Alarm as Trump Requests Permanent Reauthorization of NSA Mass Spying Program Exposed by Snowden

Common Dreams

Civil liberties groups and privacy advocates raised alarm Thursday after the Trump administration called on Congress to reauthorize an NSA mass surveillance program that was exposed by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

The New York Times, which obtained the Trump administration's request to Congress, reported that "the administration urged lawmakers to make permanent the legal authority for the National Security Agency to gain access to logs of Americans' domestic communications, the USA Freedom Act."

"It's long past time that this surveillance program was shuttered once and for all."
—Patrick Toomey, ACLU

"The law, enacted after the intelligence contractor Edward J. Snowden revealed the existence of the program in 2013, is set to expire in December, but the Trump administration wants it made permanent," according to the Times.

The administration claimed in its letter to Congress—which was signed by outgoing National Intelligence chief Dan Coats—that the NSA has suspended the spying program, but Free Press Action government relations director Sandra Fulton said in a statement that this "should give little comfort to those whose privacy rights are routinely violated by authorities."

Read more

Facebook bans Natural News; Health Ranger responds with message for humanity

Mike Adams
Natural News

In response to a coordinated, heavily-funded smear campaign against Natural News and myself, the Health Ranger, Facebook has now permanently banned Natural News from posting content. The channel name that has been banned is Facebook.com/healthranger, which was our primary channel reaching over 2.5 million people.

This is on top of the permanent bans of Natural News content from Twitter, YouTube, Pinterest, Google News, Apple and other techno-fascists that now represent the greatest threat to human freedom the world has ever seen.

The techno-fascists, including Wikipedia, have decided that no speech that questions any official narrative will be allowed on any platform. Anyone who questions the safety of toxic vaccines, 5G cell towers, geoengineering, chemotherapy or glyphosate weed killer chemicals is now maliciously attacked, smeared and de-platformed. You’re not even allowed now to talk about nutrition, anti-cancer foods or nutritional supplements without being labeled a “vitamin” website accused of pushing fake cures. (That’s right: The left-wing authoritarian tyrants are now anti-nutrition on top of everything else.)

Every website or individual who expresses any view of dissent against the corrupt scientific establishment is immediately labeled “fake news,” even as the left-wing media routinely pushed total fabrications about President Trump and anyone who supports Trump.

As I have repeatedly pointed out, the tech giants and their CEOs are truly enemies of humanity.

Remember: As all this censorship is taking place, the tech giants somehow claim they aren’t censoring anyone at all. They claim to have a monopoly on “facts” or “truth” and proclaim themselves to have the King’s unique right to decide who gets to speak and who must be silenced. These criminals like Zuckerberg, Dorsey and Cook are un-elected, subject to zero transparency and offer no mechanism for due process whereby channels who are banned might defend themselves against unfair, dishonest smears or fake news attacks run by left-wing journo-terrorism hacks.

Read more

See also:

Glenn Greenwald Rips Liberals Begging For Censorship After YouTube 'Adpocalypse'

Against Big Tech Viewpoint Discrimination 

YouTube to delete thousands of accounts after it bans supremacists, conspiracy theorists and other ‘harmful’ users

Here's A List Of Ideas & Statements YouTube Will Ban You For Expressing Under Their New 'Hate Speech Policy'

Big brother Britain: Facial recognition cameras deployed in London, man fined for covering his face

Mark Duell
Daily Mail

Police fined a pedestrian £90 for disorderly behaviour after he tried to cover his face when he saw a controversial facial recognition camera on a street in London.

Officers set up the camera on a van in Romford, East London, which then cross-checked photos of faces of passers-by against a database of wanted criminals.

But one man was unimpressed about being filmed and covered his face with his hat and jacket, before being stopped by officers who took his picture anyway.  


After being pulled aside, the man told police: 'If I want to cover me face, I'll cover me face. Don't push me over when I'm walking down the street.'

It comes just weeks after it was claimed the new technology incorrectly identified members of the public in 96 per cent of matches made between 2016 and 2018.

The cameras have been rolled out in a trial in parts of Britain, with the Met making its first arrest last December when shoppers in London's West End were scanned.

