Foreign press

[Камень]

Нашел интересную заметку про принца Джорджа. Да, того самого, чьего появления на всем с таким трепетом и любовью ожидала Великобритания 2 года назад.

Prince George’s Classmates And Teachers Call Him ‘George’ At Nursery School

Prince George is simply called by his first name “George” at his nursery school near his country home in Norfolk. The tot started his preschool at Westacre Montessori in Norfolk in January. He is currently in his sixth week of nursery school.

The third-in-line to the British throne is just another kid in his nursery school. The school does not give him any special treatment by virtue of him being a royal. Like all the other students of his class, George hangs his coat everyday on a peg with his name written on top.

The two-year-old royal is just called “George” among his classmates and teachers, a royal source confirmed. The name is mostly written on his coat-and-backpack peg. Little George’s teachers write it for him on his artwork, said Louise Livingston, who is director of training at the Maria Montessori Institute.

In the first few weeks, George's teachers will have spent a great deal of time going over the rules that govern Montessori learning.

Little George has settled into his nursery environment which he attends part time. In the Montessori school the kids learn to respect others and also the environment, Livingston said. She added that kids learn to say little things like "Good Morning," how to push their chair back under the table so no one else trips over it. Two-year-old George is learning things at school through play activities like how to unroll a mat for activity, where to place it so as it is not in the way of anyone else's activity and how to ask for help when needed.

Meanwhile, his mother Kate Middleton revealed during her engagement at the 75th anniversary of the RAF’s Air Training Corps on Sunday that George wants to join the air cadets like his dad, Prince William. The 34-year-old royal said that George is obsessed with airplanes and she has shown him pictures of Spitfires. Westacre Montessori training head also told that his teachers will definitely show him pictures of airplanes and teach him their names.

[asdfg]

ввс.com

A teenage girl in Germany will be allowed to keep a bar of gold worth €16,000 ($18,000; £11,500) found in a lake after the owner could not be identified, police said.
The 16-year-old found the 500g (1lb) gold bar at a depth of about 2m (6.5ft) while swimming near the shore of Bavaria's Koenigssee lake last August.
She handed it into police, who were unable to find the owner.
It is still not clear how the bar ended up in the lake.
A six-month investigation could not identify the owner and, as a result, the teenager will be allowed to keep the gold. The girl has not been identified.

The bar's identity number had been defaced but officials managed to restore it, German media reported.
The find revived rumours of Nazi gold supposedly lost in the lake, near Germany's southern border with Austria, but reports said the find was not connected to the Nazi era.

[Рина З.]

France Wants Alliance With Russia, but Divisions Over Assad’s Future a Hurdle
French seek to broaden coalition fighting Islamic State after Paris attacks
PARIS—France’s plan for enlisting Russia into a “grand coalition” alongside the U.S. to combat Islamic State faces a critical stumbling block: disagreement about the future of Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad.
French President François Hollande has long argued that Mr. Assad’s atrocities created Islamic State in the first place. He viewed it as a betrayal when President Barack Obamapulled back in 2013 from planned joint military action against the Damascus regime.
Russia, by contrast, has intervened militarily in Syria with the express goal of shoring up Mr. Assad. Moscow says that without him, the Syrian state would collapse—to the benefit of Islamist extremists.

[Рина З.]

Russia confirms Sinai plane crash was result of a terrorist attack

A Russian official said that traces of explosives found in the plane’s wreckage indicated that an improvised explosive device had been detonated, killing all 224 people on board.
By Andrew Roth·

[Alesto]

Victory Day in Russia

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vicEiHG3ljM" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vicEiHG3ljM</a>

[Quart]

WASHINGTON POST

A sober Snowden deems life in Russia ‘great’

MOSCOW — Edward Snowden would like everyone – especially his critics – to know that he is happy with life in Russia. Happy, and also sober.

“They talk about Russia like it’s the worst place on earth. Russia's great,” the former NSA contractor told journalist James Bamford during an interview in Moscow for the PBS program "NOVA," which released a transcript of the conversation Thursday.

