Professor Richard Wolff returns to the show for an economic update on inflation, employment, student debt, China, and the U.S.’s future role in the world.

For more from Prof Wolff, subscribe to Democracy at Work on YouTube: youtube.com/democracyatwrk

And find all the info on Economic Update here: https://www.democracyatwork.info/economicupdate

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the month since veteran journalist Seymour Hersh published his bombshell report alleging that President Joe Biden personally authorized a covert action to bomb the Nord Stream pipelines, we’ve seen a frenzy of speculation, detailed dissection of Hersh’s specific assertions, and the emergence of competing narratives both supporting and denouncing the report.

The question of whether Hersh’s story is accurate — either in whole or in part — is of monumental significance, and there are some issues related to this story that have not received as much attention as they deserve. Among these are questions surrounding the legal and constitutional framework the Biden administration would have used if, as Hersh’s source alleges, Biden directly ordered the bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines. There is also an emerging counternarrative to Hersh’s reporting from U.S. intelligence that warrants scrutiny, both on its merits and for how it might relate to Hersh’s story.

“A Pro-Ukrainian Group”

On March 7, the New York Times and the German newspaper Die Zeit both published stories that thicken the plot. The Times story was based on a narrative clearly being pushed by U.S. intelligence sources that “a pro-Ukrainian group carried out the attack.” The Times asserted that a “review of newly collected intelligence suggests they were opponents of President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, but does not specify the members of the group, or who directed or paid for the operation.” The report was spartan in its specifics, used no named sources, and seemed reminiscent of other efforts by anonymous U.S. intelligence sources to launder a narrative under the guise of a news scoop. “U.S. officials declined to disclose the nature of the intelligence, how it was obtained or any details of the strength of the evidence it contains,” the report said. “They have said that there are no firm conclusions about it, leaving open the possibility that the operation might have been conducted off the books by a proxy force with connections to the Ukrainian government or its security services.”

The Times report was almost immediately contested by reporting in CNN and the Washington Post, downplaying the certainty of U.S. officials that the intelligence was accurate. An unnamed senior administration official told the Washington Post, “My understanding is that we don’t find this conclusive.” The Ukrainian government has denied any connection to the operation, saying it “absolutely did not participate in the attack on Nord Stream 2.”

Die Zeit’s investigation, conducted with public broadcasters ARD and SWR, was based on a German criminal probe led by the federal police. Die Zeit reports that its journalists identified the boat that was allegedly used in the operation. “It is said to be a yacht rented from a company based in Poland, apparently owned by two Ukrainians. According to the investigation, the secret operation at sea was carried out by a team of six people. It is said to have been five men and one woman,” according to the report. “The group consisted of a captain, two divers, two diving assistants and a doctor, who are said to have transported the explosives to the crime scenes and placed them there. The nationality of the perpetrators is apparently unclear.” They allegedly “used professionally forged passports, which are said to have been used, among other things, to rent the boat.”

In response to the story, Germany’s defense minister Boris Pistorius said, “We need to clearly differentiate whether it was a Ukrainian group that acted on the orders of Ukraine or … without the government’s knowledge.”

These new reports offer no concrete evidence or credible explanation for how this alleged group may have conducted the sabotage operation.

Die Zeit’s story appears to challenge Hersh’s central narrative, which offered a mass of detailed information about how exactly the U.S. allegedly carried out its attack on the pipeline, including details about the specific forces and ships involved in the operation and a technical description of how they planted and detonated the explosives. But these new reports do not actually contradict Hersh’s story, because they offer no concrete evidence or credible explanation for how this alleged group may have conducted the sabotage operation.

The German report, written by Holger Stark, made no allegation of any nation-state involvement in the attack but noted that “it is not excluded that this is also a false flag operation,” which “means that traces could also have been deliberately laid that point to Ukraine as the culprit. However, the investigators have apparently found no evidence that confirms such a scenario.” In an interview with a German radio station, Pistorius said he cannot rule out a “false flag” operation “to blame pro-Ukrainian groups and make it look that way.” That probability, he asserted, was “equally high.”

Researchers specializing in open-source intelligence, or OSINT, have loudly concluded that Hersh’s reporting does not add up and is easily debunked by tracking publicly available data on the movements of ships, aircraft, and other vessels at the time of the alleged operation. Hersh has summarily dismissed these critics, asserting that U.S. intelligence understands quite well the need to circumvent such OSINT vulnerabilities and had taken measures — including, perhaps, the disabling of location transponders — to ensure the integrity of the operation. “If you’re in the intelligence community, you’ve been running covert ops for years,” Hersh said, “certainly, the first thing you look at is how to take care of open-source people, make them think what happened isn’t happening.”

Some of the doubts and criticism aimed at Hersh’s piece, especially the fact that it appears to rely on a single source, are valid, but Hersh has a long track record of breaking major stories about covert operations and U.S. war crimes. And he has frequently proved his critics wrong. Hersh’s narrative also has the benefit of abundant public circumstantial evidence in the form of statements by the president and his advisers appearing to threaten to take out the pipeline and then gloating once it was destroyed. The U.S. had the motive and the means to carry out the operation.

When Hersh contacted the Biden administration for comment on his story, a White House spokesperson said, “This is false and complete fiction,” while the CIA told him, “This claim is completely and utterly false.”

