“Think about this for a second. All those emails you’ve written and received with discussions about politics and people that were assumed to be private and meant as inside jokes for you and your friends were being filtered through CIA headquarters. Kind of makes you wonder what you’ve written in the past few years, doesn’t it?”
The services be it free email or free instant messaging have been designed and developed in such a way that the companies that own them end up with a humongous amount of information about its users.
This data is sugarcoated and called as Big Data. It is then sold to advertisers and marketers who in the garb of providing immersive and customized user experience follow every click of yours online. This is akin to rearing animals for slaughtering them later.
The data is not just for sale to the corporates; law enforcement agencies can snoop on you without any warrants. As pointed out in the article:
“While hypocritical in many ways, these tech giants are smart enough to know who butters their bread and that the perception of trust outweighs the reality of it.
But isn’t it the government who ultimately ends up with the data if a company is intentionally spying on us and building a huge record about each of us?”
None of the tech giants accept this fact, but most are selling your data to the government, including companies like Samsung that are into the hardware business.
Is there are a way that can help you evade this online snooping? Probably no if you consider mainstream services and social media platforms. Till then, if you want to stay below the radar, delete your accounts and data on all mainstream email service providers, instant messaging apps, service providing websites and social media platform.
Facebook Employees Are Quitting Because Of Users Being Censored
The war on “fake news” embarked upon by Facebook, Google, and Twitter may be earning the media goliaths brownie points with establishment politicos, but users - and even employees - aren’t feeling as enthusiastic.
In the midst of backlash over the stunning victory of President-elect Donald Trump, which some people attribute to the preponderance of apocryphal headlines disseminated by Internet search engines and social media platforms, the companies are tweaking their algorithms in order to target specifically blacklisted sites, many of which happen to be alternative media sites that question the political and media establishment.
Many of the sites are also financially dependent on ad revenue earned by organic and referral traffic directed by Google, Facebook, and Twitter.
Now, it appears Facebook’s new algorithmic censorship practices are causing some of its employees to quit. According to the New York Times, three current and former anonymous employees claim the company has had a new tool developed specifically to restrict certain kinds of posts from appearing in users’ news feeds in certain geographic areas.
This form of censorship has been deployed under the auspices of facilitating Facebook’s entry into the Chinese market. Previously, the company did this in Pakistan, Russia, and Turkey, where the respective governments requested the ability for third parties to review and block posted content. Facebook granted the requests and removed approximately 55,000 total pieces of content.
Now Facebook wants access to 1.4 billion people in the world’s second-largest economy, China, and they are willing to adhere to draconian censorship practices in order to do so. It could be a complete coincidence that this new push happens to coincide with Facebook’s crackdown on alternative media, which has caused several employees to tender their resignations.
A Facebook spokeswoman responded to the report in a statement:
“We have long said that we are interested in China, and are spending time understanding and learning more about the country. However, we have not made any decision on our approach to China.
Our focus right now is on helping Chinese businesses and developers expand to new markets outside China by using our ad platform.”
The question now is whether there is a connection between two different but simultaneous pushes for censorship by the largest social media platform in the world.
If You Question The Establishment You Are Guilty Of Espionage, Says Corporate Media - Because Russia + The “Fake News” Furor And The Threat Of Internet Censorship December 4 2016 | From: ActivistPost / GlobalResearch
Mainstream, corporate media has launched a dangerous and slanderous campaign to label any news outlet not spewing accepted governmental narrative as professional Russian propagandists - and those unaware they’d apparently been duped by Russia, “useful idiots.”
Ordinarily, the complete dearth of proof this claim has even a shred of truth would cause a reflexive eye roll — but in this case, the American exceptionalist machine behind the supposed analysis calls for FBI and Department of Justice to investigate possible violations of Espionage Act.
Conflating legitimate journalism with espionage because it refutes a narrative acceptable to the establishment is categorically ludicrous.
This irresponsible, criminal violation of ethics devoid of any journalistic integrity came from the Washington Post, which ‘reported’ two “teams of independent researchers” discovered ‘The Russians’ were behind ‘fake news’ articles to help Donald Trump win the election and ‘undermine faith in American democracy.’
It could be said ‘you can’t make this up’ - but apparently that’s exactly what these so-called ‘expert’ researchers did.
“The flood of ‘fake news’ this election season got support from a sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign that created and spread misleading articles online with the goal of punishing Democrat Hillary Clinton, helping Republican Donald Trump and undermining faith in American democracy, say independent researchers who tracked the operation,” the Post declared in its lede.
Russia’s increasingly sophisticated propaganda machinery - including thousands of botnets, teams of paid human ‘trolls,’ and networks of websites and social-media accounts - echoed and amplified right-wing sites across the Internet as they portrayed Clinton as a criminal hiding potentially fatal health problems and preparing to hand control of the nation to a shadowy cabal of global financiers.
Who would have thunk such a thing?
The effort also sought to heighten the appearance of international tensions and promote fear of looming hostilities with nuclear-armed Russia.
However, as has been the highly-suspect tendency thus far in the corporate media’s war on ostensible disinformation, literally no evidence accompanied the Post’s report - nor the analyses provided by these two putatively independent research groups - making the article a prime example of libel.
In fact, the credibility of this reporting is so wet tissue paper-flimsy, even the mainstream outlet Fortune refuted the contents in an article appropriately titled, “No, Russian Agents Are Not Behind Every Piece of Fake News You See,” because “the case starts to come apart at the seams the more you look at it.”
Fortune notes one of the two research groups, the Foreign Policy Institute, is:
“A conservative think tank funded and staffed by proponents of the Cold War between the U.S. and Russia, which says it has been researching Russian propaganda since 2014.”
PropOrNot, the other group publishing the exhaustive list of even award-winning sites, “tweets and retweets anti-Russian sentiments from a variety of sources, has only existed since August of this year,” according to Fortune. “And an article announcing the launch of the group on its website is dated last month.”
None of the supposedly multiple people responsible for the fledgling PropOrNot website are named, even by the Post.
Its executive director, whom the Post quoted “on the condition of anonymity to avoid being targeted by Russia’s legions of skilled hackers”- a laughable excuse worthy of its own tinfoil hat - claims;
“The way that this propaganda apparatus supported Trump was equivalent to some massive amount of a media buy. It was like Russia was running a super PAC for Trump’s campaign... It worked.”
Once again, the ‘Russia did it’ narrative belies the underlying establishment frustration and inability to come to terms with the loss of democratic election - a loss alternative, independent media undoubtedly assisted, but not for the tiresome reasons corporate outlets repeat ad infinitum.
Hillary Clinton did not lose the 2016 presidential election because some shady, Russian-government crafted cabal of non-mainstream outlets plotted her downfall for the benefit of Donald Trump. Indeed, most of the outlets listed - including The Free Thought Project - castigated both Clinton and Trump when pertinent information became available.
No, Hillary Clinton lost because - even faced with as contentious a character as megalomaniacal Trump - the American populace has grown too weary of Washington politics-as-usual, foreign policy-as-usual, and corruption-as-usual.
Independent media did a phenomenal job reporting on revelations published by WikiLeaks, and equally stellar slaying of U.S. government propaganda reported as legitimate news by irresponsible corporate media presstitutes, who some time ago abandoned journalism for establishment acceptance.
Pointing fingers will never make this any less true - and, in actuality, only deepens the shameful dereliction of journalistic duty.
To wit, the Post’s regurgitating this thinly veneered anti-Russian agenda as fact, when literally no investigation was undertaken - no one contacted the outlets on this list to offer their side, for example - is precisely the sort of ‘fake news’ the establishment insists it needs to fight.
“There’s also little data available on the PropOrNot report, which describes a network of 200 sites who it says are ‘routine peddlers of Russian propaganda,’ which have what it calls a ‘combined audience of 15 million Americans.’ How is that audience measured?
We don’t know. Stories promoted by this network were shared 213 million times, it says. How do we know this? That’s unclear."
Once again, we have literally unverifiable ‘information’ coughed up by unknown entities, who employed unknown methods to produce a blacklist of media sites - which incidentally includes a disparate mishmash from Ron Paul and Chris Hedges, to the Drudge Report and Lew Rockwell - that the public should deem verboten because they said so. That, and because Russia.
Yes, the WashPost is saying: some people who we won’t identify, using methodologies we won’t describe, created This Important Blacklist!
Again, though it’s difficult not to laugh at this altogether ironic travesty, the peril lies in these unknown entities at PropOrNot suggesting these outlets and the journalists behind them “have violated the Espionage Act, the Foreign Agent Registration Act, and other related laws, but determining that is up to the FBI and the DOJ.”
Just two paragraphs prior, PropOrNot paradoxically claims it “fiercely believe in the rights to freedom of expression and freedom of the press, and have no interest in seeing anyone punished for exercising them.”
Although PropOrNot flatly claims its questionably researched and flagrantly unvetted list shouldn’t be considered McCarthyistic, well, it is.
“So in other words, any and every one who is anything but a liberal drone is now a Russian plant?”Zero Hedge, which also landed a spot on the Everyone the Establishment Dislikes Is a Russian Agent list, asked rhetorically. “McCarthy would be proud.”
The “Fake News” Furor And The Threat Of Internet Censorship
In the weeks since the November 8 election, US media reports on the spread of so-called “fake news” during the presidential campaign have increasingly repeated unsubstantiated pre-election claims that the Russian government hacked into Democratic Party email servers to undermine the campaign of Hillary Clinton.
There is more than a whiff of McCarthyism in this crusade against “fake news” on social media and the Internet, with online publications critical of US wars of aggression and other criminal activities being branded as Russian propaganda outlets.
A case in point is an article published in the November 24 edition of the Washington Post headlined “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say.”
The article includes assertions that Russian “botnets, teams of paid human ‘trolls,’ and networks of web sites and social media accounts” were used to promote sites across the Internet;
"As they portrayed Clinton as a criminal hiding potentially fatal health problems and preparing to hand control of the nation to a shadowy cabal of global financiers.”
Comment: Well they may not have been Russian bot-nets but they sure as hell were real people who have woken up to the reality of that the psychopathic luciferial control-freak establishment wanted...
According to the Post, the exposure of Russian involvement in the spread of fake election news is based on the work of a team of “independent researchers” and another anonymous group calling itself PropOrNot, which has expertise in “computer science, national security and public policy.”
Oh for the love of Christ who do they think believes this hore shit anymore?
Although no one from the PropOrNot organization is mentioned by name, the Post quotes the executive director of this group anonymously. The organization has gone so far as to publish a list of 200 web sites - including WikiLeaks, the ultra-right Drudge Report and the left-liberal Truthout - that are deemed “routine peddlers of Russian propaganda.”
It should be obvious that the Post report is itself an example of the state-sponsored pseudo-news that is increasingly dispensed by the corporate-controlled media to promote the geopolitical and military aims of American imperialism.
The New York Times has published similar articles, including one authored by David E. Sanger and posted on the Times web site on November 25 under the headline “US Officials Defend Integrity of Vote, Despite Hacking Fears.”
Sanger, the chief Washington correspondent of the Times, is a regular sounding board for the military/intelligence establishment, to which he is closely “plugged in.” He writes that:
“Intelligence officials are still investigating the impact of a broader Russian ‘information warfare’ campaign, in which fake news about Mrs. Clinton, and about United States-Russia relations, appeared intended to influence voters.”
He adds, “Many of those false reports originated from RT News and Sputnik, two state-funded Russian sites.”
The readers of this and virtually all other articles on the topic of Russia’s role in “fake news” will search in vain for a single piece of evidence to substantiate the claims made.
Instead, the views and opinions of “experts,” usually unnamed, are cited and treated as indisputable fact - much in the manner of Joe McCarthy and similar witch-hunters.
The editors and writers who produce these articles seem not even to notice that their publications have been caught in one colossal lie after another - from the claims of Iraqi “weapons of mass destruction” used to justify the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq in 2003 to the more recent flood of government propaganda in support of neo-colonial wars in Libya and Syria and drone killings in a growing number of countries - all justified in the name of “human rights” and the “war on terror.”
There are no institutions anywhere in the world more adept at producing “fake news” than the American corporate-controlled media.
These same media outlets further discredited themselves by overtly slanting their “news” coverage of the election campaign in favor of their preferred candidate, Hillary Clinton, and predicting that she would secure a decisive victory.
Blindsided by the support for Trump among disaffected and angry lower-income people and taken unawares by the electoral collapse of the Democrats, the corporate media are responding to the growth of popular distrust by seeking to discredit alternative news sources.
This is not to deny the spread of false information and propaganda masquerading as news on the Internet.
Fabricated news stories and hoaxes have been circulating online since the World Wide Web began in the 1990s, but there was a significant increase in “fake” political sites and content during the US elections.
Stories that stretched the truth or were entirely made up typically started on mock news web sites and were then amplified by social media sharing.
Other false reports originated on platforms such as Facebook and Twitter and spread rapidly with the “like,” “share” and “comment” features of social media.
