Gov & Law - Nate Levy
15 views | +0 today
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Rescooped by Nlevy14 from Saif al Islam!

Locals Leaders Resolve Libya's Oil Crisis - Foreign Policy (blog)

Locals Leaders Resolve Libya's Oil Crisis - Foreign Policy (blog) | Gov & Law - Nate Levy |
Foreign Policy (blog)
Locals Leaders Resolve Libya's Oil Crisis
Foreign Policy (blog)
On Dec.

Via Quociente Cultural
Nlevy14's insight:

This article is about armed groups in Libya that have been blockading Libya's oil terminals for months, which led to Libya losing billions of dollars, and also resulting in a global increase in oil prices. The forces then finally gave the oil back up and running. Do you think that the US should have taken action in this conflict more than they did?

Rachel DeWaard's curator insight, May 22, 2014 12:43 AM

Whether or not the U.S. should have gotten involved with this Libyan oil crisis or other foreign affairs across the globe is a matter of foreign  policy. In this case, I feel like the US did not have to become involved. I think the US should weigh which foreign affair is really our business and which we should help in.

Breanne Hemann's comment, May 23, 2014 10:29 AM
I think that it was good that we were able to help out Libya without any acts of violence. Not only did this help our country, because oil prices with be reduced but it also helped Libya. I think that in dealing with foreign affairs we should be more careful not to involve ourselves in battles that aren't necessary, but in things like this we should help out more.
Reed Klunder 's comment, May 23, 2014 1:46 PM
I think that we should do things like this more often, we need to help those who need it but not fight their battles. It not only help benefit them but it also benefitted us. This is what the government needs to lean towards. Why try and fight when you can make peace?
Rescooped by Nlevy14 from Restore America!

President Obama’s foreign policy is based on fantasy

President Obama’s foreign policy is based on fantasy | Gov & Law - Nate Levy |
His foreign policy is is based on fantasy.

Via Jack Hansen
Nlevy14's insight:

This article talks about how Obama is trying to create an "ideal" foreign policy where the United States could reduce the number of troops due to a decline in war. Doing so creates a lot of controversy on how other countries might react to Obamas ideas. Do you think that doing so will create more conflict? And that other countries might find our country as weak?

Dane Austin's curator insight, March 20, 2014 9:53 AM

Obama really needs to snap into reality and realize what's actually happening vs what he thinks is happening.

Sfitzg35's comment, March 20, 2014 12:51 PM
I think Obama needs to realize that he's running a country full of people and he needs to start looking forward to looking into a plan that is maybe a little more realistic.
MsHaeussinger's comment, March 23, 2014 6:20 PM
Maybe he is taking a more diplomatic approach and less of a hardline attack on others?
Rescooped by Nlevy14 from Mobile Photography!

The Future of Sports Photography: Drones

The Future of Sports Photography: Drones | Gov & Law - Nate Levy |
Drones are being used to film ski and snowboarding events at the Winter Olympics in Sochi, as you may have noticed. But the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for sports photography is far from a passing gimmick. In fact, you should expect more and more athletic events to be filmed by drone.

Via Jerome Okutho
Nlevy14's insight:

This article is about the use of drones for taking photos during athletic events. During the Olympics in Sochi, these drones were actually put in place to take action shots of the participants. Do you think these drones are the new future for magazine, and internet photography? do you think this would decrease the number of jobs In the country?

Jerome Okutho's curator insight, February 19, 2014 12:42 AM

According to this articles, drones will soon take over as photographers for sporting events as the Winter Olympics. Of course, drones can never replace the skills of a real life human photographer, which means you shouldn't worry about not being able to find work if one of your goals is to become a sports photographer.

Ian (ACL) Whitney's comment, March 17, 2014 12:07 AM
There are plenty of different uses for drones. some good and some bad, all depends on who is using it and what it is being used for. In this aspect I think it's acceptable.
Rescooped by Nlevy14 from Educating & Enforcing Human Rights For We The People !!!

Anonymous Hackers Launch #OpUSA against US Banking and Government Agencies

Anonymous Hackers Launch #OpUSA against US Banking and Government Agencies | Gov & Law - Nate Levy |
Anonymous Hackers Launch #OpUSA against US Banking and Government Agencies

Via Doingtime2
Nlevy14's insight:

This article is about a group of hackers that are against US government and banking industries. They use #OpUSaA as their slogan. They already have provided threats at the government saying, “We Will Wipe You Off the Cyber Map” . Do you think that the hackers are doing the right or wrong thing?