But their use has sparked a privacy debate, with civil liberties group Big Brother Watch branding the move a 'breach of fundamental rights to privacy and freedom of assembly'. Police argue they are necessary to crack down on spiralling crime.

Officers previously insisted people could decline to be scanned, before later clarifying that anyone trying to avoid scanners may be stopped and searched.

It was first deployed by South Wales Police ahead of the Champions League final in Cardiff in 2007, but wrongly matched more than 2,000 people to possible criminals.

Police and security services worldwide are keen to use facial recognition technology to bolster their efforts to fight crime and identify suspects.

But they have been hampered by the unreliability of the software, with some trials failing to correctly identify a single person.

The technology made incorrect matches in every case during two deployments at Westfield shopping centre in Stratford last year, according to Big Brother Watch. It was also reportedly 96 per cent accurate in eight uses by the Met from 2016 to 2018. 

Read more

CENSORSHIP Wins This Round As YouTube Now Deems Conspiracy Videos “BORDERLINE CONTENT”

Press For Truth

See also: 1984: YouTube Will Demote Conspiracy Videos In Its Recommendation Algorithm — A Scary Prospect For Freedom Of Thought

Putin Schools Journalists and Western Politicians in Annual Q&A Marathon

Sott.net

Russian President Vladimir Putin held his annual marathon press conference today. Over 1,600 journalists were accredited for the event, which ended up lasting just under four hours.

The entire ritual just demonstrates how far Russia still has to go before it becomes a full-fledged Western democracy. In a real democracy, leaders only take pre-approved soft-ball questions from a select group of hand-picked journalists and then read their answers from teleprompters. Tough or unexpected questions are either ignored or given a pat answer devoid of any real information. After 20 minutes or so, that's a wrap. Under no circumstances are leaders to field countless questions from a range of sources, and extemporaneously provide detailed answers on a wide range of subjects. Sound about right?

Actually, the reason Western leaders don't do such things is because they're simply incapable of it. They don't have a command of all the facts and figures. They know their 'policy positions' are just slogans and sound bites made up for public consumption, so their answers are never in-depth or backed up by anything of substance. And they know the justification for the 'party line' is based on a foundation of deceit and lies, so they can't give adequate space for facts or other points of view. When you're following a script, you can't be spontaneous. Putin, on the other hand, can do so because he's something all his Western 'colleagues' are not: a real leader.

What follows are some of the highlights of today's Q&A. Check back for updates as they come. Here's the full video, if you have 4 hours to spare: 

Some of the high points so far...

Kind words for the US administration, and a reminder that Trump is 'constrained' by 'known limitations': 'Known limitations' hold Trump back from doing what he'd like to

"There are things [Donald Trump] would like to do, but so far couldn't, meaning healthcare reform and several other issues. He's spoken about improving relations with Russia. It is obvious, that even if he wanted it, he is unable to, due to known limitations," the president said Thursday.

"I don't know whether [Trump] still wishes [to improve relations with Russia] or whether this desire is completely exhausted," Putin continued. "I hope that he does and, after all, [I trust that, in] the interests of the American and Russian people, we will eventually normalize our relations, develop them and will fight common threats." 

Read more

Visualizing The Worrying Decline Of Freedom Around The World

Zero Hedge

 

The 20th century was a bull market for literacy, freedom, prosperity, health, and technology.

As a result of these gains, wealth has increased exponentially, and world poverty is now at all-time lows. Life expectancy continues to improve in most countries, global literacy is near 90%, and there are well over 100 democracies throughout the planet.

But, as VisualCapitalist's Jeff Desjardins notes, not every positive trend can keep going forever. Sometimes things regress temporarily, only to be corrected later on. Other times things change more fundamentally – and that regression can be the beginning of a newer, long-term reality.

The Decline of Freedom: An 11-Year Trend

According to the Freedom in the World 2017 Report, which scores countries annually on various levels of freedom, there have been recent setbacks in political rights and civil liberties in a number of “Free” countries. These newest declines are partially the result of populist and nationalist forces making significant gains in democratic states.

But Freedom House, the international watchdog organization that produces the annual report, says that this is not an isolated occurrence. In fact, based on their data and methodology, freedom has actually declined on a global basis for the last 11 years.

