Month: August 2010

  • everlasting human goal of attaining a meaningful existence

    What is it to Exist? What drive can be identified that propels us forward?

    The term existence, as I put it forth in this, represents more than simply the existence which is shared by all living and non living things, that being the quality of physical reality (a rock actually exists, as does a tree, insect, snake, dog, cow, and man); by existence, I intend it to mean those qualities (and the implications thereof) which make humans unique among all other “existing” objects. Though science has shown that many other creatures are social and can communicate even relatively complicated ideas amongst themselves, these animals are no closer to achieving the ability to record and document these new ideas easily.

    There are many biological qualities unique to human existence which allow for a more advanced introspective understanding of the circumstances in which a given human brain is experiencing. The development of humans by social, creative, innovative, and adaptive means has allowed for the sharing and recording of ideas since the beginning of “recorded history”.


    -1 The development which mankind has undergone has given it a collective and ever-growing wealth of knowledge. This collective knowledge is the sum of human mental development for thousands of years, and represents everything mankind has endured and learned, planned and created, thought and dreamed. This collective knowledge is combined into each new generation, which will add its own innovations and gathered knowledge to the whole. This means that each successive generation is slightly more developed and intelligent than the one that preceded it (even if the older generation can be seen as more wise, being that they have experienced much more (on an individual basis than someone much younger, this would simply mean that the younger individual would be slightly more wise in their old age).

    Also, as the human ability to efficiently share ideas (via writing, publication, and an ever increasing range of technologies) improves, the amount of knowledge possessed by each generation will greatly increase; as they are presented with access to a greater information base, one can access a huge amount of information via the internet, for example. The development of Morse communication, telephones, radio communication, printing techniques, television and other “Idea Transmission” methods have all had major impacts on people’s ability to absorb global knowledge rather than just local knowledge; in times past, people would rely on the knowledge of those around them in their development, and even rudimentary school systems lacked any real central curriculum and structure; as well as no global connection and agreement as to what the general criteria for the knowledge required to be taught to students should be. This situation would have led to vast differences in the standards of education and knowledge that each individual from different cultures, and regions would be expected to know, even neighboring cities could have an astounding difference in quality of education.

    One specific technique allows for a greater global connection than any other; The internet is the most effective and efficient means ever developed by humans for sharing ideas and information. It is the world largest library, it contains a wealth of information, services, and entertainment, and it is accessible from the comfort of one’s own home. Simply by its existence, people are expected to know a great deal more, it’s becoming more and more incorporated indivisibly from the education of children, and it’s now accepted that: “If you have a question, you can find the answer on the internet, even if you do have to sift through a great deal of useless information”.

    So, if knowledge is the key to existence, and each development in communication has allowed for far greater access to information; therefore allowing each individual to assimilate an increased amount of knowledge; then a primary reason for existence is to learn as much as you can, and share it with others, so as to further the collective knowledge of mankind. Also, the search for this knowledge is symbolic and representational of all other human achievements and goals. As can be seen in the second argument.


    -2 Another element of existence which is connected with the first one is experience, the wealth of experiences which individuals enjoy and endure, as well as how the individual copes and adapts with those experiences, throughout their lives gives each person a unique vision of the world, and a unique “tint” in their developed wisdom.

    This subjectivity which exists in the mind of each living human allows for infinitely different ways an individual assimilates knowledge through experience, which therefore allows for seemingly infinite translations and viewpoints on a given topic.

    The search for experiences is a worthy goal, in that it is truly just another way of developing knowledge, of learning, but unlike the knowledge gained through education, the knowledge gained through experience has not necessarily been done before, and therefore increases the chances of the development of new knowledge, which can then be added to the accumulated knowledge of the world.

    Also, experience is the vehicle by which one gains wisdom, by testing the knowledge one has against the reality that presents itself everyday, and learning from mistakes made, as well as any successes or accomplishments. So, in a manner of speaking, wisdom is knowledge tempered by experience.

    Copyright. Everything.com 2010 All Rights Reserved

  • How Twitter is changing old age

    Topic:

    Social Media

    How Twitter is changing old age

    Ivy Bean, “the world’s oldest Twitter user,” dies at 104 — and reminds us of the Internet’s power to connect

  • Why We Should Actually Thank Dr. Laura for Her N-Word Rant

    Why We Should Actually Thank Dr. Laura for Her N-Word Rant

     


    A lot of people have been beating up on Dr. Laura Schlessinger lately, but I’d actually like to thank her. Before you start drafting your irate comment or e-mail to send my way, let me explain.

    By no means am I a fan of Dr. Laura, (as she’s known), but I’m even less of a fan of the n-word, which I find more offensive, more harmful, and more poisonous to our community than Dr. Laura will ever be. So the reason I’d like to thank her is because I’m hoping that her recent on air meltdown will finally help settle a philosophical debate over the n-word that has raged for years. On one side of the debate are those of us who believe that no one should say the n-word — not a white racist and not a black comedian — ever. On the other side are those who believe that if you’re black, you essentially get an n-word lifetime free pass. (I don’t recall ever receiving mine in the mail, but I am black so I must have one lying around somewhere.) But Dr. Laura reminds us why such logic is not just flawed, but dangerous.

