The Trump administration is now growing more alarmed at Beijing’s spying activities at US educational and research institutes, as Chinese Communist Party intensifies its efforts to make strides, at any cost, in American scientific research fields.

Trump administration last month announced that they may soon expel thousands of Chinese graduate students enrolled at universities in the US.

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-xi-jinpings-personal-link-with-harvard-university-306144/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

In the latest sign of tensions between the United States and Beijing over trade, the coronavirus pandemic, human rights and the status of Hong Kong, at least 54 scientists who received grants from the National Institutes of Health have been fired for failing to disclose their ties to foreign governments, particularly with China.

According to reports, China has enhanced its endeavours to put its researchers into delicate US-supported research programs. Once in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) framework, these researchers can steal research information and send it back to China, where it very well may be utilized to support the Communist system.

Chinese President Xi Jinping's daughter Xi Mingze had studied psychology and English at Harvard University between 2010 and 2014 and lived under an assumed name.

The Harvard university made exceptions for her, Xi Jinping promised millions of dollars in endowments and walked the talk when he came to power. Since 2013 -- Harvard university has been the biggest recipient of money from China almost 100 million dollars.

But China's first daughter is not its only link to Harvard, there are big money and shady ties. So much so, that Harvard is under investigation for not disclosing foreign funding.

A grand jury indicted a Harvard professor Charles Lieber for lies to government officials over links to China, the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) and the Wuhan coronavirus.

Lieber had a relationship with the Wuhan University of Technology while also chairing Harvard University’s Department of Chemistry.

Xi Jinping has been using his ties with Harvard to get coronavirus research. China is said to have donated 115 million dollars for a project involving scientists from both China and Harvard.

This is according to Harvard university's official news outlet -- the Harvard gazette. The department of education -- which is investigating Harvard -- has accused the university of lacking appropriate university controls. The department has warned Harvard and other such institutions with a direct line to Beijing. Chinese money comes with strings that can compromise academic freedom...

Some 360,000 Chinese nationals who attend US schools annually generate economic activity of about $14 billion, largely from tuitions and other fees.&nbsp;

The Trump administration is now growing more alarmed at Beijing’s spying activities at US educational and research institutes, as Chinese Communist Party intensifies its efforts to make strides, at any cost, in American scientific research fields.

The Trump administration is now growing more alarmed at Beijing’s spying activities at US educational and research institutes, as Chinese Communist Party intensifies its efforts to make strides, at any cost, in American scientific research fields. Trump administration last month announced that they may soon expel thousands of Chinese graduate students enrolled at universities in the US. In the latest sign of tensions between the United States and Beijing over trade, the coronavirus pandemic, human rights and the status of Hong Kong, at least 54 scientists who received grants from the National Institutes of Health have been fired for failing to disclose their ties to foreign governments, particularly with China. According to reports, China has enhanced its endeavours to put its researchers into delicate US-supported research programs. Once in the National Institutes of Health (NIH) framework, these researchers can steal research information and send it back to China, where it very well may be utilized to support the Communist system. Chinese President Xi Jinping's daughter Xi Mingze had studied psychology and English at Harvard University between 2010 and 2014 and lived under an assumed name. The Harvard university made exceptions for her, Xi Jinping promised millions of dollars in endowments and walked the talk when he came to power. Since 2013 -- Harvard university has been the biggest recipient of money from China almost 100 million dollars. But China's first daughter is not its only link to Harvard, there are big money and shady ties. So much so, that Harvard is under investigation for not disclosing foreign funding. A grand jury indicted a Harvard professor Charles Lieber for lies to government officials over links to China, the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) and the Wuhan coronavirus. Lieber had a relationship with the Wuhan University of Technology while also chairing Harvard University’s Department of Chemistry. Xi Jinping has been using his ties with Harvard to get coronavirus research. China is said to have donated 115 million dollars for a project involving scientists from both China and Harvard. This is according to Harvard university's official news outlet -- the Harvard gazette. The department of education -- which is investigating Harvard -- has accused the university of lacking appropriate university controls. The department has warned Harvard and other such institutions with a direct line to Beijing. Chinese money comes with strings that can compromise academic freedom... Some 360,000 Chinese nationals who attend US schools annually generate economic activity of about $14 billion, largely from tuitions and other fees.

Trump administration scouring US universities for evidence of China infiltration

The American engineering and robotics design company - Boston Dynamics - has recently announced that its quadruped Spot robot is already being used to help with COVID-19 treatment.

The basic purpose behind the initiative is to reduce the infection rates seen among medical personnel by shifting to the practice of telemedicine.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/spain-confirms-288-new-coronavirus-deaths-lowest-in-a-month-294846">Also read:&nbsp;Spain confirms 288 new coronavirus deaths, lowest in a month</a>

The hospital, Brigham And Women's Hospital of Harvard University, has been using a Spot unit since last week for remote triage of patients suspected of having COVID-19.

"Today marks the second week of Spot's presence at a local Boston hospital, Brigham and Women's, where the robot is being deployed as a mobile telemedicine platform, enabling healthcare providers to remotely triage patients," The Verge quoted the company's statement.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/coronavirus-in-italy-pm-giuseppe-conte-vows-to-reopen-schools-in-september-294855">Also read:&nbsp;Coronavirus in Italy: PM Giuseppe Conte vows to reopen schools in September</a>

"We're listening to their feedback on how Spot can do more but are encouraged by their reports that using the robot has helped their nursing staff minimize time exposed to potentially contagious patients," the statement further read.

At present, Spot is currently used to video conference with suspected patients for the initial assessment. (ANI)

The American engineering and robotics design company - Boston Dynamics - has recently announced that its quadruped Spot robot is already being used to help with COVID-19 treatment.

The American engineering and robotics design company - Boston Dynamics - has recently announced that its quadruped Spot robot is already being used to help with COVID-19 treatment. The basic purpose behind the initiative is to reduce the infection rates seen among medical personnel by shifting to the practice of telemedicine. Also read: Spain confirms 288 new coronavirus deaths, lowest in a month The hospital, Brigham And Women's Hospital of Harvard University, has been using a Spot unit since last week for remote triage of patients suspected of having COVID-19. "Today marks the second week of Spot's presence at a local Boston hospital, Brigham and Women's, where the robot is being deployed as a mobile telemedicine platform, enabling healthcare providers to remotely triage patients," The Verge quoted the company's statement. Also read: Coronavirus in Italy: PM Giuseppe Conte vows to reopen schools in September "We're listening to their feedback on how Spot can do more but are encouraged by their reports that using the robot has helped their nursing staff minimize time exposed to potentially contagious patients," the statement further read. At present, Spot is currently used to video conference with suspected patients for the initial assessment. (ANI)

Boston Dynamics' Spot robot helping doctors 'remotely' combat COVID-19

United States President Donald Trump has insisted that Harvard, the world's wealthiest university, pay back millions it received under a massive government stimulus package meant to cushion the economy from the coronavirus pandemic.

"Harvard, you pay that money back. I want Harvard to pay the money back, okay? And if they don't do that, then we'll do something else," Trump said at his daily briefing on the pandemic on Tuesday.

"I don't like it at all. This is meant for workers. This isn't meant for one of the richest institutions ... In the world," the president continued.

The Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university, to this end, tweeted it was allocated USD 8.6 million as part of the historic USD 2.2 trillion package passed last month to stimulate the collapsing US economy.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
(1/5) Harvard did not apply for, nor has it received any funds through the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) for small businesses. Reports saying otherwise are inaccurate.
— Harvard University (@Harvard) <a href="https://twitter.com/Harvard/status/1252737743567888387?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 21, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
(3/5) Like most colleges and universities, Harvard has been allocated funds as part of the CARES Act Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund.
— Harvard University (@Harvard) <a href="https://twitter.com/Harvard/status/1252737745606369281?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 21, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
(5/5) This financial assistance will be on top of the support the University has already provided to students – including assistance with travel, providing direct aid for living expenses to those with need, and supporting students’ transition to online education.
— Harvard University (@Harvard) <a href="https://twitter.com/Harvard/status/1252737747414106118?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 21, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

It said 100 per cent of the funds would be given to students "facing urgent financial needs due to the COVID-19 pandemic", and stressed that the money did not fall under the Paycheck Protection Programme for small business relief.