An analysis published by Buzzfeed on November 16 showed that false political news stories in the final three months of the election campaign, such as a report that the Pope had endorsed Trump for president, generated more engagement on Facebook than the combined top stories of nineteen major US news organizations.
The Buzzfeed study noted the “hyperpartisan right-wing” nature of the top fabricated news items, as well as the spike in the number of visitors to these sites during the final election months.
Another key aspect of online “fake news” has been the growth of its scope internationally. The Guardian reported in August, for example, that a group of teenagers and college students from Veles, Macedonia set up dozens of political web site façades to both influence and cash in on the Trump candidacy.
The Guardian report also pointed out that, although the pro-Trump sham news sites were more popular, both offshore and domestic web sites became very popular and generated income for their publishers whether they were peddling phony “conservative” or “liberal” misinformation.
That being said, the campaign in the corporate media against “fake news” on the Internet, including calls for social media outlets such as Google and Facebook to vet the material that appears on their sites, is a reactionary attack on freedom of the press.
It has already elicited positive responses from major Internet sites.
Both Google and Facebook have published statements acknowledging that they are working on systems that will use third-party “fact-checking” of news content published on their services.
In the case of Facebook, this initiative - reminiscent of Orwell’s Thought Police - will be reinforced by barring accounts identified as “fake news” sources from using online advertising tools.
Pressure to shut down or muzzle “fake news” sites and social media accounts are emanating from the offices of corporate media organizations concerned about the loss of their influence over the public. Any moves to censor Internet content must be opposed as an attack on democratic rights.
The measures being prepared today against “fake news” web sites and social media publishers will be perfected and used tomorrow against the working class and the socialist media - the World Socialist Web Site - that articulates and fights for its independent interests.
Going With The Flow: The Global Battle For Your Personal Data November 26 2016 | From: ArtsTechnica
Should governments be allowed to impose localisation requirements to protect privacy?
It's a cliché that "data is the new oil"- a metaphor that dates back to at least 2006. Like oil, data is beginning to drive conflict, as different political blocs fight for control of how this valuable resource flows around the world.
That tussle is at a critical juncture because of the confluence of three major factors: The Snowden revelations about massive online surveillance; key judgments by Europe's top court; and attempts by the US to use major trade deals to lock in unrestricted data flows globally.
The growing awareness of the importance of data flows to both technology and the world's economy is reflected in the number of reports on the topic that have been issued recently. For example, in April 2014, McKinsey published "Global flows in a digital age," which noted:
“Global online traffic across borders grew 18-fold between 2005 and 2012, and could increase eightfold more by 2025. Digital technologies, which reduce the cost of production and distribution, are transforming flows in three ways:
Through the creation of purely digital goods and services, “digital wrappers” that enhance the value of physical flows, and digital platforms that facilitate cross-border production and exchange."
A month later, the European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE) issued a report that aimed to:
“Quantify the losses that result from data localisation requirements and related data privacy and security laws that discriminate against foreign suppliers of data, and downstream goods and services providers."
Data localisation in this context means keeping data within the same country - or legal bloc, in some cases - where it originated.
According to ECIPE's econometric modelling, if the European Union were to introduce economy-wide data localisation requirements that applied across all sectors of the economy, its GDP would suffer a loss of 1.1 percent as non-EU companies run fleeing to the hills.
ECIPE said domestic investments would fall by 3.9 percent, and the economic losses suffered by EU citizens would total £156 billion (€182 billion, $193 billion).
The Snowden Revelations
One reason why many countries were and still are considering data localisation requirements that would force companies to keep data within national or legal boundaries, is the Snowden leaks.
In particular, Edward Snowden revealed that both agencies spied on data as it flowed across US and UK borders to and from other countries.
An obvious way to avoid this problem is to keep data in the country where it is generated, to minimise opportunities for foreign interception.
That too has issues - for example, it's easier for national governments to spy on and demand information - but it does place obstacles in the way of external intelligence agencies like the NSA and GCHQ.
Perhaps even more important than Snowden's impact on governments' future data localisation policies have been the knock-on consequences of his revelations for the "Safe Harbour" framework that has governed data flows from the EU to the US since 2000.
In 1998, the EU's directive on data protection went into effect, which prohibited the transfer of personal data to non-European Union countries that do not meet the 28-member-state bloc's "adequacy" standard for privacy protection - in other words, that offered sufficient safeguards for personal data.
"In order to bridge these differences in approach and provide a streamlined means for US organisations to comply with the Directive, the US Department of Commerce in consultation with the European Commission developed a 'Safe Harbour' framework and this website to provide the information an organisation would need to evaluate - and then join - the US-EU Safe Harbour programme."
Snowden's leaks showed the NSA gaining access to personal data held by major US online companies like Facebook as part of the PRISM programme.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
"Safe Harbour does not allow for [data] forwarding as it is performed under PRISM. If it would allow such forwarding the 'Safe Harbour Decision' would itself be illegal under Regulation 95/46/EC [the EU directive on data protection]."
Since Facebook has its European headquarters in Ireland, Schrems took his complaint to the Irish data protection agency. According to Schrems, the Irish data protection commissioner argued that "he does not have any duty to investigate the complaint and later argued that the legal view expressed in the complaint is 'frivolous'." As a result, Schrems' complaint was not investigated.
Schrems sought a judicial review by the Irish High Court, which then asked the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to rule on issues raised by the Safe Harbour framework. On October 6 last year, Europe's top court handed down its judgment, which effectively struck down Safe Harbour.
The central problem, the court found, was that PRISM allowed:
"Access on a generalised basis to the content of electronic communications," which the CJEU said "must be regarded as compromising the essence of the fundamental right to respect for private life," and therefore unacceptable under EU law.
Unless a suitable replacement for Safe Harbour could be found, data flows across the Atlantic would be illegal, and companies continuing to transfer EU personal data to the US risked large fines.
What was needed was an upgraded version of Safe Harbour, otherwise US companies faced the prospect of being forced to keep all the personal data of their EU users within the European Union, something they insisted they were reluctant to do.
After fraught negotiations, the new Privacy Shield framework was announced on July 8. The European Commission claimed it was "fundamentally different" from Safe Harbour, and ruled out "indiscriminate mass surveillance":
“The EU-US Privacy Shield will ensure a high level of protection for individuals and legal certainty for business. It is fundamentally different from the old 'Safe Harbour': It imposes clear and strong obligations on companies handling the data and makes sure that these rules are followed and enforced in practice.
For the first time, the US has given the EU written assurance that the access of public authorities for law enforcement and national security will be subject to clear limitations, safeguards and oversight mechanisms and has ruled out indiscriminate mass surveillance of European citizens' data.
And last but not least the Privacy Shield protects fundamental rights and provides for several accessible and affordable redress mechanisms."
Reactions to the new Privacy Shield were mixed. Microsoft called it "an important achievement for the privacy rights of citizens across Europe, and for companies across all industries that rely on international data flows to run their businesses and serve their customers."
"Privacy Shield is the product of pressure by the US and the IT industry—not of rational or reasonable considerations. It is little more than an little upgrade to Safe Harbour, but not a new deal. It is very likely to fail again, as soon as it reaches the CJEU."
Joe McNamee, executive director of European Digital Rights, agreed with this view:
"We now have to wait until the court again rules that the deal is illegal and then, maybe, the EU and US can negotiate a credible arrangement that actually respects the law, engenders trust and protects our fundamental rights."
News that Yahoo had been secretly scanning customers' e-mails greatly increases the likelihood of the Privacy Shield scheme being thrown out by the EU's top court. Snowden tweeted that during the Privacy Shield negotiations the US insisted that this kind of spying would never occur. As a result, the CJEU judges are unlikely to be impressed by any claims that Privacy Shield complies with EU laws.
A legal challenge to the Privacy Shield framework has already been filed, but not at the Court of Justice, which heard and threw out Safe Harbour. Instead, Digital Rights Ireland is asking the lesser-known General Court of the European Union to annul Privacy Shield, still on the grounds that it affords insufficient privacy protection to EU citizens.
General Data Protection Regulation
A successful challenge to Privacy Shield would be a serious problem for US companies wishing to move personal data out of the EU. At the end of 2015, the European Parliament, the Council, and the Commission reached an agreement on "new data protection rules, establishing a modern and harmonised data protection framework across the EU," including the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which greatly extends the reach and force of EU privacy laws.
Chapter 5 of the GDPR confirms the need for something like Privacy Shield to regulate the flow of data outside the EU, and spells out huge fines for companies that flout the new GDPR rules - up to €20 million, or four percent of the total worldwide annual turnover of the preceding financial year, whichever is higher.
Stricter GDPR rules, coupled with the prospect that personal data might need to remain within the EU's borders, may represent a threat for US companies, but they are also a business opportunity for cloud computing services.
For example, the newly-formed Cloud Infrastructure Services Providers in Europe (CISPE) recently announced that it had created:
"The first-ever data protection code of conduct requiring cloud infrastructure services providers to offer their customers the ability to exclusively process and store data within the EU/EEA territories."
The CISPE added:
“Under the CISPE Code of Conduct, cloud infrastructure providers cannot data mine or profile customers’ personal data for marketing, advertising or similar activities, for their own purposes or for the resale to third parties. The CISPE Code precedes the application of the new European Union (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)."
US companies are also cashing in on the demand for EU-based processing and storage. For example, last November Microsoft opened data centres in Germany, which it claimed would be immune to requests from the US government to hand over data - thus attempting to address the key problem of surveillance that emerged in the Schrems' judgment.
While the above looks like some type of military facility it is actually a Microsoft data center
“"=We’re building our global cloud infrastructure in Europe so it can be trusted by the multiple constituents. We can meet the data residency needs of our European customers."
The newspaper also noted that other US giants are also investing heavily in EU facilities:
“Amazon Web Services, the largest player, announced last week that it would soon open multiple data centres in France and Britain. Google, which already has sites in countries like Finland and Belgium, is expected to finish a new multimillion-dollar data complex in the Netherlands by the end of the year."
Although those moves might suggest that US Internet companies are resigned to a future where keeping the personal data of EU citizens within the EU will be the norm, that's not the case. The main strategy of the online giants is doing everything they can to stop data localisation happening; the new data centres are more like an insurance policy, in case they aren't successful.
These multinational megacorps have a range of weapons at their disposal, but the most powerful is trade agreements. As Ars has reported, today's big trade deals go far beyond simply removing tariffs.
Now, the emphasis is on harmonising national regulations in order to remove "non-tariff barriers." Prompted by Stateside Internet companies, the US tries to use trade deals to persuade other countries to agree to unhindered cross-border data flows, and to ban data localisation requirements.
“TTIP must include clear and enforceable commitments on digital trade, but the EU has not engaged meaningfully in this sector, particularly regarding cross border data flows and data server localization requirements."
As part of the TTIP deal, the politicians say, the EU must permit easy cross-border data flows by loosening its stringent privacy protections, and forbid member states from requiring data localisation.
TTIP is in limbo after Donald Trump won the US presidential election, and may even be dead, so the argument over how data flows should be treated there will not re-commence for many months, if ever. But there are two other major deals seeking to regulate European data flows, the Trade in Investment Services Agreement (TISA) - an international treaty between 23 parties including the US and EU - and the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) between Canada and the EU.
A recent study, entitled "Trade and privacy: complicated bedfellows?", suggested that new free trade deals should contain a binding provision which fully exempts the existing and future EU legal framework for the protection of personal data from the scope of the agreements.
“Trade and privacy are indeed difficult bedfellows. It is an open question whether data protection-proof free trade agreements are possible."
If, indeed, that is the case, the report further suggests "the EU should not enter into additional commitments concerning free data flows in new and enhanced disciplines that lack any reference to the party’s privacy and data protection laws."
“Under the CISPE Code of Conduct, cloud infrastructure providers cannot data mine or profile customers’ personal data for marketing, advertising or similar activities, for their own purposes or for the resale to third parties. The CISPE Code precedes the application of the new European Union (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)."
It's still not clear what the European Commission intends to do on this important issue. According to a report on EurActiv;
“European Commission officials have struck a deal that could put a clause guaranteeing international data flows into a trade agreement with 22 countries outside the bloc, including the United States and Australia [TISA]. But the commission is in deadlock over whether to cave to pressure from the US despite criticism that salvaging the pact on services could undermine EU privacy law."
According to the EC's summary of the latest round of TISA talks, data flows and localisation of computing facilities will "Continue to require in-depth discussions between Parties."
Once again, the election of Donald Trump is likely to be a complicating factor here.
The position of the European Parliament is more straightforward, since it has adopted a text on TISA in which it calls on the European Commission "to immediately and formally oppose the US proposals on movement of information."
Boris Johnson addresses supporters during a rally for the "Vote Leave" campaign
Finally, it's worth noting there are major implications here for the UK as it heads towards Brexit. The UK's new Information Commissioner, Elizabeth Denham, recently gave a speech called "Transparency, trust and progressive data protection," in which she directly addressed the question of what the EU's new GDPR would mean post-Brexit:
“The fact is, no matter what the future legal relationship between the UK and Europe, personal information will need to flow. It is fundamental to the digital economy.