    For those of you who have been living under a rock or without electricity for the last few days, let me catch you up. The controversial radio host said the racial slur nearly a dozen times in the context of telling a black caller that she was being too sensitive about her white husband’s friends and others using the n-word, since so many black comedians use it. As a parting shot she also told the woman that if she was so sensitive she never should have married a white guy. (So much for the myth of post-racial America.)

    Now I happen to consider Dr. Laura’s laughably flawed logic more offensive than her use of the n-word, but considering her doctorate is actually in physiology and not psychology like many believe, it’s really not that surprising that she knows so little about people or race relations. But the fact that she felt justified saying what she did confirms a fundamental reality: Arbitrary rules about who can say the n-word and who cannot simply do not work. Dr. Laura felt justified saying what she did because a host of rappers and comedians continue to validate her perspective.

    In 2007 the NAACP hosted a funeral for the n-word, a symbolic gesture aimed at putting the word to rest in our community and the community at large. The effort was met by derision and scorn by many, among them celebrities who argued the words’ artistic merit and those who noted that there are a host of more important issues plaguing our community.

    That’s certainly true. As I (and others) have written about before, AIDS is the leading cause of death of young, black women and gun violence is one of the leading causes of death of young black men. But here’s what I find interesting. I notice that those issues do not seem to generate the same level of outrage and even reaction in cyberspace among black Americans that a white person saying the n-word seems to. So clearly the word does have an impact, even if it’s one that’s clearly not as lethal as AIDS or a firearm.

    But, we all know that words do matter. Call a child stupid enough times, and eventually that child — no matter how bright — will grow into believing that they are not. Despite its racial connotation, the official definition of the n-word is this: “a person of any race or origin regarded as contemptible, inferior, ignorant, etc.” So here’s my question to those who believe that as long as the word remains within our community, it’s harmless. If a child hears his uncle refer to his father as the n-word on a regular basis, but has been told that if a white person says it to him it’s bad, do you honestly believe the word remains harmless? Are children really savvy enough to grasp the nuances of a word being an alleged term of endearment around certain types of people, but a term of degradation among others? Is it any wonder then that so many inner-city high schools have nearly fifty percent drop out rates among black boys, when many of them have likely been called the n-word (as a term of “endearment”) much of their lives? Why would they think of themselves as better than that, when they’ve been raised to believe, and say that they’re not?

    Here’s my other question to everyone from Sherri Shepherd to Jaime Foxx who believe the black community gets a lifetime n-word free pass. How black do you have to be to be allowed to say it? Can a biracial person say it? How about Mr. “Cablinasian” Tiger Woods? Legendary actress Carol Channing, who’s in her eighties and regarded as white, recently revealed that her father was part black. I wonder how Sherri Shepherd or Whoopi Goldberg would react if Channing greeted them during her next appearance on The View with a boisterous, “What up my ni****?”

    And for those who argue the word’s artistic value. Newsflash Kanye, Jaime, Sherri, Whoopi and others: if you are funny and talented enough, your act shouldn’t cease being entertaining with the elimination of one word. The n-word is not like air or water. We can live without it, so why not try?

    Which brings me to my final point. One thing that strikes as so strange about this entire debate is that our community has so much that is actually worth fighting for. We still lag behind in all of the areas in which it actually matters: graduation rates, life expectancy, compensation, and financial security. Why have some of us decided that keeping the n-word alive and well is a battle that deserves our time, attention and support? That seems to be a sad statement on our priorities.

    As I said on MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan Show just like I believe that those who choose not to vote can’t complain about the government they get — ever — because they’re not doing their part to make things better, maybe we should implement a rule that anyone who uses the N-word is no longer permitted to complain about racism from a public soapbox ever again, because they’re not doing their part to make things better either. Just think, Kanye “George Bush doesn’t care about black people” West would be forced to keep such thoughts to himself in the future until he stops using that word his songs.

    And if I still haven’t convinced you, maybe 11-year-old Jonathan Emile McCoy can. Displaying the eloquence of a man twice, if not three times his age in a groundbreaking speech last year he said: “I’m sending a message to everyone who knowingly or ignorantly uses this word to describe our people, whether you are a gangsta rapper who uses it to communicate with your boys or someone who looks down on those without a college education… It is implausible to me that forty years after the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. we still use this word… so I’m petitioning you to join me in deleting this word from our vocabulary as a people, as a nation and as a world.” (To hear the rest of Jonathan’s AWESOME speech click here).

    I’m with you Jonathan. How about the rest of you?

