost is $600 million.

This proposed sale directly supports the Iraqi government and serves the interests of the Iraqi people and the United States.

This proposed sale of RAPISCAN systems and vehicles will contribute to a stable, sovereign, and democratic Iraq. The purchase and use of these systems will facilitate progress toward this goal by increasing the Government of Iraq's ability to defend critical infrastructure and reduce terror and insurgent activities. The Z Backscatter vans will be used to scan vehicle interiors and will provide the Government of Iraq a tool to restrict the ability of insurgent and terrorist groups to operate by detecting contraband movement through borders and checkpoints. Iraq will have no difficulty absorbing this equipment.

The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.

The prime contractors will be Rapiscan Systems in Torrance, California; and American Science and Engineering in Billerica, Massachusetts. There are no known offset agreements proposed in connection with this potential sale.

Implementation of this proposed sale will require contractor representatives (30 from Rapiscan and 15 from American Science and Engineering) to travel to Iraq for a period of three years to provide management, and operation and maintenance training.

There will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale.

[FR Doc. 2013-05401 Filed 3-7-13; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-P

Obama Nation

NRPK

Nukes

Grote betoging in Tokio tegen kernenergie

Link to Article

Source: VK: Home

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:00

10/03/13, 13:19 '' bron: ANP

(C) ap. Een van de demonstranten.

Duizenden betogers hebben zondag in Tokio de sluiting van alle kerncentrales in Japan geist. De betoging is in het kader van de herdenking van de ramp die zich 11 maart 2011 in Japan voltrok. Een aardbeving voor de oostkust onder de bodem van de Stille Oceaan met een kracht van 9 op de schaal van Richter en vervolgens een tsunami kostten aan zeker 19.000 mensen het leven.

De aan de kust gelegen kerncentrale van Fukushma Daiichi, ten noordoosten van Tokio, werd verwoest door de ramp. Het is de grootste kernramp sinds die van het Russische Tsjernobyl in 1986. Japan worstelt nog steeds met de 'stralende' ruønes van de centrale.

Het land heeft eigenlijk al afscheid genomen van kernenergie. Van de ruim 50 reactoren in het land werken er nog slechts twee.

EUROLand

Fed Injects Record $100 Billion Cash Into Foreign Banks Operating In The US In Past Week | Zero Hedge

Link to Article

Source: Grand Chessboard

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 14:17

Those who have been following our exclusive series of the Fed's direct bailout of European banks (here, here, here and here), and, indirectly of Europe, will not be surprised at all to learn that in the week ended February 27, or the week in which Europe went into a however brief tailspin following the shocking defeat of Bersani in the Italian elections, and an even more shocking victory by Berlusconi and Grillo, leading to a political vacuum and a hung parliament, the Fed injected a record $99 billion of excess reserves into foreign banks. As the most recent H.8 statement makes very clear, soared from $836 billion to a near-record $936 billion, or a $99.3 billion reserve ''reallocation'' in the form of cash '' very, very fungible cash '' into foreign (read European) banks in one week.

Fed Injects Record $100 Billion Cash Into Foreign Banks Operating In The US In Past Week | Zero Hedge.

Agenten krijgen kopstoten

Link to Article

Source: VK: Home

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:43

10/03/13, 14:16 '' bron: ANP

Op twee plekken in Nederland hebben agenten zaterdagavond een kopstoot gekregen. In het Brabantse dorpje Ledeacker ging het mis toen de politie twee mannen (23, 25) wilde aanhouden.

Het duo werd een bar uitgezet nadat het klanten en personeel lastig had gevallen. Een van de mannen verzette zich, waarna de agenten zich ermee bemoeiden.

Een van de mannen gaf, toen ze al waren aangehouden en onderweg waren naar het politiebureau, een agent een kopstoot. De andere verdachte had eerder al een agent op het gezicht geslagen. Beiden bedreigden de agenten ook nog met de dood.