In a global economy we need consistency of law and standards - the GDPR is a strong law, and once we are out of Europe, we will still need to be deemed adequate or essentially equivalent.
For those of you who are not lawyers out there, this means there would be a legal basis for data to flow between Europe and the UK."
Whether or not the UK is a member of the EU, and whatever its formal relationship might be, if British companies - for example, in the financial sector - want to process EU personal data, the protection in the UK must be "adequate or essentially equivalent" for data flows from the continent to be permitted. It is therefore likely that the UK government will need to bring in data privacy laws that align closely with the GDPR.
However, it's worth remembering that the reason why Safe Harbour was struck down, and why Privacy Shield may suffer the same fate, is that the EU's highest court deemed the surveillance carried out by the NSA as excessive and therefore illegal.
But we know from Snowden's documents that GCHQ's Tempora programme is just as invasive - indeed, Snowden said that historically: "They [GCHQ] are worse than the US."
That raises the interesting question of whether the CJEU would find that GCHQ's surveillance of data flows is also excessive and therefore illegal under EU privacy laws if a challenge were brought by someone like, say, Schrems.
The UK government has managed to sidestep this issue so far. But once the UK is outside the European Union, continental companies will not want to risk fines of up to four percent of their global turnover by sending personal data to a country which may be judged a privacy pariah by the courts.
As data progresses from being the new oil that helps powers modern economies, to becoming the very life-blood that keeps them alive, data flows will become a key strategic issue for all governments.
That's especially true for the UK, which will depend on them for its new, and as-yet undefined, relationships with the world's nations, their citizens, and their companies.
Julian Assange: ‘Google Is Not What It Seems’ - They ‘Do Things The CIA Cannot’ November 22 2016 | From: TheFreeThoughtProject
Julian Assange cautioned all of us a while back, in the vein of revelations similar to those provided by Edward Snowden, that Google - the insidious search engine with a reputation for powering humanity’s research - plays the dark hand role in furthering U.S. imperialism and foreign policy agendas.
Now, as the Wikileaks founder faces days of questioning by a Swedish special prosecutor over rape allegations inside his Ecuadorian Embassy haven in London today - and particularly in wake of the presidential election - Assange’s warning Google “is not what it seems” must be revisited.
Under intense scrutiny by the U.S. State Department for several controversial Wikileaks’ publications of leaked documents in 2011, Assange first met Google Executive Chairman, then-CEO, Eric Schmidt, who approached the political refugee under the premise of a new book.
Schmidt, whose worth Forbes estimates exceeds $11 billion, partnered with Council on Foreign Relations and State Department veteran, Jared Cohen, for the work, tentatively titled The Empire of the Mind - and asked Assange for an interview.
Later acknowledging naïvte in agreeing to meet the pair of tech heavyweights, Assange found afterward how enmeshed in and integral to U.S. global agendas Schmidt and Cohen had become.
In fact, both have exhibited quite the fascination with technology’s role in burgeoning revolutions - including, but not-at-all limited to, the Arab Spring.
Schmidt created a position for Cohen in 2009, originally called Google Ideas, now Google Jigsaw, and the two began weaving the company’s importance to the United States into narratives in articles, political donations, and through Cohen’s former roles at the State Department.
That same year, Schmidt and Cohen co-authored an article for the CFR journal Foreign Affairs, which, seven years hence, appears a rather prescient discussion of Google’s self-importance in governmental affairs. Under the subheading “COALITIONS OF THE CONNECTED,” they wrote [all emphasis added]:
“In an era when the power of the individual and the group grows daily, those governments that ride the technological wave will clearly be best positioned to assert their influence and bring others into their orbits. And those that do not will find themselves at odds with their citizens.
“Democratic states that have built coalitions of their militaries have the capacity to do the same with their connection technologies. […] they offer a new way to exercise the duty to protect citizens around the world who are abused by their governments or barred from voicing their opinions.”
Perhaps appearing laudable on its surface - at least to some degree - as Assange pointed out, there is a self-mischaracterization by the American and other Western governments and inaccurately-monikered ‘non-governmental organizations’ that their interests in other nations’ affairs are innately good.
This cult of government and non-government insiders have a firm belief their goals should be the unassailable, unquestionable motivator for American imperialism - whatever the U.S. thinks best as a “benevolent superpower,” so should the rest of the ‘non-evil’ world.
“They will tell you that open-mindedness is a virtue, but all perspectives that challenge the exceptionalist drive at the heart of American foreign policy will remain invisible to them,” Assange wrote in When Google Met Wikileaks.
“This is the impenetrable banality of ‘don’t be evil.’ They believe that they are doing good. And that is a problem.”
Cohen, an Adjunct Senior Fellow at the notorious Council on Foreign Relations, lists his expertise in “Terrorism; radicalization; impact of connection technologies on 21st century statecraft; Iran,” and has worked for both Condoleezza Rice and Hillary Clinton at the Department of State.
Fortune, calling Cohen a “fascinating fellow,”noted that, in his book Children of Jihad, the young diplomat and technology enthusiast “advocates for the use of technology for social upheaval in the Middle East and elsewhere.”
Under the auspices of discussing technological aspects at Wikileaks’ disposal for the upcoming book, Schmidt; Cohen; Lisa Shields, a CFR vice president at the time; and Scott Malcomson - who would shortly afterward be appointed Rice’s lead speech advisor for her role as the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations - descended on Assange’s safe haven in Norfolk, outside London.
It wasn’t until weeks and months after this gathering Assange fully realized how closely Google operates in tandem with the government of the United States - and how perilous the innocent mask of its public intentions truly is in light of such cooperation.
Ironically enough, in Wikileaks’ publishing three years later of the Global Intelligence Files - internal emails from private security firm, Stratfor - Cohen’s and Google’s true depth of influence became strikingly apparent. Assange wrote:
“Cohen’s directorate appeared to cross over from public relations and ‘corporate responsibility’ work into active corporate intervention in foreign affairs at a level that is normally reserved for states.Jared Cohen could be wryly named Google’s ‘director of regime change.’
According to the emails, he was trying to plant his fingerprints on some of the major historical events in the contemporary Middle East.
He could be placed in Egypt during the revolution, meeting with Wael Ghonim, the Google employee whose arrest and imprisonment hours later would make him a PR-friendly symbol of the uprising in the Western press.
Meetings had been planned in Palestine and Turkey, both of which - claimed Stratfor emails - were killed by the senior Google leadership as too risky.
Only a few months before he met with me, Cohen was planning a trip to the edge of Iran in Azerbaijan to ‘engage the Iranian communities closer to the border,’ as part of Google Ideas’ project on repressive societies.”
However, most significantly, Stratfor vice president for intelligence Fred Burton, also a former official with the State Department, wrote in one of those emails:
“Google is getting WH [White House] and State Dept support and air cover. In reality they are doing things the CIA cannot do . . . [Cohen] is going to get himself kidnapped or killed.
Might be the best thing to happen to expose Google’s covert role in foaming up-risings, to be blunt. The US Gov’t can then disavow knowledge and Google is left holding the shit-bag.”
Of course, the massive company - its various facets now under the umbrella of Alphabet, Inc. - has never been fully absent government involvement. Research for what would become ultimately become Google had been undertaken by company founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin in cooperation with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) - the strictly secretive technological testing and planning arm for the Department of Defense.
Indeed Google’s continued coziness with the diplomacy, military, and intelligence wings of the United States government should not be, though perpetually are, ignored.
Political establishment bulldogs on both sides of the aisle and their cheerleader corporate media presstitutes will continue for months or years to debate the failed presidential bid of Hillary Clinton and the apparently-shocking rise and election of Donald Trump, but technology played a starring role in those events. Several reports last year cautioned Google’s algorithms could swing the election - and not only the American election, but national elections around the globe.
“We estimate, based on win margins in national elections around the world,” said Robert Epstein, a psychologist with the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology and author of one of the studies, “that Google could determine the outcome of upwards of 25 percent of all national elections.”
Considering lines between the tech giant and the government have essentially been abandoned, this revelation puts power and influence into acute, if not terrifying, perspective.
Google’s ties with the Pentagon and intelligence communities never ceased.
Revealed by a Freedom of Information Act request cited by Assange, Google founder Brin, together with Schmidt, corresponded casually by email with National Security Agency chief Gen. Keith Alexander in 2012, discussing a program called the “Enduring Society Framework.” Alexander wrote to Brin:
“Your insights as a key member of the Defense Industrial Base are valuable to ensure ESF’s efforts have measurable impact.”
According to the Department of Homeland Security, the Defense Industrial Base is “the worldwide industrial complex that enables research and development, as well as design, production, delivery, and maintenance of military weapons systems, subsystems, and components or parts, to meet U.S. military requirements .”
It also provides:
"Products and services that are essential to mobilize, deploy, and sustain military operations.”
Although Schmidt and Cohen ultimately watered down their book title The Empire of the Mind into the more palatable and less blatantly imperialistic, The New Digital Age: Reshaping the Future of People, Nations, and Business, its message amounted to self-congratulatory justification for broader foreign policy goals.
Nefarious warmonger Henry Kissinger, for one, praised the work, which included telling lines by the Google execs, such as:
“What Lockheed Martin was to the twentieth century, technology and cyber-security companies will be to the twenty-first.”
So ubiquitous has Google become, its presence - like similarly U.S. government-connected Facebook - is nearly indispensable in the daily lives of hundreds of millions worldwide.
However well-known is the government intelligence framework in such platforms, it would be ill-advised to ignore the far darker Machiavellian aspects of private corporate technology’s intersection with global political agendas - and the force that coalition wields around the planet.
Whether or not the American establishment’s empire suffered a blow in the election of Donald Trump will be a debatable point for some time, but it’s a veritable guarantee its cogs - seeing themselves as the planet’s saviors - have planned in advance for just such an occasion.
"If the future of the internet is to be Google,” Assange noted, “that should be of serious concern to people all over the world - in Latin America, East and Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, the Middle East, sub-Saharan Africa, the former Soviet Union, and even in Europe - for whom the internet embodies the promise of an alternative to US cultural, economic, and strategic hegemony.”
Empire will remain empire until its dying breath - particularly if it functions under the obstinate belief it, alone, can save the world. Julian Assange should be praised for the transparency and insight he and Wikileaks have readily given the world, instead of excoriated and blamed for faults which lie in the establishment framework - it is this political, intelligence, and military web deserving of a pointed finger.
But the dark web and Tor, the privacy-preserving browser that’s used to access hidden sites - called onions - have myriad legitimate uses, too.
New research from Terbium Labs, a company that analyzes the dark web, took a small snapshot of onion sites - a random collection of 400 sites its web-crawling robots had found in the course of one day in August - and divided up the sites based on their purpose and content.
The results suggest that less than half of what goes on beyond the reach of search engines and traditional browsers is illegal.
The rest, it turns out, is legitimate, made up of dark-web mirrors of websites like Facebook and ProPublica, websites for companies and political parties, and forums for chatting about technology, games, privacy, or even erectile disfunction. In addition, as on the “clear” internet, a good chunk of the webpages Terbium studied hosted legal pornography: photos, videos, and written material, available for free or for sale.
“Anonymity does not equate criminality, merely a desire for privacy,” wrote Clare Gollnick and Emily Wilson, the authors of the Terbium study.
That’s not to say the slice of the dark web that the analysis looked at didn’t have its fair share of unsavory and illegal material. More than 15 percent of the sample was made up of sites selling drugs or pharmaceuticals; pages with content related to hacking, fraud, illegal porn, or terrorism turned up at least once. (A lot of these same categories of websites can be found on the clear web, too, hosted on sketchy domains or protected by passwords.)
Terbium obtained the sample for the study with the same scanner that powers Matchlight, a service I’ve written about before that crawls shady forums and marketplaces on the dark web and the clear web in search of stolen sensitive or personal data.
“We’re trying to index what people don’t want indexed,” Danny Rogers, Terbium’s CEO, told me earlier this year. “There’s no desire to make things easy to find. Fundamentally, it’s a more hostile environment to crawl.”
That makes studying the dark web really difficult. Terbium’s researchers acknowledged that their study is limited by its scope and the decisions that human analysts made in categorizing the websites the crawler came across. To complicate matters further, the dark web is notoriously transient, with some sites disappearing after only hours.
Just a week passed between the day Terbium took its dark-web snapshot and the day its analysts began categorizing the sites, but some amount of the 18 percent of non-functioning URLs the analysts found may have gone down even in that short a time.
The Terbium study only examined the makeup of a small chunk of the dark web - not the traffic patterns that show where users actually tend to visit. A 2014 study determined that more than 80 percent of visits to the dark web were to child-porn sites.
But, as always, it’s hard to know just who those visitors were: That traffic could have come from bots, law-enforcement agencies investigating illegal porn sites, or even a cyber attack directed at the sites.
What’s more, the hidden sites on the dark web like the ones Terbium studied probably only make up a tiny part of the internet as a whole. Estimates from Tor itself show that the number of hidden sites has hovered between 5,000 and 6,000 over the last year - and that only about 2 percent of traffic on the Tor network is visiting them.
Most people who use Tor use it to browse the clear web while preserving their privacy and anonymity.
The network allows users to visit a normal website without revealing the types of information that are often used to track people as they make their way across the internet. Tor’s privacy-preserving features can be particularly vital to journalists, human-rights advocates, or political dissidents operating in countries hostile to their work.
The Real Reason Why The UN Wants Control Over The Internet November 2 2016 | From: DeWeeseReport
By its very nature, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) is a non-profit organization exclusively run by Technocrats.
As such, it is an apolitical body that is happy to serve whatever form of governance exists as long as funding is received and salaries are paid. To a Technocrat, a world run by science and technology is better than any other form of governance.
Technocrats likewise played a central role in support of Adolph Hitler and National Socialism (See Scientists, Engineers and National Socialism). In both cases, the Technocrat goal was not necessarily Communism or Nazism, but rather the methodical exercise of science according to its Scientific Method.
In other words, the process was more important than the outcome – and in both cases, the outcome was not questioned or resisted, but simply accepted.
Reality Check: Obama Administration Has Handed Over The Internet to a Private Corporation
The reason that ICANN formerly served the interests of the United States was simply that it answered to our government’s judicial, legislative and executive branches. In other words, the U.S. held the umbrella over ICANN and that was enough to keep it working for our national interests and not for someone else’s interests.
Obama changed that when he cut ICANN loose on September 30, 2016 by letting the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) contract expire without being renewed. After expiration, we forever lost the right to renew the contract again.
So, ICANN is now a “free-agent” looking for shelter in the same way that a boll weevil looks for a cotton plant: it needs a host organization in order to practice its craft, and, I dare say, it doesn’t care one whit who that host is.
What does ICANN do?
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
It is no secret that the United Nations is making a play to become host to ICANN. In particular, the UN’s International Telecommunications Union (ITU), run by the Peoples Republic of China, is expected to play the central role in this effort.
However, whether it is the ITU or some other UN agency is immaterial because it will still be the UN in the end.
But, why the UN? Because it is the fountainhead of the plans and operations to establish Technocracy as the sole global economic system while destroying capitalism and free enterprise. Technocracy is the issue here. Others know it as Sustainable Development or Green Economy, but the correct historical term is Technocracy.
In February 2015, the head of climate change at the UN, Christiana Figures, stated,
“This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution.” [emphasis added]
What is unclear about this? Sustainable Development, or Technocracy, is a resource-driven economic model regulated by energy rather than by supply and demand plus monetary currencies. In 1938, the original Technocrats defined Technocracy as
“The science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population.”
To achieve its Utopia goals, the UN must have ICANN’s steering wheel and throttle. But while everyone is stressing over Internet censorship of web sites and the suppression of free speech, the real prize is completely overlooked: The Internet of Things (IoT).
In terms of “follow the money”, IoT is expected to generate upwards of $3 trillion by 2025 and is growing at a rate of at least 30 percent per year. In other words, it is a huge market and money is flying everywhere. If the UN can figure out a way to tax this market, and they will, it will provide a windfall of income and perhaps enough to make it self-perpetuating. Currently, the UN is financed by contributions from member states.
But, what is the IoT and who cares? IoT are the connections between inanimate objects and the humans that depend upon them. The digital Smart Meter on your home communicates energy usage via WiFi to the utility company; but it also communicates with the major appliances in your home and can even control them remotely without your consent or knowledge.
The smart phone that you carry communicates with cell towers and localized signal receptors to create a map of your every movement. Smart home technology lets your stereo send sound to remote wireless speakers and to light bulbs equipped with sensors.
The security camera that you installed to watch your home while you were on vacation can communicate with other cameras, microphones, the police department, etc. Examples go on and on.
ICANN issues the so-called IP addresses that are assigned to all these devices on a global basis. The original addressing scheme, IPV4, was based on four blocks of up to three digits each, punctuated with a period (e.g., 192.168.2.14). This scheme allows for a discrete address for up to 16.8 million devices.
A few years ago, IPV4 ran out of numbers, forcing Internet service providers, corporations and other organizations to improvise internal numbering systems, known as ‘proxy servers’, to issue safe addresses to devices within their own domain. These systems are not only fragile, but they are bloated beyond reason and generally easy to hack.
To fix this, ICANN devised a new IP numbering system called IPV6, which adds two more blocks of numbers (e.g., 192.168.2.14.231.58).
This scheme provides for 3.4×1038 addresses, or 340 trillion, 282 billion, 366 million, 920 thousand, 938 - followed by 24 zeroes. There is probably a way to say this number, but I cannot imagine what it would be. It’s somewhere beyond a trillion trillion unique numbers for every human being on earth!
Thus, IPV6 provides a way to assign a unique and directly addressable number to every electronic device on earth… for centuries to come.
As IPV6 rolls out to the world, the modified mission for ICANN will be to inventory and categorize the device attached to each IP address. For instance, all the air conditioners in the world would be directly addressable from a single list. Likewise for all computers, all automobiles, all cameras, all phones, all refrigerators, all articles of clothing, etc.
Whoever has control over and access to this data will literally be able to control the entire world, down to the last minutiae – and that is the United Nations’ exact mission: inventory, monitor and control.
But, this concept was set in history long before the technology existed. The original bible of Technocracy, the Technocracy Study Course (1934), laid out the hard requirements necessary for its implementation:
1. “Register on a continuous 24 hour-per-day basis the total net conversion of energy.
2. “By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.
3. “Provide a continuous inventory of all production and consumption
4. “Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced and where used
5. “Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.”
- Scott, Howard et al, Technocracy Study Course, p. 232
It seeks to establish a global Scientific Dictatorship where it controls all resources, all production and limits all consumption to its own liking. These Technocrats will dutifully apply their pseudo-scientific methodology to every problem in the world, and simply issue instructions to the net to ‘make it so.’
Yes, free speech will decrease and censorship will increase, but that pales in comparison to the real prize of the IoT that the United Nations desperately wants and needs in order to accomplish its own twisted goals.
Congress never understood this when they passively let Obama fail to renew our contract with ICANN. However, Obama and his globalist handlers understood it perfectly well, which makes the deception and treachery of it even worse.
Thanks to this scurrilous bunch, the world has just been sold into digital slavery, from which there may be no return.
GCHQ Hired New Zealand Firm For Mass Hack Capabilities - Snowden Leak October 29 2016 | From: Sott
Documents obtained by the Intercept show UK spies got the NZ-based firm Endace to create data capture technology that scooped up information.
The CEO of Endace, which was founded in 2001 as an outgrowth of an academic project, was recently bought and then cut loose by the US company Emulex.
At the time of its return to independent status, CEO Stuart Wilson said;
"Operating as an independent company again allows us to continue to deliver innovative solutions to our customers under the Endace brand they've known and trusted for more than 15 years."
The firm boasts it can provide:
"100 percent accurate network recording, any speed, any network and works with the world's top 10 telecommunications giants and a number of leading US defense departments among others."
The revelations include confirmation that Endace is bound by the UK's Official Secrets Act, which prevents any disclosure of its work for the British authorities.
A cache of leaked documents seen by the Intercept, which conducted an investigation alongside Television New Zealand, are said to detail "the firm's key role helping governments across the world harvest vast amounts of information on people's private emails, online chats, social media conversations, and internet browsing histories."
The Intercept says the leaks highlight "the vital role played by the private sector in enabling the spying."
The Auckland-based firm operates under the motto "power to see all" and uses an eye as its emblem.
Endace maintains it contributes to New Zealand's export market and helps clients fighting terrorism, crime and state-sponsored cyber warfare.
Private Eyes - Obscure Company Enabling Worldwide Mass Surveillance
It was a powerful piece of technology created for an important customer. The Medusa system, named after the mythical Greek monster with snakes instead of hair, had one main purpose: to vacuum up vast quantities of internet data at an astonishing speed.
The technology was designed by Endace, a little-known New Zealand company. And the important customer was the British electronic eavesdropping agency, Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ.
Dozens of internal documents and emails from Endace, obtained by The Intercept and reported in cooperation with Television New Zealand, reveal the firm's key role helping governments across the world harvest vast amounts of information on people's private emails, online chats, social media conversations, and internet browsing histories.
The leaked files, which were provided by a source through SecureDrop, show that Endace listed a Moroccan security agency implicated in torture as one of its customers. They also indicate that the company sold its surveillance gear to more than half a dozen other government agencies, including in the United States, Israel, Denmark, Australia, Canada, Spain, and India.
Some of Endace's largest sales in recent years, however, were to the United Kingdom's GCHQ, which purchased a variety of "data acquisition" systems and "probes" that it used to covertly monitor internet traffic.
Documents from the National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden, previously disclosed by The Intercept, have shown how GCHQ dramatically expanded its online surveillance between 2009 and 2012. The newly obtained Endace documents add to those revelations, shining light for the first time on the vital role played by the private sector in enabling the spying.
Stuart Wilson, Endace's CEO, declined to answer questions for this story. Wilson said in a statement that Endace's technology:
"Generates significant export revenue for New Zealand and builds important technical capability for our country."
He added: "Our commercial technology is used by customers worldwide ... who rely on network recording to protect their critical infrastructure and data from cybercriminals, terrorists, and state-sponsored cybersecurity threats."
Endace says it manufactures technology that allows its clients to"monitor, intercept and capture 100% of traffic on networks."
The Auckland-based company's motto is "power to see all" and its logo is an eye.
The company's origins can be traced back to Waikato University in Hamilton, New Zealand. There, in 1994, a team of professors and researchers began developing network monitoring technology using university resources.
A central aim of the project was to find ways to measure different kinds of data on the internet, which was at that time only just beginning to take off. Within a few years, the academics' efforts proved successful; they had managed to invent pioneering network monitoring tools. By 2001, the group behind the research started commercializing the technology - and Endace was formed.
Today, Endace presents itself publicly as focused on providing technology that helps companies and governments keep their networks secure. But in the past decade, it has quietly entered into a burgeoning global spy industry that is worth in excess of an estimated $5 billion annually.
In 2007, Endace representatives promoted their technology at a huge surveillance technology trade show in Dubai that was attended by dozens of government agencies from across the world. Endace's advertising brochures from the show, which described the company's products and promoted the need for greater state surveillance, were published by WikiLeaks in 2013.
One Endace brochure explained how the company's technology could help clients:
"Monitor all network traffic inexpensively."
It noted that telecommunications networks carry many types of information: Skype calls, videos, emails, and instant message chats.
"These networks provide rich intelligence for law enforcement," the brochure stated, "IF they can be accessed securely and with high precision."
The United Kingdom's geographic location - situated between North America, mainland Europe, and the Middle East - made it a good market for Endace.
Many major international undersea data cables cross British territory, and according to top-secret documents from Snowden, as much as 25 percent of all the world's internet traffic flows through the U.K.
The country's spies have worked to exploit this, with GCHQ tapping into as many of the cables as it can, sifting through huge volumes of emails, instant messages, social media interactions, and web browsing records as they are being transmitted across the internet.
As of 2009, GCHQ's surveillance of undersea cables was well underway. The agency was measuring the amount of traffic it monitored in tens of gigabits per second (10Gs) - the equivalent in data of about 1 million average-sized emails every minute.
The electronic eavesdropping agency was tapping into 87 different 10Gs capacity cables and funneling the collected data into its processing systems for analysis.
By March 2011, GCHQ's aim was to tap into 415 of the 10Gs cables, and its longer-term goal was to "grow our internet access to 800 10Gs." The agency wanted to build what it described as the largest covert surveillance apparatus in the world. And in an effort to fulfill that plan, it turned to Endace's technology.
Leaked documents and emails from Endace, obtained by The Intercept, lay out a series of deals the company made with GCHQ to help it broaden its mass surveillance capabilities.
A confidential February 2010 Endace statement of work for GCHQ, for instance, outlined a £245,000 ($299,500) deal to upgrade "monitoring solutions" for the British agency that were designed to intercept large amounts of internet traffic and send it into "memory holes" - repositories used to store the data.
Between November 2010 and March 2011, GCHQ purchased more technology from Endace, including specialized surveillance technology built for "FGA only," a code name the company often uses in its internal documents to refer to GCHQ; it stands for "friendly government agency."
A November 2010 company document said that "FGA" had an order of 20 systems scheduled for delivery in March 2011. Each system was equipped with two "data acquisition" cards capable of intercepting 20Gs of internet traffic.
The total capacity of the order would enable GCHQ to monitor a massive amount of data - the equivalent of being able to download 3,750 high-definition movies every minute, or 2.5 billion average-sized emails an hour.
Endace added in the document that "a potential for 300-500 systems over the next two to three years is being discussed" and noted that it was soon anticipating another order of "30-40 additional systems."
Indeed, the following month a new $167,940 purchase order for 27 more systems arrived, and the items were swiftly dispatched for delivery to GCHQ's headquarters in Cheltenham, England.
The records of the Endace sales are confirmed by internal GCHQ documents, provided by Snowden, which describe the company's data capture devices being used as part of mass surveillance programs.
GCHQ documents from 2010 and 2011 repeatedly mention the Endace products while discussing the capture of "internet-derived" data to extract information about people's usage of services such as Gmail, Hotmail, WhatsApp, and Facebook.
GCHQ declined to comment for this story.
Throughout the summer of 2011, at Endace's offices in Auckland, New Zealand, the orders from GCHQ were continuing to flow in. Meanwhile, the company's engineers were busy turning their sights to new technology that could vastly increase surveillance capability.
Endace was developing a powerful new product for GCHQ called Medusa: interception equipment that could capture internet traffic at up to 100 gigabits per second.
Medusa was first logged in Endace's sales systems in September 2011. Endace staff produced weekly status reports about their progress and updated GCHQ at biweekly review meetings.
By November 18, 2011, the first version of Medusa arrived at GCHQ. "FGA are very pleased with the prototypes we delivered last week," Endace noted.
Apparently after testing the Medusa prototype, GCHQ requested some refinements. One feature the agency wanted was called "Separate MAC insertion by IP type."
This suggests the British agency may have sought the ability to target individuals by searching internet traffic for the built-in hardware address of their computers, routers, or phones.
Notably, the Medusa status reports reveal that Endace was using taxpayers' money to develop the new equipment for GCHQ. They state that the Medusa system was being built for "FGA" with funding from the Foundation of Research Science and Technology, the body that handed out New Zealand government research grants.
In 2010, Endace received twogrants totaling $11.1 million. A public announcement for the first grant - issued in July 2010 - said the funding was for "50% of the cost of a series of substantial product developments over the next two years," but did not say what the products were nor who they were for.
A New Zealand government spokesperson told The Intercept that he could not immediately give a "definitive" answer on whether the funding body had known Endace would use the grants to develop surveillance technology for GCHQ, but said it was:
"Highly unlikely Endace would have provided that information, as they were under no obligation to do so."
Endace has never publicly disclosed any of its work with GCHQ, likely because it is subject to strict confidentiality agreements.
In one contract obtained by The Intercept, GCHQ states that Endace staff are bound to the U.K.'s Official Secrets Act, a sweeping law that can be used to prosecute and imprison people who disclose classified information.
GCHQ warned Endace that it must not "make any press announcements or publicize the contract or any part thereof in any way."
Endace leaked client lists show three main categories of customers: governments, telecommunications companies, and finance companies.
The government clients appear to be mostly intelligence agencies. A 2008 Endace customer list included: GCHQ; the Canadian and Australian defense departments (where their electronic spy agencies are located); a U.S. government contractor called Rep-Tron Systems Group, located in Baltimore, Maryland; and Morocco's domestic surveillance agency, the DGST.
Other Endace customer lists contained in the leaked trove include the U.S. Army and the U.S. Navy's Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command, called SPAWAR; the Israeli Ministry of Defense (home of its Unit 8200 electronic spy agency); the government of India, the Spanish Ministry of Defense; and Denmark's Defense Intelligence Service.
Endace's apparent dealings with the Moroccan agency, the DGST, are particularly controversial. Moroccan authorities have been persistently accused over more than five decades of committing a range of severe human rights abuses.
Amnesty International, in a 2015 report, specifically singled out the DGST agency as a key perpetrator of recent abuses, accusing it of detaining people incommunicado and using brutal torture methods that included beatings, electric shocks, sexual violence, simulated drowning, drugging, mock executions, and food and sleep deprivation.
Sirine Rached, Amnesty's North Africa researcher, told The Intercept that sales of surveillance technology to Morocco raised major concerns.
"In Morocco, digital surveillance is intimately linked with repression of peaceful dissent - people who are peacefully protesting or criticizing the authorities face intimidation, arrest, unfair trials, and sometimes imprisonment," said Rached.
"We fear that the more that these surveillance tools are sold [to Moroccan agencies], the more we will see human rights abuses, especially in relation to freedom of expression and information."
Endace declined to comment on its dealings with Morocco. Stuart Wilson, Endace's CEO, claimed in a statement that he had to keep details about the company's customers confidential in order to help them "battle cyberthreats and breaches."
Alongside its government clients, Endace has many major corporate customers.
Endace's sales lists include finance industry giants such as Morgan Stanley, Reuters, and Bank of America.
Endace's website says it provides financial companies with its monitoring technology to help "high-frequency traders to monitor, measure, and analyze critical network environments."
In addition, Endace sells its equipment to some of the world's largest telecommunications companies, among them AT&T, AOL, Verizon, Sprint, Cogent Communications, Telstra, Belgacom, Swisscom, Deutsche Telekom, Telena Italy, Vastech South Africa, and France Telecom.
Some of these companies may use the Endace equipment for checking the security of their networks. But a key strand of Endace's business involves providing technology for telecommunications firms that enables law enforcement and intelligence agencies to intercept the messages and data of phone and internet users.
A company product strategy document from 2010 said that Endace had "seen early success" providing a Lawful Intercept product to the major U.S. telco and internet company Sprint Corporation.
All telcos and internet companies in the U.S., Europe, New Zealand, and a number of other countries are required by law to have "intercept capable" equipment on their networks.
When police or spy agencies want private data about a customer (with or without a warrant, depending on the country), it can be extracted easily.
When installed on a network, Endace's surveillance equipment can be used to perform targeted monitoring of individual people, but it can also be used to enable dragnet spying.
In one of the leaked Endace documents obtained by The Intercept - under a section titled "customer user stories" - the company describes a situation in which a government agency has obtained "the encryption keys for a well-known program." An Endace surveillance "probe," the document suggests, could help the government agency "unencrypt all packets sent by this program on a large network in the last 24 hours."
Once the data has been decrypted, the agency will be able to "look for the text string 'Domino's Pizza,'" Endace joked, "as they have information suggesting this is the favorite pizza of international terrorists."
Hackers Cripple US Internet In Wide-Scale Cyber Attack: Possible Internet "Killswitch" Test For Staged Cyberwar Or US Election False Flag Event
October 24 2016 | From: Aljazeera / Various
WikiLeaks implied its supporters may be behind the attack and asked them to "stop taking down the US internet".
Several of the world's best-known websites were inaccessible across parts of the United States on Friday after hackers unleashed a series of attacks on a company that acts as a switchboard for the internet.
The attacks affected access to Twitter, Paypal, Spotify and other customers of the infrastructure company in New Hampshire called Dyn, which processes large volumes of internet traffic.
"The attacks came in waves," Al Jazeera's Rob Reynolds, reporting from Los Angeles, said. "First targeting the East Coast of the United States, spreading then to the other parts of the country and even to Western Europe."
"The websites that were disrupted were some of the top names in the internet: CNN and the New York Times, AirBnB, Reddit, HBO ... a whole variety of sites were attacked."
"Dyn is kind of a middle man that directs users to different websites and routes traffic from server to server in a complex way," said Reynolds.
The attackers used hundreds of thousands of internet-connected devices that had previously been infected with a malicious code that allowed them to cause outages.
Twitter, Reddit and Spotify were collateral damage in a major online assault
This article discusses the national Standard Operating Procedure 303 that enables the shut-down of all Internet and cellular devices. It also discusses the new Executive Order on Space Weather events.
We have two separate issues here:
First, the government is terrified of a public that is able to record and share information in real time. This makes it difficult for the government to continue with its massive campaign of lies. The Facebook censoring of all statements that connect Hillary Clinton to her many crimes is emblematic of what the government wants to do across the board - mind control and the end of freedom of speech are part of the Obama-Clinton-Soros-Zuckerberg agenda.
Second, the government has a legitimate need to be able to shut down all electrical systems when a solar storm is about to hit, by shutting them down these systems avoid being “fried” and weather the storm, they can be turned on again once the storm passes, as if nothing had happened.
The two should not be confused.
The false accusations against the Russians are a US Government “PSYOP” against the American public, a last desperate attempt to distract the public from the very real multi-billion dollar charity fraud and influence pedding crimes of Bill and Chelsea and Hillary Clinton, with Barack Obama, Loretta Lynch, and James Comey fully complicit in all those crimes.
This type of attack is known as a distributed denial of service attack [DDoS]. They used affected computers to fire requests at the servers of Dyn simultaneously and essentially overwhelm it.
"The complexity of the attacks is what's making it very challenging for us." Dyn's chief strategy officer, Kyle York, told Reuters news agency.
Operation of a Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) Attack:
York said that at least some of the malicious traffic was coming from connected devices, including webcams and digital video recorders, that had been infected with control software named Mirai.
Security researchers have previously raised concerns that such connected devices, sometimes referred to as the Internet of Things, lack proper security.
The Mirai code was dumped on the internet about a month ago, and criminal groups are now charging to employ it in cyber attacks, said Allison Nixon, director of security research at Flashpoint, which was helping Dyn analyse the attack.
The Department of Homeland Security last week issued a warning about attacks from the Internet of Things, following the release of the code for Mirai.
On Friday, Dyn said in a statement that it had resolved one morning attack, which disrupted operations for about two hours, but disclosed a second a few hours later that was causing further disruptions. By Friday evening, it was fighting a third.
"The company fought back and was able to get things under control again," our correspondent said. "But there were additional waves of attack. So this seems to be an ongoing situation."
Attacking a large domain name service provider like Dyn can create massive disruptions because such firms are responsible for forwarding large volumes of internet traffic.
The disruptions come at a time of unprecedented fears about cyber threats in the US, where hackers have breached political organisations and election agencies.
The US Department of Homeland Security and the FBI said they were investigating the attack on Dyn.
"We still don't know who is responsible for this attack," Reynolds said. "But it certainly seems to be an attack that took coordination and possibly a lot of resources. So this is not some teenaged kid in a basement somewhere hacking for fun."
"The purpose behind their attack is also very vague since nothing was stolen. It was just disruptive, so some people are theorising that someone is trying to figure out how to shut down the internet."
WikiLeaks, a whistle blowing organisation that has been publishing hacked emails that allegedly belong to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman John Podesta, implied in a tweet that its supporters may be behind the attack and asked them to "stop taking down the US internet".
Ecuador's government later admitted that it had partly restricted internet access for Assange, who has lived in the South American country's UK embassy to avoid extradition to Sweden since mid-2012.
WikiLeaks' decision to publish documents affecting the US election was entirely its own responsibility, and the country did not want to meddle in election processes or favour any candidate, Ecuador said.
Submission On The NZ Intelligence And Security Bill October 22 2016 | From: KeithLocke
The NZ Intelligence and Security Bill unnecessarily allows for greater surveillance of New Zealanders by our intelligence services and intrudes further on our privacy.
The definition of national security is so broad that it could enable even more surveillance of legitimate political dissenters by the intelligence services than has happened to date.
Any discussion of whether the intelligence services should be granted extra powers should begin with a discussion of the threats facing New Zealand.
The fact is that we are a remarkably peaceful people. In the last 100 years there is not one proven case of politically motivated act by a New Zealander causing death. [My only qualification is that the Wellington Trades Hall bombing in 1984, which resulted in one death, may have been politically motivated.]
The only proven terrorist act was committed by non-New Zealanders, namely the French agents who bombed the Rainbow Warrior in Auckland Harbour in 1985, killing a Portuguese photographer.
Non-state terrorism has proven to be a problem in some Western countries, especially those, unlike New Zealand, that are heavily involved in foreign wars, or have a socio-economically marginalised Muslim population, or have a body politic significantly prejudiced against Muslim people.
There is no global terrorist threat. The majority of nations are not threatened by non-state terrorism.
Of course, there is always the possibility of a politically motivated violent act, causing death, taking place on New Zealand soil, but it would be an exceptional event. It would not, by itself, justify enlarging the present powers of New Zealand’s intelligence services.
The Bill Massively Increases the Collection of Personal Information on New Zealanders
There are several reasons why granting the GCSB power to spy on New Zealanders will result in a much greater intrusion on the privacy of New Zealanders.
Firstly, the GCSB’s intelligence collection is less targeted than that traditionally carried out by the Security Intelligence Service. We already know that the GCSB collects bulk information on satellite communications accessed by at its Waihopai spy station (which is part of the Five Eyes network).
There is nothing in the proposed legislation stopping this from continuing. Nor will anything in the Bill prevent the international communications of New Zealanders being drawn down into the satellite dishes at Waihopai to be stored and later analysed, because such communications don’t identify NZ citizenship.
We know from the Snowden documents that the whole direction of the Five Eyes network (including the GCSB) is to collect, store and share with each other as much raw communications and social media data as is technically possible - on the basis that some of it may later be useful.
The all-inclusive definition of “information infrastructure” in Clause 4 covers any electronic communication, and Clause 66 allows the GCSB access to any such transmitted or stored communication.