Here are the aggregate gains and declines in freedom for each year – you can see that declines have been outweighing gains since 2006.

Read more

The police state and the illusion of freedom

John W. Whitehead
The Rutherford Institute

"What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security... This separation of government from people, this widening of the gap, took place so gradually and so insensibly, each step disguised (perhaps not even intentionally) as a temporary emergency measure or associated with true patriotic allegiance or with real social purposes. And all the crises and reforms (real reforms, too) so occupied the people that they did not see the slow motion underneath, of the whole process of government growing remoter and remoter."—Historian Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free: The Germans, 1933-45

Brace yourself.

There is something being concocted in the dens of power, far beyond the public eye, and it doesn't bode well for the future of this country.

Anytime you have an entire nation so mesmerized by the antics of the political ruling class that they are oblivious to all else, you'd better beware. Anytime you have a government that operates in the shadows, speaks in a language of force, and rules by fiat, you'd better beware. And anytime you have a government so far removed from its people as to ensure that they are never seen, heard or heeded by those elected to represent them, you'd better beware.

The world has been down this road before.

As historian Milton Mayer recounts in his seminal book on Hitler's rise to power, They Thought They Were Free, "Most of us did not want to think about fundamental things and never had. There was no need to. Nazism gave us some dreadful, fundamental things to think about—we were decent people‑—and kept us so busy with continuous changes and 'crises' and so fascinated, yes, fascinated, by the machinations of the 'national enemies', without and within, that we had no time to think about these dreadful things that were growing, little by little, all around us."

We are at our most vulnerable right now. 

Read more

The National-Security State’s ISIS Racket

Jacob G. Hornberger

The Future of Freedom Foundation

 

The official enemy de jour that has everyone all riled up and scared is ISIS. If U.S. forces don’t bomb ISIS, the argument goes, ISIS will take over Iraq, and Syria, and Lebanon, and Europe, and Asia, and Latin America, and then the United States. If the bombs don’t fall on ISIS, before long Americans will be speaking Arabic and their children will be studying the Koran in America’s government schools.

 

It’s all just one great big racket — a racket based on “national security,” a term that isn’t even found in the Constitution and that doesn’t even have an objective meaning. The only way that the U.S. national-security state apparatus — i.e., the vast military establishment and military empire, the CIA, and the NSA — can justify its continued existence is by ginning up crisis after crisis with the aim of keeping the citizenry filled with fear, anxiety, and depression. The apparatus then becomes people’s sedative, assuring them that everything is going to be okay because the apparatus is the only thing keeping them safe.

Never mind that the national-security apparatus produces the very threats it then uses to scare people with. After all, did anyone hear of ISIS before the U.S. invaded and occupied Iraq, a country that had never attacked the United States or even threatened to do so?
No. That’s because there was no ISIS before the apparatus invaded and occupied Iraq. It was the invasion and occupation, along with other interventions by the apparatus, such as in Syria and Libya, that has produced ISIS, the new, scary enemy of the day.

But of course, no statist wants to hear that. The national-security state is akin to a god, one that is keeping them safe from all those scary creatures thousands of miles away from American shores, creatures that are brought into existence by the very policies of the apparatus itself.

With its ongoing, perpetual crises and wars, the apparatus is also serving as a fount of taxpayer-funded largess for the vast armies of “defense” contractors who are feeding at the public trough on a permanent basis.

As an aside, have you noticed that while some young people are traveling to the Middle East to join ISIS, hardly any Americans are traveling to Iraq to join up with the Iraqi army to fight ISIS. I suppose one possibility is that most everyone is a coward and won’t fight to protect our “national security.” Another possibility, the more likely one in my opinion, is that deep down everyone knows that this is all a crock.

The perpetual crises and fear-mongering are not a new phenomenon. We saw it throughout the Cold War, when the same fear-mongering was being done about communists that is now being done about ISIS, terrorists, and Muslims.

If we don’t stop the communists from infiltrating Latin America, we were told, it won’t be long before Americans are speaking communist. Cuba is a communist beachhead, they repeatedly said, one that was determined to turn the rest of Latin America and then the United States Red.