During the interview, Snowden focused on a speech that former NSA and CIA director Michael Hayden had given in which he predicted that Snowden would be depressed and drunk.

“It was funny because he was talking about how I was – everybody in Russia is miserable. Russia is a terrible place,” Snowden recalled, hat-tipping Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman’s coverage of the September 2013 speech. “And I’m going to end up miserable and I’m going to be a drunk and I’m never going to do anything.”

Hayden’s exact prediction during that speech was that Snowden would “end up like most of the rest of the defectors who went to the old Soviet Union: isolated, bored, lonely, depressed – and most of them ended up alcoholics.”

But even after two Russian winters, vodka’s siren song apparently has no sway over Snowden.

“I don’t drink. I’ve never been drunk in my life,” Snowden said.

Snowden has been living in Moscow for more than a year, ever since the Russian government gave him asylum after the U.S. government revoked his passport, leaving him stranded at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport.

Snowden became the subject of an international manhunt after he revealed himself as the source of highly publicized leaks detailing previously unknown U.S. surveillance programs that led to articles in The Washington Post and the British newspaper the Guardian. He is wanted in the United States on theft and espionage charges.

Snowden, who is about six months into his three-year asylum term, has apparently been settling into life in Russia rather well. His exact whereabouts haven’t been publicized, but his girlfriend moved to Russia to be with him in July, according to the recent documentary “Citizenfour."

And Snowden clearly wanted to tell a U.S. audience how much he is enjoying life in Russia, because he was not specifically asked about it during the PBS interview.

Snowden’s opinions about his new home only came up because toward the end of the interview, the producer offered him a cup of coffee.

“I actually only drink water,” Snowden said, before launching into an explanation of how Hayden wrongly predicted that he would end up drunk, sad and alone, and that nobody expected how much he would like Russia.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2015/01/09/a-sober-snowden-deems-life-in-russia-great/

[Quart]

THE DAILY CURRANT

Russia Shoots Down Santa’s Sleigh Near North Pole

Russia shot down Santa Claus’s sleigh today in international airspace over the Arctic Ocean.
According to local reports, the sleigh was beginning its annual Christmas Eve journey around the world when it was struck by a surface-to-air missile fired from the Russian island of Novaya Zemlya - just a few hundred miles from the North Pole. Santa and nearly all of his reindeer were killed instantly.
Norwegian fisherman soon located the debris field in the frigid waters of the Arctic Ocean. Images of the debris aired on CNN and other international news networks show broken limbs, teddy bears, and gift wrapping strewn throughout the sea.
Although Russia has officially denied involvement in the incident, American intelligence forces say they have proof the missile was fired from a Russian military installation on the island. Several ultra-nationalist politicians in Moscow have praised the downing, which targeted a popular Western celebrity.
“Santa Claus is a symbol of Western decadence and consumerism,” said Alexi Onnatopp, leader of the far-right Golden Bear party,”Whoever killed this fat, corrupt man is a patriot and a hero.”
Today’s events bear striking similarities to the downing of Malaysian Flight 17, which was shot down by pro-Russian rebels in Eastern Ukraine this summer using a similar surface-to-air missile. All 285 passengers and 15 crew were killed aboard that flight travelling from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur.
Remarkably one reindeer survived today’s blast and is currently being treated for his injuries at a hospital in Norway. Authorities have yet to officially release its name, but sources close to the investigation confirm that it is Rudolph -- the crimson-snouted misfit immortalized in an eponymous 1939 song.
“We were able to rescue him first because of his red nose,” says Lars Sommerhielm, an admiral in the Royal Norwegian Navy, “It stood out amongst the ocean waves. The others we couldn’t get to in time.”
In a speech from the oval office President Obama vowed an appropriate response to the tragedy, which may include tightening sanctions on an already crumbling Russian economy.
“Today Russia has gone too far,”he told reporters,“Vladimir Putin has threatened the hopes and dreams of children around the world. He will be brought to justice.”
A funeral for Mr. Claus has been set for December 28th at the North Pole. President Obama, British Prime Minister David Cameron, French President Francois Hollande and other international dignitaries are scheduled to attend

[Quart]