There are no clear limits to what can be collected and through what means.
Secondly, because the GCSB shares a mass of its raw data with its four Five Eyes partners [loosely provided for under Clause 13], the result of this sharing will be a greater intrusion into the privacy of New Zealanders, as well as its misuse against New Zealanders.
We know from the Snowden papers that the data collected by the Five Eyes is mainly used to spy on other governments or political dissenters, for political ends which are often contestable.
For example, the GCSB’s proven spying on, Roberto Azevedo, the (successful) Brazilian candidate for WTO director-general, was aimed at giving New Zealander Tim Groser the edge in the contest.
This was spying to advance the government’s neo-liberal trade and investment agenda, personified by former Trade Minister Groser, an agenda which is contested by other New Zealand political parties.
Thirdly, we also know from the Snowden papers that Five Eyes partners are providing intercept information about New Zealanders. In 2012 Tony Fullman, a New Zealand citizen, had his house raided on the basis of information passed on to the GCSB by the US National Security Agency.
His “crime” was to be a peaceful advocate of democracy in Fiji.
Analysis of the Snowden papers showed he was one several Fiji pro-democracy activists who had their Gmails and Facebook posts monitored by the NSA.
Fourthly, the warrant system contained in the Bill will not prevent information on many law-abiding New Zealanders being taken from the mass of intercept data collected by the GCSB and Five Eyes. The warrants can be very broad in their catchment.
They can be for a “class of persons” (Clause 61), or they can be what are called “purpose-based warrants” (Clause 64). Either way such warrants can cover a lot of people, such as those New Zealanders attending a mosque or group of mosques, or all those New Zealanders travelling to certain countries.
Fifthly, GCSB can pass on to other agencies for analysis anything from its mountain of electronic intelligence data. All it has to do is define that information as “incidentally-obtained intelligence” under Clause 91. Remember such intelligence doesn’t need to have anything to do with real or potential criminal activity.
All that is required is that there is believed to be a “potential threat” to New Zealand’s “security” as determined by the agencies.
Under Clause 91 information “incidentally obtained” on legitimate political dissenters could be kept or passed on.
Using Intelligence Information Against Legitimate Dissenters
There is an inherent contradiction in the legislation. Clause 22 says that collecting intelligence is not justified when it is infringing “the right of persons to engage in lawful advocacy, protest, or dissent in respect of any matter.”
However, this can be overridden when“national security”is deemed at risk.
As defined in Clause 5“national security” can include any activity, even if it is not criminal activity, which affects New Zealand’s“status as a free and democratic society” or threatens“international security” or“the quality of life of the New Zealand population” or represents“acts of foreign interference, that may cause serious damage to New Zealand’s economic security or international relations.”
What this means is that the intelligence services are authorised to act in secret to monitor and help counter perfectly legal activity if those agencies define it as contrary to “national security”, whether that activity is carried out by New Zealanders or non-New Zealanders.
All of the types of legal political activity targeted under the “national security” label are politically contestable.
For example, dissenters in New Zealand believe the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement threatens our “national security” in that the agreement threatens our “status as a free and democratic society” and our “quality of life” and could, by increasing global inequality, threaten “international security”.
The present New Zealand government believes the opposite, that the anti-TPPA dissenters threaten “national security”, and under this Bill could use the intelligence services to monitor those dissenters.
New Zealand anti-TPPA dissenters believe it is perfectly proper, under our Bill of Rights, to coordinate campaigning against the TPPA with international NGOS (eg. Greenpeace and Oxfam) or other governments without these foreign NGOs or governments being spied on for committing “acts of foreign interference that may cause serious damage to New Zealand’s economic security or international relations.”
New Zealand should champion a free global debate among people, organisations and nations over free trade and investment pacts, without any involvement of security services.
Unfortunately, that is not the case, as we have seen in the Groser/WTO case and in the NSA’s spying on European governments during trade negotiations, as disclosed in the Snowden documents.
GCSB spying on Pacific Governments Unjustified and Contrary to our Interests
The GCSB electronic spying on Pacific Island governments, exposed in Snowden papers and rightly criticised by several Pacific leaders, is an unjustified and illegal breach of their right to privacy. It negatively affecting our relations with these states, none of whom are conducting electronic spying on us.
Spy agencies focus on political critics of the NZ government, not those engaged in illegal activity.
The fundamental problem is that the SIS and GCSB are primarily agencies for political spying on legal activity. While part of the Bill’s definition of “national security” [Clause 5] covers “unlawful acts” (ie: those which have a political motive), in practice the agency does little in this area, for two reasons.
The first, which I aludded to earlier, is that in recent years there have been not been politically motivated criminal acts of any consequence.
Secondly, we already have an institution, the Police, which is dedicated to detecting and prosecuting politically motivated illegal acts – such as the bombing of the Rainbow Warrior in 1985, or the securing of fraudulent New Zealand passports by Mossad agents in 2004.
A perusal of those personal SIS files that have been released proves that the overwhelming bulk of the agencies work has been directed against perfectly legal dissent.
This is likely to continue under the terms of this Bill. My own SIS file, which covers 51 years of my life, records only my legal political activities as a dissenter. I have no criminal record.
Oversight Mechanisms Inadequate
There has been some improvement in oversight mechanisms, but they are still inadequate. While more people from outside the service will be involved in granting surveillance warrants this won’t act as much of a check if those people accept the Bill’s ethos that political spying to advance a government’s political agenda is ok.
The Intelligence and Security Committee in the Parliament will remain relatively toothless.
The GCSB and SIS Directors can still block information going to the Committee by defining it as “sensitive” (Clause 163). It is good, however, that the Inspector-General will now have access to all security information (Clause 142).
Much will now depend on the quality of the Inspector-General as a check on abuses in the system, and as someone who can listen to whistleblowers. However, in relation to whistleblowers, I strongly oppose new provision 78AA (Clause 207) providing for 5 years in prison for those who disclose anything “classified”.
Whistleblowing is sometimes the only way to expose wrongdoing in public institutions and the SIS and GCSB are not exceptions. Particularly worrying is the potential for journalists to be penalised (under 78AA 2 (b) (ii)) for publishing classified material that exposes wrongdoing.
An Independent Cybersecurity Agency Needed
The GCSB currently has one useful responsibility, cybersecurity [see Clause 15], but this function should be devolved to a new independent government cybersecurity agency, which involves and coordinates its work with the Police and other relevant agencies.
The GCSB, tasked with breaking in to computers and creating back door entry in to communications devices, is not the best agency to protect our IT systems.
I ask the Select Committee be bold and challenge the need for the SIS and the GCSB, given that our Police force is perfectly adequate to deal with politically motivated criminal behavior, and we don’t need a state agency to monitor our non-criminal political behavior.
The GCSB’s cybersecurity function should be devolved to a new independent agency.
I recommend the Select Committee not proceed with this Bill in its present form.
Overall it puts New Zealanders in a worse situation than in already existing legislation, in relation to both their personal privacy and their right to untrammeled freedom of expression.
However, given the Bill is likely to have the numbers to proceed I do support the deletion (or amendment) of any Clauses which extend the scope of GCSB and SIS spying on non-criminal political activity.
I have already mentioned the problems with Clauses 4, 5, 13, 15, 61, 64, 66, 91, 163 and 207. Conversely, I support all measures in the Bill which may improve, even if marginally, the accountability of SIS and GCSB operatives. I have mentioned, for example, Clause 142 which I support because it removes the existing restraint on the Inspector-General accessing all security information.
Dear Clinton Team: We Noticed You Might Need Some Email Security Tips
October 20 2016 | From: TheIntercept
There is probably no one more acutely aware of the importance of good cybersecurity right now than Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta, whose emails have been laid bare by WikiLeaks, are being mined for news by journalists (including at The Intercept), and are available for anyone with internet access to read.
So as a public service to Podesta and everyone else on Clinton’s staff, here are some email security tips that could have saved you from getting hacked, and might help you in the future.
Use a Strong Password
There’s a method for coming up with passwords that are mathematically unfeasible for anyone to ever guess by brute force, but that are still possible for you to memorize. I’ve written about it before, in detail, including an explanation of the math behind it.
But in short: You start with a long list of words and then randomly select one (by rolling dice), then another, and so on, until you end up with something like: “slinging gusty bunny chill gift.”
Using this method, called Diceware, there is a one in 28 quintillion (that is, 28 with 18 zeros at the end) chance of guessing this exact password.
For online services that prevent attackers from making very many guesses - including Gmail - a five-word Diceware password is much stronger than you’ll ever need. To make it super easy, use this wordlist from the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Do Not Use a Weak Password
So if that’s a strong password, what does a weak password look like? “Runner4567.”
Use a Unique Password for Each Application
The same day that WikiLeaks published Podesta’s email, his Twitter account got hacked as well. How do you think that happened? I have a guess: He reused a password that was exposed in his email, and someone tried it on his Twitter account.
Even if you use a strong password, it quickly becomes worthless if you use it everywhere. The average person has accounts on dozens of websites. For those who reuse passwords, all it takes is for any one of those sites to get hacked and your password to get compromised, and the hacker can gain access to your accounts on all of them.
You can avoid this by using different strong passwords for every account. The only way this is possible is by using a password manager, a program that remembers all your passwords for you (in an encrypted database) so you don’t have to. You should secure your password manager with an especially strong password. I recommend a seven-word Diceware passphrase.
There are many password managers to choose from: KeePassX, LastPass, 1Password, and more. Shop around for whichever one fits your organization the best. It doesn’t so much matter which you use, so long as you use strong, unique passwords for each account. Password managers also help you generate secure random passwords.
Turn on Two-Factor Authentication
Last year, when I asked National Security Agency whistleblower Edward Snowden what ordinary people could do to improve their computer security, one of the first pieces of advice he gave was to use two-factor authentication. If Podesta had enabled it on his Gmail account, you probably wouldn’t be reading his email today.
Google calls it “2-Step Verification” and has an excellent website explaining why you need it, how it works, and how it protects you.
Comment: Of course in reality you do not want to be using ANYTHING Google makes. It really is the fox guarding the hen house.
In short: When you log in to your account, after you type in your password you’ll need one more piece of information before Google will allow you to proceed. Depending on how you set it up you might receive this uniquely generated information in a text message, a voice call, or a mobile app, or you could plug in a special security key into your USB port.
Once you start using it, hackers who manage to trick you into giving up your password still won’t be able to log in to your account - at least not without successfully executing a separate attack against your phone or physically stealing your security key.
Do it Right this Second
Google handles all of the email for hillaryclinton.com. If you’re a Clinton staffer, you should immediately stop what you’re doing and make sure you’ve enabled 2-Step Verification for your email.
You should also enable two-factor authentication for all of the many other services that support it, including Twitter, Facebook, Slack, and Dropbox, to name just a few. (If Podesta had enabled it on his Twitter account, that probably wouldn’t have gotten hacked either.)
Watch Out for Phishers
How did these prominent political figures get their emails hacked in the first place? It appears that Russian hackers used “spear-phishing” attacks against many high-profile political targets, and some of them bit.
Spear-phishing works like this: The attacker sends a target a carefully crafted email, something that looks legitimate but is actually a fake. The target clicks a link in the email and ends up at what looks like a login page for their bank, or an online store, or, in this case, the Google login page.
But it’s not. If they carefully examined the URL of the website, they would see that it doesn’t begin with https://accounts.google.com/ and therefore isn’t a real Google login page.
But they don’t notice, so they go ahead and enter their username and password. Without realizing it, they just gave their Google password to the attacker. Now the attacker can use this password to log in to the target’s Gmail account and download all of their email (assuming they are not using two-factor authentication, that is).
Well-crafted spear-phishing emails can be incredibly hard to spot, but if you ever end up on a website asking you for a password, you should be skeptical. Check the URL and make sure you’re at a legitimate login page before typing in your password, or navigate to the login page directly.
Encrypt Your Email
All of the previous tips are aimed at keeping your email account secure. But even if you follow all of the security best practices, it’s still possible that your email could get compromised.
You could fall for an incredibly sophisticated spear-phishing attack that tricks you into giving up your password as well as your two-factor authentication token
Your Google Apps administrator could get hacked, giving the hacker the ability to reset the email passwords of everyone in your organization
A hacker could find a fundamental security flaw in Gmail itself and use that to gain access to your account
A state-level actor could find a way to exploit the infrastructure of the internet to spy on all of your data held by Google
Or maybe you just don’t trust Google, or anyone who can compel the company with legal requests for data, with the contents of your email.
For any or all of those reasons, it’s probably worth using encrypted email.
Using encrypted email is more complicated than using a strong password and using two-factor authentication - which are really easy - but it’s simple enough that everyone at The Intercept, including all of the non-nerds, uses it.
An important caveat is that everyone needs to be ready to use encrypted email before you can start using; you can’t send an encrypted email to someone who doesn’t have an encryption key yet. (You can find our encryption keys on our staff profiles if you want to send us encrypted emails.)