Ian (ACL) Whitney's comment, February 11, 2014 3:59 PM
This article is crazy! Why would you try to go against the US government especially going through the internet with all the wizes they probably have employed in the government!
cander05's comment, March 9, 2014 12:39 AM
This is very interesting, it's hard to believe that a bunch of random hackers can outsmart the government, but we
cander05's comment, March 9, 2014 12:39 AM
will see.
Rescooped by Nlevy14 from Conflict Transformation!

The Man Behind Obama's Foreign Policy - Foreign Policy (blog)

The Man Behind Obama's Foreign Policy - Foreign Policy (blog) | Gov & Law - Nate Levy |
The Man Behind Obama's Foreign Policy
Foreign Policy (blog)
When it comes to formulating U.S.

Via Grace Christian Kisame K
Nlevy14's insight:

This article is about the man helping Obama with his decisions on foreign policy. That man is Tom Donilon, he has helped Obama make decisions on whether or not to intervene in Syria, dealing with Chinese cyberhacking,  and how to deal with issues dealing with Iran and North Korea. Do you think that the President should be giving this man so much power?

cander05's comment, March 23, 2014 12:02 AM
I think that the president should make his own decisions, as he was the one elected not this other guy non one has heard of.
Michael Hanson's curator insight, May 21, 2014 8:34 PM

This article is about  Thomas E. Donilon, who was Obama's National Security Adviser until 2013. Article talks about how Donilon was a major influence is the Presidents decision to intervene in Libya. It also, shows the importance of a man that serves in a position that many don't know exists. 


Rescooped by Nlevy14 from AIHCP Magazine, Articles & Discussions!

Top 5 Reasons to Steer Clear of GMOs

Top 5 Reasons to Steer Clear of GMOs | Gov & Law - Nate Levy |
Many new organizations, including the Non-GMO Project, are on a mission to preserve non-GMO products, and increase the awareness through food labeling. Want to be part of the non-GMO bandwagon? Here are my top five reasons to let go of GMOs.

Via American Institute Health Care Professionals
Nlevy14's insight:

This article is about why we should not use GMOs. The use of GMOs in our food has overdosed. Too many organizations are using GMOs in our foods, and in our crops. "super weeds" are being created because of the use of GMOs. If this goes on any further, bigger and bigger, and more advanced weeds. Do you think that the use of GMOs should be banned?

American Institute Health Care Professionals's curator insight, May 28, 2013 12:16 PM

If you did not know it already but Genetically Modified Organisms, or GMO for short, are plants and animals that have had their DNA modified in a lab.   If this is something you are okay with consuming and having in your body then you probably would not enjoy reading this article.   However if you are like me and are into eating organic foods and following a holistic diet then you should read the "Top 5 Reasons to Steer Clear of GMOs".  

Sfitzg35's comment, March 13, 2014 12:06 PM
I think the use of GMOs shouldn't be banned completely, but should be limited because some people don't really care what they consume in their bodies and there are some benefits from them. I do however agree with the fact that there needs to be more labeling on food stating if the product contains GMOs. People should have the right to know what they are putting in their body if they are concerned.
cander05's comment, March 22, 2014 11:36 PM
GMO's definitely have their side effects, but they still have positive effects too. I think they should be limited to certain situations.
Rescooped by Nlevy14 from Drones and Moans!



Drones (autonomous flying vehicles), are becoming very routine equipment in warfare. They are also making market impacts in policing and sports. I first encountered them in 1981 when I started work in missile design.

It was obvious even back then that we couldn't go on using planes with people on board, if only because they are so easy to shoot down. People can't withstand very high G forces so planes can't be as agile as missiles. However, most of the drones used in war so far are not especially agile.

This is mainly possible because the enemies they are used against are technologically relatively primitive. Against an enemy with a decent defence system, such as Russians or Chinese, or in another European war, they wouldn't last so long.

Drones come in many shapes and sizes - large insects, model airplanes, and full size planes. Large ones can carry big missiles and lots of sensors. Small ones can evade detection more easily but can still carry cameras. As miniaturisation continues, we will see some that take the shape of clouds, too.

A swarm of tiny drones could use swarming algorithms to stay together and use very short range comms to act as a single autonomous entity. Rapid dispersal mechanisms could make clouds almost immune to current defence systems too.

Tiny drones can't carry large payloads, but they can carry detectors to identify potential targets, processors to analyse data and comms devices to communicate with remote controllers, and lasers that can mark out confirmed targets for larger drones or missiles so can still be part of a powerful weapon system.

The ethics of using remote machines to wage war are finally being discussed at length and in some depth. Personally, I have fewer problems with that than many people. I see it as a natural progression from the first use of a bone or stick to hit someone.

A drone isn't so different from throwing stones. Nobody yet expects machines to be used up to the point of annihilation of an enemy. Once the machines have run their course, people will still end up in face to face combat with each other before surrender comes.