The Guardian

The Guardian view on Russia’s economic turmoil: a good time to talk to Vladimir Putin

With the fall of the rouble, the Russian president is cornered. Creative western diplomacy must prevent him from pulling his country further into nationalism and military adventures

Financial crises of the kind now hitting Russia are not new, but they are always spectacular. They usually involve a currency in freefall, stocks knocked sideways and panicky central bankers jacking up interest rates and spending millions to shore up their currency. So far, so familiar: Russians themselves went through something very similar just over 15 years ago. The rest of the ballet normally goes like this: businesses begin pulling back their operations (as Apple has shut down its Russian online store); the central bank keeps burning through its war chest (which in Moscow’s case is huge: it’s spent $90bn so far this year, and has over $400bn spare); then there is talk of a bank run, or of the government imposing capital controls. All of this is running to the script. But were this any other country, there would be one more act to come: market participants would be counting down the days until the IMF was called in. The twist here is that it is almost impossible to imagine Vladimir Putin begging Washington to come to his aid.

One thing is for certain: the consequences of Russia’s economic rut will be felt beyond its borders. Even if Russia has long since ceased to be the Soviet superpower, it does retain both a nuclear arsenal that compares to that of the US and considerable international reach. Mr Putin has put great effort into reminding the world of this, and not only through inflammatory speeches. Military aggression against Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea this year brought Russia’s assertiveness to a spectacular climax. The Kremlin embarked on a policy that amounted to disrupting Europe’s post-cold-war order, complete with the scrambling of military jets over Nato skies.

Whether a cornered Mr Putin will become more mellow or, on the contrary, resort to still more provocations is anyone’s guess. An upcoming press conference will be scrutinised for answers. Initial indications are that the regime is gearing up public opinion to withstand economic hardships, with much exaltation of the nation’s history of resisting the onslaught of external foes. But nevertheless, it is clear that Mr Putin’s domestic narrative for the last 15 years – the strongman stepping on democratic rights in return for higher living standards – is now at risk of being shattered. The cronyism and the lack of modernisation that have characterised his rule are coming back to haunt him, as both the oil price and the rouble crash.

Some in the west will now calculate that the wounded bear should be wounded some more so that he relents. It is not hard to see the case. The September ceasefire in Ukraine exists only on paper, because there has been no Russian military withdrawal. Brash behaviour could backfire on Mr Putin. His reaction to sanctions – an embargo on European food – has only contributed to higher domestic inflation. Also, Russia can ill afford to threaten anyone with cutting off gas supplies, when it so desperately needs foreign currency revenues just now. On the Middle East, Russia would risk more than it could gain by going confrontational. After all, Mr Putin can only be satisfied with current US policies on Iraq and Syria, seeing as they don’t contradict his strategic aim of keeping Bashar al-Assad in power. Nor is there is any desire in Moscow to kill off the international talks over Iran’s nuclear programme, which are aimed at preventing proliferation.

Yet instead of hastily concluding that it would cost nothing to treat a financially weak Russia as a complete pariah, the time may have come for a burst of diplomatic creativity. The crisis in Russia provides the west with the best possible circumstances for combining smart pressure with new openings for dialogue. Pressure is important if one wants to be taken seriously by a Russian regime that has made great use of western hesitation. So there should be no lifting of sanctions as long as the conflict in Ukraine festers on. But dialogue is equally crucial.

Any talks must be open-eyed, and must not compromise on values that form the core of Europe’s architecture, as Russia tries to assert some regional influence. Reaching out to Mr Putin would deprive him of the possibility of claiming he has no other option but to pull Russia further into insular nationalism and military adventurism. It is precisely when the bear is down that more effort should be put into communicating with him.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/dec/17/guardian-view-russia-economic-turmoil-talk-vladimir-putin

[Quart]

Federal judge: Obama immigration actions 'unconstitutional'

A federal judge has declared parts of President Obama's immigration executive actions unconstitutional, in the first court opinion to tackle Obama's controversial policy changes.

In an opinion filed Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Arthur Schwab, in Pennsylvania, said Obama's immigration actions are invalid and effectively count as "legislation" from the Executive Branch. 

