Thursday, April 23, 2015


News Clips For The Day


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/tulsa-sheriffs-office-had-investigated-robert-bates-in-2009/

​Deputy who fired gun instead of taser was investigated in 2009
By OMAR VILLAFRANCA CBS NEWS
April 22, 2015


Photograph – Robert Bates, left, is accused in the fatal shooting of Eric Harris
CBS NEWS

TULSA, Okla. -- CBS News has learned that a 2009 investigation by the Tulsa Sheriff's Office concluded that there were concerns over Robert Bates behavior in the field. Bates, a 73-year-old reserve deputy, pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder charges in the death of Eric Harris. Bates says he shot and killed Harris by mistake after pulling his gun instead of his taser.

Since the incident there have been allegations that Bates was not properly trained. CBS News learned that in 2009, the Tulsa Sheriff's Office launched an internal investigation to find out if Bates received special treatment during training and while working as a reserve deputy. They also investigated whether supervisors pressured training officers on Bates' behalf.

The investigation concluded Bates' training was questionable and that he was given preferential treatment.

The investigation found that deputies voiced concerns about Bates' behavior in the field, almost from the very beginning. Bates reportedly used his personal car to make unauthorized vehicle stops. When confronted Bates said that he could do what he wanted, and that anyone who had a problem with him should go see the sheriff.

The investigation concluded that high ranking officers created an atmosphere where employees were intimidated in order to violate department policy.

Dan Smolen, the attorney for Eric Harris, says if the findings had been acted on in 2009 Harris might still be alive.

"I think there are so many people who look on at so much corruption it's more than just a couple of people," said Smolen.

A spokesman for the Tulsa Sheriff acknowledged that some type of internal review was conducted, but that there was no further action taken. Sheriff Stanley Glanz said this week he believes Bates received his required training.




“When confronted Bates said that he could do what he wanted, and that anyone who had a problem with him should go see the sheriff. The investigation concluded that high ranking officers created an atmosphere where employees were intimidated in order to violate department policy. …. The investigation concluded that high ranking officers created an atmosphere where employees were intimidated in order to violate department policy. "I think there are so many people who look on at so much corruption it's more than just a couple of people," said Smolen.”

Power structures, especially in places where there is little competition among candidates for the positions, a police department composed completely of all one political party in a county without any competition for the party, or which otherwise has had no “shakeups” in a long time, simply tends to become corrupt. Two previous articles were about Bates, and said that he was a close friend and business collaborator with the sheriff and that he was a comparatively wealthy man in the town, so he had privileges in the department that were unhealthy. This was a clearcut case of that situation, but there are others around the nation which are less obvious. Whenever the Mayor and City Council don't watch over what is going on, there will probably be “bad apples” who are allowed to stay on in their positions. In this case with Bates, I suspect that at 73 years old he is “losing his edge” mentally. Many people are by that age. He made a dangerous but simple mistake. He planned to grab his taser but got the gun instead. He shouldn't have been out there trying to take on suspects and especially with a gun in his possession. People who love guns tend to say that “guns aren't dangerous, just people.” Time after time the responsible adult in a household is careless and leaves a gun where a child can get his hands on it, and someone is killed.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/gyrocopter-pilot-doug-hughes-monitored-into-capitol-washington/

"Multiple weapons" were aimed at gyrocopter pilot
CBS NEWS April 23, 2015

WASHINGTON -- House Oversight Committee Chair Jason Chaffetz had harsh words on Wednesday for postman Doug Hughes, who flew a gyrocopter through restricted airspace last week and landed it on the Capitol lawn.

"He is lucky to be alive," said Chaffetz, "he should have been blown out of the air."

But CBS News' Mark Albert reports Rep. Chaffetz reserved even tougher language for NORAD and the FAA -- which are responsible for monitoring airspace -- including the nation's most restricted patch of sky over Washington D.C.

"They chose not to brief us today and that's the heart of the question that we will be asking next Wednesday," he said. The Capitol Police also declined to attend the briefing on Wednesday, adding to Chaffetz and other lawmakers' frustration.

During the closed door briefing, officials from the Secret Service and Capitol Police revealed that multiple agencies had tracked the aircraft, saying "multiple weapons" were trained on Hughes, but security officials made a judgment call not to shoot him down, partly out of concern for the safety of people on the ground.