The Department of Education was to receive USD 30.8 billion to support schools and universities, which are closed across the country, under the stimulus package.

The Harvard Crimson reported on Tuesday that the university's endowment, the largest of any in the world, was last valued in 2019 at USD 40.9 billion -- though it cited administrators as saying that may have declined to the "mid 30-billion range" as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

United States President Donald Trump has insisted that Harvard, the world's wealthiest university, pay back millions it received under a massive government stimulus package meant to cushion the economy from the coronavirus pandemic.

United States President Donald Trump has insisted that Harvard, the world's wealthiest university, pay back millions it received under a massive government stimulus package meant to cushion the economy from the coronavirus pandemic. "Harvard, you pay that money back. I want Harvard to pay the money back, okay? And if they don't do that, then we'll do something else," Trump said at his daily briefing on the pandemic on Tuesday. "I don't like it at all. This is meant for workers. This isn't meant for one of the richest institutions ... In the world," the president continued. The Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university, to this end, tweeted it was allocated USD 8.6 million as part of the historic USD 2.2 trillion package passed last month to stimulate the collapsing US economy. (1/5) Harvard did not apply for, nor has it received any funds through the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) for small businesses. Reports saying otherwise are inaccurate. — Harvard University (@Harvard) April 21, 2020 × (3/5) Like most colleges and universities, Harvard has been allocated funds as part of the CARES Act Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund. — Harvard University (@Harvard) April 21, 2020 × (5/5) This financial assistance will be on top of the support the University has already provided to students – including assistance with travel, providing direct aid for living expenses to those with need, and supporting students’ transition to online education. — Harvard University (@Harvard) April 21, 2020 × It said 100 per cent of the funds would be given to students "facing urgent financial needs due to the COVID-19 pandemic", and stressed that the money did not fall under the Paycheck Protection Programme for small business relief. The Department of Education was to receive USD 30.8 billion to support schools and universities, which are closed across the country, under the stimulus package. The Harvard Crimson reported on Tuesday that the university's endowment, the largest of any in the world, was last valued in 2019 at USD 40.9 billion -- though it cited administrators as saying that may have declined to the "mid 30-billion range" as a result of the coronavirus pandemic.

Trump not happy over Harvard receiving millions in coronavirus aid, wants it back

A one-time lockdown won't halt the novel coronavirus and repeated periods of social distancing may be required into 2022 to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed, Harvard scientists who modeled the pandemic's trajectory said Tuesday.

Their study comes as the US enters the peak of its COVID-19 caseload and states eye an eventual easing of tough lockdown measures.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-announces-funding-halt-to-world-health-organisation-292533" hreflang="en">Trump announces funding halt to World Health Organisation</a>

The Harvard team's computer simulation, which was published in a paper in the journal Science, assumed that COVID-19 will become seasonal, like closely related coronaviruses that cause the common cold, with higher transmission rates in colder months.

But much remains unknown, including the level of immunity acquired by previous infection and how long it lasts, the authors said.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/not-the-time-to-reduce-the-resources-of-who-un-chief-292537" hreflang="en">'Not the time to reduce the resources' of WHO: UN chief</a>

"We found that one-time social distancing measures are likely to be insufficient to maintain the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 within&nbsp; the limits of critical care capacity in the United States," lead author Stephen Kissler said in a call with reporters.&nbsp;

"What seems to be necessary in the absence of other sorts of treatments are intermittent social distancing periods," he added.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-treasury-airlines-reach-deal-on-aid-to-avoid-bankruptcy-amid-coronavirus-pandemic-292536" hreflang="en">US Treasury, airlines reach deal on aid to avoid bankruptcy amid coronavirus pandemic</a>

Widespread viral testing would be required in order to determine when the thresholds to re-trigger distancing are crossed, said the authors.

The duration and intensity of lockdowns can be relaxed as treatments and vaccines become available. But in their absence, on and then off distancing would give hospitals time to increase critical care capacity to cater for the surge in cases that would occur when the measures are eased.

"By permitting periods of transmission that reach higher prevalence than otherwise would be possible, they allow an accelerated acquisition of herd immunity," said co-author Marc Lipsitch.

Conversely, too much social distancing without respite can be a bad thing. Under one modeled scenario "the social distancing was so effective that virtually no population immunity is built," the paper said, hence the need for an intermittent approach.

The authors acknowledged a major drawback in their model is how little we currently know about how strong a previously infected person's immunity is and how long it lasts.

At present the best guesses based on closely-related coronaviruses are that it will confer some immunity, for up to about a year. There might also be some cross-protective immunity against COVID-19 if a person is infected by a common cold-causing betacoronavirus.

One thing however is almost certain: the virus is here to stay. The team said it was highly unlikely that immunity will be strong enough and last long enough that COVID-19 will die out after an initial wave, as was the case with the SARS outbreak of 2002-2003.

A one-time lockdown won't halt the novel coronavirus and repeated periods of social distancing may be required into 2022 to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed, Harvard scientists who modeled the pandemic's trajectory said Tuesday.

A one-time lockdown won't halt the novel coronavirus and repeated periods of social distancing may be required into 2022 to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed, Harvard scientists who modeled the pandemic's trajectory said Tuesday. Their study comes as the US enters the peak of its COVID-19 caseload and states eye an eventual easing of tough lockdown measures. Also read: Trump announces funding halt to World Health Organisation The Harvard team's computer simulation, which was published in a paper in the journal Science, assumed that COVID-19 will become seasonal, like closely related coronaviruses that cause the common cold, with higher transmission rates in colder months. But much remains unknown, including the level of immunity acquired by previous infection and how long it lasts, the authors said. Also read: 'Not the time to reduce the resources' of WHO: UN chief "We found that one-time social distancing measures are likely to be insufficient to maintain the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 within the limits of critical care capacity in the United States," lead author Stephen Kissler said in a call with reporters. "What seems to be necessary in the absence of other sorts of treatments are intermittent social distancing periods," he added. Also read: US Treasury, airlines reach deal on aid to avoid bankruptcy amid coronavirus pandemic Widespread viral testing would be required in order to determine when the thresholds to re-trigger distancing are crossed, said the authors. The duration and intensity of lockdowns can be relaxed as treatments and vaccines become available. But in their absence, on and then off distancing would give hospitals time to increase critical care capacity to cater for the surge in cases that would occur when the measures are eased. "By permitting periods of transmission that reach higher prevalence than otherwise would be possible, they allow an accelerated acquisition of herd immunity," said co-author Marc Lipsitch. Conversely, too much social distancing without respite can be a bad thing. Under one modeled scenario "the social distancing was so effective that virtually no population immunity is built," the paper said, hence the need for an intermittent approach. The authors acknowledged a major drawback in their model is how little we currently know about how strong a previously infected person's immunity is and how long it lasts. At present the best guesses based on closely-related coronaviruses are that it will confer some immunity, for up to about a year. There might also be some cross-protective immunity against COVID-19 if a person is infected by a common cold-causing betacoronavirus. One thing however is almost certain: the virus is here to stay. The team said it was highly unlikely that immunity will be strong enough and last long enough that COVID-19 will die out after an initial wave, as was the case with the SARS outbreak of 2002-2003.