    So thank you Dr. Laura, for reminding us yet again how truly useless and destructive this word really is, and how tiresome efforts to defend and preserve it really are.

    This piece republished courtesy of TheLoop21.com for which Goff is a political blogger.

    www.keligoff.com

     

    Follow Keli Goff on Twitter: www.twitter.com/keligoff

  • Jets’ Ryan: Dungy ‘unfairly judged me’

    August 18, 2010

    There are serious matters with pending death and financial ruin, complete failure of ecosystems and communities hang in the balance. The futures of our children’s children are being influenced even as you read this.

    Moving out from our center of the challenges that are understood to have defined the summer of 2010
    We clearly know that our shared border and the entire sovereign nation of Mexico are violently out of control. Killings and violence have turned the region into yet another severe crisis, without any predictable resolution.

    The American Real Estate industry continues floundering and FORECLOSING at a rate that is shredding families and communities in almost every part of America. Without a rock hard bottom in clear view, the inevitable rebound seems to remain around the next bend of an endless winding road and ephemeral notion of an unknown solution seemingly less realizable than ever.

    Our sons and daughters are dying on two fronts of the same failed mission, begging to reveal any long term benefit to a single American that I know.

    Unless you were a beneficiary of massive, multi billion dollar Defense contracts, secured through non competitive bid assignments. Blackwater, a privately owned corporation ,shadowy in its global dealings , well known for employing retired military Brass, with well greased Pentagon resumes, epitomized this rape of our Treasury . While grandly exploiting Bush’s criminal incompetence , they narrowly escaped having to stand trial for the massive slaughter of eighteen unarmed Iraqi civilians in a single incident of unexplained barbarism and hubris.

    This unraveling of our ability to even come close to a presumption of effective mission control, was perpetrated by the very same personnel and Corporate command structure, Cheney and Rumsfeld so unrelentingly countenanced as a Security/Para Military organization, championed as an asset seasoned and effective,  highly paid  for  keeping our sacred warmongers out of harms way.

    Blackwater, it was said, was infinitely superior to any garden variety Armed Forces . This company was given billions in American tax dollars, to perform tasks that our own Military could not undertake, as they were involved in more mission critical assignments. A loosely disciplined, and haphazardly composed command structure, revealed a private money pit, and a largely out of control band of obscenely compensated, renegade mercenaries.

    They were permitted to go about the Iraqi theater of war as they dam well pleased. It was not an easy pill to swallow, as these fortune seeking Dogs of War flaunted the superiority of every single aspect of the equipment and sophisticated amour and weaponry they were able to purchase at will.

    Of course, if you are making more money in one month than  an American GI dreams of making in a 12 month tour, you surely don’t want an injury to limit the growth of your Swiss Franc, tax exempt secret, and foreign Bank account.


    There you have it, and the winner is.

     

     

    Wednesday, August 18, 2010

     

    Jets’ Ryan: Dungy ‘unfairly judged me’

     	Rex Ryan extended an invite to Tony Dungy Wednesday to spend a day at Jets practice.
    Rex Ryan extended an invite to Tony Dungy Wednesday to spend a day at Jets practice.

    Updated Aug 18, 2010 2:19 PM ET

    CORTLAND, N.Y. (AP)

    Rex Ryan wants Tony Dungy to know he’s more than just a foul-mouthed coach.

     

    FOX SPORTS POLL

     Should Ryan listen to Dungy?
    • Yes, he should watch his language
    • No, it’s part of being a football coach
  • ; $(document).ready(function() { new fsMedia.Poll(‘#poll_11736705′); });

     

    Dungy criticized the New York Jets coach earlier this week for his Rex-pletive-filled appearance on the premiere episode of HBO’s ”Hard Knocks.”

    ”The thing is, I’ve been a big admirer of Tony Dungy, and I’m sure a lot of people are,” Ryan said Wednesday. ”I felt that he unfairly judged me, and that was disappointing to me.”

    Dungy, a devout Christian, told ”The Dan Patrick Show” on Monday that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell should talk to Ryan about his excessive cursing because, ”I just don’t think the league needs that.” Dungy, who won a Super Bowl with Indianapolis, is an NFL analyst for NBC.

    Ryan said he called Dungy and left a message that included his telephone number, and anticipated hearing back from him.

    ”I’ve invited him to come to camp or any time to spend the day with me and the organization,” Ryan said. ”I think maybe he’ll have a different take on it.”

    Ryan said last week he only cared that he disappointed his mother, Doris, but apologized if he offended ”more people than I usually offend.”

    NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said there is no chat planned between Goodell and Ryan.

    ”No, Rex’s mother delivered the message,” Aiello told The Associated Press.

    Ryan was asked if he was surprised Dungy suggested that the commissioner get involved.

     

    Preseason buzz

    Get all the breaking news from NFL training camps and preseason right here.

     

    ”I think I was more surprised that he judged me,” Ryan said.