Chaffetz and others on the Hill made it clear they want a full explanation as to what was behind that decision, and they didn't get it on Wednesday.

Until Wednesday, it had been unclear whether Hughes might have managed to pilot his light aircraft into the heart of the nation's capital by flying so low and slow that he simply evaded detection until he was literally buzzing tourists' heads.

The Oversight Committee's top Democrat, Elijah Cummings, expressed frustration that members of Congress were never made aware of the potential threat.

"This is a wakeup call for all of us and for all of the agencies to look very carefully at what happened here," Cumming said, stressing the need to "figure out every way they can to make sure it doesn't happen again."

Hughes flew into Washington from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, intending to deliver letters to members of congress that day about campaign finance reform.

"I landed, I delivered the mail without anyone getting hurt, without any property damage, I succeeded," he said in an interview after the stunt.

The 61-year-old has since been charged with operating an unregistered aircraft and he remains under house arrest in Florida. If convicted, Hughes could face up to four years in prison, and heavy fines.




“House Oversight Committee Chair Jason Chaffetz had harsh words on Wednesday for postman Doug Hughes, who flew a gyrocopter through restricted airspace last week and landed it on the Capitol lawn. "He is lucky to be alive," said Chaffetz, "he should have been blown out of the air." But CBS News' Mark Albert reports Rep. Chaffetz reserved even tougher language for NORAD and the FAA -- which are responsible for monitoring airspace -- including the nation's most restricted patch of sky over Washington D.C. "They chose not to brief us today and that's the heart of the question that we will be asking next Wednesday," he said. The Capitol Police also declined to attend the briefing on Wednesday, adding to Chaffetz and other lawmakers' frustration. …. "I landed, I delivered the mail without anyone getting hurt, without any property damage, I succeeded," he said in an interview after the stunt. The 61-year-old has since been charged with operating an unregistered aircraft and he remains under house arrest in Florida. If convicted, Hughes could face up to four years in prison, and heavy fines.”

It's too bad if Hughes goes to prison for some four years at his age, but he really should have found some other way to make a political statement – though I agree with his viewpoints fully. He did, after all, have an active political website and should have contented himself with that. If he wanted to deliver those letters, all he had to do was send them through the US mail. He wanted to make a highly visible statement, however, and unfortunately for him it has backfired. His message concerns the Citizens United Supreme Court decision that has opened the door for the very wealthy brothers to literally buy the candidate of their choice.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/activist-larry-kramer-stirs-up-controversy-in-new-book-american-people/

Did Lincoln, Washington have affairs with men?
By DEXTER MULLINS CBS NEWS
April 15, 2015

NEW YORK -- When Larry Kramer has something to say, he gets right to the point.

At 79, the HIV and gay rights advocate may move a bit more slowly and speak a bit more softly than he did at the height of the AIDS crisis in the 1990s. Nevertheless, he's just as passionate about finding a cure and fighting for equality, and is still stirring up headlines with his controversial claims -- this time, with his new book.

In Volume One of his two-part "The American People," Kramer makes bold assertions about some of America's most-revered leaders.

"We know that Abraham Lincoln was gay," Kramer told CBS News in a recent interview. "Why is that not in the history books? Because all history books are written by straight people, and they don't wanna either admit that, or they wouldn't know how to recognize what we call 'gaydar.'"

According to Kramer, George Washington and Alexander Hamilton had intimate affairs with men, John Wilkes Booth had a new motive for killing Lincoln and Jamestown was a bastion of gay sex.

"It's only natural that men would sleep with each other, when there are no women around for months on end," he explained.

"It's called a 'novel,' but that's just to keep the lawyers away from me," he said, laughing. "I believe everything in the book is true. Everything in there happened."

Kramer said the first book, nearly 800 pages long, took him 40 years to write. It runs from prehistoric America to the 1950s, and lays the groundwork for what is to come -- a retelling of American history that includes gay people in a way that only Kramer could.

"I'm so tired of reading history books that don't have anything about gay people in (them), when we know that there are so many famous people in the history of this country who were gay," Kramer said.

Kramer's version of history is more than just an outing of America's earliest leaders. He said he has traced the HIV virus to its very beginnings, in a group of prehistoric monkeys in what would become the Everglades.