On-off social distancing may be needed until 2022: Harvard study

A video is making a lot of buzz which claims that the US has found the man who made and sold coronavirus to China. Doctor Charles Lieber, a Harvard professor, was blamed in the video for sending the coronavirus which has become humanity's greatest tragedy since the second world war.&nbsp;

However, it turns out, that the video is fake and old and WION confirmed the video's veracity was before on January 29.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Gravitas?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Gravitas</a> | Dr Charles Lieber was allegedly setting up a lab in Wuhan. He was arrested by the American authorities earlier this year. 
Is the arrest of a Harvard professor somehow linked to the Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak? <a href="https://twitter.com/palkisu?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@palkisu</a> brings you a fact check. <a href="https://t.co/GWZ9uEB33w">pic.twitter.com/GWZ9uEB33w</a>
— WION (@WIONews) <a href="https://twitter.com/WIONews/status/1247238142094200833?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 6, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

So who is Dr. Lieber and what is his story?

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/coronavirus-new-york-shutdown-extended-till-april-29-as-us-death-toll-crosses-10000-290979">Coronavirus: New York shutdown extended till April 29 as US death toll crosses 10,000</a>

Lieber is a nanoscientist, who develops small or nanomaterials. He heads Harvard University's Chemistry and Biology department and has been affiliated with the university since 1991.&nbsp;

The doctor is arrested, but not on April 5 as claimed in the video but this January.&nbsp;

He has been charged not for coronavirus, but for aiding China in a case of financial conflict of interest.&nbsp;

In China, there is an assistance program called "Thousand Talent Plans" for aiding foreign experts, who bring knowledge to the country.

Reportedly, the program also rewards individuals who steal proprietary information.

The complaint against Lieber says that he lied to Harvard and the government about his involvement with the Talents Plan. It says that Lieber was associated with the program from at least 2012 to 2017. His contract included a salary as high as $5000 a month, living expenses of nearly $150,000 per year and another $1.5 million for the establishment of a lab at the Wuhan Institute of Technology.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

A video is making a lot of buzz which claims that the US has found the man who made and sold coronavirus to China. Doctor Charles Lieber, a Harvard professor, was blamed in the video for sending the coronavirus which has become humanity's greatest tragedy since the second world war.

A video is making a lot of buzz which claims that the US has found the man who made and sold coronavirus to China. Doctor Charles Lieber, a Harvard professor, was blamed in the video for sending the coronavirus which has become humanity's greatest tragedy since the second world war. However, it turns out, that the video is fake and old and WION confirmed the video's veracity was before on January 29. #Gravitas | Dr Charles Lieber was allegedly setting up a lab in Wuhan. He was arrested by the American authorities earlier this year. Is the arrest of a Harvard professor somehow linked to the Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak? @palkisu brings you a fact check. pic.twitter.com/GWZ9uEB33w — WION (@WIONews) April 6, 2020 × So who is Dr. Lieber and what is his story? Also read | Coronavirus: New York shutdown extended till April 29 as US death toll crosses 10,000 Lieber is a nanoscientist, who develops small or nanomaterials. He heads Harvard University's Chemistry and Biology department and has been affiliated with the university since 1991. The doctor is arrested, but not on April 5 as claimed in the video but this January. He has been charged not for coronavirus, but for aiding China in a case of financial conflict of interest. In China, there is an assistance program called "Thousand Talent Plans" for aiding foreign experts, who bring knowledge to the country. Reportedly, the program also rewards individuals who steal proprietary information. The complaint against Lieber says that he lied to Harvard and the government about his involvement with the Talents Plan. It says that Lieber was associated with the program from at least 2012 to 2017. His contract included a salary as high as $5000 a month, living expenses of nearly $150,000 per year and another $1.5 million for the establishment of a lab at the Wuhan Institute of Technology.

WION fact check: Did Harvard doctor sell coronavirus to China?

Scientists have discovered why does <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/therapy-dogs-bring-stress-relief-to-travellers-at-moscow-airport-271410">stress</a> speed up the process of hair turning grey in a recent <a href="https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/01/200122135313.htm">study</a> conducted by <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/harvard-university-says-it-accepted-gifts-from-epstein-before-2008-sex-crime-conviction-249528">Harvard University</a>.

The researchers say they might have also discovered a potential way of preventing it from happening without using the dye.

The study highlights how stem cell depletes throughout the body due to ageing.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
A study on graying hair offers new insights into how stress can impact the body <a href="https://t.co/ridoNYXqFC">https://t.co/ridoNYXqFC</a>
— Harvard University (@Harvard) <a href="https://twitter.com/Harvard/status/1220047316398243841?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 22, 2020</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Researchers discovered that in the case of mice, ''permanent damaged is caused to the pigment which regenerates stem cells in the hair follicle by the kind of nerve involved in their fight-or-flight mechanism''.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/harnessing-immune-system-can-help-in-curing-all-types-of-cancers-study-275712">Newly discovered immune cell could help kill all types of cancers: Study</a>

For the research, the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/mice-are-smarter-than-you-think-2627">mice</a>&nbsp;were restrained for four hours a day and five days a week.

Combinations of rapid change in lighting, damp bedding and tilting their cages were done in the research.

Initially, scientists suspected this triggered an immune attack on cells which produced hair pigment.

But they had to rule it out when the hair of mice without an <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/harnessing-immune-system-can-help-in-curing-all-types-of-cancers-study-275712">immune</a>&nbsp;still turned grey.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/health-and-wellness/genetics-act-as-basis-for-anxiety-study-273326">Genetics foundation of anxiety and depression: Study</a>

Eventually, the researchers&nbsp;discovered that it was stress that caused the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/nsg-commandos-to-undertake-regular-yoga-psychological-tests-31359">sympathetic nervous system</a> to pump out a hormone called noradrenaline.

This hormone transforms a huge number of stem cells into melanocytes and makes them drift away from the hair follicle due to which there are insufficient or no stem cells left.

It is because of this reason that hair does not regenerate.

This study proved that intense stress damaged the stem cells that control the colour of hair and skin.

Scientists have discovered why does stress speed up the process of hair turning grey in a recent study conducted by Harvard University. The researchers say they might have also discovered a potential way of preventing it from happening without using the dye.

Scientists have discovered why does stress speed up the process of hair turning grey in a recent study conducted by Harvard University. The researchers say they might have also discovered a potential way of preventing it from happening without using the dye. The study highlights how stem cell depletes throughout the body due to ageing. A study on graying hair offers new insights into how stress can impact the body https://t.co/ridoNYXqFC — Harvard University (@Harvard) January 22, 2020 × Researchers discovered that in the case of mice, ''permanent damaged is caused to the pigment which regenerates stem cells in the hair follicle by the kind of nerve involved in their fight-or-flight mechanism''. Also read: Newly discovered immune cell could help kill all types of cancers: Study For the research, the mice were restrained for four hours a day and five days a week. Combinations of rapid change in lighting, damp bedding and tilting their cages were done in the research. Initially, scientists suspected this triggered an immune attack on cells which produced hair pigment. But they had to rule it out when the hair of mice without an immune still turned grey. Also read: Genetics foundation of anxiety and depression: Study Eventually, the researchers discovered that it was stress that caused the sympathetic nervous system to pump out a hormone called noradrenaline. This hormone transforms a huge number of stem cells into melanocytes and makes them drift away from the hair follicle due to which there are insufficient or no stem cells left. It is because of this reason that hair does not regenerate. This study proved that intense stress damaged the stem cells that control the colour of hair and skin.

Stress is making your hair turn grey: Study

Nobel laureate TS Eliot’s love letters to scholar Emily Hale were released on Thursday amid fevered speculation and under tight security at an elegant library on the campus of the Ivy League’s Princeton University.

