DHS emergency power extended, including control of private telecom systems

The Obama administration has given the Department of Homeland Security powers to prioritize government communications over privately owned telephone and Internet systems in emergencies. An executive order signed June 6 “gives DHS the authority to seize control of telecommunications facilities, including telephone, cellular and wireless networks, in order to prioritize government communications over private ones in an emergency,” said Amie Stephanovich, a lawyer with the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC). The White House says Executive Order 13618, published Wednesday in the Federal Register, is designed to ensure that the government can communicate during major disasters and other emergencies and contains no new authority. “The [order] recognizes the creation of DHS and provides the Secretary the flexibility to organize the communications systems and functions that reside within the department as [she] believes will be most effective,” White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said in an email. “The [order] does not transfer authorities between or among departments.” She said the order replaced one originally signed in 1984 by President Reagan and amended in 2003 by President George W. Bush after DHS was set up and took responsibility for emergency response and communications. When the original order “was written during the Cold War, the motivating national security concern was maintaining communications capability following a devastating nuclear strike,” Ms. Hayden said. The new order “address[es] a world in which our economy and government are far more reliant on communications technologies to maintain essential functions than we were then,” she wrote.

At issue is a provision of the four-page order that says Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano “shall … satisfy [federal] priority communications requirements through the use of commercial, government, and privately owned communications resources.” “The previous orders did not give DHS those authorities over private and commercial networks,” Ms. Stepanovich said. “That’s a new authority.” “This should have been done by Congress, so there could have been proper debate about it,” she added. “This is not authority that should be granted by executive order.” Ms. Hayden said the legal basis for the order is Section 706 of the 1934 Communications Act. The section authorizes the president to “cause the closing of any facility or station for wire communication” and gives him “control of any such facility or station” if a state of war, or the threat of one, exists. The new order “extends Section 706 powers to the Internet,” said James Harper, an electronic-privacy advocate at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank. The authorities “might have made sense in the 1930s,” but now the communication networks are too complex and interdependent, he said. “If you try to seize control of the Internet that way, you will break it.” Under the previous executive orders, communications providers have long established priority access programs for federal users. In the telephone system, a special code the user inputs before dialing a number automatically tells the phone companies’ equipment to give the call priority. “Mobile phones, the Internet, and social media are all now integral to the communications landscape,” Ms. Hayden said.

Obama gives himself control of all communication systems

US President Barack Obama quietly signed his name to an Executive Order on Friday, allowing the White House to control all private communications in the country in the name of national security. President Obama released his latest Executive Order on Friday, July 6, a 2,205-word statement offered as the “Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions.” And although the president chose not to commemorate the signing with much fanfare, the powers he provides to himself and the federal government under the latest order are among the most far-reaching yet of any of his executive decisions.

“The Federal Government must have the ability to communicate at all times and under all circumstances to carry out its most critical and time sensitive missions,” the president begins the order. “Survivable, resilient, enduring and effective communications, both domestic and international, are essential to enable the executive branch to communicate within itself and with: the legislative and judicial branches; State, local, territorial and tribal governments; private sector entities; and the public, allies and other nations.” President Obama adds that it is necessary for the government to be able to reach anyone in the country during situations it considers critical, writing, “Such communications must be possible under all circumstances to ensure national security, effectively manage emergencies and improve national resilience.” Later the president explains that such could be done by establishing a “joint industry-Government center that is capable of assisting in the initiation, coordination, restoration and reconstitution of NS/EP [national security and emergency preparedness] communications services or facilities under all conditions of emerging threats, crisis or emergency.”

“The views of all levels of government, the private and nonprofit sectors, and the public must inform the development of NS/EP communications policies, programs and capabilities,” he adds. On the government’s official website for the National Communications Systems, the government explains that that “infrastructure includes wireline, wireless, satellite, cable, and broadcasting, and provides the transport networks that support the Internet and other key information systems,” suggesting that the president has indeed effectively just allowed himself to control the country’s Internet access. In order to allow the White House to reach anyone within the US, the president has put forth a plan to establish a high-level committee calling from agents with the Department of Homeland Security, Pentagon, Federal Communications Commission and other government divisions to ensure that his new executive order can be implemented. In explaining the order, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) writes that the president has authorized the DHS "the authority to seize private facilities when necessary, effectively shutting down or limiting civilian communications." In Section 5 of his order, President Obama outlines the specific department and agency responsibilities that will see through his demands. In a few paragraphs, President Obama explains that Executive Committee that will oversee his order must be supplied with “the technical support necessary to develop and maintain plans adequate to provide for the security and protection of NS/EP communications,” and that that same body will be in tasked with dispatching that communiqué “to the Federal Government and State, local, territorial and trial governments,” by means of “commercial, Government and privately owned communications resources.” Later, the president announces that the Department of Homeland Security will be tasked with drafting a plan during the next 60 days to explain how the DHS will command the government’s Emergency Telecommunications Service, as well as other telecom conduits. In order to be able to spread the White House’s message across the country, President Obama also asks for the purchasing of equipment and services that will enable such.