    Ryan was criticized by some fans and media for what they thought was an excessive use of profanity during the show, which first airs at 10 p.m. EDT on Wednesdays. The five-part ”Hard Knocks” series chronicles the team through training camp.

    In the premiere, Ryan is shown using profanity during a team meeting and while talking to players and coaches. HBO posts warnings to viewers about the language contained in the program, and replays have profanity bleeped out during the day.

    He also reiterated Wednesday that he will always be himself – colorful language and all.

    ”I’m a good person,” Ryan said. ”Just because somebody cusses or whatever doesn’t make them a bad person. Just because a guy doesn’t cuss doesn’t make him a good person. So, I’ll stand by my merits.”

    Ryan said he had ”no idea” if there would be less profanity in the second episode. Then he was informed that HBO’s preview indicated sharp-tongued special teams coordinator Mike Westhoff would be featured.

    ”Then,” he said with a grin, ”there could be more.”

     Copyright. Fox Sports. 2010. All Rights Reserved

    Meanwhile, the attached article really has to make you wonder what is going on in the minds of apparently aware media and sports executives, as the NFL is responding to the discomfort created in the unbelievable vocabulary choices liberally flavored with salty four letter sins, chosen by N.Y. Jets Coach Ryan. Well, fuck me runnin!

    If that is all Tony Dungy has to worry about, home boy is way out front of most of us, with rare and quite limited exceptions.

    I chose to post this innocuous tempest in a tea pot., because in reading this, I could not help becoming incensed, and nauseated by the obvious pretentiousness.


    If he really was so disturbed at the degenerate vulgarities Ryan unleashed in the incident, he knows bloody well enough as a Coach and Minister, that he would have been more likely to be effective in turning Coach Ryan’s filthy mouth into a more gentile, fit for public consumption, locus operandi, if he would have humbly requested the opportunity to meet with Coach Ryan privately, and explain the source of his concern in a way more representative of sincere beliefs and common sense.

    Dungy preferred to spew forth sanctimoniously, in a publicly broadcast T.V. show, where Ryan was not present, falsely attempting to get Ryan in the heat with NFL league Administrators, by throwing a challenge to the NFL Commissioner to sanction or “reign in” the foul mouthed Coach. Dungy always seemed cool, and I know he lost his son to suicide so tragically, not so many years ago. It is still mind bogglingly cheeky to make an issue in such a disingenuine and self-righteous, manner.


    Rather than demonstrating an understandable concern for the lack of civility and conduct unbecoming, and humbly making an honest effort to appeal to Mr. Ryan in a private setting, Dungy chose to travel the low road in his attempt to publicly humiliate a member of his own fraternity of NFL leaders…

    It is the mirror image of the same type of vacuous, moral depravity familiar as the hallmark of every single degenerate betrayal of the American people by Bush Bullies, as they fabricated false justification for war.

    When Dubya disguised himself as a fighter pilot, and stood on the deck of the carrier and announced, “Mission accomplished”. The mission he had accomplished was about his war to get the money stream open and commence lining the pockets of countless cohorts in the exclusive elite of war profiteers. They amassed incalculable fortunes by spilling the blood and murdering the loved ones of people who lives in places they have never been, and are populated by people they couldn’t care less about.

    This sucks, it is wrong, and it must stop. Sorry Tony. I just get passionate and the next thing you know the S word just pops right out.

    All comments and opinions welcome and appreciated.

    Michael

  • Jets’ Ryan: Dungy ‘unfairly judged me’

    <br />
	Rex Ryan extended an invite to Tony Dungy Wednesday to spend a day at Jets practice.<br />

    Rex Ryan extended an invite to Tony Dungy Wednesday to spend a day at Jets practice.
     
     
    Updated Aug 18, 2010 2:19 PM ET

    CORTLAND, N.Y. (AP)

    Rex Ryan wants Tony Dungy to know he’s more than just a foul-mouthed coach.

    FOX SPORTS POLL

       Should Ryan listen to Dungy?
      • Yes, he should watch his language
      • No, it’s part of being a football coach
    ; $(document).ready(function() { new fsMedia.Poll(‘#poll_11736705′); });

    Dungy criticized the New York Jets coach earlier this week for his Rex-pletive-filled appearance on the premiere episode of HBO’s ”Hard Knocks.”

    ”The thing is, I’ve been a big admirer of Tony Dungy, and I’m sure a lot of people are,” Ryan said Wednesday. ”I felt that he unfairly judged me, and that was disappointing to me.”

    Dungy, a devout Christian, told ”The Dan Patrick Show” on Monday that NFL commissioner Roger Goodell should talk to Ryan about his excessive cursing because, ”I just don’t think the league needs that.” Dungy, who won a Super Bowl with Indianapolis, is an NFL analyst for NBC.

    Ryan said he called Dungy and left a message that included his telephone number, and anticipated hearing back from him.