Nobel laureate TS Eliot’s love letters to scholar Emily Hale were released on Thursday amid fevered speculation and under tight security at an elegant library on the campus of the Ivy League’s Princeton University. Hale, the great poet’s muse and source of “supernatural ecstasy” for more than 30 years, has long been the fascination of Eliot scholars but remained hidden, on both the poet and Hale’s wishes, for 50 years after Hale’s death in 1969. The Nobel laureate met Hale when both were studying at Harvard University in 1912. The letters reveal that his feelings for her were intense and later were reciprocated by the younger Hale – but despite this, their love was ultimately and heartbreakingly thwarted. Hale has long been understood to be the inspiration for some of Eliot’s most breathtaking verse, including the first lines from Burnt Norton, the first poem of his Four Quartets.

TS Eliot’s hidden love letters to muse released after 60 years 

Harvard University expressed remorse on Friday for accepting millions of dollars in gifts from <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/jeffrey-epstein-accusers-detail-sexual-abuse-claims-in-emotional-court-hearing-246133">Jeffrey Epstein</a> in the years before his 2008 sex crimes conviction and said it regretted its association with the disgraced financier.

Harvard President Lawrence Bacow said Epstein donated about $9 million to the university between 1998 and 2007 before Epstein pleaded guilty to prostitution charges in 2008. Harvard said it knowingly rejected a gift from Epstein in 2008 following his conviction, but that its internal review is still ongoing.

"Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes were repulsive and reprehensible," Bacow said in a letter addressed the university community. "I profoundly regret Harvard’s past association with him."

The university's statement came a day after revelations that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology had accepted gifts from Epstein after his Florida conviction on prostitution so long as the donations remained anonymous.

MIT's president acknowledged the donations on Thursday and said he signed a thank-you letter to Epstein in 2012.

Harvard added that it will donate the total unspent balance of $186,000 to organizations that support victims of human trafficking and sexual assault.

"This is an unusual step for the university, but we have decided it is the proper course of action under the circumstances of Epstein’s egregiously repugnant crimes," Bacow said.

Epstein was arrested on July 6 on federal charges for sex trafficking. Prosecutors said he recruited dozens of underage girls to give him massages and then sexually abused them. Epstein pleaded not guilty.

The wealthy 66-year-old money manager was found dead on Aug. 10 in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Lower Manhattan. An autopsy concluded that he hanged himself.

Harvard University expressed remorse on Friday for accepting millions of dollars in gifts from Jeffrey Epstein in the years before his 2008 sex crimes conviction and said it regretted its association with the disgraced financier.

Harvard University expressed remorse on Friday for accepting millions of dollars in gifts from Jeffrey Epstein in the years before his 2008 sex crimes conviction and said it regretted its association with the disgraced financier. Harvard President Lawrence Bacow said Epstein donated about $9 million to the university between 1998 and 2007 before Epstein pleaded guilty to prostitution charges in 2008. Harvard said it knowingly rejected a gift from Epstein in 2008 following his conviction, but that its internal review is still ongoing. "Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes were repulsive and reprehensible," Bacow said in a letter addressed the university community. "I profoundly regret Harvard’s past association with him." The university's statement came a day after revelations that the Massachusetts Institute of Technology had accepted gifts from Epstein after his Florida conviction on prostitution so long as the donations remained anonymous. MIT's president acknowledged the donations on Thursday and said he signed a thank-you letter to Epstein in 2012. Harvard added that it will donate the total unspent balance of $186,000 to organizations that support victims of human trafficking and sexual assault. "This is an unusual step for the university, but we have decided it is the proper course of action under the circumstances of Epstein’s egregiously repugnant crimes," Bacow said. Epstein was arrested on July 6 on federal charges for sex trafficking. Prosecutors said he recruited dozens of underage girls to give him massages and then sexually abused them. Epstein pleaded not guilty. The wealthy 66-year-old money manager was found dead on Aug. 10 in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Lower Manhattan. An autopsy concluded that he hanged himself.

Harvard University says it accepted gifts from Epstein before 2008 sex-crime conviction

&nbsp;A Harvard law professor who joined the legal team defending Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein against sexual assault charges will not be allowed to continue as dean of a residential house on campus, a university official said on Saturday.&nbsp;

The Ivy League university`s move to end the role of law professor Ronald Sullivan Jr and law school lecturer Stephanie Robinson, Sullivan`s wife, at Winthrop House follows protests over his representation of Weinstein.

Sullivan and Robinson in 2009 became the first African-American faculty deans in Harvard history when they took their positions at Winthrop House, one of several undergraduate residences at the Cambridge, Massachusetts, university.

Their terms as faculty deans were scheduled to end on June 30. Harvard College Dean Rakesh Khurana said in a statement that he had decided not to keep them in their roles at Winthrop House beyond that date.&nbsp;

"Over the last few weeks, students and staff have continued to communicate concerns about the climate in Winthrop House to the college," Khurana said.

"The concerns expressed have been serious and numerous. The actions that have been taken to improve the climate have been ineffective, and the noticeable lack of faculty dean presence during critical moments has further deteriorated the climate in the house," Khurana said.

Khurana has previously said Sullivan`s decision to join Weinstein`s legal team was a matter of academic freedom and that everyone is entitled to a vigorous legal defence. Sullivan and Robinson continue to hold their positions at Harvard Law School.

Sullivan and Robinson said in a joint statement that they were "surprised and dismayed" by the decision.

"We believed the discussions we were having with high-level university representatives were progressing in a positive manner, but Harvard unilaterally ended those talks," they said.&nbsp;

In January, a judge approved Weinstein`s request to have Sullivan join his legal team.

Prosecutors in New York accuse Weinstein, 67, of forcibly performing oral sex on a woman in 2006 and raping another woman in 2013.

Weinstein faces five criminal charges, including rape, and could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted.

He has pleaded not guilty to the charges.&nbsp;

More than 70 women have accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct. He has denied all accusations and said any contact was consensual.

Students at Winthrop House staged a sit-in this month to protest Sullivan`s defence of Weinstein, according to a report at the time in the Harvard Crimson student newspaper. Students denounced Sullivan in other actions earlier this year. 
 
 
&nbsp;

A Harvard law professor who joined the legal team defending Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein against sexual assault charges will not be allowed to continue as dean of a residential house on campus, a university official said on Saturday.

A Harvard law professor who joined the legal team defending Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein against sexual assault charges will not be allowed to continue as dean of a residential house on campus, a university official said on Saturday. The Ivy League university`s move to end the role of law professor Ronald Sullivan Jr and law school lecturer Stephanie Robinson, Sullivan`s wife, at Winthrop House follows protests over his representation of Weinstein. Sullivan and Robinson in 2009 became the first African-American faculty deans in Harvard history when they took their positions at Winthrop House, one of several undergraduate residences at the Cambridge, Massachusetts, university. Their terms as faculty deans were scheduled to end on June 30. Harvard College Dean Rakesh Khurana said in a statement that he had decided not to keep them in their roles at Winthrop House beyond that date. "Over the last few weeks, students and staff have continued to communicate concerns about the climate in Winthrop House to the college," Khurana said. "The concerns expressed have been serious and numerous. The actions that have been taken to improve the climate have been ineffective, and the noticeable lack of faculty dean presence during critical moments has further deteriorated the climate in the house," Khurana said. Khurana has previously said Sullivan`s decision to join Weinstein`s legal team was a matter of academic freedom and that everyone is entitled to a vigorous legal defence. Sullivan and Robinson continue to hold their positions at Harvard Law School. Sullivan and Robinson said in a joint statement that they were "surprised and dismayed" by the decision. "We believed the discussions we were having with high-level university representatives were progressing in a positive manner, but Harvard unilaterally ended those talks," they said. In January, a judge approved Weinstein`s request to have Sullivan join his legal team. Prosecutors in New York accuse Weinstein, 67, of forcibly performing oral sex on a woman in 2006 and raping another woman in 2013. Weinstein faces five criminal charges, including rape, and could be sentenced to life in prison if convicted. He has pleaded not guilty to the charges. More than 70 women have accused Weinstein of sexual misconduct. He has denied all accusations and said any contact was consensual. Students at Winthrop House staged a sit-in this month to protest Sullivan`s defence of Weinstein, according to a report at the time in the Harvard Crimson student newspaper. Students denounced Sullivan in other actions earlier this year.