The New York Times has not published serious reporting — or any reporting — on the substance of Hersh’s allegations or the denials from the White House and other government agencies. But in its piece on the “pro-Ukrainian group” the Times mentions Hersh’s report in the 23rd graph of the story. “Last month, the investigative journalist Seymour Hersh published an article on the newsletter platform Substack concluding that the United States carried out the operation at the direction of Mr. Biden. In making his case, Mr. Hersh cited the president’s preinvasion threat to ‘bring an end’ to Nord Stream 2, and similar statements by other senior U.S. officials,” the report said. “U.S. officials say Mr. Biden and his top aides did not authorize a mission to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines, and they say there was no U.S. involvement.”

In an interview on “The Daily,” a New York Times podcast, one of the reporters on the story, Julian Barnes, was asked if he knows who did the bombing. “Yeah, we think we do know,” he replied. But later in the nearly 30-minute discussion, he said, “I should be very clear that we know really very little, right? This group remains mysterious and it remains mysterious, not just to us, but also to the U.S. government officials that we have spoken to. They know that the people involved were either Ukrainian or Russian or a mix. They know that they are not affiliated with the Ukrainian government, but they know they’re also anti-Putin and pro-Ukraine.”

Barnes described the evolution of the pro-Ukraine story as beginning with the Times reporters speaking to U.S. intelligence officials. He said that initially the Times had been focusing its probe into the bombing on the Russian and Ukrainian governments, but that it was “just hitting dead end after dead end,” so the reporters “started asking a different question: ‘Could this have been done by nonstate actors? Could this have been done by a group of individuals who were not working for a government?’” Barnes added, “The more we talked to officials who had access to intelligence, the more we saw this theory gaining traction.” Barnes did not mention Hersh’s story on the podcast.

Despite the claim that this story emerged from a speculative hunch on the part of the Times reporters, it certainly appears to be an effort by some forces within U.S. intelligence to rework and spin the previous narrative that sought to imply that Russia itself had blown up the pipeline. Germany, Sweden, Denmark, and other nations have spent months investigating the explosion. The Times story could be an indication that after doing forensic and other investigations, Washington’s allies do not believe that Russia was behind the attack. Several European media outlets, including the Times of London, reported that European investigators zeroed in on the alleged pro-Ukrainian group very soon after the explosion, despite the fact that it only hit the news media in the past week. It may turn out that this is precisely what happened, and that the U.S. had nothing to do with the operation. But it would be unwise — and would require a complete disregard of U.S. history — to assume without evidence that the inferences of anonymous U.S. officials are genuine.

“I don’t know what happened here but it would be naive and irresponsible for journalists to take U.S. intel agencies’ claims at face value,” said Jameel Jaffer, a former lawyer for the American Civil Liberties Union who spent years battling the Bush and Obama administrations over issues of secrecy and national security.

Floating Narratives

If the bombing of the Nord Stream pipelines was, as Hersh alleges, directed by the U.S., then the leaked suggestion that the culprits were a “pro-Ukrainian group” could indicate a nascent effort at floating a cover story. There is also the possibility that some elements within the U.S. government ran a covert operation using deniable assets, such as Ukrainian “partisans” operating with fake passports. Further, “pro-Ukrainian group” is so vague that it could apply to an infinite number of actors, including former U.S. military or intelligence personnel or those of an allied nation. Die Zeit reported that the alleged perpetrators rented a yacht from a Polish company owned by two Ukrainians. According to the report, the group failed to clean the yacht they allegedly used in the operation, leading investigators to discover residue from explosives on a table in the cabin. This is either unbelievably sloppy tradecraft, evidence of total amateurism, or an intentional “clue” left with the intent to deceive. The U.S. or another nation could have used such a team as a patsy operation to mislead investigators and cover the tracks of the actual perpetrators.

There are recent precedents for foreign actors taking credit for U.S. operations to conceal Washington’s involvement.

No one has claimed responsibility for this attack, but there are recent precedents for foreign actors taking credit for U.S. operations to conceal Washington’s involvement. This was the case when President Barack Obama authorized a cruise missile attack in Yemen in December 2009, which killed more than three dozen people, most of them women and children. The Yemeni government announced it had conducted the strikes, a claim later proven false when a journalist photographed the remnants of U.S. cluster munitions. In fact, this practice of cloaking the U.S. role in drone and other airstrikes in Yemen was common during the Obama administration.

European news outlets have been aggressively pursuing the story of the private boat that U.S. and German intelligence have suggested was used by the “pro-Ukrainian group.” Some of the open-source researchers who criticized Hersh’s version of events have also identified inconsistencies and problems with the initial reporting on this new theory. Among these are questions of how such a small vessel could have transported the quantity of explosives allegedly used in the attack on the Nord Stream, the extreme difficulty such a small team on a yacht would face in pulling off the operation, and the perplexing narrative about the alleged land route they used to deliver the explosives to the ship. Some analysts have also raised doubt that a small team of divers would have the technical capacity to have pulled off such a complicated and deep dive or why they would choose a difficult access point to place the explosives.

I am not saying I believe any specific theory about the Nord Stream explosion at present, including Hersh’s. But I am not about to denounce Hersh’s reporting. He has repeatedly been accused of being wrong, only later to be proven right. That was true of My Lai, it was true of the CIA’s domestic spying in the 1970s, and it was true of the secret plans to manufacture a “weapons of mass destruction” threat in Iraq, the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, and countless other stories throughout his career. I am confident that if Hersh publishes a story, he believes that it is true and that he has a source or sources he has deemed reliable who are providing information. That does not mean that he or his sources are always right about every detail. In that sense, the ultimate question of credibility for Hersh’s story rests exclusively on his source’s level of direct access to the planning and their personal firsthand knowledge about the execution of the operation.