"This is the 35th year of this plague," Kramer said. "Why has it been allowed to continue? Why have the government, the Congress, the president, not attended to it in the way they should? Why is there no cure? Why don't I hear anything about the word 'cure?'"

Kramer, who is HIV-positive himself, says the second book will be just as controversial.

"You'll hear all about the plague of AIDS in the second volume, and a lot about Ronald Reagan," Kramer said. "It's not a nice story, but it's one that needs to be told. If I've been kept alive for any reason, it was to tell this story."



http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/05/16/study-finds-gaydar-up-to-80-percent-accurate-on-sexuality

Study Finds 'Gaydar' Up to 80 Percent Accurate on Sexuality
By Jason Koebler
May 16, 2012

In a study of college students at the University of Washington, most people were able to identify a person's sexuality with greater-than-chance accuracy based on black-and-white photo flashes of them for just 50 milliseconds—faster than the blink of an eye. Photos used in the study were digitally altered to remove hair, jewelry, and other "self-presentational" aspects of a person, suggesting there may be such a thing as a "gay face," according to researcher Joshua Tabak, a doctoral candidate at the university and lead author of the paper.

"The world's best lie detection experts top out at around 80 percent accuracy," he says. "Being at 80 percent accuracy on this type of judgment—just seeing a picture of a face in grayscale—that's pretty amazing."

But not everyone's "gaydar" is exactly on point. Some weren't able to guess sexuality at all, while others scored above 80 percent accuracy at identifying 96 randomly ordered gay and straight people. Overall, people were about 57 percent accurate at identifying the self-identified sexual orientation of subjects.

Although more studies are necessary, Tabak says his results suggest that guessing sexual preference is something that is likely learned via exposure to a wide variety of gay and straight people. Put in a real-world scenario, adding "hair, jewelry, clothing, gait, and posture," people might be even more accurate—or it might just contribute excess noise.

"The more you add, you might be adding conflicting information," he says. "Most likely, the differences in accuracy are driven by social factors. We can speculate that some people are more motivated to make these judgments or have more experience making these judgments."

[Straight or Gay? Vowels in Speech May Give it Away]

Gaydar has been an oft-studied phenomenon, with several studies debunking it and several others suggesting that people couldn't tell sexual orientation based on body shape, walking style, or voice. Tabak says he believes it's a real thing—at least in a college population.

"I believe this is real in the population I'm testing," he says. "Grandma grew up in a different time, probably not knowing she was interacting with both gay and straight people. But if you're growing up now, you're exposed to a lot of different people."

His study suggests, but doesn't prove, that there may genetic facial components common in gay people. Surprisingly, students were more accurate at detecting lesbian women than they were at detecting gay men.

[Ovulation Seems to Aid Women's 'Gaydar']

"With their prevalence in the media and the stereotypes, you'd think that since we have more exposure to the 'gay man,' we have reasons to believe we'd be more accurate in judging men," he says. "In fact, it was the opposite."

It also happens extremely fast—and perhaps unconsciously.

"It's judged so rapidly and efficiently," like other characteristics such as gender and race, he says. "It suggests that we may actually be judging sexual orientation without intending to in everyday life."

Tabak says he hopes his study makes people consider whether they may be discriminating against others without even realizing it.

"One primary argument against nondiscrimination protection, the stereotypical Republican response, is that if gay people kept it to themselves, it would be impossible to be discriminated against," he says. "Well, people might be making these judgments even when they're not trying to."

Jason Koebler is a science and technology reporter for U.S. News & World Report. You can follow him on Twitter or reach him at jkoebler@usnews.com
Vote now on whether or not gay marriage should be legal nationally
Read: Rumors swirl on Obama 'evolution' on gay marriage
Follow U.S. News Debate Club on Twitter




"We know that Abraham Lincoln was gay," Kramer told CBS News in a recent interview. "Why is that not in the history books? Because all history books are written by straight people, and they don't wanna either admit that, or they wouldn't know how to recognize what we call 'gaydar.'" According to Kramer, George Washington and Alexander Hamilton had intimate affairs with men, John Wilkes Booth had a new motive for killing Lincoln and Jamestown was a bastion of gay sex. "It's only natural that men would sleep with each other, when there are no women around for months on end," he explained. …. It runs from prehistoric America to the 1950s, and lays the groundwork for what is to come -- a retelling of American history that includes gay people in a way that only Kramer could. "I'm so tired of reading history books that don't have anything about gay people in (them), when we know that there are so many famous people in the history of this country who were gay," Kramer said. Kramer's version of history is more than just an outing of America's earliest leaders. He said he has traced the HIV virus to its very beginnings, in a group of prehistoric monkeys in what would become the Everglades. …. Kramer, who is HIV-positive himself, says the second book will be just as controversial. "You'll hear all about the plague of AIDS in the second volume, and a lot about Ronald Reagan," Kramer said. "It's not a nice story, but it's one that needs to be told. If I've been kept alive for any reason, it was to tell this story."