The large military drones carrying missiles may be purely battlefield technology, but we shouldn't underestimate what could be done with tiny drones. Tiny drones can be very cheap, so there could be a lot of them. Think about it. We have all experienced barbecues ruined by wasps. Wasp sized drones that carry stings or other chemical or biological warfare delivery would be just as irritating and potentially much more lethal, and if they have cloud based image recognition and navigation, there is much that could be done using swarms of them.

With self organisation, insect-sized drones could come at a target from lots of directions, making detection almost impossible until the last second. This could become a perfect technology for strategic assassination and terrorism, as well as gang warfare. Tiny drones could eventually be a more dangerous prospect than the large ones making headlines now.

In the UK, non-military drones are being licensed, too. The emergency services, utilities and some sport clubs are among the first given licenses. There will be many more. Many companies will want to use them for all sort of reasons. Our skies will soon always have a drone somewhere in the field of view, probably lots eventually.

If we were confident that they would only ever be used for the purpose registered, and that the registration authorities would be supremely competent and informed about risks, then objections would be more about potential noise than invasiveness, but we can be certain that there will be gaping holes in registration competence and misuse of drones once registered. There will also inevitably be illegal use of unregistered drones.

This raises strong concerns about privacy, corporate, local government and state surveillance, criminality, heavy handed policing and even state oppression. During the day, you could be being filmed or photographed by lots of airborne cameras and during the night by others using infrared cameras or millimetre wave imaging.

Correlation of images with signals from mobile phones and tablets or often even face recognition could tell the viewers who is who, and the pictures could sometimes be cross referenced with those from ground based cameras to provide a full 3D view.

The potential use of drones in crime detection is obvious, but so is the potential for misuse. We recently heard disturbing figures from police chiefs about the levels of misuse of the police uniform, data and equipment, even links to criminal gangs.

Amplifying the power available to police without cracking down on misuse would be unhelpful. The last thing we need is criminal gangs with under-the-table access to police quality surveillance drones! But even the drones owned by utilities will need good cameras, and some will have other kinds of sensors. Most will have more power than they need to fly so will be able to carry additional sensor equipment that may have been added without authority.

Some abuses are inevitable. Privacy is being undermined from other directions already, of course, so perhaps this doesn't make much difference, just adding another layer of privacy erosion on several that are already established. But there is something about extra video surveillance from the sky that makes it more intrusive. It makes it much harder to hide, and the smaller the drones become, the harder it will get.

The fly on the wall could be a spy. The argument that if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear holds no merit at all. Drones are already making headlines, but so far we have only seen their very earliest manifestations. Future headlines will get far scarier.

Nlevy14's insight:

This article is about the coming of drones to America. Ever since the 1980s America has been doing lots of research on drones. This is not only going on in America, all over the world there has been lots of research going on about drones. This article is also about the types of drones that are being processed, and the uses for each one. The author talkes about the drones coming to America, and how if you have nothing to hide, then there is nothing to be worried about. Do you think that drones are okay? Do you think that peoples privacy will be taken away?

SASFOR's curator insight, February 1, 2013 11:10 PM

lmortl78's curator insight, May 14, 2014 11:51 PM

This is talking about how the government can make different size and looking drones to Spy. They can have ones that look like insects, birds, or even clouds. A good tactic to use in warfare is making millions of little drones that look like wasps and have a stinger on them to take out certain targets which would be easier, cheaper, and no innocent lives would be taken. 

Joe Smith's comment, May 18, 2014 1:44 AM
It's crazy to think these inventions are going to be used in the world today. Although the use of drones to spy is a touchy subject with the public, I agree with Lance that they would be useful in warfare.
Rescooped by Nlevy14 from InfoBlazeME!

Overwhelming majority voted for Egypt’s new constitution, official says

Overwhelming majority voted for Egypt’s new constitution, official says | Gov & Law - Nate Levy |
The unofficial results after most of the ballots had been counted indicated that more than 90 per cent voted “yes” on the constitution.

Via InfoBlaze
Nlevy14's insight:

This article is about the new Constitution that Egypt is putting into effect. Obviously Egypt's people are happy with the new idea, since over 90% of voters voted "yes" on the new constitution. I think that this is great for Egypt, because now they might have a stronger structure for their government. Do you think this is good for Egypt to pass this?

cander05's comment, February 9, 2014 2:13 AM
I also think that this is a good thing for Egypt and their government. Although it doesn't go into much detail about the Constitution, if 90% of the population votes to pass it, it must have some really good proposals that can help improve Egypt's economy.
MsHaeussinger's comment, February 9, 2014 11:46 AM
Egypt becoming more stable would be good for the Middle East and good for foreign relations in the U.S. But, we have to address the idea that there was extremely low voter turnout here. So what does that sa?