Like many reasonable observers who understand the history of U.S. covert actions, I am following the developments closely, with an open mind. It is possible for a journalist to get many details correct while also being fed some unreliable information by sources who are passing off speculation as fact. This is one of the major risks of single-sourced reporting, no matter how reliable the source is. Very few people in government are privy to every single detail of a covert operation, and I know from experience that sometimes sources know a lot about some aspects of a program or operation but are trying to fill in the blanks about the aspects they do not know directly. This is not done out of malice or with an intent to deceive, but because that’s how many people operate. Sometimes it is difficult to parse fact from speculation with sensitive sources who are reluctant to talk, especially if the source does not make clear what they know to be true and what they suspect to be true.

It is also possible that sources themselves have been fed bad or incomplete information and pass it along sincerely believing it to be true. There are many instances too where assertions confirmed by more than one source and published by major publications with substantial resources turn out to be false. Despite getting some details wrong, it is still possible for a reporter to get the overarching conclusion right.

It remains conceivable that Hersh correctly identified the sponsor of the Nord Stream attack, even if some of the details provided by his source were speculative, inaccurate, or based on outdated operational plans.

President Joe Biden, right, during a news conference with Olaf Scholz, Germany’s chancellor, in the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 7, 2022.

Photo: Leigh Vogel/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Oversight and Authority

There is another important set of questions to consider: If the U.S. did carry out the strike on the Nord Stream with Biden’s direct authorization, under what authority would the operation have been conducted? Under what legal basis would Biden and his administration have to keep even senior congressional leadership out of the loop and then blatantly lie about it to the public?

It’s worth noting that as a young senator, Biden played a role in creating the permanent congressional intelligence committees and in crafting laws regulating the oversight of the CIA and covert actions in the aftermath of the Nixon-era lawlessness.

First, let’s review what Hersh reported about the authorities at play in the alleged operation. “The CIA argued that whatever was done, it would have to be covert. Everyone involved understood the stakes. ‘This is not kiddie stuff,’ the source said. If the attack were traceable to the United States, ‘It’s an act of war.’”

According to Hersh, things changed after remarks Biden made on February 7, 2022, as he stood next to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz in the East Room at the White House. “If Russia invades … there will no longer be a Nord Stream 2. We will bring an end to it,” said Biden. “We will — I promise you, we’ll be able to do it.” Hersh’s source said the framework for the operation shifted to a military umbrella because senior CIA officers determined that destroying the pipeline “no longer could be considered a covert option because the President just announced that we knew how to do it.” Hersh writes, “The plan to blow up Nord Stream 1 and 2 was suddenly downgraded from a covert operation requiring that Congress be informed to one that was deemed as a highly classified intelligence operation with U.S. military support. Under the law, the source explained, ‘There was no longer a legal requirement to report the operation to Congress. All they had to do now is just do it — but it still had to be secret.’”

“There is supposed to be at least some congressional notification of any covert action.”

I consulted several constitutional law scholars and experts on U.S. covert actions to explore the legal framework within which the Biden administration would have needed to operate to carry out such an operation. All of the sources I spoke with said it would be a serious violation of law if such a covert action were not briefed to at least some senior U.S. lawmakers. At a minimum, the operation would need to be reported to the so-called Gang of Eight — the House speaker and minority leader, the Senate majority and minority leaders, the chair and ranking members of both intelligence committees — either beforehand or, if necessary for the integrity of the operation, shortly thereafter. In that case, the president would be required to provide an explanation as to why Congress was not briefed ahead of time. In rare cases, presidents have chosen to brief only four members of Congress, though the practice has no basis in U.S. statute. “There is supposed to be at least some congressional notification of any covert action,” said Steven Aftergood, who served as director of the Government Secrecy Project at the Federation of American Scientists from 1991-2021. “If notification is not provided in advance, it must still be given in ‘a timely fashion.’ Failure to do so would be a violation of law.”

Within the U.S. laws governing military and intelligence operations, there are gray areas. Title 50 of the U.S. code sets out the rules and structures for intelligence operations, while Title 10 covers military actions. The code under which a particular operation is performed has serious implications for oversight and accountability. A covert action requires the drafting of a presidential “finding,” or memorandum of notification, and the White House must brief the House and Senate Intelligence Committees on its contents. This briefing must occur before the covert action unless there are “extraordinary circumstances.” The requirements for congressional involvement were established to prevent scandals such as the Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba and other dubious CIA operations.

Military doctrine defines another class of activities, “clandestine operations,” in which the point of secrecy is to protect the integrity of the mission, not to conceal its sponsor, the U.S. government. The military may conduct operations that are both covert and clandestine, but these are rare. Unlike covert actions, clandestine operations do not require a presidential finding if “future hostilities” are “anticipated” in the country where they are taking place. Nor is the administration required to report the operation to Congress. Such operations are defined as “traditional military activities,” or TMAs, and offer the intelligence committees no real-time oversight rights. Under U.S. law, the military is not required to disclose the specific actions of an operation, but the U.S. role in the “overall operation” should be “apparent” or eventually “acknowledged.”

Hersh’s source said the “covert action” was officially changed to a U.S. military operation after Biden’s public threat and that it used regular U.S. Navy divers instead of those from U.S. Special Operations Command “whose covert operations must be reported to Congress and briefed in advance,” thus eliminating the reporting requirement to the intelligence committees. “What qualifies as TMA has long been a subject of push and pull between Congress and the executive,” said University of Houston constitutional law scholar Emily Berman. “So the bottom line is that what rules apply would depend on which authority the President relied on to carry out the mission, which will often not be evident.”