The only thing that would lead me to think Abe Lincoln, the brilliant and powerful leader, was gay is the fact that a book on his life stated that his speaking voice was excessively high and light, almost “squeeky.” I do tend to assume that men with a voice like that are somewhere between “perhaps” and “probably” gay. The voice is genetic. Likewise the very fragile bone structures that some gay men have is to me a giveaway. But in addition those inherited characteristics is a certain “simper” that some men have, which to me is usually indicative of that, and of course the sashay of their hips. Those are the “effeminate” men. Among Hollywood gay men, however, those characteristics may not be present, with a bodybuilder's physique and a very handsome face appearing instead. Gay men, I understand, like the very masculine men as much as women do in many cases, so the big man with the cowboy hat may be the preferred target of gay men.

Setting apparent sexual characteristics aside, many men – too many in regard to the AIDS epidemic – are bisexual and not gay or straight. They are married, or have girlfriends. One man I knew once said that men “know how” to please another man sexually sometimes more than a woman does. That makes sense, because they have their own experiences to go by. In addition to that, as Kramer stated above, men in situations of enforced absence from women are more likely than we might think to turn to gay sex, even if the practice on one level repells them. That is one of those horror stories about life in prisons – homosexual rape. The human sexual drive is high enough to cause that.

Besides there are recorded cases of animals engaging in homosexual activity, so gay sex probably goes back to our very beginnings as a species. The BBC site “http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150206-are-there-any-homosexual-animals” and a Reddit site “http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/2sd6rw/how_was_homosexuality_viewed_in_ancient_times_and/” discuss these phenomena. The Reddit site asks the question “At what point did cultures start to become anti-gay?” The Greeks and Romans considered gay sex to be normal and it was not practiced in a way that excluded heterosexual activity. The Reddit article states of China, “In the Han dynasty scribes kept a record of the emperor’s male lovers and even as late as the Qing dynasty the literati (and more than one Qing emperor) carried on affairs with young men, especially at the time when ... a flood of young actors, all male, came to perform. Confucianism did much the same, focusing more on social philosophy. The laws regarding homosexuality were directed more towardsprostitution than to mature relationships. In fact, recorded opposition to homosexuality appeared later on when Christian and Islam writers that reflected their own attitudes reached China.” One thing I am sure of, gay sex is here to stay, and is so commonplace that I no longer consider it to be “abnormal.” It's on a spectrum of activities that both men and women perform.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/pentagon-cyberwarfare-a-viable-option-in-conflicts-with-enemies/

Pentagon: Cyberwarfare a viable option in conflicts with enemies
CBS/AP
April 23, 2015

Photograph – A cybersecurity expert monitors telecommunications traffic at a network operations center in a Verizon facility in Ashburn, Virginia in this July 15, 2014 file photo.  REUTERS/JONATHAN ERNST/FILES

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. -- A new Pentagon cybersecurity strategy lays out for the first time publicly that the U.S. military plans to use cyberwarfare as an option in conflicts with enemies.

The 33-page strategy says the Defense Department "should be able to use cyber operations to disrupt an adversary's command and control networks, military-related critical infrastructure and weapons capabilities."

The cybersecurity strategy is the second done by the Pentagon and is slated for release Thursday, but it was obtained early by The Associated Press. The previous strategy, which was publicly released in 2011, made little reference to the Pentagon's offensive cyber capabilities, although U.S. officials have spoken quietly about the issue.

The new document takes a more open approach in part because officials said the Pentagon wants more transparency in its cyber mission - and because it could provide some deterrence to adversaries.

"I think it will be useful to us for the world to know that, first of all, we're going to protect ourselves, we're going to defend ourselves," Defense Secretary Ash Carter told reporters traveling with him to California. He added that the new strategy is "more clear and more specific about everything, including (U.S.) offense."

