Today, live from Miami, Kevin gives the government some advice on how to finally get America out of debt once and for all.
Bill Gates, Abu Dhabi Prince Pledge Vaccine Funds
Taco Bell Fights Back in Meat Lawsuit
Hungry For Genetically Engineered Fish?
BPA Found On Register Receipts Causing Health Issues
Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer?
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
Today, Kevin reveals the top four things happening right now that have been designed to keep you fearful and alter your perception of what you consider ‘normal.’
290,000 Eggs Recalled Due To Salmonella At Ohio Egg Farm
Drug Company Money Affects Doctors’ Prescriptions
Cancer Patients Radioactive!
Drug Companies Hire Troubled Doctors As Experts
Cancer Is Purely Man Made Say Scientists
Amino Acids In Watermelon Lower Blood Pressure
Abbott Labs Sold Bug Tainted Baby Formula
Why Technology Is Really Bad For Your Health
Take Trudeau on the Go! Click here to download this show to your iPod, mp3 player, or PC through iTunes!
November 9th, 2010
By: Luis Martinez
The mystery of a missile launch last night off the Southern California coast deepened today as U.S. military officials said they were still checking to see if the missile was one of theirs.
The unmistakable contrail of a missile streaking into the California sunset was captured on video last night by a KCBS news helicopter flying over Los Angeles at around 5 p.m. Pacific time.
The missile firing drew more attention when local news stations were told by Navy and Air Force officials that they did not launch a missile last night.
Flying above Los Angeles, the crew aboard the helicopter estimated the missile was fired approximately 35 miles west out to sea, north of Catalina Island.
The missile appeared to have been launched at sea, which prompted speculation that it had been launched by a U.S. Navy vessel.
However, Navy officials contacted by local news stations said they were unaware of a missile launch in that area. Contacted by ABC News, a Navy official said today they were still looking into the report, but, a preliminary check indicated it was not a Navy asset.
U.S. Northern Command said it’s investigating. They say there was no launch last night from Vandenberg Air Force Base which is a regular launch point for the testing of missiles.
“NORAD and USNORTHCOM are aware of the unexplained contrail reported off the coast of Southern California yesterday evening,” the agency said in a statement. “At this time, we are unable to provide specific details, but we are working to determine the exact nature of this event. We can confirm that there is no indication of any threat to our nation and we will provide more information as it becomes available.”
Wall Street Journal
By Charles Levinson
Sixty years of near-constant war, a low tolerance for enduring casualties in conflict, and its high-tech industry have long made Israel one of the world’s leading innovators of military robotics.
WSJ’s Charles Levinson reports from Jerusalem to discuss Israel’s development of robotic, unmanned combat systems. He tells Simon Constable on the News Hub how they are deploying unmanned boats, ground vehicles and aerial vehicles.
“We’re trying to get to unmanned vehicles everywhere on the battlefield for each platoon in the field,” says Lt. Col. Oren Berebbi, head of the Israel Defense Forces’ technology branch. “We can do more and more missions without putting a soldier at risk.”
In 10 to 15 years, one-third of Israel’s military machines will be unmanned, predicts Giora Katz, vice president of Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd., one of Israel’s leading weapons manufacturers.
“We are moving into the robotic era,” says Mr. Katz.
Over 40 countries have military-robotics programs today. The U.S. and much of the rest of the world is betting big on the role of aerial drones: Even Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite guerrilla force in Lebanon, flew four Iranian-made drones against Israel during the 2006 Lebanon War.
When the U.S. invaded Iraq in 2003, it had just a handful of drones. Today, U.S. forces have around 7,000 unmanned vehicles in the air and an additional 12,000 on the ground, used for tasks including reconnaissance, airstrikes and bomb disposal.
In 2009, for the first time, the U.S. Air Force trained more “pilots” for unmanned aircraft than for manned fighters and bombers.
U.S. and Japanese robotics programs rival Israel’s technological know-how, but Israel has shown it can move quickly to develop and deploy new devices, to meet battlefield needs, military officials say.
“The Israelis do it differently, not because they’re more clever than we are, but because they live in a tough neighborhood and need to respond fast to operational issues,” says Thomas Tate, a former U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who now oversees defense cooperation between the U.S. and Israel.
Among the recently deployed technologies that set Israel ahead of the curve is the Guardium unmanned ground vehicle, which now drives itself along the Gaza and Lebanese borders. The Guardium was deployed to patrol for infiltrators in the wake of the abduction of soldiers doing the same job in 2006. The Guardium, developed by G-nius Ltd., is essentially an armored off-road golf cart with a suite of optical sensors and surveillance gear. It was put into the field for the first time 10 months ago.
In the 2006 Lebanon War, Israeli soldiers took a beating opening supply routes and ferrying food and ammunition through hostile territory to the front lines. In the Gaza conflict in January 2009, Israel unveiled remote-controlled bulldozers to help address that issue.
Israel pioneered the use of aerial drones like the Heron, under construction, above, at Israeli Aerospace Industries.
Within the next year, Israeli engineers expect to deploy the voice-commanded, six-wheeled Rex robot, capable of carrying 550 pounds of gear alongside advancing infantry.
After bomb-laden fishing boats tried to take out an Israeli Navy frigate off the coast off Gaza in 2002, Rafael designed the Protector SV, an unmanned, heavily armed speedboat that today makes up a growing part of the Israeli naval fleet. The Singapore Navy has also purchased the boat and is using it in patrols in the Persian Gulf.