That’s why the national-security state installed and supported brutal military dictatorships in Guatemala and Chile, entered into a partnership with the Mafia to assassinate Cuba’s president Fidel Castro, participated as a partner in the international torture and assassination ring based in Latin America known as DINA, and much more — all to ensure that the communist-socialist infection didn’t spread to Latin American countries, especially by democratic means. Democracy had to be destroyed, we were told, in order to save democracy.

The tens of thousands of people who were rounded up, tortured, raped, disappeared, executed, and assassinated, were considered an societal inoculation — like a vaccine — to ensure that Latin American regimes and then the United States didn’t go Red.

That’s what arming the Contras and starting an extremely brutal, deadly, and destructive civil war in Nicaragua was all about — to oust the communist-socialist regime of Daniel Ortega. It was also what the invasion of Grenada was all about.

The idea was that if the radical leftists were to gain the reins of power in Latin American countries, especially through democratic elections, the United States as we know it would cease to exist.

It was all a Cold War, national-security state, fear-mongering racket, one that was keeping the national-security state apparatus in existence and, equally important, keeping all those “defense” looters and plunderers in high cotton.

The fact is that it wouldn’t have made any difference at all, insofar as the United States was concerned, if every Latin American country went Red.

How do we know that? Because after the national-security state lost communism as its official enemy, many of those Latin American regimes have ended up with socialist presidents, many of them duly elected by their citizenry. Consider: Cuba, Nicaragua, Chile, Bolivia, Brazil, Ecuador, Venezuela, and more.

In fact, check out this Wikipedia entry entitled “Pink Tide.” It states “In 2005, the BBC reported that out of 350 million people in South America, three out of four of them lived in countries ruled by ‘left-leaning presidents’ elected during the preceding six years.”

Yet, as everyone knows, the United States is still standing. The United States wasn’t the final domino that fell to the communists. Oh sure, we’ve got our own welfare state, which is no different in principle from the socialism that all those Latin American socialist regimes believe in, but that’s just because Americans believe in socialism as much as Latin Americans do, not because Latin American regimes have gone socialist.

It won’t make any difference to the freedom and well-being of the American people if ISIS takes over Iraq, Syria, Libya, or any other area of the Middle East, any more than it has made a difference that socialists and communists have taken over countries in Latin America. It’s all just a fear-mongering racket, one designed to keep the cancerous tumor known as the national-security state, along with its vast army of “defense” plunderers and looters, attached to the body politic, where it is sucking the lifeblood out of the American people.

What a racket. It’s amazing that so many Americans continue to fall for it.

Censorship and What Freedom of Speech Really Means: Comedian Bill Hicks’s Brilliant Letter to a Priest

Brain Pickings

“‘Freedom of speech’ means you support the right of people to say exactly those ideas which you do not agree with.”

In early June of 1993, several months before cancer took his life at the age of thirty-two, beloved comedian Bill Hicks received a letter from a priest, bemoaning the “blasphemous” content in Hicks’s live television special Revelations and reprimanding British broadcaster Channel 4 for having put it on the air. Writing a mere eight days before his fatal pancreatic cancer diagnosis — a young man still oblivious to his imminent tragic fate — Hicks decided to respond to the missive personally, in what became one of the most lucid and beautiful defenses of the freedom of speech ever articulated, on par with Voltaire’s piercing admonition about censorship and Madeleine L’Engle’s timeless words on the subject.

From Letters of Note: Correspondence Deserving of a Wider Audience (public library) — the same wonderful compendium by Shaun Usher that gave us young Hunter S. Thompson on how to live a meaningful life, E.B. White’s heartening response to a man who had lost faith in humanity, and Eudora Welty’s impossibly charming lesson in how to apply to your dream job — comes Hicks’s brilliant, thoughtful, and immeasurably important response.