“To the extent that ‘traditional military activities’ can look a lot like covert actions, congressional notification is only required under Title 50 (covert action) operations, not Title 10 (military) ones,” explained Melinda Haas, an assistant professor of international affairs at the University of Pittsburgh, in an email. “It isn’t possible to know up front, however, whether a certain behavior is considered a ‘covert action.’”

The military, while not subject to the select committees on intelligence, does have its own reporting requirements to the Senate and House Armed Services committees. While there is a debate about what sort of congressional oversight would be required if the action was done under a military umbrella, it would be brazen for Biden’s administration and the Pentagon leadership to refuse to do so. Even the notoriously secretive and anti-oversight George W. Bush administration briefed four members of Congress, including Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., in January 2003 about the existence of CIA torture videos. It is also true that the CIA subsequently spied illegally on Senate torture investigators.

Robert Litt, the former general counsel for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence under President Barack Obama, told me that he thought it was unlikely that the U.S. carried out the operation, but that if it did so, regardless of which U.S. forces performed such an operation, it would still “fall within a well-established statutory framework for covert action.” Litt said, “If a ‘highly classified intelligence operation’ is intended to affect conditions abroad and not to be acknowledged, it is a covert action under the law, and has to be treated as such. I don’t think this would be considered to fall within the traditional military activity exemption even though that may be what [Hersh’s] source is imprecisely referring to.”

If, as Hersh’s source alleges, no members of Congress were read into this operation, it would mean that Biden essentially adopted an Iran-Contra-style strategy of boxing out legislative oversight entirely, potentially setting himself up for a public scandal of epic proportions. There is, however, precedent for this. A 1986 memo prepared by the Office of Legal Counsel during the Reagan administration argued that the president was “within his authority in maintaining the secrecy” of a covert operation “from Congress until such time as he believed that disclosure to Congress would not interfere with the success of the operation.”

While this is not unfathomable in light of U.S. history, that likelihood seems low when you look at the vast number of agencies and people within the U.S. government — including an interagency working group with people from the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the CIA, and the State and Treasury departments — who were allegedly working on the plans. Not to mention a foreign government and a cover story of a highly publicized NATO training exercise. This would mean mid-level U.S. government bureaucrats and foreign officials were read into the operation, but not senior members of Congress with statutory oversight authorities and sworn secrecy oaths.

“I believe that if this activity had been done by the U.S., it is almost certain that at least the Gang of Eight was informed, and by now probably the full committees as well,” said Litt. “Given the requirement of congressional briefing, the likelihood of leaks, and the political situation in Washington, I would doubt that the president would take the risk of actually lying had this been a U.S. operation.” Litt added: “My bottom line is that I think it is highly unlikely that if the U.S. did this Congress was not briefed.”

Beyond the issue of whether Congress was informed of the alleged operation, it’s hard to imagine a scenario, if Hersh’s source is accurate, in which no one involved eventually confirms at least parts of Hersh’s reporting, or intentionally or unwittingly leaks details and backs up the claims. According to Hersh’s source, there were dissenters within the CIA and State Department who said, “Don’t do this. It’s stupid and will be a political nightmare if it comes out.”

Hersh has been confronted with this exact question before, including after his 2015 story challenging the official narrative of the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound was published. “How many people do you think in the American government in the years 2001, 2002, 2003 leading up to the late March attack on Iraq knew that the government was misrepresenting the intelligence on the WMD?” Hersh asked in an interview with NPR’s On the Media, adding that potentially thousands of government employees and contractors also knew that the National Security Agency was engaged in warrantless collection of the communications of American citizens prior to Edward Snowden’s revelations, but kept silent. “We’ve demonstrated that you can cow the bureaucracy, you can cow people to an extraordinary length in this society to the length where nobody’s going to go public on it,” Hersh added.

If the U.S. did blow up the pipeline, it could be that the administration did in fact inform some congressional leaders and they are assisting in concealing the operation. “I don’t know of any rule that would prevent the President from denying involvement in an operation that was designed to remain unacknowledged, as covert actions are,” said Berman.

“As for lying to the public, I’m not aware of any law that would prevent the President from doing that (there is certainly plenty of recent precedent for presidential prevarication), although more typically the approach is when asked about a covert action is not to comment,” Litt wrote in an email. He added that “the military’s position is that they will not affirmatively lie about military action.”

Regardless of the U.S. military’s official position on lying about its activities, it is undeniable that military officials have lied or misled the public at various points throughout U.S. history, including the recent case of an August 2021 drone strike in Afghanistan that killed 10 members of an Afghan family, including seven children. Whether it is lying or misdirecting the public in the Nord Stream case obviously depends on the veracity of the information provided by Hersh’s source. When the intent is to deceive an “enemy” nation or hostile force, rather than the U.S. public or Congress, the military has extensive guidelines for doing so.

Aftergood points out that there is no U.S. law or rule prohibiting the government from promoting a false alternative explanation to conceal an operation. “This is an established practice in military operations and intelligence activities where it is often known as ‘cover and deception,’” he said. “Sometimes, in order to maintain the operational security of X, you have to declare that it is actually Y.”

The post Conflicting Reports Thicken Nord Stream Bombing Plot appeared first on The Intercept.