To get started, check out the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Surveillance Self-Defense guide for using email encryption for Windows, Mac OS X, and Linux. If enough people in your organization use encrypted email, consider using our newly released tool GPG Sync to make it somewhat simpler.
Had Podesta, or anyone in the Democratic National Committee - or really anyone who’s had their email leaked in recent years - used encrypted email, a lot more of the emails would look something like this:
If a hacker steals all of your encrypted email and then wants to decrypt it, they’ll need to hack into your computer and steal your secret encryption key. That is a whole level of difficulty higher than just getting your password. If you choose to keep your secret encryption key on a physical USB device, such as a Yubikey, the hacker has even more hoops to jump through before they have any hope of decrypting your emails.
Alternately, Use an Encrypted Messaging App Instead of Email
If encrypting your email sounds too hard, it might make sense to just use email less, in favor of easy-to-use encrypted message apps such as Signal. The Clinton campaign is reportedly already using Signal for its mobile communications about Donald Trump.
Now the iPhone version of the app has desktop support, too. So if you need to send a quick, but sensitive, message to a colleague, why not type it into the Signal app instead of sending an email?
Don’t Listen to the Wrong People
Hillary Clinton’s policy on encryption is dubious, even to the point of calling for the government to commission a “Manhattan-like project” to figure out how to create strong, unbreakable encryption that nevertheless has a back door for law enforcement to access. This idea is firmly in the realm of fantasy, because a back door is definitionally a weakness.
And no matter what U.S. policy is in the future, the email encryption I described above will not contain a backdoor and will be available to everyone in the world, because it’s open source software developed largely outside of the United States.
The obvious conclusion is that Clinton simply doesn’t understand cybersecurity, in theory or in practice.
On the practical level, she needs better in-house technical expertise.
On the theoretical level, she should listen to the unanimous consensus of cryptography experts and take a firm stance in support of strong encryption without back doors. This will improve the cybersecurity of both government and private businesses, protect the constitutionally protected privacy rights of Americans - and maybe even save herself from similar embarrassments in the future.
Comment: I can personally recommend the following solutions to anyone seeking secure communications:
Columbus, Ohio, actually won $50 million in DOT grant money to turn their city into a "Smart City" calling it "SmartColumbus." The city of Columbus will receive an additional $90 million in pledges from public and private sector partners.
The City of Pittsburgh sees the confluence of transportation and energy as the key to U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) Smart City Challenge. To meet the challenge, we will develop an open platform and corresponding governance structure to improve the safety, equity, and efficiency of our transportation network and its interaction with the energy and communications networks.
By building on existing technology deployments and increasing fixed and mobile sensors over a number of major “Smart Spine” corridors that connect with primary commercial centers and amenities, Pittsburgh will collect, analyze, visualize, and act on information to improve mobility for residents.
The non-proprietary nature of our platform allows the City of Pittsburgh and its partners to set an open, national standard for a municipal service delivery platform, which enhances industry and supports innovation.
According to the SCC, 'smart spines' use advanced technology like real-time adaptive traffic signals and vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communication at intersections.
"Smart PGH" is working with Uber to spy on customers. (see page 4)
It appears that "smart cities" are part of the government's "Vision Zero" program, see page 6 of SCC's 'Enabling Hierarchy' diagram. Also on page 6, under the subject 'Data Collection Network' they mention, "Social Media Assets" otherwise known as social media spying. (more on that below)
In addition, we [Smart PGH] would like to work with Pittsburgh Bike Share, Uber, Lyft, and others to move towards more robust V2V communications that allow Port Authority buses, City fleet, bike share bicycles, ride-sharing services, etc. to become safer by sensing one another on Pittsburgh’s streets. Bicycle tracking has already begun, Ford Motor Company has given Palo Alto, $1.1 million to equip bicycles with GPS devices.
Joshuah Mello, the city’s chief transportation official, said the main draw of the new smart-bike system, operated by Motivate and sponsored by Ford, is that it will be part of a network growing in Bay Area cities from San Jose to San Francisco, “making it one of the largest systems in the entire world.”
What he should say is, this makes it one of the largest bicycle surveillance systems in the entire world! What follows, are some of the most chilling intrusions of government spying to date. Govt spying on social media.
To address Vision Element #9, SmartPGH will deploy our “Citizens as Sensors” effort aimed at extracting relevant data from social media. Scrubbing these sites and app will provide information on what people are doing in different places across Pittsburgh, data that can be used to infer behavior and data that can detect changes in behavior due to physical modifications made by SmartPGH and the City of Pittsburgh.
Pittsburgh can more easily detect if the modifications it is making are producing the desired changes or if they are leading to unanticipated outcomes or unhappy residents.
For example, changes to the number of check-ins citizens make to restaurants and retail establishments following the parking rate change can provide evidence of how much this change has impacted dining and shopping behaviors, providing valuable feedback not just on residents emotional reactions but also the wider economic impact of such decisions.
The City of Pittsburgh is in conversation with Duquesne Light and partner-company DQE Communications regarding the use of their extensive network of dark fiber. Most of the network capacity is currently “dark” and available for use by partners including the City of Pittsburgh.
To make the most of their network, Duquesne Light recently built a wireless communication infrastructure to support the increased data-flow between their electric meters and the company’s centralized operating center.
This effort has evolved into a high-capacity, resilient, wireless network covering the entirety of the City of Pittsburgh and the surrounding 817-square-mile service territory.
The grid of microgirds will spy on everyone's health, electrical and gas usage.
The grid-of-microgrids is designed to connect critical infrastructure like hospitals, universities, and data and telecommunications centers. Other partners in the effort include the UPMC health system, NRG energy, Duquesne Light and People’s natural gas.
Govt spying on Pittsburgh residents is frightening.
PennDOT’s Western Regional Traffic Management Center includes a fully integrated Centralized Software System, a Media Partner room that broadcasts live on-air reports of traffic conditions, and, a state of the art video wall capable of displaying 160 video images.
The center monitors and/or controls ITS devices on 12 freeway corridors, including many within Pittsburgh's limits.
These devices include: 293 CCTV cameras, 37 Highway Advisory Radio transmitter locations, 86 Highway Advisory Radio signs with beacons, 200 Microwave Traffic Detectors, 24 Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC) radios, 93 Digital Wave Radar Vehicular Detector units and many more specific ITS-related items.
List of govt agencies spying on residents:
Penn DOT and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission
Port Authority of Allegheny County
Pittsburgh Parking Authority
Port of Pittsburgh Commission
Pittsburgh Bike Share
Utilities including energy distribution, water, and natural gas
University Partners, particularly University of Pittsburgh and Carnegie Mellon University
Major freight operators in Pittsburgh
Representatives of the Business and Philanthropic Communities
Citizens and Community Stakeholders Industry partners
The model for the WPRDC is unique because it is designed to be extensible and inclusive, able to host datasets from any municipality, non-profit, or researcher with data to share. By bringing together various levels of government, civil society, and academia around information resources, we have begun to improve our region’s capacity for innovation and evidence-driven policy-making.
The WPRDC’s web resources provide machine-readable data downloads and APIs of key administrative data on topics such as property assessment, building inspection, public health, crime, and asset management.
Click on the image above to open a larger version in a new window
Seven companies work with Surtrac to spy on everyone.
“Do Not Resist”: The Police Militarization Documentary Everyone Should See
October 19 2016 | From: TheIntercept
On a sunny afternoon last summer, Craig Atkinson, a New York City-based filmmaker, stood in a front yard in South Carolina surrounded by several heavily armed police officers.
The officers, members of the Richland County Sheriff’s Department tactical team, were descending on a modest one-story house looking for drugs and guns. The team smashed through the windows of the home with iron pikes, then stormed the front door with rifles raised.
Inside, they found a terrified family of four, including an infant. As the family members were pulled outside, Atkinson’s camera captured a scene that plays out with startling regularity in cities and towns across the country, one of many included in his new documentary, “Do Not Resist,” an examination of police militarization in the United States.
And it's not just hapening there.
The police begin rooting through the trash. “Where the fuck is the weed?” one officer asks, as the team ransacks a car parked in the driveway. “Boy that was sweet,” another says, commenting on the speed of the raid. One officer finds a backpack, which yields a bit of marijuana - it’s not enough to roll a joint, but it’s something.
The officer in charge questions the owner of the backpack, a young African-American man. In a conversation captured on Atkinson’s microphone, the young man, a local community college student, tells the officer he runs a small landscaping business.
Knowing he’s being taken into custody, with his hands cuffed in front of him, he asks the officer for a favor: Can he remove the $876 in his pocket set aside for new lawn-care equipment and give it to one of his employees to go to the hardware store? Instead of handing the cash to the arrestee’s co-worker, the tactical team seizes the money.
“I never one time said you’re a bad person,” the officer tells the young man before he’s led off. “I just have a job to do, and you happen to be in the middle of it.”
The pernicious practice of civil asset forfeiture, which allows law enforcement to grab cash or property during the course of raids, then requires people to prove the assets were not related to criminal activity in order to get them back — and allows police to keep the assets if they fail to do so - has been well documented.
What’s less common is to see one of those interactions play out on camera. Capturing those kinds of moments is what “Do Not Resist” is all about.
Trailer for “Do Not Resist,” a New Documentary Examining Police Militarization in the United States:
The film begins in Ferguson, Missouri, on a rainy night of protest in August 2014 that erupted into a melee of tear gas and screaming.
It then quickly moves to a seminar with Dave Grossman, a law enforcement guru who gives trainings on lethal force and the application of a warrior mentality in the name of the law.
“The policeman is the man of the city,” Grossman begins, before explaining that cops he’s spoken to routinely describe their first on-the-job kill as a prelude to the best sex of their lives.
“Both partners are very invested in some very intense sex,” Grossman says.
“There’s not a whole lot of perks that come with this job. You find one, relax and enjoy it.”
Grossman believes that a violent reckoning between law enforcement and critics of police militarization is fast approaching.
“We are at war,” Grossman tells the crowd, “and you are the front-line troops in this war.”
The language reflects a theme that runs throughout “Do Not Resist.”
Atkinson began the project three years ago in the wake of the Boston Marathon bombings. The images of armored cars and commando cops in the streets resonated for him on a personal level. Atkinson’s father spent 29 years as a police officer outside Detroit - 13 of them on a SWAT team, where he held the rank of commander.
Atkinson and his brother would take part in their dad’s training, playing the part of hostages when they were little and mock shooters when they were big enough to handle weapons.
Watching the footage from Boston, it was obvious to Atkinson that something profound had shifted since his dad’s days on the force. He set out to create a film that would capture that shift.
The “Do Not Resist” crew attended expos and trade shows, community meetings and federal hearings, training seminars and SWAT contests. All told, the team traveled to 19 states, went on roughly 20 police ride-a-longs, observed half a dozen raids, and interacted with hundreds of police officers.
The hope was to be on-hand for an incident in which a SWAT team’s use of heavy weapons would be unquestionably warranted.
“I thought the whole time I would be able to show something that would kind of reflect the entire scope of what a SWAT officer might go through sometimes, where you actually do need the equipment,” Atkinson explained.
Instead, the filmmaker repeatedly found himself watching police with military-grade weaponry executing dubious search warrants.
The frequency of the raids was particularly shocking, with one of the officers in the film claiming his team does 200 such operations a year.
By comparison, Atkinson notes, his father performed a total of 29 search warrant raids over his entire 13 years in SWAT - according to some estimates, SWAT teams now carry out between 50,000 to 80,000 raids across the country annually.
“The search warrants, we’re told, are always used for massive drug dealers and kingpins, and then we run in these homes and we never found anything,” Atkinson said.
Beyond the day-to-day breaking down of doors, “Do Not Resist” explores the growing role of private surveillance companies in local policing, and law enforcement’s thirst for technology that can predict crimes before they happen.
An analyst inspects video feeds of a wide-scale aerial surveillance system being utilized by local police departments
The film highlights Persistence Surveillance Systems, a company offering low-cost aerial surveillance honed in Fallujah to domestic law enforcement. “We’re not out to watch the whole world, just all the world that’s got crime,” Ross McNutt, the president of the company, insists.
“That’s the next wave in the militarization of police,” Atkinson told The Intercept in an interview.
“What we found was a whole slew of retired military officers now in the private sector now selling the exact same surveillance technology that they just got back from Iraq and Afghanistan with to local law enforcement for small money on the dollar.”
The intent of “Do Not Resist,” Atkinson said, is to provide a glimpse inside the realities of American policing, challenge the policing-for-profit model that has caused departments in economically depressed communities to treat their citizens as walking ATM machines, call out a warrior culture that divides law enforcement from the public they’re sworn to serve, and flag the dangers of war-zone technologies being applied domestically.
For the most part, the reaction from law enforcement has been positive, Atkinson said.
“I’ve had a lot of law enforcement really respond well to the film and say that it reflects these issues that a lot of them have been working on themselves,” he said.
As for his father, Atkinson said, watching the film stirs up uncomfortable feelings.