Read more

Obama’s War on Freedom

Comment: Stephen telling it exactly as it is. Whether you are on the right on the left or you have begun to wean yourself off the pantomime that is Establishment politics of today, you will see that Obama is much worse than Bush. (Yes, that's right). Bush was clearly an idiot placed in power to the bidding of the Bush dynasty and to pave the way for someone like Obama who could carry through the groundwork of Neo-Conservatism. For those who accuse this man of being a covert socialist, and others who claim he is a fascist - both are wrong. He is puppet for his handlers who comprise of both ideologies. A perfect hybrid of international collectivism/Fabianism and inverted totalitarianism/fascism in vitro. A puppet maybe - but a very dangerous one. 

Stephen Lendman

Perhaps no president in US history disappointed supporters more than Obama. He pledged "change you can believe it." He promised hope.

He did Lincoln one better. He fooled most people enough times to matter. He never cared about rule of law principles. He trashed them in office. He deplores democratic values.

He's beholden to monied interests. "Yes we can" conceals his dark side duplicity. He made America look increasingly like Guatemala. Nothing ahead suggests change.

International, constitutional and US statute laws don't matter. Bush declared them null and void. So did Obama.

He presides over a ruthless police state apparatus. No one is free and safe. Big Brother watches everyone. Mass surveillance is official US policy.

On Friday, Obama will announce so-called new guidelines. He'll ask Congress for help. Expect business as usual to continue. Expect worse than ever ahead. Expect lies claiming otherwise.

Ending the fake war on terror matters. So does halting mass surveillance entirely. Restoring rule of law freedoms matters most.

Expect Obama's war to destroy them to continue. When Bush signed the Patriot Act into law, Center for Constitutional Rights senior litigation attorney Nancy Chang asked: "What's so patriotic about trampling on the Bill of Rights?"

In March 2006, Congress renewed most Patriot Act powers. In May 2011, Congress and Obama extended key ones for another four years.

They include mass surveillance. Domestic spying increased markedly under Obama. Anything goes more than ever became policy. It remains so.

Expect the worst of what's ongoing to continue. Expect another Obama pledge to be broken.

Expect the worst of mass surveillance to remain official US policy. Expect fake national security threats given as reasons.

Expect hyped fear to continue. Expect freedom to keep eroding en route to disappearing altogether.

Spying in America is institutionalized. Big Brother is no longer fiction. State-of-the-art technology permits the worst of what's ongoing.

Decades earlier spying was crude compared to today's. Modern capability is unprecedented. Virtually everyone can be monitored everywhere at all times.

Nothing too secret or personal can escape scrutiny. NSA technology permits monitoring offline computers. It's done through radio waves.

At least 100,000 computers worldwide include software enabling it. Perhaps they all will eventually.

NSA can penetrate computers covertly. It can alter data without Internet access. It can create a digital highway for cyberattacks.

Its program is code-named "Quantum." According to cybersecurity expert James Andrew Lewis:

"What's new here is the scale and sophistication of (NSA's) ability to get into computers and networks to which no one had ever had access before."

"Some of these capabilities have been around for a while, but the combination of learning how to penetrate systems to insert software and learning how to do that using radio frequencies has given the US a window it's never had before."

Expect NSA to take full advantage. Perhaps everyone connected online will be monitored this way eventually.

Perhaps targeted individuals will be attacked this way. Expect greater than ever harm committed.

Expect Obama and Congress to do nothing to stop it. Manufactured threats permit the worst of what's ongoing. Domestic spying more than ever is institutionalized.

In August 2007, candidate Obama addressed the Woodrow Wilson Center. He lied like he always does. He does it shamelessly. It's part of his DNA.

He addressed many issues. He lied about every one. He promised real change if elected president. He exceeds the worst of George Bush.

We lost our "basic values," he said. We got "color-coded politics of fear" instead.

He argued against waging one war after another. He promised to close Guantanamo straightaway in office.

It's "time to turn a page," he said. We'll "restore our values." We'll "secure a more resilient homeland."

We'll end wars that shouldn't be waged, he said. "The solution in Afghanistan is not just military. (It's) political and economic."

"(T)he days of compromising our values are over."

Obama promised to "adhere to the Geneva Conventions." He trashed them straightaway in office. He systematically violates rule of law principles. Nothing impedes his ruthlessness.

No promise is too sacred not to break. He pledged "no more illegal wiretapping of American citizens."

"No more national security letters (NSLs) to spy on citizens who are not suspected of a crime."