The computer world has a tendency of reinventing the wheel once in a while. I am not a fan of that process, but sometimes I just have to bite the bullet and adapt to change. This post explains how I adapted to one particular change: the netstat to sockstat transition.

I used to do this to show which processes where listening on which port on a server:

netstat -anpe

It was a handy mnemonic as, in France, ANPE was the agency responsible for the unemployed (basically). That would list all sockets (-a), not resolve hostnames (-n, because it's slow), show processes attached to the socket (-p) with extra info like the user (-e). This still works, but sometimes fail to find the actual process hooked to the port. Plus, it lists a whole bunch of UNIX sockets and non-listening sockets, which are generally irrelevant for such an audit.

What I really wanted to use was really something like:

netstat -pleunt | sort

... which has the "pleut" mnemonic ("rains", but plural, which makes no sense and would be badly spelled anyway). That also only lists listening (-l) and network sockets, specifically UDP (-u) and TCP (-t).

But enough with the legacy, let's try the brave new world of sockstat which has the unfortunate acronym ss.

The equivalent sockstat command to the above is:

ss -pleuntO

It's similar to the above, except we need the -O flag otherwise ss does that confusing thing where it splits the output on multiple lines. But I actually use:

ss -plunt0

... i.e. without the -e as the information it gives (cgroup, fd number, etc) is not much more useful than what's already provided with -p (service and UID).

All of the above also show sockets that are not actually a concern because they only listen on localhost. Those one should be filtered out. So now we embark into that wild filtering ride.

This is going to list all open sockets and show the port number and service:

ss -pluntO --no-header | sed 's/^\([a-z]*\) *[A-Z]* *[0-9]* [0-9]* *[0-9]* */\1/' | sed 's/^[^:]*:\(:\]:\)\?//;s/\([0-9]*\) *[^ ]*/\1\t/;s/,fd=[0-9]*//' | sort -gu

For example on my desktop, it looks like:

anarcat@angela:~$ sudo ss -pluntO --no-header | sed 's/^\([a-z]*\) *[A-Z]* *[0-9]* [0-9]* *[0-9]* */\1/' | sed 's/^[^:]*:\(:\]:\)\?//;s/\([0-9]*\) *[^ ]*/\1\t/;s/,fd=[0-9]*//' | sort -gu
          [::]:* users:(("unbound",pid=1864))        
22  users:(("sshd",pid=1830))           
25  users:(("master",pid=3150))        
53  users:(("unbound",pid=1864))        
323 users:(("chronyd",pid=1876))        
500 users:(("charon",pid=2817))        
631 users:(("cups-browsed",pid=2744))   
2628    users:(("dictd",pid=2825))          
4001    users:(("emacs",pid=3578))          
4500    users:(("charon",pid=2817))        
5353    users:(("avahi-daemon",pid=1423))  
6600    users:(("systemd",pid=3461))       
8384    users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
9050    users:(("tor",pid=2857))            
21027   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
22000   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
33231   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
34953   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
35770   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
44944   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
47337   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
48903   users:(("mosh-client",pid=234126))  
52774   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
52938   users:(("avahi-daemon",pid=1423))  
54029   users:(("avahi-daemon",pid=1423))  
anarcat@angela:~$

But that doesn't filter out the localhost stuff, lots of false positive (like emacs, above). And this is where it gets... not fun, as you need to match "localhost" but we don't resolve names, so you need to do some fancy pattern matching:

ss -pluntO --no-header | \
    sed 's/^\([a-z]*\) *[A-Z]* *[0-9]* [0-9]* *[0-9]* */\1/;s/^tcp//;s/^udp//' | \
    grep -v -e '^\[fe80::' -e '^127.0.0.1' -e '^\[::1\]' -e '^192\.' -e '^172\.' | \
    sed 's/^[^:]*:\(:\]:\)\?//;s/\([0-9]*\) *[^ ]*/\1\t/;s/,fd=[0-9]*//' |\
    sort -gu

This is kind of horrible, but it works, those are the actually open ports on my machine:

anarcat@angela:~$ sudo ss -pluntO --no-header |         sed 's/^\([a-
z]*\) *[A-Z]* *[0-9]* [0-9]* *[0-9]* */\1/;s/^tcp//;s/^udp//' |      
   grep -v -e '^\[fe80::' -e '^127.0.0.1' -e '^\[::1\]' -e '^192\.' -
e '^172\.' |         sed 's/^[^:]*:\(:\]:\)\?//;s/\([0-9]*\) *[^ ]*/\
1\t/;s/,fd=[0-9]*//' |        sort -gu
22  users:(("sshd",pid=1830))           
500 users:(("charon",pid=2817))        
631 users:(("cups-browsed",pid=2744))   
4500    users:(("charon",pid=2817))        
5353    users:(("avahi-daemon",pid=1423))  
6600    users:(("systemd",pid=3461))       
21027   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
22000   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
34953   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
35770   users:(("syncthing",pid=232169))   
48903   users:(("mosh-client",pid=234126))  
52938   users:(("avahi-daemon",pid=1423))  
54029   users:(("avahi-daemon",pid=1423))

Surely there must be a better way. It turns out that lsof can do some of this, and it's relatively straightforward. This lists all listening TCP sockets:

lsof -iTCP -sTCP:LISTEN +c 15 | grep -v localhost | sort

A shorter version from Adam Shand is:

lsof -i @localhost

... which basically replaces the grep -v localhost line.