The strategy also, for the first time, includes a small section on U.S. concerns about continued cyberespionage by China against U.S. companies and agencies. It says the U.S. will continue to try to work with Beijing to bring greater understanding and transparency of each nation's cyber missions to "reduce the risks of misperception and miscalculation."

Carter is in Silicon Valley to reach out to high-tech companies and experts and seek their help in countering the growing cybersecurity threat and ensuring that America's military has the cutting-edge technologies it needs.

But he is likely to face a tough techie audience that has long been suspicious of U.S. surveillance programs and is determined to protect its clients and customers from government prying. He is giving a speech at Stanford University and expects to meet with technology company leaders, including Facebook chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, as well as a group of venture capitalists.

Speaking to reporters on the plane Wednesday, Carter acknowledged the challenge, including suspicions involving the case of intelligence leaker Edward Snowden.

"One of the things we need to do is have that dialogue," said Carter, who has long been entrenched in cybersecurity issues, including when he served as deputy defense secretary. "We have a tremendous common interest in having a safe but also open and prosperous society, so that's common ground, and it's that common ground I'm trying to get us to stand on."

He agreed the military may face a "coolness" shortfall as it tries to lure young Silicon Valley techies to work with the Pentagon.

"To be relevant in today's world you have to have a coolness factor, so we want that, we want our mission to be exciting to people, for them to feel like it's cool to be part of something that's bigger than themselves."

Carter is expected to make a series of announcements about new ways the Pentagon will partner with technology firms. According to defense officials, he is setting up a full-time unit of military, civilian and reservist workers in the San Francisco Bay area in the next month or so to scout out promising emerging technologies and build better relations with the companies there.

He also will launch a pilot program with In-Q-Tel, a nonprofit technology company that already works with the U.S. intelligence community, to invest in early-stage innovations such as nano-electronics.

And the Pentagon will tap into the U.S. Digital Service to help coordinate the transfer of electronic health records between the Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs. The service was created to help solve problems with the launch of the Obama administration's HealthCare.gov website.

In February, Homeland Security Adviser Lisa Monaco announced the creation of a new federal agency that will coordinate threat responses and intelligence across government entities. The Cyber Intelligence Integration Center is expected to facilitate investigations and "connect the dots" undertaken by the National Security Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other intelligence operations.

Cyberattacks against U.S. government and industry have grown increasingly more severe and sophisticated. The new strategy says, "During heightened tensions or outright hostilities, DOD must be able to provide the president with a wide range of options for managing conflict escalation."

It adds that, as part of those options, the military must have cyber capabilities that can "achieve key security objectives with precision, and to minimize loss of life and destruction of property."

The announcements come on the heels of President Barack Obama's decision earlier this month to authorize financial sanctions against malicious overseas hackers or companies that use cyberespionage to steal U.S. trade secrets. Those companies could include state-owned corporations in Russia, China or other countries that have long been named as cyber adversaries.

"The next headline-grabbing breach is undoubtedly already underway," according Michael DeCesare, a veteran technology industry executive and former president of Intel Security.




“The new document takes a more open approach in part because officials said the Pentagon wants more transparency in its cyber mission - and because it could provide some deterrence to adversaries. …. It says the U.S. will continue to try to work with Beijing to bring greater understanding and transparency of each nation's cyber missions to "reduce the risks of misperception and miscalculation." Carter is in Silicon Valley to reach out to high-tech companies and experts and seek their help in countering the growing cybersecurity threat and ensuring that America's military has the cutting-edge technologies it needs. …. But he is likely to face a tough techie audience that has long been suspicious of U.S. surveillance programs and is determined to protect its clients and customers from government prying. …. The service was created to help solve problems with the launch of the Obama administration's HealthCare.gov website. In February, Homeland Security Adviser Lisa Monaco announced the creation of a new federal agency that will coordinate threat responses and intelligence across government entities. The Cyber Intelligence Integration Center is expected to facilitate investigations and "connect the dots" …. The new strategy says, "During heightened tensions or outright hostilities, DOD must be able to provide the president with a wide range of options for managing conflict escalation." It adds that, as part of those options, the military must have cyber capabilities that can "achieve key security objectives with precision, and to minimize loss of life and destruction of property." …. financial sanctions against malicious overseas hackers or companies that use cyberespionage to steal U.S. trade secrets. Those companies could include state-owned corporations in Russia, China or other countries that have long been named as cyber adversaries.”