    ”I’ve invited him to come to camp or any time to spend the day with me and the organization,” Ryan said. ”I think maybe he’ll have a different take on it.”

    Ryan said last week he only cared that he disappointed his mother, Doris, but apologized if he offended ”more people than I usually offend.”

    NFL spokesman Greg Aiello said there is no chat planned between Goodell and Ryan.

    ”No, Rex’s mother delivered the message,” Aiello told The Associated Press.

    Ryan was asked if he was surprised Dungy suggested that the commissioner get involved.

    Preseason buzz

    Get all the breaking news from NFL training camps and preseason right here.

    ”I think I was more surprised that he judged me,” Ryan said.

    Ryan was criticized by some fans and media for what they thought was an excessive use of profanity during the show, which first airs at 10 p.m. EDT on Wednesdays. The five-part ”Hard Knocks” series chronicles the team through training camp.

    In the premiere, Ryan is shown using profanity during a team meeting and while talking to players and coaches. HBO posts warnings to viewers about the language contained in the program, and replays have profanity bleeped out during the day.

    He also reiterated Wednesday that he will always be himself – colorful language and all.

    ”I’m a good person,” Ryan said. ”Just because somebody cusses or whatever doesn’t make them a bad person. Just because a guy doesn’t cuss doesn’t make him a good person. So, I’ll stand by my merits.”

    Ryan said he had ”no idea” if there would be less profanity in the second episode. Then he was informed that HBO’s preview indicated sharp-tongued special teams coordinator Mike Westhoff would be featured.

    ”Then,” he said with a grin, ”there could be more.”

     

  • Newscaster Continues To Use Twitter To Connect With Community

     
    Journalism

    Journalism

    by Mike Masnick


    Filed Under:
    back channel, community, journalism, stephen clark, twitter


    tweetcount_title = “Newscaster Continues To Use Twitter To Connect With Community”;tweetcount_src = “RT @Techdirt”;tweetcount_background = “80b62a”;tweetcount_text = “FFFFFF”;tweetcount_url = “http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100810/01061910565.shtml”;

    Newscaster Continues To Use Twitter To Connect With Community

    from the keep-mocking dept

    A few weeks back, I wrote about how a evening newscaster in Detroit named Stephen Clark was successfully embracing Twitter to break down the typical walls between newscaster and audience, and discovering some interesting things at the same time — such as the fact that the community doesn’t just want to talk to him, but to each other. One point I noted was that Clark still could go even further with his embrace of Twitter. He talked about how his use of Twitter had changed his perception from talking at people to talking to people — and I wondered when it would reach the point of talking with people. It looks like it’s getting there.

    Clark himself alerted me to his latest experiment to better connect with viewers by asking them to pitch stories for the evening news — and even to try to put together their own video and share it not just with him, but with the wider community that’s come together:

    Starting immediately I want you to find the stories that I will cover on Channel 7. I want you to find the good people doing good things in your community. I want you to tell me about the interesting characters and fascinating sights that make your communities special. I want you to stop complaining that all you see on TV is bad news and give me some good news.

    That’s it…pretty simple. Oh, there is one little catch. I don’t want you just to tell me about it. I want you so show me. I want you to show the entire #backchannel. It doesn’t have to be perfect and polished. Just take your flip camera or iPhone and shoot some video. Show us the pictures of why it is a compelling story. If you have a fascinating character that needs to be introduced to the #backchannel… and the Channel 7 audience… put him/her/it on camera and show us. If you can edit some sound, video, even your own narration into a short story, do it! Post the video on YouTube or Vimeo or wherever and hashtag a synopsis to the #backchannel.
    When I first wrote about Clark, some of the usual skeptics scoffed that the nature of the conversation somehow wasn’t substantial. But, of course, that missed the point. It’s like the people who mocked blogging in the early days because they “don’t care about your cat,” or the folks who mocked Twitter because they “don’t want to know what some stranger had for lunch.” But the point is that all of this is totally voluntary. You don’t follow the people whose lunch plans or cats you don’t find interesting. But for all the cats and lunches you don’t want to hear about, there’s likely to be something or someone interesting that you do want to find out about.

    In this case, perhaps the community sometimes came together over silly discussions — such as the “Silverfish Hand Catch!” example we discussed in the first post, but it’s those kinds of group bonding experiences that allows the community to build a relationship with each other, trust each other, and do something more interesting and compelling in the long run. I have no idea if this latest experiment will actually produce anything of value. And I already know that the same folks who complained about “nothing substantial” occurring in the #backchannel last time, will pop up to complain that now Clark is asking for “free labor” or something such as that. In the end, people who want to hate will always find something to complain about… and while they do, they’ll miss the fact that some amazing new forms of communication have sprouted out right beneath their eyes while they were sneering about how beneath them it was.
     
