Confession could be bad for Lance Armstrong's bank account

Now that Lance Armstrong has finally admitted to using performance-enhancing drugs during his storied athletic career, the shamed cyclist could be pulled into courtrooms around the globe for legal battles with people seeking millions of dollars.

That's one of the many downsides to the confession of a once-adored athlete who for more than a decade not only denied doping but aggressively counterattacked his accusers.

But a significant question remains about whether there is an upside to his coming clean in an interview with Oprah Winfrey scheduled to air later this week.

The confession potentially represents a first step in trying to rebuild his tarnished public image. It might also help in persuading sports officials to reduce his lifetime ban so that the 41-year-old might someday compete in sanctioned triathlons and marathons.

Armstrong faces an uphill climb.

"For him to chart a course to redemption is really complicated and would take a lot of time," said Adam Hanft, a branding and crisis communications strategist. "It's not going to be reversed with a TV appearance."

In his 21/2-hour interview at a downtown Austin, Texas, hotel, Armstrong was forthcoming about the doping allegations that dogged him during a career that included seven Tour de France victories, Winfrey told "CBS This Morning" on Tuesday.

"I don't think 'emotional' begins to describe the intensity or the difficulty he experienced in talking about some of these things," she said, declining to provide further details.

Armstrong has come under increasing pressure in the months since the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency enforced the ban and issued a 1,000-plus-page report that accused him of leading "the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen."

With 11 former teammates providing depositions, he was stripped of his Tour championships and lost several big-money sponsors, including Nike, that had made him one of the sporting world's richest endorsers.

Now, Armstrong stands to lose a large chunk of his personal wealth, reported at about $100 million.

His most pressing concern appears to be a federal whistle-blower lawsuit filed by former teammate Floyd Landis, who was stripped of the 2006 Tour de France title for doping. The suit accuses Armstrong of defrauding the U.S. Postal Service, which sponsored his racing team for a number of years.

Armstrong's attorneys have met with government officials to discuss, among other things, how much the Postal Service was actually damaged by his misconduct, according to a person with knowledge of the situation who is not authorized to speak publicly.

During those talks, settlement figures were discussed, the person said.

A lengthy federal investigation into Armstrong and his team was dropped early last year without charges being brought. It remains to be seen whether the criminal statute of limitations has elapsed, but the Department of Justice could join in the civil suit.

The False Claims Act, the basis of whistle-blower suits, carries heavy penalties, including triple damages and fines, said Mike Morse, a Philadelphia-based lawyer who specializes in such cases.

"Violations of the federal False Claims Act can expose him to some really significant monetary damages," Morse said. "There could also be a whole host of private lawsuits."

Reacting to early allegations of Armstrong's doping, a Dallas-based promotional company declined to pay him a $5-million bonus for winning the 2004 Tour de France. He sued and received a $7.5-million settlement.

Now SCA Promotions plans to sue Armstrong to get its money back. "We do expect to file soon," said Jeffrey Dorough, the company's in-house counsel. "We don't know what impact the interview will have until we see it."

The government of South Australia state has said it will seek to recoup several million dollars in appearance fees paid to Armstrong for competing in the Tour Down Under from 2009 through 2011.

Read More..

A Google-a-Day Puzzle for Jan. 16

Our good friends at Google run a daily puzzle challenge and asked us to help get them out to the geeky masses. Each day’s puzzle will task your googling skills a little more, leading you to Google mastery. Each morning at 12:01 a.m. Eastern time you’ll see a new puzzle posted here.

SPOILER WARNING:
We leave the comments on so people can work together to find the answer. As such, if you want to figure it out all by yourself, DON’T READ THE COMMENTS!

Also, with the knowledge that because others may publish their answers before you do, if you want to be able to search for information without accidentally seeing the answer somewhere, you can use the Google-a-Day site’s search tool, which will automatically filter out published answers, to give you a spoiler-free experience.

And now, without further ado, we give you…

TODAY’S PUZZLE:

Note: Ad-blocking software may prevent display of the puzzle widget.

Ken is a husband and father from the San Francisco Bay Area, where he works as a civil engineer. He also wrote the NYT bestselling book "Geek Dad: Awesomely Geeky Projects for Dads and Kids to Share."

Read more by Ken Denmead

Follow @fitzwillie and @wiredgeekdad on Twitter.

Read More..

Stuart Scott’s cancer back – but he tweets he’s fighting hard

NEW YORK (TheWrap.com) – ESPN anchor Stuart Scott tweeted that his cancer has returned, but that he’s fighting hard.