After Syrian missile batteries in Lebanon took a heavy toll on Israeli fighter jets in the 1973 war, Israel developed the first modern unmanned aerial vehicle, or UAV.
When Israel next invaded Lebanon in 1981, the real-time images provided by those unmanned aircraft helped Israel wipe out Syrian air defenses, without a single downed pilot. The world, including the U.S., took notice.
The Pentagon set aside its long-held skepticism about the advantages of unmanned aircraft and, in the early 1980s, bought a prototype designed by former Israeli Air Force engineer Abraham Karem. That prototype morphed into the modern-day Predator, which is made by General Atomics Aeronautical Systems Inc.
Unlike the U.S. and other militaries, where UAVs are flown by certified, costly-to-train fighter pilots, Israeli defense companies have recently built their UAVs to allow an average 18-year-old recruit with just a few months’ training to pilot them.
Military analysts say unmanned fighting vehicles could have a far-reaching strategic impact on the sort of asymmetrical conflicts the U.S. is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan and that Israel faces against enemies such as Hezbollah and Hamas.
In such conflicts, robotic vehicles will allow modern conventional armies to minimize the advantages guerrilla opponents gain by their increased willingness to sacrifice their lives in order to inflict casualties on the enemy.
However, there are also fears that when countries no longer fear losing soldiers’ lives in combat thanks to the ability to wage war with unmanned vehicles, they may prove more willing to initiate conflict.
In coming years, engineers say unmanned air, sea and ground vehicles will increasingly work together without any human involvement. Israel and the U.S. have already faced backlash over civilian deaths caused by drone-fired missiles in Gaza, Pakistan and Afghanistan. Those ethical dilemmas could increase as robots become more independent of their human masters.
September 18, 2009
by Meir Javedanfar
The stated goal of the US’s missile shield programme, which was devised during the Bush administration, was to defend the US against any missiles launched from Iran. However, the Russian government, especially the prime minister, Vladimir Putin, opposed it, for several reasons. It saw the programme as a challenge to Russia’s own long-range missiles, important components of Russia’s strategy of reasserting itself into the global arena as a superpower. Furthermore, plans to base the missiles in Czech Republic and Poland, countries which once were under Russian control, were also considered as provocative and even insulting to Moscow.
Russia’s leadership was so infuriated that it even went as far as threatening military action to dissuade the US and the host countries from deploying the system. This was an unprecedented move in Russia’s post-cold war relations with the west. It was also a strong indication of the threat Moscow felt and how far it was willing to go to stop it from materialising.
To some, especially American neoconservatives, Washington’s decision to scrap the system may be interpreted as capitulation to Russia.
However, if we look at the timing of the decision and the reaction from Moscow, we can see that President Obama may have a bigger goal in mind; preventing Iran from becoming armed with nuclear weapons.
With talks between the P5+1 (consisting of the US, Russia, China, UK, France and Germany) and Iran scheduled for 1 October, Obama has been trying to ensure that the west enters the negotiations with a strong hand. To achieve this goal he has devised a multi-faceted strategy, which consisted of reaching out to the Muslim world through his Cairo speech, stabilising Iraq and increasing his efforts to restart talks between Israelis and Palestinians. He also reached out to the Iranian government through two letters to the Iranian supreme leader, as well as his New Year message to the people of Iran.
All these efforts slowly started to put Iran’s leadership on the back foot. Suddenly, it was deprived from its two main battle cries. One was that America was against the Muslim world and the other that the US had ambitions to apply regime change in Iran. This panicked Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, which is why he decided to back Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in presidential elections, apparently allowing extensive fraud in his favour.
With the regime’s legitimacy severely damaged domestically after the recent demonstrations, and its foreign influence weakened after Hezbollah’s defeat in the Lebanese elections, the Iranian government became even more dependent on support from Russia and China.
This is especially true after the Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov’s statement last week that Moscow would not back further sanctions against Iran. After this, the importance of Russia to Iran’s leaders as one of its two pillars of support in the UN security council increased even further.
However, such sense of comfort in Tehran was unexpectedly dashed yesterday, after the Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, stated what many consider to be a U-turn, by making a strong hint in his speech that Russia could now back tougher sanctionsagainst Iran.
This is a severe setback for Iran, as it is very possible that Russia would do this. Moscow has let Tehran down before, and it could do so again.
However the question remains: did the recent Russian overture come about as part of a deal with Washington, whereby in return for scrapping the missile shield programme, Moscow would back the US in its efforts to impose tougher sanctions against Iran?
Judging by statements made by Obama during a trip to Prague in April this year, the answer seems positive. During that trip, he linked the missile system issue to the Iranian nuclear programme. He suggested that a it could be discarded. “If the Iranian threat is eliminated, we will have a stronger basis for security, and the driving force for missile defence construction in Europe at this time will be removed,” the US president said. The fact that the US scrapped this system the day after Medvedev’s statement further backs the theory that a deal was made, especially since Russian backing for sanctions could eliminate the Iranian threat, as Obama put it.
Should Russia desert Iran’s side and join the west, China could find itself standing alone. Under such circumstances, its leadership could also decide that the cost of supporting Iran far outweighs the benefits. This would mean that the US achieved two goals, with one move.
Obama’s decision shows that the US president is prioritising. Although the missile defence shield is important, stopping Iran from becoming armed with nuclear weapons is far more vital. America could always replace the system in the future. It has no “point of no return”. But Iran’s path to becoming a nuclear state does, and the US president seems to be applying smart chess moves to prevent this from happening.