    Copyright. Techdirt.com.2010 All Rights Reserved

  • Ruing Exile, Russian Says He’s No Spy

    August 13, 2010    
    Jonathan Player for The New York Times

    Igor Sutyagin, above at the British Museum, says he does not feel at home in London.

     

    August 12, 2010

    Ruing Exile, Russian Says He’s No Spy

    LONDON — Call him the spy who wants to go home again. Except that Igor Sutyagin insists he is not a spy. And his friends warn him not to go home again.

    “Everybody but one,” he said, “tells me run from that country.”

    That country is Russia, where he was locked up for 11 years for working for a British consulting firm that Moscow called a C.I.A. front. Plucked from the bowels of a Russian prison camp, Mr. Sutyagin was freed last month in a dramatic spy swap arranged by the president of the United States even as America denied he had been a spy.

    Mr. Sutyagin has had a decade to think about where he went awry, how sending foreigners information about the Russian military gleaned from newspapers could be taken for treason. But in the weeks since he and three other prisoners were traded for 10 Russian sleeper agents on a Vienna tarmac, he has struggled to come to grips with his abrupt liberation and his role at the center of a geopolitical bargain intended to preserve warming relations between the United States and Russia.

    Deposited here in a strange land, Mr. Sutyagin was given a change of clothes and $3,000, then left to his own devices, a modern-day Rip Van Winkle emerging from the cold isolation of a remote prison near the Arctic to find a dizzying new world.

    He has yet to see his family. He does not feel at home in London. In some ways, he said, he has simply traded one prison for another.

    “I remember very well what Solzhenitsyn said,” said Mr. Sutyagin, the first of the released prisoners to speak with a Western news organization. “He said, ‘My biggest dream is to wake up someday as a free man in a free country.’ So that’s a reason for me to go back and find out whether I can wake up as a free man in a free country. Because without that, my liberation is incomplete.”

    But so, he fears, is Russia’s, as society has grown more closed since he went away. “Over the last 11 years,” he said, “I had the feeling that the people who experienced the most complete freedom in Russia were the people behind bars. It’s very sad. You lose one peace for another. I don’t know whether it’s like that there, but I have to go back to find out.”

    Slight of stature, his hair thinning on top, Mr. Sutyagin, 45, seems an unlikely figure in a drama that briefly captivated the world. While the other three men released by Russia were career intelligence officers, he was a scientist who never had security clearance.

    Over the course of seven hours of interviews in London this week, Mr. Sutyagin adamantly denied any espionage. “No, of course I’m not a spy,” he said in a soft but firm voice. “Of course, I’m not a spy.”

    He looked distraught as he described the pressure to sign a statement admitting otherwise last month when the Americans requested his release. “It’s a very simple deal: you give your honor in exchange for your freedom,” he said. “If it weren’t for my family, I would have stayed.”

    The State Department said flatly that Mr. Sutyagin was not an American spy, an exoneration it did not provide the other three. Half a dozen government and intelligence officials from three administrations have said privately that they do not believe he was.

    So why did the Americans ask for him? The White House called it a humanitarian gesture. He had long ago been declared a political prisoner by Amnesty International, and the United States has in the past traded spies for dissidents.

    Mr. Sutyagin came of age as the Soviet Union collapsed and got to know Americans during the heady 1990s. As a visiting scholar at Stanford University, he met professors like Condoleezza Rice, who would go on to become President George W. Bush’s secretary of state, and Michael McFaul, now President Obama’s top Russia adviser.

    As a young arms researcher at the Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies in Moscow, Mr. Sutyagin attended a conference in Birmingham, England, and met representatives of Alternative Futures, a British firm advising investors in Russia. They put him on a contract for up to $1,000 a month, more than his day job. In exchange, he said, he provided analyses based on public sources like newspapers and government statements.

    In October 1999, two months after Vladimir V. Putin, a former K.G.B. colonel, became president and began restoring the authority of the security services, Mr. Sutyagin was accused of treason. Although it took the F.S.B., the domestic successor to the K.G.B., five years and extraordinary legal contortions to make it stick, he remained in prison the entire time.

    The first judge threw the case out because it was too vague. After the F.S.B. revived it, a second judge and jury were abruptly replaced midtrial. The third judge refused to let the new jury decide whether the information Mr. Sutyagin provided was actually secret; he was sentenced to 15 years.

    In interviews, Mr. Sutyagin gave two examples of information he provided. One report he wrote on problems with Russia’s early warning system used information that had been published in The Washington Post. Another on the creation of new military units was based on public statements by Defense Ministry officials in Red Star, the official military newspaper. “It’s truly Kafka,” he said.

    Was the mysterious British company a C.I.A. front even if he did not know it? That is where Mr. Sutyagin grew less certain. “I’m not a counterintelligence specialist so I can’t tell you,” he said. But, he added, “What kind of intelligence service is it that’s interested in information that six months ago was published in The Washington Post?”