How hard? He went from tweeting Monday night about his health to hosting SportsCenter, as if nothing were wrong. As he hosted, he was inundated with supportive tweets.

“Blessed by prayers… I’m back in the Fight,” Scott wrote. “C reared its head again. Chemo evry 2 wks but I’ll still work, still work out..still #LIVESTRONG”

In another tweet, he said that after chemotherapy treatments he goes straight to work out, doing either P90X or mixed martial arts.

Scott was treated for cancer in 2007 after doctors found malignant tissue following an emergency appendectomy. He returned to work at ESPN a month later.

In January 2011, Scott began undergoing chemotherapy after more cancerous tissue was removed. He again returned after a month.

Scott has become a symbol of hope for many who have loved ones fighting the disease or who are fighting it themselves. He traded tweets with some of them after his latest announcement.

He also tweeted Tuesday: “Don’t like using profanity on Twitter but some of my fav well wishes R the good folks who say #F@$ KCancer… I can’t spell it out but I AGREE.”

Celebrity News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Stuart Scott’s cancer back – but he tweets he’s fighting hard
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/stuart-scotts-cancer-back-but-he-tweets-hes-fighting-hard/
Link To Post : Stuart Scott’s cancer back – but he tweets he’s fighting hard
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Well: Boosting Your Flu Shot Response

Phys Ed

Gretchen Reynolds on the science of fitness.

As this year’s influenza season continues to take its toll, those procrastinators now hurrying to get a flu shot might wish to know that exercise may amplify the flu vaccine’s effect. And for maximal potency, the exercise should be undertaken at the right time and involve the right dosage of sweat, according to several recent reports.

Flu shots are one of the best ways to lessen the risk of catching the disease. But they are not foolproof. By most estimates, the yearly flu vaccine blocks infection 50 to 70 percent of the time, meaning that some of those being inoculated gain little protection. The more antibodies someone develops, the better their protection against the flu, generally speaking. But for some reason, some people’s immune systems produce fewer antibodies to the influenza virus than others’ do.

Being physically fit has been found in many studies to improve immunity in general and vaccine response in particular. In one notable 2009 experiment, sedentary, elderly adults, a group whose immune systems typically respond weakly to the flu vaccine, began programs of either brisk walking or a balance and stretching routine. After 10 months, the walkers had significantly improved their aerobic fitness and, after receiving flu shots, displayed higher average influenza antibody counts 20 weeks after a flu vaccine than the group who had stretched.

But that experiment involved almost a year of dedicated exercise training, a prospect that is daunting to some people and, in practical terms, not helpful for those who have entered this flu season unfit.

So scientists have begun to wonder whether a single, well-calibrated bout of exercise might similarly strengthen the vaccine’s potency.

To find out, researchers at Iowa State University in Ames recently had young, healthy volunteers, most of them college students, head out for a moderately paced 90-minute jog or bike ride 15 minutes after receiving their flu shot. Other volunteers sat quietly for 90 minutes after their shot. Then the researchers checked for blood levels of influenza antibodies a month later.

Those volunteers who had exercised after being inoculated, it turned out, exhibited “nearly double the antibody response” of the sedentary group, said Marian Kohut, a professor of kinesiology at Iowa State who oversaw the study, which is being prepared for publication. They also had higher blood levels of certain immune system cells that help the body fight off infection.

To test how much exercise really is required, Dr. Kohut and Justus Hallam, a graduate student in her lab, subsequently repeated the study with lab mice. Some of the mice exercised for 90 minutes on a running wheel, while others ran for either half as much time (45 minutes) or twice as much (3 hours) after receiving a flu shot.

Four weeks later, those animals that, like the students, had exercised moderately for 90 minutes displayed the most robust antibody response. The animals that had run for three hours had fewer antibodies; presumably, exercising for too long can dampen the immune response. Interestingly, those that had run for 45 minutes also had a less robust response. “The 90-minute time point appears to be optimal,” Dr. Kohut says.

Unless, that is, you work out before you are inoculated, another set of studies intimates, and use a dumbbell. In those studies, undertaken at the University of Birmingham in England, healthy, adult volunteers lifted weights for 20 minutes several hours before they were scheduled to receive a flu shot, focusing on the arm that would be injected. Specifically, they completed multiple sets of biceps curls and side arm raises, employing a weight that was 85 percent of the maximum they could lift once. Another group did not exercise before their shot.