In theory, this would do the equivalent on UDP

lsof -iUDP -sUDP:^Idle

... but in reality, it looks like lsof on Linux can't figure out the state of a UDP socket:

lsof: no UDP state names available: UDP:^Idle

... which, honestly, I'm baffled by. It's strange because ss can figure out the state of those sockets, heck it's how -l vs -a works after all. So we need something else to show listening UDP sockets.

The following actually looks pretty good after all:

ss -pluO

That will list localhost sockets of course, so we can explicitly ask ss to resolve those and filter them out with something like:

ss -plurO | grep -v localhost

oh, and look here! ss supports pattern matching, so we can actually tell it to ignore localhost directly, which removes that horrible sed line we used earlier:

ss -pluntO '! ( src = localhost )'

That actually gives a pretty readable output. One annoyance is we can't really modify the columns here, so we still need some god-awful sed hacking on top of that to get a cleaner output:

ss -nplutO '! ( src = localhost )'  | \
    sed 's/\(udp\|tcp\).*:\([0-9][0-9]*\)/\2\t\1\t/;s/\([0-9][0-9]*\t[udtcp]*\t\)[^u]*users:(("/\1/;s/".*//;s/.*Address:Port.*/Netid\tPort\tProcess/' | \
    sort -nu

That looks horrible and is basically impossible to memorize. But it sure looks nice:

anarcat@angela:~$ sudo ss -nplutO '! ( src = localhost )'  | sed 's/\(udp\|tcp\).*:\([0-9][0-9]*\)/\2\t\1\t/;s/\([0-9][0-9]*\t[udtcp]*\t\)[^u]*users:(("/\1/;s/".*//;s/.*Address:Port.*/Port\tNetid\tProcess/' | sort -nu

Port    Netid   Process
22  tcp sshd
500 udp charon
546 udp NetworkManager
631 udp cups-browsed
4500    udp charon
5353    udp avahi-daemon
6600    tcp systemd
21027   udp syncthing
22000   udp syncthing
34953   udp syncthing
35770   udp syncthing
48903   udp mosh-client
52938   udp avahi-daemon
54029   udp avahi-daemon

Better ideas welcome.

Andy Zaltzman is joined by Mark Steel, Ria Lina, Catherine Bohart and Camilla Long. This week the panel discuss President Zelensky's surprise visit to the UK, Rishi Sunak's cabinet reshuffle and Liz Truss' political comeback.

Hosted and written by Andy Zaltzman with additional material from Alice Fraser, Zoë Tomalin, Rebecca Bain and Cameron Loxdale.

Producer: Georgia Keating Executive Producer: Richard Morris Production Co-ordinator: Becky Carewe-Jeffries Sound Editor: Marc Willcox

A BBC Studios Production

Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the pioneering Danish astronomer Tycho Brahe (1546 – 1601) whose charts offered an unprecedented level of accuracy.

In 1572 Brahe's observations of a new star challenged the idea, inherited from Aristotle, that the heavens were unchanging. He went on to create his own observatory complex on the Danish island of Hven, and there, working before the invention of the telescope, he developed innovative instruments and gathered a team of assistants, taking a highly systematic approach to observation. A second, smaller source of renown was his metal prosthetic nose, which he needed after a serious injury sustained in a duel.

The image above shows Brahe aged 40, from the Atlas Major by Johann Blaeu.

With

Ole Grell Emeritus Professor in Early Modern History at the Open University

Adam Mosley Associate Professor of History at Swansea University

and

Emma Perkins Affiliate Scholar in the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge.

While the Thirty Years War rages on, in England, a similar set of crises leads to Civil War.

Interactive atlas, bibliography and credits for the series can be found at: hellonearth.chapotraphouse.com

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ryan and Emily are joined by legendary investigative journalist Seymour Hersh to discuss his belief that the New York Times Nordstream report is fake, Elizabeth Warren slams Jerome Powell for considering future interest rate hikes that may cause a recession, Biden says he has a plan to extend the future of Medicare, Biden administration considering reviving detention of migrant families, China accuses US of containment leading other Western countries to encircle and suppress China, a DC crime reform bill thats puts the spotlight on DC statehood, Ryan asks Karine Jean Pierre a question on the FBI spying on Americans, Ryan looks into Matt Gaetz calling for all American troops to leave Syria, and Emily looks into the January 6th Tapes and how Media is ignoring the real scandal.

To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/

To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify

Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl

Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Krystal and Saagar discuss the FAA in a state of emergency after multiple near death accidents, Jet Blue and Spirit airlines merger blocked, the clearest signs yet of a Trump indictment, Dems celebrate the return of Trump, DHS revealed to have illegal spying program, Fauci caught prompting a coverup of the Lab Leak theory, how a CNN Boss quashed lab leak investigation, Jan 6th footage shows police escorting the Q-Anon Shaman through the Capitol, Saagar looks into Alex Murdaugh's verdict based on data from his cell phone establishes a dangerous new precedent, Krystal looks into how California's Housing Crisis is sweeping the rest of the nation, and we introduce our newest BP partner Spencer Snyder (https://www.youtube.com/@SpencerSnyder).