The idea that our cybersecurity systems could replace bombs and armies with cyberattacks sounds good to me. The idea that the Cyber Intelligence Integration Center could “connect the dots” about the life activities of American citizens and produce the Big Brother state sooner and more effectively is less than pleasant. Already the license plates of cars that merely drive harmlessly down the nation's highways are, in some places at least, being collected and put into data files with the idea that the whereabouts of any citizen can be pulled up out of all that data instantaneously, and a patrol car can be dispatched to arrest the driver. He may have published unflattering commentary on his blog site, for instance. Hopefully that won't be the use these new techniques will be put to. I am concerned in a number of ways about our society, and this is one of them. The military armed city police forces could be used to control everybody also. I wonder who will be in control by the time I die? I do hope we will still have a few civil rights left by that time. Please pardon my paranoia. It's just that my country has changed so much since I was a young person that I can barely recognize it.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/secret-service-delayed-fixing-alarm-at-houston-home-of-former-president-george-h-w-bush/

Secret Service delayed fixing alarm at Bush 41's home
By ARDEN FARHI CBS NEWS
April 23, 2015

The alarm system protecting former President George H. W. Bush's Houston home did not work properly for more than a year starting in September 2013, according to a Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General report to be released today.

During the 13 or more months the alarm was inoperable, the United States Secret Service (USSS), which is responsible for the security of all former pre‎sidents, their spouses and their residences, assigned an employee to a "roving post to secure the residence," the report says. No breaches occurred.

It is not clear precisely when the alarm failed, leaving the possibility that the 41st president and his wife, Barbara, were home without the protection of the alarm or the additional personnel, the report says.

The Secret Service's Technical Security Division purchased a replacement system in January 2014, but it was not installed until December, 11 months later.

The faulty alarm system was originally installed in President Bush's residence in 1993, the year he left office. In 2010, a Secret Service employee determined the system "had exceeded its life cycle" and recommended it be replaced, the report says. But the request was denied for an unknown reason. "Limited upgrades" were made in 2012.

Jim McGrath, a spokesman for former President Bush, told CBS News, "George and Barbara Bush have total confidence in the men and women of the Secret Service. Their trust in them is as unshakable as it is unbreakable."

The inspector general report, which is partially redacted, also raises concerns about security at other former presidents' residences. The presidents' names are blacked out in the report. A Secret Service official described security equipment at one former president's home as showing "signs of impending failure."

The report was prepared by Homeland Security Inspector General John Roth and addressed to Secret Service Director Joseph Clancy. It recommends the Secret Service "review security equipment" and "evaluate the process for tracking maintenance requests" at all protectees' residences.

Director Clancy concurred with those recommendations and said an assessment of protectees' residences was completed in January. His agency has also implemented a new process to track maintenance requests.

"With these fixes in place, we believe the Secret Service will more effectively meet its mission to protect the lives and homes of our former presidents," Roth said in a statement.

But Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz, who chairs the House committee charged with overseeing the Secret Service, isn't convinced. "I'm glad they know about it now, but for more than a year we had a former president of the United States whose basic alarm system wasn't working. Are you kidding me? That's unbelievable," he said in an interview with CBS News.

The USSS has been reeling after a string of embarrassing events tarnished the agency's once sterling reputation. Inspector General Roth said his office is also looking into the 2014 fence-jumping incident and the March 4 incident in which two agents drove an official vehicle through an active bomb investigation on White House grounds.
"They've got to get their act together and get it together fast," Chaffetz continued.




“It is not clear precisely when the alarm failed, leaving the possibility that the 41st president and his wife, Barbara, were home without the protection of the alarm or the additional personnel, the report says. The Secret Service's Technical Security Division purchased a replacement system in January 2014, but it was not installed until December, 11 months later. The faulty alarm system was originally installed in President Bush's residence in 1993, the year he left office. In 2010, a Secret Service employee determined the system "had exceeded its life cycle" and recommended it be replaced, the report says. But the request was denied for an unknown reason. "Limited upgrades" were made in 2012. …. "With these fixes in place, we believe the Secret Service will more effectively meet its mission to protect the lives and homes of our former presidents," Roth said in a statement. But Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz, who chairs the House committee charged with overseeing the Secret Service, isn't convinced. "I'm glad they know about it now, but for more than a year we had a former president of the United States whose basic alarm system wasn't working. Are you kidding me? That's unbelievable," he said in an interview with CBS News.”