After four weeks, the researchers checked for influenza antibodies. They found that those who had exercised before the shot generally displayed higher antibody levels, although the effect was muted among the men, who, as a group, had responded to that year’s flu vaccine more robustly than the women had.

Over all, “we think that exercise can help vaccine response by activating parts of the immune system,” said Kate Edwards, now a lecturer at the University of Sydney, and co-author of the weight-training study.

With the biceps curls, she continued, the exercises probably induced inflammation in the arm muscles, which may have primed the immune response there.

As for 90 minutes of jogging or cycling after the shot, it probably sped blood circulation and pumped the vaccine away from the injection site and to other parts of the body, Dr. Kohut said. The exercise probably also goosed the body’s overall immune system, she said, which, in turn, helped exaggerate the vaccine’s effect.

But, she cautions, data about exercise and flu vaccines is incomplete. It is not clear, for instance, whether there is any advantage to exercising before the shot instead of afterward, or vice versa; or whether doing both might provoke the greatest response – or, alternatively, be too much and weaken response.

So for now, she says, the best course of action is to get a flu shot, since any degree of protection is better than none, and, if you can, also schedule a visit to the gym that same day. If nothing else, spending 90 minutes on a stationary bike will make any small twinges in your arm from the shot itself seem pretty insignificant.

Read More..

Rights Group Reports on Abuses of Surveillance and Censorship Technology

A Canadian human rights monitoring group has documented the use of American-made Internet surveillance and censorship technology by more than a dozen governments, some with harsh human rights policies like Syria, China and Saudi Arabia.

Jakub Dalek of the Munk School of Global Affairs.

Thor Swift for The New York Times

Morgan Marquis-Boire led the research with Mr. Dalek.

The Citizen Lab Internet research group, based at the Munk School of Global Affairs at the University of Toronto, used computer servers to scan for the distinctive signature of gear made by Blue Coat Systems of Sunnyvale, Calif.

It determined that Egypt, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Republic employed a Blue Coat system that could be used for digital censorship. The group also determined that Bahrain, China, India, Indonesia, Iraq, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Malaysia, Nigeria, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Singapore, Thailand, Turkey and Venezuela used equipment that could be used for surveillance and tracking.

The authors said they wanted to alert the public that there was a growing amount of surveillance and content-filtering technology distributed throughout the Internet. The technology is not restricted from export by the State Department, except to countries that are on embargo lists, like Syria, Iran and North Korea.

“Our findings support the need for national and international scrutiny of the country Blue Coat implementations we have identified, and a closer look at the global proliferation of dual-use information and communications technology,” the group noted. “We hope Blue Coat will take this as an opportunity to explain their due diligence process to ensure that their devices are not used in ways that violate human rights.”

A spokesman for Blue Coat Systems said the firm had not seen the final report and was not prepared to comment.

In 2011, several groups, including Telecomix and Citizen Labs, raised concerns that Blue Coat products were being used to find and track opponents of the Syrian government. The company initially denied that its equipment had been sold to Syria, which is subject to United States trade sanctions.

Shortly afterward, Blue Coat reversed itself and acknowledged that the systems were indeed in Syria, but it said that the devices had been shipped to a distributor in Dubai, and said that it thought that they had been destined for the Iraqi Ministry of Communications.

The Citizen Lab research project was led by Morgan Marquis-Boire and Jakub Dalek. Mr. Marquis-Boire, a Google software engineer, has during the last year been involved in a variety of research projects aimed at exposing surveillance tools used by authoritarian regimes. He said that he carefully segregated his work at Google from his human rights research.

Last year, Mr. Marquis-Boire used computer servers to identify the use of an intelligence-oriented surveillance software program, called FinSpy, which was being used by Bahrain to track opposition activists.

On a hunch last month, the researchers used the Shodan search engine, a specialized Internet tool intended to help identify computers and software services that were connected to the Internet. They were able to identify a number of the Blue Coat systems that are used for content filtering and for “deep packet inspection,” a widely used technology for detecting and controlling digital content as it travels through the Internet.

The researchers stressed that they were aware that there were both benign and harmful uses for the Blue Coat products identified as ProxySG, which functions as a Web filter, and a second system, PacketShaper, which can detect about 600 Web applications and can be used to control undesirable Web traffic.

“I’m not trying to completely demonize this technology,” Mr. Marquis-Boire said.

The researchers also noted that the equipment does not directly fall under the dual-use distinction employed by the United States government to control the sale of equipment that has both military and civilian applications, but it can be used for both political and intelligence applications by authoritarian governments.

“Syria is subject to U.S. export sanctions,” said Sarah McKune, a senior researcher at the Citizen Lab. “When it comes to other countries that aren’t subject to U.S. sanctions it’s a more difficult situation. There could still be significant human rights impact.”

The researchers also noted that a large number of American and foreign companies supplied similar gear in what Gartner, the market research firm, described as a $1.02 billion market in a report issued in May 2012.

The researchers said that some American security technology companies, like Websense, had taken strong human rights stands, but had declined to grapple with the issue of the possible misuse of the technology.

This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: January 16, 2013

An earlier version of this article misspelled the surname of a senior researcher at the Citizen Lab Internet research group. She is Sarah McKune, not McCune.

Read More..

SoCal Edison destroyed downed poles before inspection

A state probe into the widespread power outages caused by a furious 2011 windstorm was unable to determine whether toppled utility poles met safety standards because Southern California Edison destroyed most of them before they could be inspected.

The winds that roared through the San Gabriel Valley knocked down hundreds of utility poles, snapped cables and uprooted scores of trees, leaving nearly a quarter of a million Edison customers without power, some for a full week.

In a report released Monday, the California Public Utilities Commission found that at least 21 poles were unstable because of termite destruction, dry rot or other damage before tumbling over in wind gusts of up to 120 mph on Nov. 30 and Dec. 1, 2011.

But more than 75% of the 248 Edison poles that were knocked down in the storm were destroyed by the utility before they could be inspected, a violation of commission rules.

"At the onset of [power] restoration efforts, preservation of failed poles was not made a priority by Southern California Edison," the report says.

Of the 248 poles that failed, partial segments of only about 60 poles were collected and delivered for analysis by commission engineers — the remaining poles were "discarded by SCE staff," according to the report.

Efforts to reconstruct downed poles, many of them sliced into segments smaller than 10 inches, "were immensely hindered by the nature of SCE's collection and cataloging methodology," investigators reported.

Edison workers scattered small pole segments in various collection bins, "making it nearly impossible to determine which failed pole they belonged to," according to investigators.

A spokesman for the utility declined to comment on the report, saying the utility was in the process of formulating a statement.

Commission investigators also found that at least 17 wire pole support systems did not meet safety standards.

The report calls on Edison to update its emergency response procedures and test them on a yearly basis.

Officials will consider formal enforcement actions, including financial penalties, if Edison does not comply.

In a statement Monday, U.S. Rep. Judy Chu (D-Monterey Park) — who represents Pasadena, South Pasadena, San Marino and other San Gabriel Valley cities — called for "immediate action" to ensure the issues raised in the report would not recur.

"This report confirms that by following such regulations and by asking for mutual assistance, power could have been restored more quickly," Chu said.

Former Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, who until recently represented part of the affected area, said the report "confirms what everyone who lived through the windstorm knew from personal experience, that Edison was not prepared and public safety and consumers suffered as a result."

State Sen. Carol Liu (D-La Cañada Flintridge) said the report raises fears that Edison equipment might sustain similar damage in future disasters.

"I am concerned that service and safety doesn't seem to be their priority," said Liu, who is married to California Public Utilities Commission President Michael Peevey.

The report comes less than a year after an Edison-commission study determined the utility had inadequate plans in place for emergencies and communicating with the public. The study, by Maryland-based Davies Consulting, also said the utility could have shortened power restoration time by one day or more by doing a better job of tracking and preparing for bad weather.

At the same time, the consultant commended Edison for having adequate staffing and managing a response that left no workers or customers injured.

joe.piasecki@latimes.com

Read More..

A Google-a-Day Puzzle for Jan. 15

Our good friends at Google run a daily puzzle challenge and asked us to help get them out to the geeky masses. Each day’s puzzle will task your googling skills a little more, leading you to Google mastery. Each morning at 12:01 a.m. Eastern time you’ll see a new puzzle posted here.

SPOILER WARNING:
We leave the comments on so people can work together to find the answer. As such, if you want to figure it out all by yourself, DON’T READ THE COMMENTS!

Also, with the knowledge that because others may publish their answers before you do, if you want to be able to search for information without accidentally seeing the answer somewhere, you can use the Google-a-Day site’s search tool, which will automatically filter out published answers, to give you a spoiler-free experience.

And now, without further ado, we give you…

TODAY’S PUZZLE:

Note: Ad-blocking software may prevent display of the puzzle widget.

Ken is a husband and father from the San Francisco Bay Area, where he works as a civil engineer. He also wrote the NYT bestselling book "Geek Dad: Awesomely Geeky Projects for Dads and Kids to Share."

Read more by Ken Denmead

Follow @fitzwillie and @wiredgeekdad on Twitter.

Read More..

Will.i.am on top as Bowie returns to UK charts

LONDON (Reuters) – U.S. producer will.i.am’s collaboration with Britney Spears topped the British pop charts on Sunday as David Bowie notched up his first top 10 single in two decades with his surprise new release.

Launched without warning on Bowie’s 66th birthday, the single “Where Are We Now?” caused widespread media interest, and charted in sixth place despite only having been available for five days.

It was his first new song in almost a decade and produced his best chart performance since 1986, when he reached number two with “Absolute Beginners”, the Official Charts Company said.

Topping the chart was “Scream and Shout” by will.i.am, featuring Britney Spears, giving her a first British number one since 2004.

U.S. country-pop star Taylor Swift‘s “I Knew You Were Trouble” moved up to second, with James Arthur, winner of the British version of the “X Factor” TV talent show last year, dropping from first to third with “Impossible”.

In the album chart, singer Emeli Sandé returned to number one with “Our Version of Events”, which has now spent 48 consecutive weeks in the Top 10.

Last week’s chart-topper “18 Months” by Scottish producer and singer Calvin Harris dropped to second place, and English singer Jake Bugg rose a place to third with his eponymous album.

R&B star Rihanna climbed three to fourth with “Unapologetic”. The only new entry in the top 10 was the soundtrack from the Oscar-nominated film musical “Les Miserables”, which debuted in fifth.

(Reporting by Michael Holden; Editing by Kevin Liffey)

Music News Headlines – Yahoo! News

Title Post: Will.i.am on top as Bowie returns to UK charts
Url Post: http://www.news.fluser.com/will-i-am-on-top-as-bowie-returns-to-uk-charts/
Link To Post : Will.i.am on top as Bowie returns to UK charts
Rating:
100%

based on 99998 ratings.
5 user reviews.
Author: Fluser SeoLink
Thanks for visiting the blog, If any criticism and suggestions please leave a comment

Read More..

Well: Turning to the Web for a Medical Diagnosis

Thirty-five percent of American adults said they have used the Internet to diagnose a medical condition for themselves or someone else, according to a new Pew Research Center study. Women are more likely than men to turn to the Internet for diagnoses. Other groups more likely to do so are younger people, white adults, people with college degrees and those who live in households with income above $75,000.

The study, released by Pew’s Internet and American Life Project on Tuesday, points out that Americans have always tried to answer their health questions at home, but that the Internet has expanded the options for research. Previous surveys have asked questions about online diagnoses, but the Pew study was the first to focus on the topic with a nationally representative sample, said Susannah Fox, an associate director at Pew Internet. Surveyors interviewed 3,014 American adults by telephone, from August to September 2012.

Of the one in three Americans who used the Internet for a diagnosis, about a third said they did not go to a doctor to get a professional medical opinion, while 41 percent said a doctor confirmed their diagnosis. Eighteen percent said a doctor did not agree with their diagnosis. As far as where people start when researching health conditions online, 77 percent said they started at a search engine like Google, Bing or Yahoo, while 13 percent said they began at a site that specializes in health information.

Read More..

Chuck Hagel's opponents switched gears

WASHINGTON — For all the controversy over President Obama's choice for Defense secretary, many of Chuck Hagel's most outspoken critics were for the former Nebraska senator before they were against him.

In 2006, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who forged a close bond with Hagel over their shared service in Vietnam and penchant for bucking the Republican establishment, said, "I'd be honored to have Chuck with me in any capacity."

In 2007, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell acknowledged that many of Hagel's dire predictions about the Iraq war had come true. He praised Hagel at an Omaha fundraiser as "one of the premier foreign policy voices" and "one of the giants in the United States Senate."

Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) worked with Hagel for years on efforts to ease the embargo against Cuba and promote trade policies to help Midwestern farmers. He tolerated playful ribbing from Hagel when the University of Nebraska beat Kansas schools in football.

Now, McCain says he worries about his fellow Republican's "worldview." McConnell said, "I'm going to take a look at all the things that Chuck has said over the years and review that … in terms of his qualifications to lead our nation's military." And Roberts has said flatly that he won't back his onetime friend for the Pentagon post, citing "a lot of concern about Chuck."

Several factors are behind the opposition to Hagel, including the anger he caused among many Republicans by criticizing the George W. Bush administration's Iraq policies and by endorsing some Democrats for office.

At least in public, the opposition to his nomination has focused on remarks he's made on Israel and Iran, particularly one 2006 interview in which he said the "Jewish lobby intimidates a lot of people" in Congress. Critics have objected to his referring to the lobbying as "Jewish" rather than "pro-Israel."

Supporters note that Israeli leaders haven't voiced any such worries about Hagel, who has often called Israel "a close friend and ally." They say he's been the victim of a U.S. political landscape that has become not only more partisan but less tolerant of criticism of Israel. Particularly on the Republican side of the aisle, unwavering support for Israeli policies has become a litmus test over the last decade.

"The debate about the U.S. relationship with Israel has certainly moved to the right," said Bob Kerrey, a Nebraska Democrat who served alongside Hagel in the Senate until 2001. "You could oppose settlements in the 1990s," he said, referring to Israelis building on land beyond Israel's 1968 borders. "Not anymore."

A review of Hagel's history shows a worldview, particularly on the Middle East, that does not fit easily into current political divisions.

Shaped by a tour in Vietnam — where mine explosions left him with burns and shrapnel lodged in his chest — Hagel, 66, has long been a reliable if sometimes blunt voice for caution in using military force. He has called for engaging with America's enemies instead of isolating them and for a healthy but restrained defense budget.

He first ran for the Senate in 1996 on a pledge to increase defense spending, which had been cut sharply after the end of the Cold War. By the time he ran for his second term, defense spending had begun to soar in the buildup after the Sept. 11 attacks. In recent years he's called the Pentagon budget "bloated."

Hagel had been in the Senate barely a year when, during a Foreign Relations Committee hearing in 1998, he cited a "perception in the Arab world that we've tilted way too far toward Israel in the Middle East peace process."

But at the same time he was building ties to Israeli leaders. In December 2000, a surge of deadly violence threatened President Clinton's bid to seal an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal in the final weeks of his presidency. At the request of the incoming Bush administration, Hagel carried an urgent message to Israeli leaders.

In a private meeting at the Israeli defense ministry, Hagel assured embattled Prime Minister Ehud Barak that Bush would support the peace deal if he signed it. It was a crucial promise from the American president-elect, who was then little known in the Middle East. In the end, Palestinian opposition killed the peace bid.

Martin Indyk, then-U.S. ambassador to Israel and the only other person in the meeting, said Hagel was "very sensitive, sympathetic and most of all supportive. He helped to calm Barak."

In recent years, Hagel has rejected unilateral sanctions against Iran, arguing that they only inflame anger in the Muslim world, but has said he supports sanctions imposed in concert with U.S. allies. He has argued against military action to stop Iran from building a nuclear weapon but, in a September opinion article in the Washington Post, called for "keeping all options on the table, including the use of military force."

That skepticism about sanctions has a long history with Hagel. In 2001, he was one of two senators to vote "no" on renewing unilateral U.S. sanctions against Iran and Libya.

"Somebody has to give another point of view here," Hagel said at a Senate Banking Committee hearing in which he questioned whether the sanctions worked.

But at the same hearing, he invoked Israel's needs, saying, "I don't think you bring more security to Israel by this kind of policy — which, again, unless you can tell me otherwise, has not produced any results."

In a 2006 speech at the Brookings Institution, Hagel criticized U.S. boycotts of talks with Hamas, Iran, Syria and other foes, saying that approach impeded efforts to end crises in the region.

"I don't know how the world has gotten better" by the U.S. refusal to talk, he said. "Things have gotten worse by any measure. And so it tells me that we'd better take some serious review of our current policy."

Many of Hagel's words echo those of Obama, who, like many Israeli military leaders, is said to be reluctant to launch a military strike on Iran. Obama has imposed tough sanctions on Iran but resisted more severe measures pushed by some in Congress because they could weaken a broad coalition of nations — including China — that backs the measures currently in place.

Hagel's supporters say that in his two terms in the Senate — he now serves as chairman of the Atlantic Council, a think tank that promotes multilateralism — he was a consistent realist.

"The principles he came away with from Vietnam are still there," said Charlyne Berens, a University of Nebraska-Lincoln journalism professor who wrote a 2006 biography on Hagel. "He's been saying these things for more than a decade."

shashank.bengali@latimes.com

Read More..