Palestinians to renew efforts for bid to U.N. - Washington Times

Palestinians to renew efforts for bid to U.N. - Washington Times RAMALLAH, West Bank — Palestinian officials say that they will resume their effort to gain U.N. membership, and that they could launch a nonviolent third intifada because they see no chance of reaching a peace deal with the current Israeli government. The Palestinians had put their U.N. bid on hold to participate in informal Jordanian-sponsored talks with Israel that began at the beginning of the year in Amman. The Middle East “Quartet” — the United States, the European Union, the United Nations and Russia — had urged the parties to submit proposals on borders and security by Jan. 26, with the goal of reaching an agreement by the end of 2012. But with that proposals deadline approaching, officials here said Thursday that they do not expect any breakthroughs. “We hear from our Jordanian friends that things are not going well,” said Sabri Saidam, deputy speaker of the Fatah Council and an adviser to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Mr. Saidam and other Palestinian officials told The Washington Times that, barring a last-minute development Thursday, the U.N. campaign would begin anew. A return to the U.N. would rile the U.S., which has vowed to veto the Palestinian application for membership in the Security Council. The U.S. was spared the headache of a veto in September because the Palestinians failed to gain a nine-vote majority. “We got 8 3/4,” Mr. Saidam said. The entire U.N. campaign has attained great symbolism here. A giant blue chair bearing the words “Palestine’s Right: Full Membership in the United Nations” still sits in Ramallah’s central square. A wall of Mr. Abbas‘ presidential compound features a giant photo of him holding up the Palestinian application during his speech to the U.N. General Assembly. The Palestinians began the campaign after bolting short-lived U.S.-sponsored peace talks in September 2010, when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government did not extend a 10-month freeze on Jewish settlements in the West Bank. Palestinians say they will not restart formal direct talks unless Israel freezes settlement activity and agrees to President Obama’s formulation that any two-state solution be based on Israel’s pre-1967 frontiers — conditions Mr. Netanyahu has refused. But the U.N. campaign is just one aspect of what many Palestinian officials describe as the “South Africanization” of their struggle — an approach that seeks to isolate Israel diplomatically while engaging in mass nonviolent protests. “We can learn from the South African struggle against apartheid that international activism works,” said Nabeel Shaath, Fatah’s commissioner for international relations. “You don’t really have to shoot in order to get your rights.” Mr. Shaath said it was “absolutely” a mistake for Palestinians to militarize the second intifada — the 2000-2005 uprising that claimed about 4,000 Palestinian and 1,000 Israeli lives amid suicide bombings and Israeli military strikes. Page Two

Stages of a Pandemic-The World Health Organization (WHO)

Stages of a Pandemic
The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a global influenza preparedness plan, which defines the stages of a pandemic, outlines the role of WHO, and makes recommendations for national measures before and during a pandemic. The phases are:

Interpandemic period
Phase 1 : No new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans. An influenza virus subtype that has caused human infection may be present in animals. If present in animals, the risk of human infection or disease is considered to be low.

Phase 2: No new influenza virus subtypes have been detected in humans. However, a circulating animal influenza virus subtype poses a substantial risk of human disease.

Pandemic alert period
Phase 3: Human infection(s) with a new subtype but no human-to-human spread, or at most rare instances of spread to a close contact.

Phase 4: Small cluster(s) with limited human-to-human transmission but spread is highly localized, suggesting that the virus is not well adapted to humans.

Phase 5: Larger cluster(s) but human-to-human spread still localized, suggesting that the virus is becoming increasingly better adapted to humans but may not yet be fully transmissible (substantial pandemic risk).

Pandemic period
Phase 6: Pandemic: increased and sustained transmission in general population.

Notes: The distinction between phases 1 and 2 is based on the risk of human infection or disease resulting from circulating strains in animals. The distinction is based on various factors and their relative importance according to current scientific knowledge. Factors may include pathogenicity in animals and humans, occurrence in domesticated animals and livestock or only in wildlife, whether the virus is enzootic or epizootic, geographically localized or widespread, and other scientific parameters.

The distinction among phases 3, 4, and 5 is based on an assessment of the risk of a pandemic. Various factors and their relative importance according to current scientific knowledge may be considered. Factors may include rate of transmission, geographical location and spread, severity of illness, presence of genes from human strains (if derived from an animal strain), and other scientific parameters.