Technology upgrades and fences will only improve security so much. As long as there are insane people who are willing to climb the fence or who bluff their way through the front gate presidents will still be in danger. I was really unhappy, though, when I heard that the alarm at the White House had been turned off by a manager there because the noise it made was annoying – I forget just who that was – and that on top of that, an intruder forced the door open against the efforts of the door guard to prevent it, making his way well into the White House – that seems like a scandal to me. Likewise the drunken party with prostitutes and later the agent who had apparently passed out in the hotel hallway. Those are human failures, and USSS agents need to be fighters in hand to hand combat as well as alert all the time. One incident was stopped outside the white house after an intruder got onto the lawn. Luckily there was an alert German Shepherd dog on duty, and upon command he did what they do best – “took down” the intruder.





http://www.cbsnews.com/news/police-search-coyotes-spotted-new-york-city-new-jersey/

Growing concern over coyotes roaming NYC's streets
CBS NEWS April 23, 2015

21 Photographs – Animals in the wrong place at the wrong time

Coyotes live all across North America, but in recent years they've migrated outside their normal habitats into new ones. Now, new concerns are brewing over the wild animals adapting to the urban jungles of Manhattan, CBS News' Michelle Miller reports.

Wildlife officials have clocked an alarming number of sightings in New York City's boroughs. They've scampered across roofs, roamed through streets and even evaded the nation's largest police force, which searched by air and ground.

"We have been encroaching into the natural habitat, so these opportunists, coyotes, have been looking for other sources of prey that is natural to them," Animal Planet predator expert Dave Salmoni said.

He said coyotes are becoming less afraid of humans.

"Generally speaking, I would say a coyote is a very low-risk animal for people. Coyotes are very nervous, and they're skiddish," Salmoni said.

In neighboring New Jersey, the most densely populated state, residents are worried after a man was attacked on Sunday while walking his dog.

Nancy Balian-Tedona snapped a photo of a coyote Wednesday while on the way to her son's preschool.

"I thought it was a dog crossing the road, and I looked again and said 'No, this is the coyote,'" she said.

Norwood, New Jersey, Police Chief Jeff Krapels was part of a search team Wednesday.

"When my officers arrived, the coyote started chewing on the tires of the police car," Krapels said.

He said they captured one coyote but were still looking for a second.

Adding further to the fears of anxious residents, that captured coyote tested positive for rabies.

"The ones that are sick and the ones that are aggressive are the ones we are concerned about," Krapels said.

The coyote spotted in Manhattan still remains at large. Wildlife officials believe it was healthy and likely retreated back to its den. One animal expert told CBS News the risk of being killed by a coyote was about equal to being killed by a vending machine.




"When my officers arrived, the coyote started chewing on the tires of the police car," Krapels said. He said they captured one coyote but were still looking for a second. Adding further to the fears of anxious residents, that captured coyote tested positive for rabies. "The ones that are sick and the ones that are aggressive are the ones we are concerned about," Krapels said.” One of the signs of rabies is eating indigestible materials. A coyote shouldn't be “chewing on the tires” of a car. They can have spasmodic movements of the jaws with rabies, as well as an unsteady gate when walking. I'm an animal lover, but I am of the opinion that coyotes which venture into cities should be shot. The cases of mountain lions coming into towns are the same, although they may be close to extinction, so moving them if they are healthy out into the wilderness would be preferable. Twice over the last few years a black bear has been spotted within the borders of Jacksonville, FL, where I live. Bears are very attractive animals, but they should all be viewed as dangerous with or without rabies. Jacksonville is built on a river delta and is surrounded by large areas of forest land which follow the tributaries into the city. Deer have come into the city, too, along with numerous foxes, raccoons and feral cats, all of which carry rabies. It's a very dangerous situation.





http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/04/22/401258904/why-many-doctors-dont-follow-best-practices

Why Many Doctors Don't Follow 'Best Practices'
Anders Kelto
April 22, 2015

Graphics – Science-based guidelines say there's no benefit to getting an EKG of heart activity before routine cataract surgery — even if the patient is old. But most doctors order such tests anyway.
Bull's Eye/ImageZoo/Corbis

For all their talk about evidence-based medicine, a lot of doctors don't follow the clinical guidelines set by leading medical groups.

Consider, for example, the case of cataract surgery. It's a fairly straightforward medical procedure: Doctors replace an eye's cloudy lens with a clear, prosthetic one. More than a million people each year in the U.S. have the surgery — most of them older than 65.

"The procedure itself is relatively painless and quick," says Dr. Catherine Chen, an anesthesiologist and researcher at the University of California, San Francisco. She calls it the "prototypical low-risk surgery."

And since at least 2002, Chen says, clinical guidelines have stipulated that no preoperative testing is needed before cataract surgery. A large study showed that procedures like chest X-rays, blood tests and EKGs — tests sometimes recommended when older people undergo more complicated surgeries — do not benefit someone who is simply having a cataract removed.

But Chen noticed that a lot of patients are having these preoperative tests done anyway. How many? Digging into the numbers, she discovered that half the ophthalmologists who performed cataract surgery on Medicare patients in 2011 ordered unnecessary tests. That's the same percentage as in 1995.

"In about 20 years, nothing has really changed in terms of physician performance," Chen says. She recently published those findings in the New England Journal of Medicine.

Dr. Steven Brown, a professor of family medicine at the University of Arizona, has studied doctors' reasons for ordering unnecessary tests before a scheduled surgery. A lot of it has to do with perceived safety, he says.

"They think, somehow, that this is going to make the patient more likely to do well in surgery," he says. "It's not."

Brown says some doctors don't know the latest guidelines, which is somewhat understandable, since there can be hundreds to follow.

But often, he says, doctors order extra tests because they think someone down the line — another surgeon or anesthesiologist — will require them.

"[It becomes] this game of tag," he says, "where you're doing something because you think somebody else wants it, even if you don't really want it."

So, even in the midst of good science and a clear consensus on what should be done, a lot of physicians don't follow the "best practice" guidelines.

Now, imagine what happens when the science isn't clear.

That was the case Monday, when the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force updated its guidelines for breast cancer screening. After analyzing the best studies, the influential panel now suggests most women get a mammogram every other year, beginning at age 50. Guidance from this task force largely determines which tests will be covered by Medicare, Medicaid and insurance companies.

Meanwhile, the American Cancer Society and the American College of Radiology still recommend annual screening mammograms for women beginning at age 40.

"There's really a lot more ambiguity about what is the right thing — "what's appropriate [and] what's not appropriate." says Dr. Albert Wu, an internist and professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

In cases like these, Wu says, doctors are more likely to follow their gut instincts. And when that happens, fear often comes into play.

Imagine, for example, that a healthy, 40-year-old woman walks into your office and asks about a mammogram.

"If that woman were to develop breast cancer or to have breast cancer, you can imagine what might happen to you if you didn't order the test," Wu says. "Maybe you'd get sued."

Doctors often hear stories like this, he says, and that can affect their judgment.

"Emotion and recent events do influence our decision-making," he says. "We are not absolutely rational, decision-making machines."




“Brown says some doctors don't know the latest guidelines, which is somewhat understandable, since there can be hundreds to follow. But often, he says, doctors order extra tests because they think someone down the line — another surgeon or anesthesiologist — will require them. …. Meanwhile, the American Cancer Society and the American College of Radiology still recommend annual screening mammograms for women beginning at age 40. "There's really a lot more ambiguity about what is the right thing — "what's appropriate [and] what's not appropriate." says Dr. Albert Wu, an internist and professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. In cases like these, Wu says, doctors are more likely to follow their gut instincts. And when that happens, fear often comes into play.”

There was a similar article several years ago which went on to say that even self-examination was not being “recommended” because it tends to cause “fear” in women. In other words they go to the doctor and annoyingly want to be examined for cancer when they find a lump. Many women have lumps in their breasts which are actually cysts and not cancer, but they can be large and painful. The idea that women shouldn't have those things x-rayed or that insurance shouldn't pay for it just because the patient's age has reached the 50 mark yet is shameful in my view. It is known that many cancers if found early can be cured. I will continue to report any lumps to me doctor and ask for x-rays. The fact that insurance wants to save money in every possible occasion doesn't justify that kind of careless treatment of a human life. “The bottom line” is not always the best rule to follow.