    Over the years, Mr. Sutyagin said the authorities acknowledged privately to him that the case was bogus. “Of course I realize,” he quoted an investigator telling him. “But if we admit that and let you go, we’ll take your place behind bars.”

    His prison odyssey took him to four camps, eventually in the far north near Arkhangelsk. While behind bars, his daughters grew up — one is 18, the other 20 — and his father grew sick. On July 5, as he took a break from building a walkway, a prison official rushed up.

    “Get your things together quickly,” he said. “You’re being sent away.”

    He was taken to Lefortovo prison in Moscow, where the authorities catalogued his worldly possessions in typical Russian detail: 23 spare buttons, 17 paper clips, 106 postcards, 74 envelopes. Only when told to put on a shirt and tie for a photograph did he begin to suspect. Then he was taken to the prison director’s office, where three American officials and two Russian ones told him their presidents had agreed on his release.

    He resisted. He did not want to sign a clemency request that included an admission, and he did not want to leave Russia. But he realized that forces were at work beyond his control. “I was between a rock and a hard place and if I didn’t sign, the rock and hard place would have pulverized me,” he said.

    Mr. Sutyagin was put on a Russian plane with three other prisoners and flown to Vienna. As they disembarked, a Russian official gave instructions: do not say a word, do not look around, do not look at the other prisoners, do not make any gestures.

    He was greeted by an American official he recognized from the Moscow embassy in the 1990s, a period when he was in frequent contact with foreigners. Once safely on the plane, another released prisoner asked for whiskey and there were toasts. When they landed in Britain, he and another prisoner were taken off, while the other two continued on to the United States, a decision he said he had no part in. The British put him up in a hotel at first. The Americans, he said, have not been in touch.

    Today, Mr. Sutyagin is staying with friends of a friend. He talks by phone each day with his wife in Russia and wants her to visit London before he goes home. He has a valid Russian passport and a presidential pardon so there is no legal obstacle to his return — only the dire warnings of his friends.

    He has written a book of 46 satirical prison stories he wants to publish. He relishes swimming in the sea, walking in the forest and eating watermelon. Skype has been a revelation. Strolling through the rain one day, he expressed amazement at London’s rent-a-bike stands.

    His favorite discovery is Google Earth, which peers into secretive Russia like no spy ever could. Sitting at a computer, he used it to find his house outside Moscow. But he was uncertain whether it was the one on the left or the one on the right.

    So instead, he brought up his prison camp. He had no problem identifying each building. “There’s no relief,” he sighed. “It’s becoming easier but it hasn’t ended for me.”


    Copyright. New York Times Company. 2010. All Rights Reserved


     

  • India threatens to suspend BlackBerry by 31 August

    India threatens to suspend BlackBerry by 31 August

    Mobile phone store in Kolkata India is seen as a growth market for smartphone and mobile devices

    India has given BlackBerry phone maker RIM a deadline of 31 August to give the government access to all of its services or face being shut down.

    The country is reported to be considering similar bans on Skype and Google services, according to the Financial Times.

    RIM has issued a statement outlining when it claims “lawful” access to encrypted data is acceptable.

    It has no “special deals” with specific countries, it claims.

    In the statement, RIM sets out four principles which underpin any request for access to data sent and received by BlackBerry handsets.

    It includes a stipulation that BlackBerry services are not treated any differently to its competitors in terms of access.

    It also states that “no changes to the security architecture for BlackBerry Enterprise Server customers” can be made.

    Start Quote

    It will get resolved if there is a chance for rational discussion”

    End Quote Michael Lazardis RIM

    “RIM maintains a consistent global standard for lawful access requirements that does not include special deals for specific countries,” reads the statement.

    India fears the device could be used by militants and insurgents in a repeat of the 2008 attack on Mumbai that left 166 people dead.

    The row is the latest in a long running dispute between Research in Motion (RIM) and international governments.

    The central issue is how governments monitor the encrypted traffic from BlackBerry devices.

    The United Arab Emirates (UAE) was the first country to propose a block on the devices, saying they posed a “national security risk” in their ability to send messages and e-mail without the authorities having the ability to monitor the communications.

    Related stories

    RIM sends this data to servers in Canada and the encryption used to secure this is virtually uncrackable.

    Other countries followed the UAE’s lead, including Lebanon, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait.

    India is the latest country to enter the fray, with analysts expecting more to follow suit.

    In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, RIM’s ceo, Michael Lazardis, was strongly critical of governments threatening to ban BlackBerry services, saying they risked undermining the growth of e-commerce.

    “This is about the internet…everything on the internet is encrypted,” Mr Lazaridis said.

    “[and] this is not a BlackBerry-only issue…if they can’t deal with the internet, they should shut it off,” he added

    Imminent threat

    In 2008, the BBC reported that RIM was at loggerheads with the Indian government over demands that it help decrypt suspicious text messages.

    RIM’s answer then, as now, was that it does not allow any third party – or even the company itself – to read information sent over its network.