"President Obama's unilateral legislative action violates the separation of powers provided for in the United States Constitution as well as the Take Care Clause, and therefore, is unconstitutional," the judge wrote.

The opinion, though, is unique in that it did not come in response to a challenge to Obama's immigration policy announcement. It is unclear what impact, if any, the opinion might have other than to rally critics and fuel momentum behind other lawsuits.

Rather, Schwab issued his opinion in response to a criminal case against Honduran illegal immigrant Elionardo Juarez-Escobar, who was previously deported in 2005 -- and was caught in the U.S. again earlier this year.

He already has pleaded guilty to "re-entry of a removed alien," but the court subsequently examined the impact of Obama's immigration actions on the case.

For that review, Schwab left open whether the actions might apply to Juarez-Escobar but determined the executive actions themselves were unconstitutional.

He wrote that the action goes beyond so-called "prosecutorial discretion" -- which is the "discretion" the administration cites in determining whether to pursue deportation against illegal immigrants.

Obama's policy changes would give a reprieve to up to 5 million illegal immigrants, including those whose children are citizens or legal permanent residents and who meet other criteria. 

Schwab, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote that this "systematic and rigid process" applies to a "broad range" of enforcement decisions, as opposed to dealing with matters on a "case-by-case basis."

Further, he wrote that the action goes beyond deferring deportation by letting beneficiaries apply for work authorization and allowing some to become "quasi-United States citizens."

He also cited Obama's argument that he was proceeding with executive action after Congress failed to act on comprehensive immigration legislation, and countered: "Congressional inaction does not endow legislative power with the Executive."

The Justice Department downplayed the significance of the opinion.

"The decision is unfounded and the court had no basis to issue such an order," a DOJ spokesperson said in a statement. "No party in the case challenged the constitutionality of the immigration-related executive actions and the department's filing made it clear that the executive actions did not apply to the criminal matter before the court. Moreover, the court's analysis of the legality of the executive actions is flatly wrong. We will respond to the court's decision at the appropriate time."

Critics of the administration's policy, though, hailed the opinion.

"The President's unilateral executive action suspending the nation's immigration laws for roughly five million illegal aliens has received its first judicial test, and it has failed," John Eastman, law professor at Chapman University, said in a statement.

Other direct legal challenges to Obama's immigration actions, including one by two-dozen states, remain pending before the federal courts.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/17/federal-judge-obama-immigration-actions-unconstitutional/

[Quart]

TRIBLIVE

A COUNTERINTUITIVE PLAN TO DEAL WITH RUSSIA

Recent reports of more troop and equipment movements into the separatist-held regions of Ukraine suggest that Russia is once again seeking to stir up trouble. The natural Western reaction has been to respond with firmness. Sanctions might be tightened; defensive weaponry might be provided to Ukraine's underequipped and overmatched military. Given such bullying Russian tactics, this reaction is not only natural but perhaps inevitable.

Yet the Western policy response is half-wrong and the incorrect part of it risks making 2015 just as bad a year for Ukrainian security and East-West relations as was 2014.

Western policymakers do not deserve blame for the unconscionable tactics that Russian President Vladimir Putin has employed in Crimea and eastern Ukraine. But their actions risk reinforcing an action-reaction dynamic that will quite probably make the No. 1 victim of this crisis to date — the people of Ukraine — worse off than before.

It is entirely justifiable to provide weapons to a sovereign nation seeing its territory assaulted by a much more powerful neighbor. But regardless of right and wrong, the result of providing weapons will not be a robust self-defense capability for Ukraine. The Ukrainian military faces Russian armed forces more than five times as large and perhaps 10 to 20 times as powerful. Indeed, should such arms encourage Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to directly challenge Russian forces on his territory, the most likely outcome is escalation of the military crisis and a dramatic increase in death and destruction in Ukraine.

Before taking such actions, NATO leaders should attempt to work with Moscow to create a new European security order acceptable to both sides. Many Western voices will view any such effort as rewarding Russia and Putin for their miserable behavior of the past year. However, this approach would be designed not as a reward but to protect Ukraine's security — and our own.

In keeping with some of the ideas put forth by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and building as well on suggestions from former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, the deal that we should propose to Russia would include elements like these:

• Russia can make its historically based claim on Crimea but would have to accept a binding referendum under outside monitoring that would determine the region's future, with independence as one option.

• Russia would agree to verifiably remove its military “volunteers” from eastern Ukraine.

• Russia would permanently commit, once the Crimea matter was settled, to uphold Ukraine's territorial security, as promised under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum covering the denuclearization of Ukraine and other former Soviet republics.

• Ukraine and the United States would agree that Ukraine would not be a candidate for NATO membership, now or in the future.

• A new pan-European security structure, building perhaps on the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, would be established with an eye toward upholding the territorial integrity of European states writ large. This association should give Moscow some sense of equal partnership and could include NATO members and former Soviet states.

• NATO would be unapologetically retained with its current membership. But because of the new security arrangement, it could eschew further enlargement and increasingly play only a supporting role in European security, refocusing on missions outside of Europe.

• The European Union would agree to work with Russia to make any possible future Ukrainian relationship with the union, including membership, compatible with Ukraine's participation in Russia's Eurasian Economic Union project.

• Sanctions on Russia would be gradually — and, in the end, completely — lifted as the elements of this agenda came into effect.

To be sure, Putin could claim that this agreement accomplished his core goals and portray it as a great victory. Perhaps his popularity would then rise to 88 percent or 90 percent — for a while. Then, as time went on, this accomplishment would be internalized, and Russian voters would likely hold Putin accountable for what he should have been doing all along: improving their way of life through good economic and political leadership.

Michael O'Hanlon and Jeremy Shapiro are foreign policy scholars at the Brookings Institution

http://triblive.com/opinion/featuredcommentary/7331005-74/ukraine-russia-security#axzz3LrUDqIMh

[Quart]

"WASHINGTON EXAMINER"

GLOBAL TUG-OF-WAR OVER aRCTIC RESOURCES

On the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev warned that Russia and the West are headed toward another Cold War.

He has a strong case. Russian provocations are on the rise both in the West, where Russia threatens the sovereignty of several Eastern European nations, and in the East, where Russian President Vladimir Putin is using his energy resources to shore up relations with China.

But Putin is not merely looking east or west, but north as well. The Arctic is equally critical in his geopolitical calculus.

The war between the United States and Russia over the Arctic and its abundant resources is definitely a cold one, but it’s as real and harmful of a threat as any facing U.S. security today. Whereas Russia is acutely aware of its opportunities in the north, U.S. leaders and officials refuse to acknowledge the critical importance of the Arctic, which could help the United States lower costs and become more independent of Middle Eastern oil.

Over the past several months, Russia has announced plans for a large-scale militarization of the Arctic. Plans include a 6,000-soldier permanent military force in the northwest Murmansk region, new radar and guidance system capabilities and new nuclear-powered submarines and icebreakers. Increased militarization of the region comes as state-owned oil companies advance Arctic oil and natural gas development programs. Their discoveries — which suggest that the Russian Kara Sea could hold some of the world’s largest oil reserves — have only accelerated Russia’s expansion north. This has frustrated U.S. efforts to cooperate in the Arctic.

According to National Journal, fraying U.S.-Russian relations forced the United States this year to suspend joint naval exercises in the Arctic, cancel a bilateral meeting on Coast Guard operations and suspend a submarine rescue partnership.

In October, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel acknowledged at the Washington Ideas Forum that opening waterways in the Arctic and increased commercial activity by Russia presents a challenge to U.S. interests. The Department of Defense and other U.S. agencies have outlined strategies to respond to the changing landscape of the Arctic, but actions to date have been muted.

The U.S. government must demonstrate that it sees the Arctic as a region of significant geopolitical importance and increase U.S. investments in Arctic infrastructure, including developing a fleet of icebreakers. The United States has only one functioning icebreaker, while Russia has five nuclear-powered icebreakers and more in the queue. Efforts to appropriate greater funds for icebreaker development have fallen drastically short: For fiscal 2015, Congress appropriated $8 million to fund a new ocean icebreaker, but each ship typically costs about $1 billion.