To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/

To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify

Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl

Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

How is the 30 Years War remembered in Germany? Is the Kipper- und Wipperzeit why the trains keep breaking down? Why does the Catalonian anthem go so hard? To talk to us about central Europe's 17th century blood bath we had Matt Christman of Chapo Trap House on. Make sure to catch Matt's new mini series he made with Chris Wade, "Hell on Earth"

FIND OUR GUEST HERE:
https://twitter.com/cushbomb
https://twitter.com/CHAPOTRAPHOUSE
https://hellonearth.chapotraphouse.com/

HOW TO SUPPORT US:
https://www.patreon.com/cornerspaeti

HOW TO REACH US:
Corner Späti https://twitter.com/cornerspaeti
Julia https://twitter.com/KMarxiana
Rob https://twitter.com/leninkraft
Nick https://twitter.com/sternburgpapi
Uma https://twitter.com/umawrnkl
Ciarán https://twitter.com/CiaranDold

Support Corner Späti

Krystal and Saagar discuss Trump dominating at CPAC, Desantis short circuiting when asked about Trump endorsement, Steve Bannon declaring war on Fox News, another Norfolk Southern Train derails, Buttigieg concedes he needs to do more, MSNBC smears Marianne's candidacy, Russel Brand goes viral on Bill Maher, Krystal looks into Amazon rugpulling on their HQ2 facility, Saagar looks into the rise of loneliness in liberal teenagers, and we're joined by former Navy pilot Ryan Graves to discuss his piece in Politico on the continued persistent sightings of UFOs despite a lack of investigation.

To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/

To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify

Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl

Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Watch full episodes on Rumble, streamed LIVE 7pm ET: https://rumble.com/c/GGreenwald Become part of our Locals community: https://greenwald.locals.com/

---

Follow Glenn:

Twitter: https://twitter.com/ggreenwald

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/glenn.11.greenwald/

Follow System Update:

Twitter: https://twitter.com/SystemUpdate_

Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/systemupdate__/ TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@systemupdate__ Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/systemupdate.tv/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/systemupdate/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

When I write code I jump around in the code quite a bit, as I'm sure many other developers do. The ability to jump to the definition of a function, or a type, is invaluable when trying to understand code. In Emacs the built-in xref package provides the basic functionality for this, with many other packages providing their custom functions for looking up identifiers. This works beautifully except for one thing, there's only one global stack for keeping track of how you've jumped around.

Well, that used to be the case.

As I tend to have multiple projects open at a time I used to find it very confusing when I pop positions off the xref stack and all of a sudden find myself in another project. It would be so much nicer to have a per-project stack.

I've only known of one solution for this, the perspective package, but as I've been building my own Emacs config I wanted to see if there were other options. It turns out there is one (almost) built into Emacs 29.

In Emacs 29 there's built-in support for having per-window xref stacks, and the way that's done allows one to extend it further. There's now a variable, xref-history-storage, that controls access to the xref stack. The default is still a global stack (when the variable is set to #'xref-global-history), but to get per-window stacks one sets it to #'xref-window-local-history.

After finding this out I thought I'd try to write my own, implementing per-project xref stacks (for projectile).

The function should take one optional argument, new-value, if it's provided the stack should be updated and if not, it should be returned. That is, something like this

(defun projectile-param-xref-history (&optional new-value)
  "Return project-local xref history for the current projectile.

Override existing value with NEW-VALUE if it's set."
  (if new-value
      (projectile-param-set-parameter 'xref--history new-value)
    (or (projectile-param-get-parameter 'xref--history)
        (projectile-param-set-parameter 'xref--history (xref--make-xref-history)))))

Now I only had to write the two functions projectile-param-get-parameter and projectile-param-set-parameter. I thought a rather straight forward option would be to use a hashtable and store values under a tuple comprising the project name and the parameter passed in.

(defvar projectile-params--store (make-hash-table :test 'equal)
  "The store of project parameters.")

(defun projectile-param-get-parameter (param)
  "Return project parameter PARAM, or nil if unset."
  (let ((key (cons (projectile-project-name) param)))
    (gethash key projectile-params--store nil)))

(defun projectile-param-set-parameter (param value)
  "Set the project parameter PARAM to VALUE."
  (let ((key (cons (projectile-project-name) param)))
    (puthash key value projectile-params--store))
  value)

Then I tried it out by setting xref-history-storage

(setq xref-history-storage #'projectile-param-xref-history)

and so far it's been working well.

The full code is here.

This week on Deconstructed, host Ryan Grim revisits his reporting on how the Democratic Majority for Israel, Mainstream Democrats PAC, and the American Israel Public Affairs Committee spent so much money on the politics of Israel that the question of Israel-Palestine now dominates Democratic primaries.

If you’d like to support our work, go to theintercept.com/give, where your donation, no matter what the amount, makes a real difference.

And if you haven’t already, please subscribe to the show so you can hear it every week. And please go and leave us a rating or a review — it helps people find the show. If you want to give us additional feedback, email us at Podcasts@theintercept.com

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Award-winning investigative journalist Seymour Hersh joined Rania Khalek on Dispatches to discuss his latest bombshell on how the Biden administration destroyed the Nord Stream pipeline using remotely triggered explosives with the help of the CIA, US Navy divers, and NATO member Norway. This means the US targeted the critical energy infrastructure of its most important European ally, a major violation of sovereignty in what essentially constitutes objectively an act of war against Germany. But Germany is looking the other way. 

Hersh’s article: https://seymourhersh.substack.com/p/how-america-took-out-the-nord-stream

You can listen to all episodes of Rania Khalek Dispatches anywhere you get podcasts.