In Rijswijk (Zuid-Holland) kreeg een agent een kopstoot nadat hij een man had aangehouden. De politie moest ingrijpen omdat er een vechtpartij was. In totaal drie Hagenaars werden aangehouden.

Syria

Syrian National Coalition postpones meeting to form government

Link to Article

Source: Reuters: World News

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 13:05

TweetShare thisEmailPrint1 of 2. Syrian National Coalition leader Moaz Alkhatib speaks to the media after meeting with Arab League head Nabil al-Arabi in Cairo February 11, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Asmaa Waguih

AMMAN | Sun Mar 10, 2013 8:39am EDT

AMMAN (Reuters) - Syria's opposition as postponed a meeting to form a provisional government, in the latest setback to opposition efforts to create an administration to take over if President Bashar al-Assad is ousted, coalition sources said on Sunday.

The Syrian National Coalition meeting to elect a provisional prime minister, which was due to be held on March 12 after being postponed once already, has been rescheduled for March 20, but it was uncertain it would be held even then, the sources said.

"We cannot afford a split over this issue any more. The revolution was not born chaotic," said coalition member Kamal al-Labwani, a veteran opposition figure who spent nine years as a political prisoner after Assad took over from his father in 2000.

Labwani said the coalition was split in two over the merits of forming government, with some preferring to wait to see if U.N. mediator Lakhdar Brahimi's efforts to form a transitional government as part of a political compromise succeed.

Other wanted to form a government immediately to pre-empt any deal that could see Assad remaining in power, Labwani said.

A second coalition source said that the meeting could go ahead on March 20 and that even if only a small number of members attended they could approve a government with a simple majority.

Osama al-Qadi, an economist who leads an opposition taskforce drawing up plans for post-conflict economic recovery, has emerged as front-runner for the post of prime minister after former Prime Minister Riad Hijab, the highest-ranking civilian defector from Assad's government, withdrew his candidacy.

Hijab had run into opposition from Islamists and liberals in the coalition over his former ties with Syria's ruling elite.

(Reporting by Khaled Yacoub Oweis; Editing by Louise Ireland)

Tweet thisLink thisShare thisDigg thisEmailReprintsComments (0)

Be the first to comment on reuters.com.

Add yours using the box above.

UN Peacekeepers Released by Syrian Rebels

Link to Article

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 12:36

Vaccine$

Does it take one to know one? Endorsement of conspiracy theories is influenced by personal willingness to conspire - Douglas - 2011 - British Journal of Social Psychology

Link to Article

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 16:58

Brief report

Karen M. Douglas*,Robbie M. SuttonArticle first published online: 12 APR 2011

DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02018.x

(C)2011 The British Psychological Society

Additional Information

How to CiteDouglas, K. M. and Sutton, R. M. (2011), Does it take one to know one? Endorsement of conspiracy theories is influenced by personal willingness to conspire. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50: 544''552. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02018.x

Author InformationUniversity of Kent, Canterbury, UK

*Karen Douglas, School of Psychology, University of Kent, Canterbury CT2 7NP, United Kingdom (e'Æmail: k.douglas@kent.ac.uk).

Publication HistoryIssue published online: 2 SEP 2011Article first published online: 12 APR 2011Received 12 May 2010; revised version received 15 December 2010We advance a new account of why people endorse conspiracy theories, arguing that individuals use the social''cognitive tool of projection when making social judgements about others. In two studies, we found that individuals were more likely to endorse conspiracy theories if they thought they would be willing, personally, to participate in the alleged conspiracies. Study 1 established an association between conspiracy beliefs and personal willingness to conspire, which fully mediated a relationship between Machiavellianism and conspiracy beliefs. In Study 2, participants primed with their own morality were less inclined than controls to endorse conspiracy theories '' a finding fully mediated by personal willingness to conspire. These results suggest that some people think 'they conspired' because they think 'I would conspire'.

More content like this

Find more content:Find more content written by:

AN ACT REQUIRING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS FOR CHILDREN.

Link to Article

Thu, 07 Mar 2013 14:37

AN ACT REQUIRING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS FOR CHILDREN.

General Assembly

Proposed Bill No. 374

January Session, 2013

LCO No. 2001

Referred to Committee on PUBLIC HEALTH

Introduced by:

SEN. HARP, 10th Dist.

REP. WALKER, 93rd Dist.

AN ACT REQUIRING BEHAVIORAL HEALTH ASSESSMENTS FOR CHILDREN.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened:

That section 10-206 of the general statutes be amended to require (1) each pupil enrolled in public school at grades 6, 8, 10 and 12 and each home-schooled child at ages 12, 14 and 17 to have a confidential behavioral health assessment, the results of which shall be disclosed only to the child's parent or guardian, and (2) each health care provider performing a child's behavioral health assessment to complete the appropriate form supplied by the State Board of Education verifying that the child has received the assessment.

Statement of Purpose:

To provide behavioral health assessments to children.

VIDEO

Bill Clinton Says Defense Of Marriage Act Which He Signed Into Law Should Be Overturned

NATIONWIDE CANNED TUNA RECALL

VIDEO-Manchester police officer shot by fellow officer during college - WFSB 3 Connecticut

Link to Article

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:28

MANCHESTER, CT (WFSB) -About 24 hours after the lockdown was lifted at Manchester Community College, the campus seemed back to normal.

A lockdown was issued after a student reported seeing a man with a "handgun protruding out from his waistband" Wednesday afternoon.

About 4,000 people were "under a shelter-in-place emergency," while police searched each classroom.

During the lockdown, a Manchester police officer was shot in the foot. However, he did not shoot himself. It was an accidental discharge by another officer.

After about six hours, the lockdown was lifted after no one with a firearm was located on the campus.

"I wasn't really apprehensive," said student Jonathan Taylor. "I think they got everything under control now."

Some students told Eyewitness News that it was hard to come to Manchester Community College Thursday morning.

"My parents actually had to convince me to come back to school today," said student Diana Dunn.

State police told Eyewitness News even though the possible suspect was never found, it believes the call the agency received on the suspect was believable.

However, students and faculty alike give the college high marks for how it handled the situation.

"I feel as though they handled it well. From the updates they gave me, they gave me like a million updates," said Manchester Community College Instructor Crystal Wiggins. "I got like ten updates during the time they were locking down the classrooms."

Students at Manchester Community College were alerted of the situation via text message, the school website and media outlets.

Manchester Community College President Gena Glickman spoke at a campus safety at the State Capitol in Hartford Thursday morning.

Manchester Community College has their own sworn officers and they called Manchester Police Department for help.

On Thursday, Glickman discussed her proposal to get weapons for her five unarmed, but state certified police officers.

"They can't be part of the response team," she said. "They can be part of the logistics team, which they certainly were. They were invaluable yesterday, but they had to turn over their keys."

Glickman said she believes arming the Manchester Community College police could be done at little, if any, cost. It must be approved by the Connecticut Board of Regents.

Police told Eyewitness News the suspect is believed to be a heavyset Hispanic man, who is possibly 5'8" to 5"10" and wearing a red short-sleeved shirt.

No arrests have been made at this time and no evidence was located.

The incident remains under investigation by state police.

Copyright 2013 WFSB (Meredith Corporation). All rights reserved.

Coupons.com Brothers Commercial - YouTube

Link to Article

Sun, 10 Mar 2013 03:44

VIDEO-Bitcoin for libertarians: Roger Ver at NH Liberty Forum 2013 - YouTube

Link to Article

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:58

"After WE Killed al-Awlaki A Drone Killed His Son We're Now Told That Was An Accident"

McCain Justifies Killing Totally Innocent Americans On US Soil

"I'll Keep Fighting To Solve The Real Challenges Facing Middle-Class Families" Pres Obama Weekly

"THEY Could Take A Toyota Pickup Put A Nuke In The Back And Park It In Any American City!"

North Korea Threatens "First Strike Nuclear Attack That Will Leave Washington DC In A Sea Of Flame"

Hey Ed Schultz: Your Employer MAKES Those Drones!

Link to Article

Source: MRCTV - News & Politics

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 15:17

If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.

[Caller rips Ed Schultz to shreds on drone issue]

CALLER (07 March 2013): Hey, regarding drones, you suddenly sound like a neo-conservative, so I googled 'unmanned aerial systems,' otherwise known as drones and the words 'General Electric' and I see your parent company is knee-deep in profiteering off drone manufacturing. Also ...

SCHULTZ: And you think that that, and you think that that drives my opinion?

CALLER: I don't know, it's just weird ...

SCHULTZ: Oh give me a break! Terry! (crosstalk) Listen to what the hell you're saying! (argument ensues, each talking over the other). Do you, I am with the president! Exclu, excuse me, I am with the president! I'm with the president on this!

CALLER: You're an idiot! You're an idiot, war-profiteering, you should be speaking about GE paying some taxes too instead of gutting Social Security or the sequester ...

SCHULTZ: Wow, psycho talk (crosstalk), psych-, keep going, keep going, this is good. So sick in Los -, Terry, sick in Los Angeles.

CALLER: Google 'unmanned aerial systems' and GE and you'll see, they are profiteering off drones and now all of a sudden ...

SCHULTZ: You just found that out?! You just found that out?! (starts imitating Cheney) Terry, it is a fact that you have lost your mind, uh, it is a fact, Terry, that you better watch out, you might be taken out by a drone yourself, Terry, you just never know. (laughs, turning into guffaw). Folks, let me tell you something -- if I get to the boardroom of General Electric, to that pay grade, I'll do something about it, OK? But for her to call in and say that that affects where I stand on issues, that's a stretch. (sarcastically) Hysterical, she's just absolutely hysterical.

Dianne Feinstein: "It's legal to hunt humans" with high capacity magazines

Link to Article

Source: MRCTV - News & Politics

Sat, 09 Mar 2013 07:06

MRC TV is an online platform for people to share and view videos, articles and opinions on topics that are important to them -- from news to political issues and rip-roaring humor.

MRC TV is brought to you by the Media Research Center, a 501(c) 3 nonprofit research and education organization. The MRC is located at: 325 South Patrick Street, Alexandria, VA 22314. For information about the MRC, please visit www.MRC.org.

Copyright (C) 2013, Media Research Center. All Rights Reserved.

DICK CHENEY!!! Libs Shift Drone Blame Away From Obama

Link to Article

Source: MRCTV - News & Politics

Fri, 08 Mar 2013 15:08

If the player does not load, please check that you are running the latest version of Adobe Flash Player.

BILL PRESS (07 March 2013): I hate to pop your bubble, but here's something we have to remember, President Obama is not going to be in the White House forever, okay there's going to be someone else sitting there, and some day it's going to be a Republican and would you really trust a George Bush or a Dick Cheney or a Newt Gingrich or a Herman Cain or a Michelle Bachmann or you name it, or a Rand Paul to use this kind of authority and to have that kind of authority that killing authority here in the United States? No freaking way!

--- MIKE IN CHICAGO (STEPHANIE MILLER SHOW - 07 MARCH 2013) (30:47): Imagine another Dick Cheney in office

STEPHANIE MILLER: Yeah.

MIKE IN CHICAGO: and this becomes law.

STEPHANIE MILLER: Did you ah read the Maureen Dowd piece about Dick Cheney.

MIKE IN CHICAGO: No.

STEPHANIE MILLER: Yeah yeah it really is terrifying. There's a new documentary The World According to Dick Cheney. Have you heard about it?

MIKE IN CHICAGO: Yeah I saw the preview of it yesterday. STEPHANIE MILLER: Yeah but now that's

MIKE IN CHICAGO: It's really scary he has no remorse either. That's the most unbelievable part.

STEPHANIE MILLER: That's what I mean.

JIM WARD: He's a sociopath, incapable of remorse.

STEPHANIE MILLER: Yeah.

XML