    BlackBerry poster in Delhi There are over 1 million BlackBerry users in India

    In July this year, RIM responded to a report in India’s Economic Times that said the firm would allow Indian security authorities to monitor Blackberry services.

    The firm said it co-operated with all governments “with a consistent standard and the same degree of respect”, but denied it had ever provided anything unique to the government of one country that it had not offered to the governments of all countries.

    Government officials said that if no solution between themselves and RIM was found, then they would ask mobile phone operators to block BlackBerry’s messaging and e-mail until RIM provides access to data transmitted over the handset.

    A Home Ministry spokesperson confirmed that it had now issued a deadline to RIM to comply with its demands.

    This differs from Saudi Arabia’s demands, who only wanted access to the handsets messaging system.

    There are more than one million BlackBerry users in India, with the continent slated to be a significant market for smart phone manufactures as the country expands its network coverage.

    The government say RIM had proposed helping authorities track e-mails without sharing encryption details but, say officials, that does not go far enough.

    “(RIM) genuinely tries to be as cooperative as possible with governments in the spirit of supporting legal and national security requirements, while also preserving the lawful needs of citizens and corporations,” said the firm.

    Mr. Lazaridis said that his devices were being unfairly singled out by foreign governments out to score political points and while he would not comment on the status of individual negotiations, be believed a mutually agreeable settlement can be reached.

    “We have dealt with this before and it will get resolved if there is a chance for rational discussion,” Mr. Lazaridis said.

    More on This Story

    Related stories

    Copyright. BBC Technology.com. 2010 All Rights Reserved

  • India deadline for BlackBerry crackdown

     

    By Joe Leahy in Mumbai and David Gelles in San Francisco

    Published: August 12 2010 19:07 | Last updated: August 13 2010 00:23

    Research in Motion, the Canadian maker of the BlackBerry, has said it will not cut deals with specific countries while it attempts to co-operate with threats from governments around the world about blocking its services.

    The statement came in response to a public threat by the Indian government on Thursday, which said it would block encrypted BlackBerry corporate e-mail and messaging services if its security agencies were not granted access to them by the end of the month.

    RIM is already grappling with a similar threat from the United Arab Emirates if it does not open its services to scrutiny by October 11, and is also negotiating with Saudi authorities on security issues.

    “Although RIM cannot disclose confidential regulatory discussions that take place with any government, RIM assures its customers that it genuinely tries to be as co-operative as possible with governments in the spirit of supporting legal and national security requirements, while also preserving the lawful needs of citizens and corporations,” the company said in a statement.

    RIM said any access it granted governments and local carriers met four criteria – it was legal; the access granted to BlackBerry devices was no greater than that granted to other services; it did not change the security architecture for corporate BlackBerry customers; and it did not make country-specific deals.

    The Indian government’s public threat against BlackBerry is running in parallel with an as yet unannounced decision to pursue similar concerns with Google, Skype and other communications services, according to a government document seen by the Financial Times.

    The proposal was discussed at a July meeting between the Indian government and telecoms and internet operator associations. The minutes of a meeting between the Department of Telecommunications (Security Wing) and operator associations on July 12 was convened to look at a “possible solution” for interception and monitoring of encrypted communications by security agencies.

    “There was consensus that there [is] more than one type of service for which solutions are to be explored. Some of them are BlackBerry, Skype, Google etc,” according to minutes from a meeting between the Department of Telecommunications (Security Wing) and operator associations on July 12. “It was decided first to undertake the issue of BlackBerry and then the other services.”

    Department officials could not be reached for comment but representatives from two of the operator associations present confirmed the details of the meeting.

    The Indian measures will ratchet up the pressure on RIM and other communications providers.

    Like other governments, Indian authorities want access to BlackBerry’s encrypted corporate e-mail service and its tightly controlled messaging function amid fears these could be used by terrorists.

    India, which is still recovering from an attack on Mumbai in 2008 by Pakistani terrorists that killed 166 people, is keen to increase security in the country ahead of the Commonwealth Games in October.

    In a statement regarding BlackBerry, the Ministry of Home Affairs warned: “If a technical solution is not provided by August 31, 2010, the government will review the position and take steps to block these two services from the network.”

    People familiar with the government’s position warned that security agencies were keen for access to all internet-based traffic.

    “At the last security meeting, the agencies were talking about BlackBerry. They were also coming out heavily on Skype and Google,” said Rajesh Chharia, president of the Internet Service Providers Association of India. “They are tackling them one by one.”

    Industry executives believe that by first taking on BlackBerry, known for its sophisticated encryption, security authorities may be hoping other providers will fall in line.

    Skype did not respond to an e-mail request for comment. Google said it could not comment because it had “not received any communication from the government on the issue”.

    Telecom operators said a corporate e-mail service provided by Nokia could also come under scrutiny. But Nokia has said it is in the process of installing infrastructure to meet government security requirements.