Harvard professor loses house dean role after joining Weinstein defense

In January 2019, a liberal-arts student from New York born to immigrant parents will become the first black woman to lead Harvard University's Crimson newspaper in its 145-year history.

Kristine Guillaume, who is studying literature, history and African-American studies, was elected this month with a promise to steer the traditional bastion of the establishment towards a more diverse, digital-first future.

She has previously served as a chair of a diversity and inclusivity committee, responsible for making The Harvard Crimson more diverse and welcoming to students from all backgrounds.

"If my being elected to the Crimson presidency as the first black woman affirms anyone's sense of belonging at Harvard, then that will continue to affirm the work that I'm doing," she told The New York Times.

The 20-year-old is the third black president and first black woman to helm the organization since it was founded in 1873.

The Crimson has traditionally been a fast-track to illustrious careers. Past writers and editors at the daily include John F&nbsp;Kennedy and Franklin D&nbsp;Roosevelt, two of America's most celebrated presidents.

According to the Times, Guillaume plans to pursue a doctorate in African-American studies and a career in academia, with some writing on the side. She considers the author Ta-Nehisi Coates a role model.

Guillaume, the daughter of two doctors -- her Chinese mother and Haitian father -- will be joined by Angela Fu as incoming managing editor. Harvard was taken to court this fall over criticism that it discriminates against Asian students.

In 2018, people of colour make up just over 22 per cent of the workforce in US newsrooms, according to the American Society of Newspaper Editors.

In 1990, Barack Obama was the first black person elected to lead The Harvard Law Review, considered the highest student position at Harvard Law School.

In January 2019, a liberal-arts student from New York born to immigrant parents will become the first black woman to lead Harvard University's Crimson newspaper in its 145-year history.

In January 2019, a liberal-arts student from New York born to immigrant parents will become the first black woman to lead Harvard University's Crimson newspaper in its 145-year history. Kristine Guillaume, who is studying literature, history and African-American studies, was elected this month with a promise to steer the traditional bastion of the establishment towards a more diverse, digital-first future. She has previously served as a chair of a diversity and inclusivity committee, responsible for making The Harvard Crimson more diverse and welcoming to students from all backgrounds. "If my being elected to the Crimson presidency as the first black woman affirms anyone's sense of belonging at Harvard, then that will continue to affirm the work that I'm doing," she told The New York Times. The 20-year-old is the third black president and first black woman to helm the organization since it was founded in 1873. The Crimson has traditionally been a fast-track to illustrious careers. Past writers and editors at the daily include John F Kennedy and Franklin D Roosevelt, two of America's most celebrated presidents. According to the Times, Guillaume plans to pursue a doctorate in African-American studies and a career in academia, with some writing on the side. She considers the author Ta-Nehisi Coates a role model. Guillaume, the daughter of two doctors -- her Chinese mother and Haitian father -- will be joined by Angela Fu as incoming managing editor. Harvard was taken to court this fall over criticism that it discriminates against Asian students. In 2018, people of colour make up just over 22 per cent of the workforce in US newsrooms, according to the American Society of Newspaper Editors. In 1990, Barack Obama was the first black person elected to lead The Harvard Law Review, considered the highest student position at Harvard Law School.

First black woman to take over Harvard's Crimson newspaper

Putting an end to speculation about him joining hands with Superstar Rajinikanth to form an alliance, actor-turned-politician Kamal Haasan said that there was a hue of saffron in Rajini&#39;s politics and unless that changes, there won&#39;t be any alliance.&nbsp;

While speaking at Harvard University, Haasan said,&#39;&#39;Alliance with Rajinikanth is unlikely as of now. He further said &#39;&#39;I hope Rajinikanth&#39;s politics is not saffron.&#39;&#39;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
There is a hue of saffron in Rajni&#39;s politics. If that doesn&#39;t change then I don&#39;t see an alliance with him. We are good friends but politics is different: <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/KamalHaasan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#KamalHaasan</a> (file pic) <a href="https://t.co/UnUpBYLxQ5">pic.twitter.com/UnUpBYLxQ5</a>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/962540273006981120?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 11, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

&#39;&#39;There is a hue of saffron in Rajini&#39;s politics. If that doesn&#39;t change then I don&#39;t see an alliance with him. We are good friends but politics is different,&#39;&#39; news agency ANI reported quoting Haasan.&nbsp;

Speculation has been rife over an alliance between the two after both announced their plunge into politics.&nbsp;

When asked about forming an alliance with Kamal Haasan, Rajinikanth recently responded in his inimitable filmy style saying &#39;&#39;only time will answer this question&#39;&#39;.&nbsp;

Haasan is likely to announce his political party&rsquo;s name on February 21 at Tamil Nadu&rsquo;s Ramanathapuram and begin a state-wide tour the same day. Christened &#39;&#39;Naalai Namadhe&#39;&#39;, the tour will see the actor-turned-politician crisscrossing the state to take stock of the issues faced by the people of Tamil Nadu. &nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Let&rsquo;s join hands to build a sustainable village. New TN begins with you. Visit <a href="https://t.co/aHwGLWPlEJ">https://t.co/aHwGLWPlEJ</a> to volunteer #naalainamadhe#maiam#TamilPride
&mdash; Kamal Haasan (@ikamalhaasan) <a href="https://twitter.com/ikamalhaasan/status/962537634437521408?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 11, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The tour will be held in phases. The actor will begin the journey from Ramanathapuram &mdash; his hometown &mdash; and later visit people from the districts of Madurai, Dindigul and Sivagangai.

In January, Rajinikanth had extended his wishes to Haasan for announcing his political debut. &ldquo;I wish him all the best,&rdquo; 67-year-old had said.

Kamal Haasan also greeted &nbsp;Rajinikanth when he made an announcement about his political ambitions.&nbsp; 
&nbsp;

Speculation has been rife over an alliance between the two after both announced their plunge into politics

Putting an end to speculation about him joining hands with Superstar Rajinikanth to form an alliance, actor-turned-politician Kamal Haasan said that there was a hue of saffron in Rajini's politics and unless that changes, there won't be any alliance. While speaking at Harvard University, Haasan said,''Alliance with Rajinikanth is unlikely as of now. He further said ''I hope Rajinikanth's politics is not saffron.'' There is a hue of saffron in Rajni's politics. If that doesn't change then I don't see an alliance with him. We are good friends but politics is different: #KamalHaasan (file pic) pic.twitter.com/UnUpBYLxQ5 — ANI (@ANI) February 11, 2018 × ''There is a hue of saffron in Rajini's politics. If that doesn't change then I don't see an alliance with him. We are good friends but politics is different,'' news agency ANI reported quoting Haasan. Speculation has been rife over an alliance between the two after both announced their plunge into politics. When asked about forming an alliance with Kamal Haasan, Rajinikanth recently responded in his inimitable filmy style saying ''only time will answer this question''. Haasan is likely to announce his political party’s name on February 21 at Tamil Nadu’s Ramanathapuram and begin a state-wide tour the same day. Christened ''Naalai Namadhe'', the tour will see the actor-turned-politician crisscrossing the state to take stock of the issues faced by the people of Tamil Nadu. Let’s join hands to build a sustainable village. New TN begins with you. Visit https://t.co/aHwGLWPlEJ to volunteer #naalainamadhe#maiam#TamilPride — Kamal Haasan (@ikamalhaasan) February 11, 2018 × The tour will be held in phases. The actor will begin the journey from Ramanathapuram — his hometown — and later visit people from the districts of Madurai, Dindigul and Sivagangai. In January, Rajinikanth had extended his wishes to Haasan for announcing his political debut. “I wish him all the best,” 67-year-old had said. Kamal Haasan also greeted Rajinikanth when he made an announcement about his political ambitions.

There is a hue of 'saffron' in Rajini's politics: Kamal Haasan

In November, the&nbsp;Charles Koch Foundation&nbsp;announced&nbsp;that it would provide nearly $4 million in grants to Harvard University and MIT to train the next generation of foreign policy professionals. It&rsquo;s part of the foundation&rsquo;s effort to steer US foreign policy away from its emphasis on military intervention and big Pentagon budgets.

Yes, that&rsquo;s right: Charles Koch.

He&rsquo;s the same fellow profiled in Jane Mayer&rsquo;s devastating critique of how right-wing billionaires have injected their anti-government toxins into the American bloodstream. In&nbsp;Dark Money, Mayer describes how Charles and his brother David have funded organizations that have promoted tax cuts for the wealthy, an anti-regulatory agenda that trashes the environment in favor of energy companies (like Koch Industries) and Tea Party formations that want to shrink government to the point of non-existence.

The Kochs subscribe to a radical, right-wing version of libertarianism according to which nothing should stand in the way of free enterprise. No surprise that the Kochs&rsquo; philosophy helps their own bottom line. They spent nearly a million dollars in support of George W. Bush and other Republicans in 2000, and then&nbsp;benefited hugely&nbsp;from the Bush administration&rsquo;s preferential treatment of energy companies (not to mention the tens of millions of dollars in government contracts they secured since 2000). Even during the Obama years, their efforts at the federal and state level to &ldquo;get government off their backs&rdquo;&nbsp;helped&nbsp;to&nbsp;double their fortune, from $19 billion each in 2008 to $41 billion each in 2016.

MAINSTREAM CREDIBILITY

The Kochs are disgusting in many ways. But they can&rsquo;t be faulted for being inconsistent in their hatred of government,&nbsp;all&nbsp;government. Most right-wing deficit hawks employ a national-security exception when they try to defund all parts of the government except the Pentagon. But the Kochs at least treat defense spending like all other government spending. In this case, it even goes against their pecuniary interests. The&nbsp;Kochs made&nbsp;around $170 million&nbsp;between 1996 and 2011&nbsp;from defense contracts. In the grand scheme of things, of course, $10 million a year is a rounding error for billionaires.

Their anti-war and anti-intervention philosophy has meant that the Cato Institute, the libertarian think tank started and funded by the Kochs, has taken consistently&nbsp;good positions&nbsp;on foreign policy over the years. But the Cato Institute, even with its huge budget and swank downtown headquarters, has always been a little off to the side in the Washington policy community. The Kochs crave mainstream credibility.

So that&rsquo;s why the Charles Koch Foundation is providing money to Harvard and MIT &mdash; the very definition of mainstream credibility &mdash; to encourage anti-interventionist thinking in academia. The two people who will administer the program are thoughtful critics of US militarism: Harvard&rsquo;s Steven Walt and MIT&rsquo;s Barry Posen.&nbsp;Walt and John Mearsheimer&nbsp;wrote a&nbsp;perceptive essay&nbsp;in&nbsp;Foreign Affairs&nbsp;in 2016 laying out the argument for &ldquo;offshore balancing,&rdquo; a grand strategy of&nbsp;scaling back US military commitments overseas that Posen&nbsp;also supports.

I have a lot of respect for Walt and Posen. I have also worked with folks at Cato on various foreign policy initiatives. But in the current political climate, when the Trump administration is launching an all-out assault on federal programs and a&nbsp;Koch-supported tax bill&nbsp;is on its way to becoming law, should progressives welcome the few crumbs that the Kochs are throwing in the direction of anti-war initiatives?

THE KOCHS AND TRUMP

As a candidate for president, Donald Trump made some noises about opposing military interventions and reducing the Pentagon&rsquo;s footprint overseas. Thanks largely to his senior advisor Steve Bannon, Trump also came to embrace the radical anti-government positions that right-wing libertarians favor.

But Charles and David Koch actively disliked Trump; a third brother, Bill, supported the Republican nominee. As the 2016 campaign heated up, rumors circulated of a&nbsp;Koch-funded&nbsp;anti-Trump campaign&nbsp;and of&nbsp;Charles Koch&nbsp;even supporting Hillary Clinton. Those turned out to be false. The Kochs didn&rsquo;t activate their network to support Trump, but they also didn&rsquo;t rule out cooperation.

Indeed, a number of Koch-friendly politicians and operatives were&nbsp;embedded in the campaign, from Mike Pence (Trump&rsquo;s running mate) to Corey Lewandowski (Trump&rsquo;s campaign manager, fired in June 2016). Marc Short, Pence&rsquo;s communications advisor and then Trump&rsquo;s legislative director, once headed up Freedom Partners, a Koch-funded organization. &ldquo;The vacuum in Trump not having his own network is filled by people who&rsquo;ve been cultivated for years by the Koch network,&rdquo;&nbsp;Richard L. Hasen,&nbsp;a UC Irvine law professor&nbsp;told&nbsp;the&nbsp;Los Angeles Times.

It wasn&rsquo;t long after the administration took office that the&nbsp;Koch brothers&nbsp;began to investigate&nbsp;how the Trump team could advance their agenda. They welcomed Trump&rsquo;s pullout from the Paris Climate Agreement, the various environmental regulations that the administration rolled back and the&nbsp;congressional effort&nbsp;to kill&nbsp;the Affordable Care Act.

By May, the brothers&nbsp;identified Trump&rsquo;s tax plan&nbsp;as something they could get behind &mdash; in a big way. As the fight intensified in Congress, the Koch network was going all out. Tim Phillips, president of the Koch-affiliated Americans for Prosperity,&nbsp;told&nbsp;The&nbsp;Boston Globe: &ldquo;It&rsquo;s the most significant federal effort we&rsquo;ve ever taken on.&rdquo; The Koch network has pooled $400 million for the next two years of political work, and it&rsquo;s applying a good chunk of that to getting the tax bill passed. It&rsquo;s been a full-court press&nbsp;with op-eds&nbsp;and $8 million in&nbsp;attack ads.

So, let&rsquo;s dispense with the notion that the Kochs can be relied on to fund a big-tent effort against Trump. They don&rsquo;t like his positions on immigration, marijuana or criminal justice reform. But they&rsquo;re eager to exploit Trump as a &ldquo;useful idiot&rdquo; in their campaign to pillage the commonwealth.

AGAINST THE GLOBALISTS

It&rsquo;s easy for me to take a principled stand against taking money from the Kochs. They haven&rsquo;t offered me any. But here are some reasons why others might think twice about taking their anti-war resources.

The ideological reason: A progressive anti-war position is part of a larger internationalist program that supports global peacekeeping and post-conflict reconstruction, robust environmental programs, transnational anti-poverty efforts and human rights mechanisms that hold countries and individuals accountable. The Kochs aren&rsquo;t interested in any of that.

All of the prescriptive elements of the progressive internationalist agenda require strong states. The Kochs believe that the invisible hand of the free market will solve all problems, without any state guidance or interference. In the same way that Margaret Thatcher didn&rsquo;t believe in society, only individuals, the Kochs don&rsquo;t really believe in the international community. The only transnational force that has any import for them are transnational corporations. Their anti-war funding thus comes with some serious (if often hidden) ideological strings attached.

The monetary reason:&nbsp;So far, the Charles Koch Foundation has shelled out less than $15 million to support programs at educational institutions to look at a less militaristic foreign policy. That&rsquo;s a pittance compared to what it&rsquo;s spending on efforts to unravel Obamacare or get Trump&rsquo;s tax plan passed. It&rsquo;s also about what the Kochs make every year off the US military. Perhaps if Koch Enterprises announced that it was divesting from all military-related activities, their charitable giving would have more impact.

The educational reason: As Jane Mayer points out in&nbsp;Dark Money, the Kochs have funded programs at universities to shift academic discourse away from liberal and progressive thinking. Their funding of programs on &ldquo;law and economics,&rdquo; for instance, has helped to shift the legal profession toward more laissez-faire thinking. And it&rsquo;s not as if the Kochs have been particularly transparent about their methods. Jane Mayer&nbsp;quotes&nbsp;a&nbsp;Koch advisor, George Pearson: &ldquo;Traditional gifts to universities, he warned, didn&rsquo;t guarantee enough ideological control. Instead, he advocated funding private institutes within prestigious universities, where influence over hiring decisions and other forms of control could be exerted by donors while hiding the radicalism of their aims.&rdquo;

The legitimacy reason: The Kochs have been trying to give the appearance of being transpartisan. They have collaborated with progressives on sentencing reform, though as Mayer points out they&rsquo;re probably more interested in getting reduced sentences for corporations than for the poor. They work with the Negro College Fund, but the money&nbsp;goes toward demonstrating&nbsp;how &ldquo;principled entrepreneurship, economics, and innovation contribute to well-being for individuals, communities, and society.&rdquo;

The term &ldquo;well-being,&rdquo; as Mayer details, was something the Kochs came up with to put a smiley face on funding that otherwise destroys communities, social welfare programs and the environment. Even if their new foreign policy funding doesn&rsquo;t come with such strings, it still helps with the image makeover of the Kochs.

So, even though Walt and Posen, not Charles Koch, will be administering the funds at Harvard and MIT, the program could well be the thin edge of the wedge. If the Kochs decide to pour money into foreign policy, they could successfully untether the anti-war position from its internationalist foundations.

If such arguments prove successful, the United States will scale back its military presence, but the world won&rsquo;t become any safer as a result. Overall global military spending might&nbsp;increase&nbsp;to compensate for US retrenchment. US allies &mdash; South Korea, Japan &mdash; might decide to acquire their own nuclear weapons programs if the US nuclear umbrella becomes frayed. Absent a strong international security framework, other countries will inevitably fight each other for the mantle of US hegemonic authority.

The Kochs don&rsquo;t care. They welcome global anarchy because they think they&rsquo;ll be able to profit by it. Perhaps Walt and Posen believe that they are successfully using Charles Koch toward their own end of constructing a more realist US foreign policy. But the Kochs, with billions of dollars at their disposal, are more likely to be the ones manipulating, not being manipulated.

&nbsp;

This <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/region/north_america/david-charles-koch-tax-bill-donlad-trump-us-politics-latest-news-88176/" rel="nofollow" target="blank">article</a> was first published in the <a href="https://www.fairobserver.com/" rel="nofollow" target="blank">Fair Observer</a>

&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

The anti-war movement needs money, and the Koch brothers have it. But it comes with strings attached.

In November, the Charles Koch Foundation announced that it would provide nearly $4 million in grants to Harvard University and MIT to train the next generation of foreign policy professionals. It’s part of the foundation’s effort to steer US foreign policy away from its emphasis on military intervention and big Pentagon budgets. Yes, that’s right: Charles Koch. He’s the same fellow profiled in Jane Mayer’s devastating critique of how right-wing billionaires have injected their anti-government toxins into the American bloodstream. In Dark Money, Mayer describes how Charles and his brother David have funded organizations that have promoted tax cuts for the wealthy, an anti-regulatory agenda that trashes the environment in favor of energy companies (like Koch Industries) and Tea Party formations that want to shrink government to the point of non-existence. The Kochs subscribe to a radical, right-wing version of libertarianism according to which nothing should stand in the way of free enterprise. No surprise that the Kochs’ philosophy helps their own bottom line. They spent nearly a million dollars in support of George W. Bush and other Republicans in 2000, and then benefited hugely from the Bush administration’s preferential treatment of energy companies (not to mention the tens of millions of dollars in government contracts they secured since 2000). Even during the Obama years, their efforts at the federal and state level to “get government off their backs” helped to double their fortune, from $19 billion each in 2008 to $41 billion each in 2016. MAINSTREAM CREDIBILITY The Kochs are disgusting in many ways. But they can’t be faulted for being inconsistent in their hatred of government, all government. Most right-wing deficit hawks employ a national-security exception when they try to defund all parts of the government except the Pentagon. But the Kochs at least treat defense spending like all other government spending. In this case, it even goes against their pecuniary interests. The Kochs made around $170 million between 1996 and 2011 from defense contracts. In the grand scheme of things, of course, $10 million a year is a rounding error for billionaires. Their anti-war and anti-intervention philosophy has meant that the Cato Institute, the libertarian think tank started and funded by the Kochs, has taken consistently good positions on foreign policy over the years. But the Cato Institute, even with its huge budget and swank downtown headquarters, has always been a little off to the side in the Washington policy community. The Kochs crave mainstream credibility. So that’s why the Charles Koch Foundation is providing money to Harvard and MIT — the very definition of mainstream credibility — to encourage anti-interventionist thinking in academia. The two people who will administer the program are thoughtful critics of US militarism: Harvard’s Steven Walt and MIT’s Barry Posen. Walt and John Mearsheimer wrote a perceptive essay in Foreign Affairs in 2016 laying out the argument for “offshore balancing,” a grand strategy of scaling back US military commitments overseas that Posen also supports. I have a lot of respect for Walt and Posen. I have also worked with folks at Cato on various foreign policy initiatives. But in the current political climate, when the Trump administration is launching an all-out assault on federal programs and a Koch-supported tax bill is on its way to becoming law, should progressives welcome the few crumbs that the Kochs are throwing in the direction of anti-war initiatives? THE KOCHS AND TRUMP As a candidate for president, Donald Trump made some noises about opposing military interventions and reducing the Pentagon’s footprint overseas. Thanks largely to his senior advisor Steve Bannon, Trump also came to embrace the radical anti-government positions that right-wing libertarians favor. But Charles and David Koch actively disliked Trump; a third brother, Bill, supported the Republican nominee. As the 2016 campaign heated up, rumors circulated of a Koch-funded anti-Trump campaign and of Charles Koch even supporting Hillary Clinton. Those turned out to be false. The Kochs didn’t activate their network to support Trump, but they also didn’t rule out cooperation. Indeed, a number of Koch-friendly politicians and operatives were embedded in the campaign, from Mike Pence (Trump’s running mate) to Corey Lewandowski (Trump’s campaign manager, fired in June 2016). Marc Short, Pence’s communications advisor and then Trump’s legislative director, once headed up Freedom Partners, a Koch-funded organization. “The vacuum in Trump not having his own network is filled by people who’ve been cultivated for years by the Koch network,” Richard L. Hasen, a UC Irvine law professor told the Los Angeles Times. It wasn’t long after the administration took office that the Koch brothers began to investigate how the Trump team could advance their agenda. They welcomed Trump’s pullout from the Paris Climate Agreement, the various environmental regulations that the administration rolled back and the congressional effort to kill the Affordable Care Act. By May, the brothers identified Trump’s tax plan as something they could get behind — in a big way. As the fight intensified in Congress, the Koch network was going all out. Tim Phillips, president of the Koch-affiliated Americans for Prosperity, told The Boston Globe: “It’s the most significant federal effort we’ve ever taken on.” The Koch network has pooled $400 million for the next two years of political work, and it’s applying a good chunk of that to getting the tax bill passed. It’s been a full-court press with op-eds and $8 million in attack ads. So, let’s dispense with the notion that the Kochs can be relied on to fund a big-tent effort against Trump. They don’t like his positions on immigration, marijuana or criminal justice reform. But they’re eager to exploit Trump as a “useful idiot” in their campaign to pillage the commonwealth. AGAINST THE GLOBALISTS It’s easy for me to take a principled stand against taking money from the Kochs. They haven’t offered me any. But here are some reasons why others might think twice about taking their anti-war resources. The ideological reason: A progressive anti-war position is part of a larger internationalist program that supports global peacekeeping and post-conflict reconstruction, robust environmental programs, transnational anti-poverty efforts and human rights mechanisms that hold countries and individuals accountable. The Kochs aren’t interested in any of that. All of the prescriptive elements of the progressive internationalist agenda require strong states. The Kochs believe that the invisible hand of the free market will solve all problems, without any state guidance or interference. In the same way that Margaret Thatcher didn’t believe in society, only individuals, the Kochs don’t really believe in the international community. The only transnational force that has any import for them are transnational corporations. Their anti-war funding thus comes with some serious (if often hidden) ideological strings attached. The monetary reason: So far, the Charles Koch Foundation has shelled out less than $15 million to support programs at educational institutions to look at a less militaristic foreign policy. That’s a pittance compared to what it’s spending on efforts to unravel Obamacare or get Trump’s tax plan passed. It’s also about what the Kochs make every year off the US military. Perhaps if Koch Enterprises announced that it was divesting from all military-related activities, their charitable giving would have more impact. The educational reason: As Jane Mayer points out in Dark Money, the Kochs have funded programs at universities to shift academic discourse away from liberal and progressive thinking. Their funding of programs on “law and economics,” for instance, has helped to shift the legal profession toward more laissez-faire thinking. And it’s not as if the Kochs have been particularly transparent about their methods. Jane Mayer quotes a Koch advisor, George Pearson: “Traditional gifts to universities, he warned, didn’t guarantee enough ideological control. Instead, he advocated funding private institutes within prestigious universities, where influence over hiring decisions and other forms of control could be exerted by donors while hiding the radicalism of their aims.” The legitimacy reason: The Kochs have been trying to give the appearance of being transpartisan. They have collaborated with progressives on sentencing reform, though as Mayer points out they’re probably more interested in getting reduced sentences for corporations than for the poor. They work with the Negro College Fund, but the money goes toward demonstrating how “principled entrepreneurship, economics, and innovation contribute to well-being for individuals, communities, and society.” The term “well-being,” as Mayer details, was something the Kochs came up with to put a smiley face on funding that otherwise destroys communities, social welfare programs and the environment. Even if their new foreign policy funding doesn’t come with such strings, it still helps with the image makeover of the Kochs. So, even though Walt and Posen, not Charles Koch, will be administering the funds at Harvard and MIT, the program could well be the thin edge of the wedge. If the Kochs decide to pour money into foreign policy, they could successfully untether the anti-war position from its internationalist foundations. If such arguments prove successful, the United States will scale back its military presence, but the world won’t become any safer as a result. Overall global military spending might increase to compensate for US retrenchment. US allies — South Korea, Japan — might decide to acquire their own nuclear weapons programs if the US nuclear umbrella becomes frayed. Absent a strong international security framework, other countries will inevitably fight each other for the mantle of US hegemonic authority. The Kochs don’t care. They welcome global anarchy because they think they’ll be able to profit by it. Perhaps Walt and Posen believe that they are successfully using Charles Koch toward their own end of constructing a more realist US foreign policy. But the Kochs, with billions of dollars at their disposal, are more likely to be the ones manipulating, not being manipulated. This article was first published in the Fair Observer (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: When bad money supports good foreign policy