Most people never heard of them. Many are victims without knowing it. Others are gagged from discussing them.

They involve abusive police state intrusions. Patriot Act authority gives FBI operatives access to whatever personal information they want.

No court approval is needed. Most targeted individuals committed no crimes. They planned none. It doesn't matter.

NSL use is unconstitutional. Obama continues the worst of Bush administration abuses. Another promise made. Another broken.

"No more tracking citizens who do nothing more than protest a misguided war," he said. "No more ignoring the law when it is inconvenient."

"That is not who we are...We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary."

Obama pledged to end violating civil liberties. He called doing so unacceptable. He exceeded the worst of Bush administration policies.

He lies claiming otherwise. He trashed rule of law principles. He mocks democratic values.

He declared cyberwar on ordinary Americans. He supports draconian cybersecurity legislation.

Cyber-preemption increases police state power. Homeland repression is worse than ever.

Administration policies are the most secretive in US history. They're the most lawless and out-of-control.

On January 15, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) asked: "Will Obama Hit the Mark on Real NSA Reform?"

He'll announce so-called changes. He'll claim he supports reform. "What can we expect," asked EFF?

"Many people are (justifiably) skeptical...Instead of actually stopping the spying, Obama could just make a pronouncement calling for more transparency or additional layers of bureaucratic oversight."

"(H)e could duck the most important thing (needed) to show leadership: rein in government surveillance."

EFF offered "common-sense fixes." They address key issues. Don't expect Obama to change anything meaningful. Expect worse than ever practices ahead. EFF reforms include:

(1) "Stop mass surveillance of digital communications and communication records." Stop using legislative or Executive Order cover to justify the unjustifiable.

(2) "Protect the privacy rights of foreigners." Calling them fair game doesn't wash.

(3) "Don't turn communications companies into the new Big Brother: no data retention mandate." End NSA's telecommunications collection program.

(4) Require judicial authorization for National Security Letters. End gag order authority. Rein in lawless FBI practices. Restore rule of law principles.

(5) "Stop undermining Internet security, weakening encryption, and infiltrating companies." Abolish these practices once and for all.

(6) "Oppose the FISA Improvements Act (FIA)." Senator Dianne Feinstein (D. CA) sponsored it. She chairs the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

On October 31, FIA was introduced. Senate Intelligence Committee members approved it. They voted 11 to 4 in favor. Legislation awaits a full floor vote.

It's a fake fix. Enactment would enhance NSA spying. It'll codify it into law.

(7) "Reject the third party doctrine." Obama should say data held by third parties (like phone and Internet companies) have "the same constitutional protections as data stored at home."

(8) "Provide a full public accounting of our surveillance apparatus." End administration secrecy. Tell Americans and others what they deserve to know.

(9) "Reform the state secrets privilege and stop over-classifying." Sunlight more than ever is needed. Public accountability is most of all. End rule of law abuses.

(10) "Reform the FISA court: provide a public advocate and stop secret law." FISA court judges are secretive, unaccountable and rubber-stamp. Abolishing their authority entirely should be ordered.

(11) "Protect national security whistleblowers working for the public good." Candidate Obama called whistleblowing "acts of courage and patriotism."

He pledged whistleblower protection, saying:

"Often the best source of information about waste, fraud, and abuse in government is an existing employee committed to public integrity and willing to speak out."

"We need to empower federal employees as watchdogs of wrongdoing and partners in performance."

He promised to do it. He promised protection. He's targeted more whistleblowers than all his predecessors combined. It bears repeating. Another promise made. Another broken.

(12) "Criminal defendants should know if national security surveillance is being used against them." Failing to do so violates Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights.

They guarantee defendants "meaningful opportunity" to effectively challenge government accusations.

EFF will score Obama's Friday speech. It'll publish its assessment online. It bears repeating. Policy pronouncements don't matter. They ring hollow.

Enforcing rule of law principles alone counts. Obama betrayed the public trust. He's done so consistently.

Expect no change going forward. Expect worse ahead than ever. Expect continuing police state lawlessness. Expect full-blown tyranny if not stopped.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanII.html

Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.

Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.

It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.

http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour