Saturday, October 28, 2017

The great firewall of China - Bloomberg


So much for the lofty goals of the internet, breaking down information barriers and fomenting the free flow of ideas across the globe. China’s online population of 731 million gets a highly restricted internet, one that doesn’t include access to Google, Facebook, YouTube or the New York Times. There’s little coverage of the 1989 student protests in Tiananmen Square. Even Winnie the Pooh got temporarily banned. China is able to control such a vast ocean of content through the largest system of censorship in the world, aptly known as the Great Firewall of China. It’s a joint effort between government censors and technology and telecommunications companies that are compelled to enforce the state’s rules. The stakes go beyond China, which is setting an example that other authoritarian countries can imitate.
The Situation
While strict censorship is nothing new in one-party China, President Xi Jinping has tightened the online crackdown, particularly around the time of politically sensitive events like the death of Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo in July. Ahead of the Communist Party Congress in October, China began blocking Facebook Inc.’s WhatsApp messaging service and extended a clampdown on virtual private networks, a commonly used method to circumvent the Great Firewall. Securing China’s “cyber sovereignty,” or protecting the country’s internet from undue foreign influence, is one of Xi’s avowed goals. Recent moves to restrict online freedoms include measures that all but eliminate the ability to post social media anonymously, making app store owners responsible for how customers use their purchases and ordering online portals to stop news reporting. Pooh’s temporary banishment came after bloggers depicted Xi as the cartoon bear. Meantime, foreign companies that want to operate on the mainland are forced to adopt practices often seen as invasive abroad. Apple Inc., which publicly fought efforts by the U.S. government to create backdoors into its products, has quietly deleted apps and built local data centers in line with Chinese government requirements. All this contributes to China having the least online freedom on the planet, according to rights group Freedom House.
The Background
China hasn’t always had tight restrictions. When the web formally arrived in 1994, it was relatively free and seen as an extension of the Open Door policy of tapping Western knowledge to reform the economy. As its popularity grew, the government yielded to a sentiment expressed by former leader Deng Xiaoping: When you open the window, the flies come in. From 2000, the foundations of the Great Firewall were laid with the introduction of the Golden Shield Project, a database-driven surveillance system capable of accessing every citizen’s record and connecting China's security organizations. Now, the government employs at least 50,000 people to enforce censorship, barring websites it disapproves of and forcing search engines to filter out content considered harmful. There’s also an army of social-media influencers who, by one estimate, post 500 million pro-government comments a year. Crucially, the authorities make companies responsible for the content they show, even that generated by users, a practice that encourages self-censorship in a country where the state licenses all media. With an almost captive local market, China’s tech giants — Tencent Holdings Ltd. and Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. — have flourished, in the process becoming important taxpayers in China. At the other extreme, Greatfire.org, a non-profit group that opposes censorship, has created mirrored sites and a browser to get around the controls.
The Argument
Most countries impose some sort of cyber control, like banning websites that promote hate. With more than half its 1.4 billion people online, China argues that the restrictions are mostly about maintaining social order and safeguarding national security. Proponents cite the worrying control over news flow exerted by the likes of Google and Facebook as a reason for the state to adopt an active role. Critics say China’s Great Firewall reflects its paranoia over the internet’s potential to spread opposition to one-party rule. As well as impeding freedom of speech, China’s approach constrains it economically, they say, by stifling innovation, preventing the exchange of important ideas and cutting access to services used by businesses like Google Cloud. Academics cannot access Google Scholar, used globally by colleges to share work. More broadly, critics fear if Russia and other like-minded countries follow China’s example and succeed in imposing restrictions on their citizens and global online companies, the vision behind the founding of the internet — an unfettered global exchange of information — could be seriously scaled back.
The Reference Shelf
Stanford University’s Torfox project details the Great Wall’s history.
Freedom House assesses China’s internet freedom.
QuickTakes on China’s virtual private networks and Xi Jinping.
Bloomberg profiles Greatfire.org.
China’s technology restrictions explained and another story on censorship.
Bloomberg View’s Adam Minter says China risks alienating its middle class by raising the Great Firewall too high.
Bloomberg Gadfly’s Tim Culpan considers Apple’s decision to remove VPN apps in China, as does Bloomberg View’s Tyler Cowen.
To receive a free monthly QuickTake newsletter, sign up at bloombergbriefs.com/quicktake
FIRST PUBLISHED OCT. 12, 2017

Bad News for Bannon: Mitt Romney May Be Headed to the Senate - Intelligencer ( New York Magazine )

Bad News for Bannon: Mitt Romney May Be Headed to the Senate
By
Ed Kilgore
There’s something worse for Steve Bannon than Orrin Hatch in the Senate. It’s Mitt Romney in the Senate. Photo: Bill Pugliano/Getty Images
With all the talk about Steve Bannon starting a “civil war” in the Republican Party, mostly by inspiring primary challenges to incumbent Republican senators, the latest rumors from Utah are kind of a good-news-bad-news story for the Breitbart News chieftain.
According to a new report from McKay Coppins, one of Bannon’s targets, Orrin Hatch, is telling friends back home that he’s definitely not running for reelection next year.
That’s the good news. The bad news is that Hatch’s reported retirement is being planned in synch with a move by Mitt Romney to succeed him. And Romney is by any measure a much bigger enemy of Bannon’s.
While Hatch’s office is denying he’s made any definitive decisions about his future plans (he probably doesn’t need any retirement talk while he’s in the middle of cracking heads to pass a major tax bill), the writing’s been on the wall for a while for the 83-year-old seven-term incumbent, who first won his seat after a campaign in which he attacked three-term incumbent Frank Moss for sticking around Washington too long.
A recent poll showed an emphatic 75 percent of Utah voters thinking Hatch should retire. He drew a serious primary challenge six years ago, and with or without Bannon’s involvement, he’ll draw one (or more) in 2018 if he does run.
And with or without Hatch’s blessing, Mitt Romney could probably walk to the GOP nomination if he wanted it. The same poll that showed Utah voters wanting Hatch to retire also showed Romney far ahead of Hatch and anyone else in a theoretical primary, with 57 percent against a large field where no one else got more than 13 percent. A different survey earlier this year showed Romney’s favorable/unfavorable rating among Utah Republicans at an unconquerable 83/15. He is without any question the most popular pol in the state.
In case you have forgotten, Romney has not exactly exhibited the kind of unqualified support for Donald Trump that Bannon is demanding from all GOP senators.
Mitt Romney called Donald Trump a “fraud” and “phony” whose words and actions are “degrading” to women, and whose policies would trigger a recession, make America less safe and foster an era of “trickle-down racism.”
That was in 2016. In 2017, Romney had this to say about Trump’s reaction to the violence in Charlottesville:
Whether he intended to or not, what he communicated caused racists to rejoice, minorities to weep, and the vast heart of America to mourn.
That’s certainly no more harsh than what Steve Bannon said about Romney at a time when the former Massachusetts senator was the GOP nominee for president:
This is a guy who avoided military duty in Vietnam; who has five sons who look like movie stars who have not served their country one day. Oh, but by the way all of them did their two years of Mormon missionary work — every one of them.
Yeah, that’s the kind of attack that will go over really well in Utah.
Bannon better take the state off his list of 2018 Senate “purge” targets.

JFK assassination documents released - CBS News

JFK assassination documents released
Last Updated Oct 27, 2017
The U.S. government has finally begun releasing its last files pertaining to the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
Historians and scholars are almost unanimous in their belief that Lee Harvey Oswald, a 24-year-old former Marine, was the lone gunman when Kennedy was shot and killed on November 22nd, 1963. This is also remains the official story of the U.S. government. However, polls have consistently shown that a majority of Americans believe that Kennedy dies as the result of a conspiracy. A CBS News poll from 2013 found that 61 percent of Americans believed that more than one man was responsible for the assassination.
The latest collection of files are includes over 3,100 documents that together run tens of thousands of pages. Of those documents, 2,800 are expected to be released Thursday night. They are being released in keeping with a 1992 law that stipulates that the documents must be revealed by Thursday.
CBS News will be reviewing the documents as they become available.
JFK files live updates:
Interview with Former Assistant Director of FBI, James H. Gale: "…Oswald might have had foreign intelligence connections – Soviet or Cuban – although none was ever found…no knowledge that Oswald was ever an FBI informant."
From the London CIA station, 11/26/63: Memo from FBI director to Dep. CIA Director James Angleton indicates on Nov. 22, British reporter received anonymous tip to call U.S. embassy "for some big news." Twenty-five minutes later, Kennedy had been shot.
Secret Service threat list: This 413-page memo lists every threat the Secret Service was watching between March and December 1963, including KKK Klansmen, Puerto Rican Nationalists, gang members, and individuals with a history of mental illness. Included is a brief description indicating their history and degree of threat.
JFK Bet: The Secret Service spoke with Robert C. Rawls, who overheard a man betting $100 that President Kennedy would be dead within three weeks, seven to 10 days before the assassination. He thought it was "drunk talk" and admits to being intoxicated himself, at the time. Rawls did not recall the man's name, appearance, or bar he was in.
London reporter received anonymous tip before JFK assassination
Memo from FBI director to Dep. CIA Director James Angleton, dated 11/26/63: A cable from the London CIA station four days after Kennedy's assassination told of a UK reporter, from the Cambridge News, who, on Nov. 22, 1963, had received anonymous tip to call the U.S. embassy "for some big news." Twenty-five minutes later, British Security Services MI-5 calculated, Kennedy was shot. The reporter had a solid reputation and said he had never before received a call of this kind.
Oswald's killer was already on FBI's surveillance radar: Jack Rubenstein, also known as Jack Ruby, killed Oswald. But he was on the FBI's radar as early as August 6, 1962, more than a year prior. The first time a surveillance that either monitored, overheard, or made a mention of Rubenstein was August 6, 1962. The FBI decided to review any records related to that surveillance.
Trump orders release of thousands of JFK documents
FBI memo discusses Oswald prior to JFK assassination: A document originating with the New Orleans office of the FBI appears to discuss Lee Harvey Oswald before he killed President Kennedy. The document, marked "10/25/63," indicates that an FBI agent or agent was keeping up "with Cuban sources" for information relating to the Pro-Castro "Fair Play for Cuba Committee," which Oswald was a member of.
The document says that the committee appears to have gone dormant since Oswald left the area, and that the "Dallas Division for information" is searching for Oswald. It says that if Oswald has relocated to Dallas "he may inaugurate an FPCC branch in that area."
The FBI warned of a death threat to Oswald: A report directed by then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover said the FBI received a call at its Dallas office threatening Oswald's life the night before he was shot and killed by Jack Ruby.
"There is nothing further on the Oswald case except that he is dead," says the Nov. 24, 1963 document originally marked "secret." "Last night, we received a call in our Dallas office from a man ... in a calm voice and saying he was a member of a committee organized to kill Oswald."
"We at once notified the chief of police and he assured us Oswald would be given sufficient protection. This morning we called the chief of police again warning of the possibility of some effort against Oswald and he again assured us adequate protection would be given. However, this was not done."
The document also mentions Hoover's suspicions that Ruby was an "underworld" figure "with the reputation of being a homosexual."
Reactions of Soviet leaders: A 1966 FBI document discusses how the Soviet Union reacted with "great shock" to President Kennedy's assassination, and that "church bells were tolled" in his memory. Some within the ruling Communist Party believed that the assassination was in fact a "coup" initiated by the "ultraright." They were also worried that a rogue US general might use the lack of leadership to fire a nuclear weapon at the Soviet Union.
The memo, citing a source, goes on to state that Soviet officials denied any involvement with Lee Harvey Oswald, who had briefly defected to the Soviet Union years before: "They described him as a neurotic maniac who was disloyal to his own country and everything else."
The document goes on to cite a second source who said the assassination shocked Soviet diplomats who would preferred having Kennedy at the head of the US government, in part because they knew little about Lyndon Johnson.
The KGB's chief officer in New York City, Boris Ivanov, described Kennedy's death as a "problem" for his agency. Ivanov also told his agents that he believed that a conspiracy had been involved in Kennedy's assassination, and that the KGB should find out what really happened. He emphasized the need for the KGB "to determine precisely what kind of man the new president Lyndon Johnson would be."
The document further notes that a defector "whose bona fides have not been established" said that the KGB believed Oswald to be unstable, in part owing to a suicide attempt he undertook while in Soviet custody. This defector also said that Kennedy was held in "high esteem" by the Soviet government, and that KGB guards were posted outside the American embassy to prevent any "disrespect" from being shown.
1960 document discusses "sex parties": One new FBI document discusses a "high-priced Hollywood call girl" and friend of Los Angeles private detective Fred Otash, who had "convicted of horse race fixing." The woman in question contacted members of the FBI's Los Angeles field office to tell them that Otash had asked about her "participation in sex parties" that included then-Senator John Kennedy, his brother-in-law Peter Lawford, Frank Sinatra, and Sammy Davis Jr. She also told agents that she knew of no such sex parties.
Otash later implied to the FBI that "Confidential" magazine was "looking for dirt on Kennedy or Lawford" that it could use before the 1960 election.
Castro denies involvement in Kennedy assassination: One of the documents discusses a 1978 trip to Cuba by members of the House Select Committee on Assassinations, which was formed in 1976 to investigate the killings of President Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. On April 3rd, 1978, the document says that the members met with Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, "who assured the Committee that neither he nor his government had any involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy."
Wikileaks announces $100,000 reward for withheld docs: WikiLeaks, which of course played a role in publishing leaked information about Democrats during the 2016 presidential election, announced in a tweet that it will give a $100,000 reward for the JFK documents the various intelligence agencies are withholding, "should they show violations of law, inefficiency, or administrative error."
The CIA discusses Martin Luther King, Jr.: The Civil Rights icon is discussed in a report from 1967. The document cites a 1964 Washington Post story that stated King was planning to visit the Soviet Union, but was dissuaded from doing so by Rev. Ralph Abernathy.
The CIA discusses Bill Ayers: A 1969 document discusses William "Bill" Ayers, then a member of the Students for a Democratic Society and soon after a leader of the Weather Underground, a leftist terror group that carried out bombings across the United States. The document discusses a speech Ayers gave at American University in which he calls for a war against American "imperialism."
1975 "statement of facts" on foreign assassination plots: A document from 1975 lays out some of the CIA's efforts to assassinate foreign leaders, including Fidel Castro. The document discusses CIA contacts with the Mafia, including mob boss Sam Giancana, for the purposes of assassinating Castro.
According to the document, the CIA also discussed assassinating Congolese leader Patrice Lumumba and Indonesian President Sukarno.
1962 "minutes of special meeting" on anti-Castro efforts: One newly revealed document includes minutes from a 1962 meeting in which Kennedy administration officials, including Attorney General Robert Kennedy and National Security Adviser McGeorge Bundy, discuss sabotage efforts against the Cuban government.
The document indicates that the CIA explored "the possibility of producing crop failures by the introduction of biological agents which would appear to be of natural origin" as part of that effort.
"It was suggested that the matter of attacking and harassing of Soviet personnel within Cuba should be considered," the document also states.
Documents released: Thursday night's batch of some 2,800 files has been released on the National Archives' website.
CIA releases statement: In a statement Thursday evening, the CIA said it "welcomed" Mr. Trump's directive to "conduct further review of the documents."
"Every single one of the approximately 18,000 remaining CIA records in the collection will ultimately be released, with no document withheld in full," the CIA statement added. "While some of these 18,000 records currently contain targeted redactions, the information redacted represents less than one percent of the total CIA information in the collection."
Trump releases statement: President Trump said Thursday evening that the public "deserves" to know as much as possible about the assassination, "executive departments and agencies (agencies) have proposed to me that certain information should continue to be redacted because of national security, law enforcement, and foreign affairs concerns. I have no choice --today -- but to accept those redactions rather than allow potentially irreversible harm to our Nation's security."
"To further address these concerns, I am also ordering agencies to re-review each and every one of those redactions over the next 180 days," the statement adds.
Some JFK records to be released Thursday night: President Trump has ordered 2,800 records related to the assassination of former President John F. Kennedy to be released Thursday night, although any redacted records will not be released at this time, senior administration officials told reporters.
Government agencies seek to block release: There has been late lobbying by various agencies of the U.S. government asking President Trump to hold off on releasing some of the John F. Kennedy assassination documents, and the White House was reportedly receptive to some of those requests, CBS News Andres Triay reports

White House distances itself from Whitefish power grid deal - BBC News

White House distances itself from Whitefish power grid deal
By Paul Blake
BBC News, Washington
27 October 2017
More than five weeks after Storm Maria, most Puerto Ricans are still in the dark
The White House has distanced itself from a $300m (£228m) contract awarded to a tiny Montana firm to help reconstruct Puerto Rico's power grid.
The press secretary spoke out as President Donald Trump asked his Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke if he had any role in the Whitefish Energy deal.
Federal authorities have expressed "significant concerns" about the contract, and are reviewing it.
Some 75% of Puerto Ricans have no power five weeks after Hurricane Maria.
At Friday's daily White House briefing, questions persisted over why a little-known, two-year old firm with no experience of work on this scale was awarded the contract so quickly.
Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters the "federal government has nothing to do with this contract".
She said they would look forward to the results of an ongoing audit.
The press secretary deflected a question about campaign donations made by a major Whitefish investor to the Trump campaign and allied groups during the 2016 election.
Ms Sanders also revealed that Mr Trump asked Mr Zinke at the White House earlier on Friday "just for clarification purposes" if he had any role in the process.
Mr Zinke "reiterated once again that we have no role - the federal government, and specifically he had no role in that contract", according to the press secretary.
Whitefish Energy regrets Twitter spat with San Juan mayor
Puerto Rico to audit power contract for Montana firm
Earlier this week, Mr Zinke's office acknowledged that he knows Whitefish Energy's chief executive - they hail from the same small town in Montana.
But he denied any involvement in the Puerto Rico deal, or taking any meetings on behalf of the company.
On Friday, Mr Zinke issued a new statement saying that "after the initial contract was awarded, I was contacted by the company, on which I took no action".
He said he welcomed an investigation by his agency's inspector general.
In a statement, Whitefish Energy said it would "cooperate with any and all information requests".
More than five weeks after Storm Maria most light on the island is generator-driven
Claims by Prepa, the US territory's main utility, that the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) reviewed the deal have been contradicted.
The contract states that "Prepa hereby represents and warrants that Fema has reviewed and approved of this Contract".
It also says Fema "confirmed this Contract is in an acceptable form to qualify for funding from Fema or other US Governmental agencies".
But in an email to reporters on Thursday night, Fema denied that.
It said "any language in any contract between Prepa and Whitefish that states Fema approved that contract is inaccurate".
Fema also said it "has significant concerns with how Prepa procured this contract and has not confirmed whether the contract prices are reasonable".
Its review is ongoing, but the disaster agency warned that contracts not in compliance with their regulations "risk not being reimbursed by Fema for their disaster costs".
Critics have queried why Puerto Rican authorities did not seek aid from other public utility companies - as is custom during disasters.
Little-known Whitefish Energy has raised eyebrows for possible links to the Trump administration
It is unclear what would happen if Fema refused to pay.
Walt Green, a former director of the US National Center for Disaster Fraud, told BBC News it is "impossible" to say at this stage who is responsible for costs.
"Any dispute may result in appeals, administrative hearings and lawsuits," he added.
Puerto Rican authorities initially said Fema would pay for the deal.
They are now seeking to assure the public there is "nothing illegal" about the contract.
Prepa and the Puerto Rican government are saddled with massive debts. The power authority declared bankruptcy in July.
Neither Prepa nor the Puerto Rican governor's office returned multiple BBC emails requesting comment.
The US House of Representatives Natural Resources Committee, which has jurisdiction over the Caribbean island, is also scrutinising the contract.
On Friday, top Democrats from that panel and the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee sent a letter requesting the Department of Homeland Security's inspector general launch an investigation.
The correspondence follows similar requests from other members of Congress to the interior department's inspector general.
Puerto Rico's governor has also ordered an audit.