Spotify: https://spoti.fi/3za9DRK 

Apple: https://apple.co/3zeYpeW 

Krystal and Saagar discuss the Republican civil war over East Palestine Aid, Corporate media caught running Railroad propaganda, Trump surging in all Republican 2024 polls, Fox stunned as Diner voters back Trump over Desantis, Saagar presses Vivek Ramaswamy on his 2024 run, Insulin company Eli Lily cuts insulin prices, the Havana Syndrome is debunked, China threatens Elon Musk over Lab leak tweets, Krystal looks into Fake Media Mogul at Ozy media is arrested for fraud, Saagar looks into the comparisons between Iraq WMD's and Lab Leak, and Branko Marcetic (@BMarchetich) from Jacobin joins us to talk about the media's lies on Ukranian democracy.

To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/

To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify

Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl

Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Democracy Now! 2023-03-02 Thursday

• Headlines for March 02, 2023
• "Unwinnable War"? Calls Grow for Negotiated End to Ukraine War
• Surviving a Pogrom: Palestinian in Huwara Decries Israeli Settler Attack as "Ethnic Cleansing"

Download this show

By Dan Gearino

Electric vehicle batteries keep getting larger, and the typical driving range between charges keeps growing.

Hosts Jim DeRogatis and Greg Kot are joined by their production staff to highlight new music that listeners may have missed: musical buried treasures. They also pay tribute to Television's iconic guitarist, Tom Verlaine.

Join our Facebook Group: https://bit.ly/3sivr9T

Become a member on Patreon: https://bit.ly/3slWZvc

Sign up for our newsletter: https://bit.ly/3eEvRnG

Make a donation via PayPal: https://bit.ly/3dmt9lU

Send us a Voice Memo: Desktop: bit.ly/2RyD5Ah  Mobile: sayhi.chat/soundops

Featured Songs:

Avalon Emerson, "Sandrail Silhouette," Sandrail Silhouette (Single), Another Dove, 2023

The Beatles, "With A Little Help From My Friends," Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, Capitol, 1967

Television, "Marquee Moon," Marquee Moon, Elektra, 1977

Television, "Venus," Marquee Moon, Elektra, 1977

Television, "Glory," Adventure, Elektra, 1978

Wesley Joseph, "MONSOON," MONSOON (Single), Secretly Canadian, 2022

The Get Right Band, "Hell Yes Refresh," Hell Yes Refresh (Single), Head Heart and Hips, 2022

Hurry Up, "American Weirdos," Dismal Nitch, Comedy Minus One, 2022

mazie, "it's not me (it's u)," it's not me (it's u), Good Boy, 2023

Måneskin, "GOSSIP (feat. Tom Morello)," RUSH!, Epic, 2023

Little Dragon, "Water (FKJ Remix)," New Me, Same Us Remix - EP, Ninja Tune, 2021

Ducks Ltd., "18 Cigarettes," Modern Fiction, Carpark, 2021

The Arcs, "Only One For Me," Electrophonic Chronic, Easy Eye Sound, 2023

Manasseh, "I'll Be - Live Pt. 1," Variations V1: I'll Be, Self-Released, 2023

Automatic, "New Beginning," Excess, Stones Throw, 2022

Daydream Review, "Have You Found What You’re Looking For?," Leisure, Side Hustle, 2023

Sinéad O'Connor, "Black Boys on Mopeds," I Do Not Want What I Haven't Got, Ensign/Chrysalis, 1990

Support The Show: https://www.patreon.com/soundopinions

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Alongside a couple of activists with the Young Democratic Socialists of America, Mickey infiltrates the Denver protest scene. He also starts spreading rumors that a leader of the demonstrations is a snitch. Meanwhile, the protests in Denver are becoming increasingly violent as Mickey leads the way in his silver hearse. 

https://alphabetboys.xyz/ 

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

After roughly 4 minutes of guitar noises we talk about Axel Springer's growth, weird stories they were putting out in Germany and of course Nickelback.

THINGS MENTIONED
https://news.yahoo.com/zelensky-says-hes-not-sure-095048296.html

HOW TO SUPPORT US:
https://www.patreon.com/cornerspaeti

HOW TO REACH US:
Corner Späti https://twitter.com/cornerspaeti
Julia https://twitter.com/KMarxiana
Rob https://twitter.com/leninkraft
Nick https://twitter.com/sternburgpapi
Uma https://twitter.com/umawrnkl
Ciarán https://twitter.com/CiaranDold

Support Corner Späti

Emily and Ryan discuss SCOTUS seeming set to kill Biden's student debt plan, how Biden pushed ESG takeover of the World Bank, San Francisco debating $5 million dollar Reparations, a Desantis memo requiring Protests to "Align with Mission", Dilbert creator Scott Adams cancelled after racist rant, Biden's border giveaway to the Cartels and Big Business, the NSA caught spying on a US congressman, and White House reporter @RealClearNews Philip Wegmann (@PhilipWegmann) joins us in studio to talk about the Biden administration defending Gain of Function research.

To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/

To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify

Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/breaking-points-with-krystal-and-saagar/id1570045623

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61zJSzPxNZZ3PKbXl

Merch: https://breaking-points.myshopify.com/

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

We’re joined by friend of the show Will Sommer to discuss his new book “Trust the Plan: The Rise of QAnon and the Conspiracy That Unhinged America”. We discuss the full shape of the conspiracy/movement now 5 years into its run, its effect on those who follow it, and where it might go from here. As well as all the bizarre cultural references, micro-celebrities & criminals that fill out the movement.

Pick up Will’s book here: https://www.harpercollins.com/products/trust-the-plan-will-sommer?variant=40493482541090

And listen to Will’s podcast Fever Dreams here: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/fever-dreams/id1558716930

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.