Harvard&nbsp;University&nbsp;on Friday withdrew a&nbsp;fellowship&nbsp;invitation&nbsp;to&nbsp;Chelsea&nbsp;Manning, the transgender US&nbsp;Army soldier who was convicted of leaking classified data after two top intelligence experts distanced themselves from the school over the invite.

Manning, 29, was released in May from a US&nbsp;military prison in Kansas where she had been serving time for passing secrets to the WikiLeaks website in the biggest breach of classified data in the history of the United States.

Harvard&nbsp;Kennedy School of government announced on Wednesday that it had invited the controversial figure to be a visiting fellow and speak at a forum.

The&nbsp;invitation&nbsp;to speak at the&nbsp;university&nbsp;still stands, said Douglas Elmendorf, the dean of&nbsp;Harvard Kennedy School, in a statement.

&quot;I now think that designating&nbsp;Chelsea&nbsp;Manning as a visiting fellow was a mistake, for which I accept responsibility,&quot; Elmendorf said. &quot;I see more clearly now that many people view a visiting fellow title as an honorific, so we should weigh that consideration when offering&nbsp;invitations.&quot;

The announcement came after CIA Director Mike Pompeo canceled a speaking engagement at the&nbsp;university&nbsp;on Thursday over the&nbsp;invitation&nbsp;to Manning, whom he called an &quot;American traitor&quot; in a letter to the&nbsp;university&nbsp;regarding his decision.

&quot;My conscience and duty to the men and women of the Central Intelligence Agency will not permit me to betray their trust by appearing to support&nbsp;Harvard&#39;s decision with my appearance,&quot; he wrote.

Manning said on Twitter that she was &quot;honored to be 1st disinvited trans woman visiting&nbsp;Harvard fellow. They chill marginalized voices under CIA pressure.&quot;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
honored to be 1st disinvited trans woman visiting <a href="https://twitter.com/Harvard">@harvard</a> fellow ?? they chill marginalized voices under <a href="https://twitter.com/CIA">@cia</a> pressure ?????? <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/WeGotThis?src=hash">#WeGotThis</a> <a href="https://t.co/7ViF3GaSec">https://t.co/7ViF3GaSec</a>
&mdash; Chelsea E. Manning (@xychelsea) <a href="https://twitter.com/xychelsea/status/908576331369238528">September 15, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

Also on Thursday, former deputy director and acting director of the CIA Michael Morell resigned as a senior fellow at the&nbsp;university, media reported.

&quot;Good,&quot; Manning tweeted after Morell resigned.

Harvard University on Friday withdrew a fellowship invitation to Chelsea Manning, the transgender US Army soldier

Harvard University on Friday withdrew a fellowship invitation to Chelsea Manning, the transgender US Army soldier who was convicted of leaking classified data after two top intelligence experts distanced themselves from the school over the invite. Manning, 29, was released in May from a US military prison in Kansas where she had been serving time for passing secrets to the WikiLeaks website in the biggest breach of classified data in the history of the United States. Harvard Kennedy School of government announced on Wednesday that it had invited the controversial figure to be a visiting fellow and speak at a forum. The invitation to speak at the university still stands, said Douglas Elmendorf, the dean of Harvard Kennedy School, in a statement. "I now think that designating Chelsea Manning as a visiting fellow was a mistake, for which I accept responsibility," Elmendorf said. "I see more clearly now that many people view a visiting fellow title as an honorific, so we should weigh that consideration when offering invitations." The announcement came after CIA Director Mike Pompeo canceled a speaking engagement at the university on Thursday over the invitation to Manning, whom he called an "American traitor" in a letter to the university regarding his decision. "My conscience and duty to the men and women of the Central Intelligence Agency will not permit me to betray their trust by appearing to support Harvard's decision with my appearance," he wrote. Manning said on Twitter that she was "honored to be 1st disinvited trans woman visiting Harvard fellow. They chill marginalized voices under CIA pressure." honored to be 1st disinvited trans woman visiting @harvard fellow ?? they chill marginalized voices under @cia pressure ?????? #WeGotThis https://t.co/7ViF3GaSec — Chelsea E. Manning (@xychelsea) September 15, 2017 × Also on Thursday, former deputy director and acting director of the CIA Michael Morell resigned as a senior fellow at the university, media reported. "Good," Manning tweeted after Morell resigned.

Harvard University withdraws fellowship invitation to Chelsea Manning

harvard-university

Harvard University, News on Harvard University, stories on Harvard University, articles on Harvard University, Harvard University stories at Wion, Harvard University news, Harvard University latest news

harvard university