The United States must also take steps to better facilitate development of Arctic energy resources. The federal government issued leases to develop prolific oil and natural gas resources in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas in 2005, 2007 and 2008. Since then, companies have been unable to drill to hydrocarbon depth due to a series of legal and regulatory hurdles that the administration has been unable or unwilling to resolve. Companies have invested billions of dollars in lease payments, technology development and scientific research to be able to move forward with exploration programs. As the administration dithers, Russia has accelerated its commercial activity in the Arctic.

Western leaders shouldn’t expect another rapprochement to occur anytime soon. Putin is no Gorbachev, and U.S. leadership on this issue is nonexistent. For the United States, the most effective response to Russia’s increasing influence would be to exert its own. A beefing up of infrastructure and energy development in the Arctic can serve as a one-two punch to Russia. The United States can better defend its territory and resources while diluting the influence of Russian energy. The United States must win this new cold war, but it must first admit that it’s in one.

David Hunt, a retired U.S. Army colonel, is a former security adviser to the FBI. He served as counterterrorism coordinator for the 1988 Summer Olympic Games in Seoul, South Korea. . Thinking of submitting an op-ed to the Washington Examiner? Be sure to read our guidelines on submissions for editorials, available at this link.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/global-tug-of-war-over-arctic-resources/article/2557223

[Quart]

U.S. upset at India-Russia deals

Criticism over Putin visit, Crimean Premier’s presence

A day after Russian President Putin’s visit, the United States criticised India for the agreements signed between New Delhi and Moscow. Responding to a question on the 20 agreements signed, including one on the Rupee-Rouble trade, State department spokesperson Jen Psaki said, “Our view remains that it’s not time– for business as usual with Russia. But beyond that, we’d have to take a closer look at what these agreements entail.”

The US and Ukraine have also expressed unhappiness that President Putin was accompanied by the Crimean Premier Sergey Aksyonov. Mr. Aksyonov is on the sanctions list of the U.S., Canada and European Union for his role in the accession of the former Ukrainian region to Russia in March this year.

While the U.S. state department said it was “troubled” by his presence in New Delhi, Ukranian President Petro Poroshenko accused India of putting “money” ahead of “values” and “civilisation”. “The Indian position doesn't help, it doesn't save Aksyonov,” said Mr. Poroshenko, speaking at the Lowy Institute think tank in Sydney on Friday, “He is a criminal, it's very simple.”

The Ministry of External affairs refused to comment on the attack from the U.S. and from Ukraine over the issue. Officials told The Hindu that while Mr. Aksyonov’s arrival in Delhi was “not a surprise”, he was not part of the “official delegation”, and was on a private visit. However, The Hindu has learnt his meetings in New Delhi were arranged by the Russian Consul-General in Mumbai Alexey Novikov, and he initialled a “partnership agreement” between Crimean and Indian businesses, particularly in the area of meat exports. Seafood exporter Gul Kripalani, who was present at the meeting told The Hindu, “I am really surprised that this agreement has attracted so much controversy. The meeting with the Crimean Prime Minister followed Russia’s decision to allow the import of Indian buffalo meat last week.”

India has refused to join western sanctions over Russia’s actions in Crimea, and the joint statement issued by President Putin and PM Modi said “India and Russia oppose economic sanctions that do not have the approval of the United Nations Security Council.”

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/us-upset-at-indiarussia-deals-says-cant-be-business-as-usual/article6686903.ece

[Quart]

Obama Makes Up Bible Verse To Justify Immigration Power-Grab

“A watched pot never boils.” “Don’t take any wooden nickels.” “A stitch in time saves nine.” We all remember those powerful words from the Bible, don’t we? Well, at least President Barack Obama does.

He said the following in Nashville yesterday, while ineptly defending his completely unconstitutional executive amnesty:"“I think the good book says don’t throw stones in glass houses” Obama says."
This is a new level of dishonest narcissism, even for Obama: Shut up and let him do whatever he wants, because God said so. Or, okay, maybe God didn’t really say so. But still. Shut up.But I suppose it’s no surprise. He makes up stuff that isn’t in the Constitution all the time. Why not make up stuff that isn’t in the Bible? It’s all the same. Those guys are dead, and he has a lot of power, so too bad.

I used to think he said this kind of stuff to gaslight us, to make us question our very perceptions of reality. But that’s not it. He’s just a liar, and he’s not particularly good at it. The only people he ever manages to fool are leftists and the media. But I repeat myself.

http://dailycaller.com/2014/12/10/obama-makes-up-bible-verse-to-justify-immigration-power-grab/

[Quart]

Russia India agree energy deal

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K97uQvFoEIU" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K97uQvFoEIU</a>

[Alesto]

Why Do Russia and Iran Have More Cyber Commandos Than the U.S.?

With new DOD leadership, troops returning to Iraq, and an extension of the U.S. stay in Afghanistan, doing more of the same is clearly not enough; it is time to embrace fresh national security ideas.

One of the key new approaches is the notion of special operations cyber warfare -- merging tactical computer, social network and military informational capabilities with Special Operations Forces (SOF). One would think that in the age of powerful smartphones and Google Glass that countries would have specialized cyber forces that free fall into a country, nonchalantly visit an Internet café and use some kind of James Bond-like gizmo to hijack an enemy's websites, send disruptive messages that seem to originate from an adversary's leadership, and thoroughly dominate a target's social media. And this expectation could be right -- except not for the U.S.

Unlike many other nations, especially Russia and Iran, America lacks a blended cyber and special operations capability. This is a major national security problem as recent events have clearly demonstrated the power of special operations cyber warfare. Russia's successful occupation of Ukraine was greatly assisted by teams of Russian Special Operations Forces, Spetsnaz and other troops, employing and supported by a variety of cyber warfare activities -- from manipulating online social networks to disrupting regional computing. Similarly, Iran, both in its repression of its internal democratic movement and in its projection of force into Syria, has employed teams of specially trained cyber warriors to manipulate networks, target opposition leaders through social media, and influence the Internet-driven view of events. In Ukraine, Iran, and Syria, Special Operations Forces employing cyber warfare greatly enhanced their countries' military and political efforts. These successes were not flukes; today, small teams of specially trained and equipped cyber SOF warriors can affect strategic outcomes more than much larger units of conventional forces. But the U.S. lacks this hybrid cyber commando ability. It is ironic; the country that is home to Silicon Valley has fallen far behind lesser technologically developed states in the military innovation of tactical cyber capabilities.

U.S. cyber warfare reflects a mainframe organizational culture -- one big national organization controlling and directing strategic cyber combat resources -- and given the importance of electronic media in our lives, there is certainly an essential role for a country-level Internet and computer defense. Recent conflicts, however, demonstrate the additional need for a smartphone-like approach, with tactical cyber warfare capabilities pushed to the lowest operational level possible. Tactically distributed SOF cyber capabilities not only increase the probability of victory, they reduce likely American losses. Special Forces Lieutenant Colonel, Patrick Duggan recently wrote, special operations cyber capabilities "strategically offer ways to shape the physical environment while decreasing the risk exposure and attribution to U.S. forces."

Using million-dollar missiles to destroy hundred-dollar tents; killing the "jack of diamonds" again and again, green on blue attacks, all demonstrate the futility of employing traditional counter-terrorism approaches against networked adversaries. For years, prescient thinkers like Dr. John Arquilla have said that it takes a network to fight a network. Even in this interconnected global age, however, there remains a local dimension to many electronic networks. Thus network disruption often requires small, invisible teams to have close physical proximity to a hostile and violent enemy -- a role ideally suited to SOF. Creating commandos that can project force into Internet and social media nodes merges special operations with high technology, matching our best troops with our best technology. Secretary of Defense Nominee Carter would do well to learn more about and promote greater tactical cyber warfare capabilities, so that U.S. SOF have at least as much as, if not more, cyber warfare capabilities than the increasingly slick Russian and Iranian cyber operators.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-sigmund-gartner/why-do-russia-and-iran-ha_b_6289580.html