“His major reaction was just disappointment in seeing how far the mission creep had actually gone,” he said.
“It’s obviously disappointing to see something that you were dedicating your life to so completely, evolve into something that you would never want to be a part of.”
Obama Decries 'Wild West' [Independent] Media Landscape
October 16 2016 | From: Yahoo
President Barack Obama on Thursday decried America's "wild, wild west" media environment for allowing conspiracy theorists a broad platform and destroying a common basis for debate.
Comment: Oh my, the establishment are having a wee cry now. They are not in carte-blanche control of the news media anymore.
Recalling past days when three television channels delivered fact-based news that most people trusted, Obama said democracy require citizens to be able to sift through lies and distortions.
"We are going to have to rebuild within this wild-wild-west-of-information flow some sort of curating function that people agree to," Obama said at an innovation conference in Pittsburgh.
"There has to be, I think, some sort of way in which we can sort through information that passes some basic truthiness tests and those that we have to discard, because they just don't have any basis in anything that's actually happening in the world," Obama added.
His remarks came amid an election campaign that has seen Republican candidate Donald Trump repeat ideas and take on key staff from right-wing media outlets.
They also come at the end of an eight-year presidency in which Obama has been plagued by false scandals over his place of birth that have forced him to play media-critic-in-chief.
For much of that time, Republicans and Democrats -- which their own media sources -- could rarely agree on even the most basic facts to build a debate.
"That is hard to do, but I think it's going to be necessary, it's going to be possible," he added.
"The answer is obviously not censorship, but it's creating places where people can say 'this is reliable' and I'm still able to argue safely about facts and what we should do about it."
Anyone can read between the lines here. They are desperate for something they are not going to get...
The New Snowden? NSA Contractor Arrested Over Alleged Theft Of Classified Data
October 11 2016 | From: ActivistPost A contractor working for the National Security Agency (NSA) was arrested by the FBI following his alleged theft of “state secrets.”
More specifically, the contractor, Harold Thomas Martin, is charged with stealing highly classified source codes developed to covertly hack the networks of foreign governments, according to several senior law enforcement and intelligence officials.
Martin was employed by Booz Allen Hamilton, the company responsible for most of the NSA’s most sensitive cyber-operations.
Edward Snowden, the most well-known NSA whistleblower, also worked for Booz Allen Hamilton until he fled to Hong Kong in 2013 where he revealed a trove of documents exposing the massive scope of the NSA dragnet surveillance. That surveillance system was shown to have targeted untold numbers of innocent Americans.
According to the New York Times, the theft “raises the embarrassing prospect” that an NSA insider managed to steal highly damaging secret information from the NSA for the second time in three years, not to mention the “Shadow Broker” hack this past August, which made classified NSA hacking tools available to the public.
According to a Department of Justice press release, Martin’s residence in Maryland was raided by the FBI on August 27th, 2016. During the raid, investigators found hard-copy documents and digital information stored on various devices and removable digital media.
The FBI claims that a large percentage of the materials uncovered at Martin’s home were marked as US government property and contained highly classified information including Top Secret and Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI).
Investigators also have claimed to have located government property with a combined value of over $1,000, which Martin allegedly stole. If convicted, he faces up to 11 years in prison for the theft of government property and the removal of classified material.
Snowden himself took to Twitter to comment on the arrest. In a tweet, he said the news of Martin’s arrest “is huge” and asked, “Did the FBI secretly arrest the person behind the reports [that the] NSA sat on huge flaws in US products?” It is currently unknown if Martin was connected to those reports as well.
It also remains to be seen what Martin’s motivations were in removing classified data from the NSA. Though many suspect that he planned to follow in Snowden’s footsteps, the government will more likely argue that he had planned to commit espionage by selling state secrets to “adversaries.”
According to the New York Times article on the arrest, Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea are named as examples of the “adversaries” who would have been targeted by the NSA codes that Martin is accused of stealing.
However, Snowden revealed widespread US spying on foreign governments including several US allies such as France and Germany. This suggests that the stolen “source codes” were likely utilized on a much broader scale.
Electronic harassment / electronic torture / electronic murder is about harrasment, torture and murder using electronic weapons based on radio waves.These weapons have been very refined and can cause effects comparable to many illnesses and/or injuries.
These weapons are not science-fiction but used today illegally by your national secret services on mostly random innocent victims not knowing what is being done to them.
What is Electronic Mind Control / Electronic Mind Reading / Brain Zapping / Synthetic Telepathy / Remote Neural Monitoring?
Electronic mind control is about forcing thoughts into your brain using invisible radio waves (this can be done long range). Your attackers can make you think about a certain person at a certain moment, force a song into your brain (so you will start humming / singing it).
Your attackers can also make you stand up and walk to your kitchen. If you do not know about this then you will be just following the thoughts that were planted into your brain. In other words: you are robotized.
Electronic mind reading is about reading your thoughts using invisible radio waves (this can be done from long ranges). Already it has become 'easy' to decode received brain signals into words spoken to oneself without talking.
At the moment they also make progress with decoding images from what you look at (as seen by you through your eyes).
This is not science-fiction but done today illegally by your national secret services on mostly random innocent victims not knowing what is being done to them.
Microwave weaponry systems like the Active Denial System are used in tandem to deliver physical attacks designed to stress targets, torture them physically, and turn their homes into places of extreme distress. Hoping to drive the target from their home or workplaces.
The pain is unbelievable. It involves tones, harmonics, hissing, stabs, blows, voice to skull transmissions, induced dreams (nightmares), burning sensations in the body and head, internal burning sensations inside of the body and head, crawling sensations on the body (phantom touch), electronic rape, induced and unwanted urination or orgasms, holographic inserts, and many other horrible tortures. My thoughts seem to be scanned every second. -
(Carolyn Palit) I thought I was dying. I thought that I would spontaneously combust into flames. Either it came from a base in the hills, or Commander Solo*, or it came from the heavens. It attacked me for two years. -
Some of his attacks are coming from the direction of the houses of the defendants that he has named in a law suit against these kinds of attacks. But . . . mostly . . . the attacks come from . . . "straight up."
More Information about Electronic Weapons Attacks, Including Mind Control and Mind Reading
On the STOPEG.com website www.stopeg.com there is an CBS News video of the Active Denial System (ADS), a microwave laser weapon. Although the DoD wants us to believe this is a safe weapon (that is why they showed it to us), experts agree it is not!
This video shows a big installation, but there are many kinds of laser weapons. Some are very big and mounted in trucks, ships, aircraft, or even in satellites. But there are also much smaller, portable versions, that can be very effective.
Of course military and secret services have equipment based on the most advanced technology available. Their equipment is not available to the public. But now advanced commercial devices are being shown on the internet giving an idea of how easy it must be for the attackers to cook, burn (torture) a person.
One is a portable (hand-held) laser, the S3 Spyder III Arctic laser. Although it may appear not very sophisticated, imagine someone pointing this at your back when you are in a restaurant or at the movies. To look at people through wall take a look at the XAVER 400 Compact, Tactical Through-Wall Imaging System.
Bio-Hacking and Bio-Robotizing
Rohinie Bisesar, the strikingly beautiful and accomplished financial services analyst and York University MBA with no previous criminal record was charged with first-degree murder in the sudden stabbing death of a young woman.
Many targets wonder how they can be attacked so easily when they move to a different location, e.g. a family member, friend, or go to a hotel. The attackers stuff their portable laser weapons and through-wall imaging devices into their suitcases, book rooms close to yours, and often will attack you from two different angles to confuse you.
In case you prevent them to attack the body area the want to attack, e.g. by putting your back against an outside wall of the hotel, they call in military aircraft that will blast you with very high power microwave (HPM) bursts, cooking your inside. (this happened several times to me, last time on July 6, 2011, while staying in a hotel in Westkapelle, Netherlands, the aircraft arriving around 1 am about 15 minutes after they concluded they could not perform the attacks on my back).
Many people have a problem thinking that others can read their mind, their thoughts. Again, the advanced technology used by military and secret services is not available to the public, but today more and more commercial devices are becoming available.
One company delivering a mind reading headset is Emotive, for USD 299,-. With this device you can control your games, your tv set, etc. with you mind! They also have an API (programming interface) to create your own mind reading application.
Even rudimentary electro-pulse mind reading technologies are publicly reported in the media
I cannot emphasize enough that not all but many attacks are from the sky. When driving your car they may burn your back (from the sky or from some equipment in your own car) when another car is driving behind you and make it go away when the car goes away.
If they do this every time then you probably will think it has to do with the car behind you. When driving your car, walking outside, riding your bike, they may burn your head and make many people you look at scratch their head.
Sometimes people are part of the sick network but many others may just have been beamed the same way you are, having no clue about what is going on (your attackers want you to attack other people, they don't care about anything because they are psychopaths, murderers. child abusers).
Another warning is for a much more confusing type of attack: electronic mind control.
In this case your attackers will plant thoughts into the brain of people surrounding you. Of course these thoughts relate to your life in one way or the other.
They may even plant your (!) thoughts into the heads of people surrounding you. If you do not know about this then you may start to think that these people can read your mind, which can be very depressing. I wrote several article about electronic mind control, if you are a target and do not know about this capabilities you may want to read this.
Youtube video on AudioSpotlight, Subvocal Speech and Microwave hearing:
Electronic Harassment and Electronic Torture List
[Published: February 26, 2009. Updated: February 28, 2009, April 11, 2009, June 10, 2009, June 13, 2009, June 25, 2009, September 6, 2009, December 24, 2009]
Almost anybody can become a (temporary) target of these horrible electronic weapons. Please read what can be done so you are prepared. This is not science fiction but happening right now in our 'democratic' society.
Below is a list of all possible attacks by electronic weapons that I know of by experience. I know more attacks exists. Female targets write about sexual attacks, others mention continuous ringing in the ears, etc. I may add these later. I decided to keep this list personal, i.e. in this blog I write down only what has/is being done to me, not what is being done to others.
These attacks are done by the following kind of electronic weapons:
Directed Energy Weapons (laser weapons), like ELF (very low frequency), ultrasonic, lasers, (high power) microwave weapons
Microwave hearing/Silent Sound (letting you hear sounds/things in other ways then hearing by the ear)
On the internet already a lot of symptoms and attacks by these weapons can be found. Most of these lists do not detail these attacks and that is exactly what I am trying to do here. In my opinion it is not enough to read that such a weapon gives you a burning feeling, instead the horrible details must be exposed!
Description of a (continuous) high intensity microwave weapon attack:
This weapon makes your skin really burn like a very heavy sunburn and cooks your inside, you really feel being cooked alive, you are heated like meat in a microwave oven, with intensities that exceed those of a microwave oven.
Gal is coming out of your throat and fluids inside your body evaporate making you instantly burp. In case of high intensity there is also a burning sensation on the other side of the body, where the beam, of approximately 10-30 cm diameter leaves the body.
If they cook you long enough cooked body cells explode inside you, when aimed at your upper body, lung cells explode / are destroyed and reducing lung capacity immediately noticed when walking stairs or running.
The burning sensation and the cooked-inside feeling will go away after 5-30 minutes or 1-2 days depending on the duration and intensity, it may take a day or more to recover from high power microwave bursts with durations of 5-60 seconds (but can you recover from these amounts of irradiation?).
A cup of milk is heated and starts evaporating after 5-10 seconds. The electronic weapons aimed at you can make you burp or fart within 1-3 seconds, hence the intensity of electromagnetic irradiation is not only used to torture a person but murder as well.
Covert and Intended-to-Notice (or Noticed) Electronic Harassment / Torture
Electronic harassment is called covert if the target does not know about these weapons and methods. If you do not know about these weapons you may think you have all the bad luck in the world, you will wonder what strange things are happening to you, to your body, and accept you do not control your life anymore.
If intended-to-notice (or noticed), electronic harassment is torture in its most horrible form. What would you do if your body is made to react every time to events occurring in your life, e.g. by making you burp or fart, your legs are cooked every night, your ankle is cooked during daytime when working behind your computer, your knee is beamed to cause maximum pain, etc.
To delay you:
They make you go the toilet to urinate when you want to leave your house
They cook your legs before running
They burn and cook your body high power to prevent you doing you work
Note that this delaying is often done together with gang stalking methods like cars blocking your road, phone calls when you are to leave your home, etc.
To make things worse:
They make you sneeze extra times when you have a cold
They cook your throat become sore when you have a cold
They attack your eyes until red with blood
The cook your legs after running
They cook or burn where you have pain already
To torture you:
They cook and burn your body everywhere
They cook your family, your children, friends, …
Note that this torture is often done together with gang stalking methods like synchronizing saw machines, honking horns of cars, screaming birds (pigeons, crows), etc.
The Maximum Pain Business, Beyond Imagination Horror and Cruelty Without Evidence
Special methods have been developed to make you think you have a heart problem, erection problem, toothache, etc.
For the ones exposing these horrendous crimes they developed methods to inflict maximum pain, e.g. by cooking such a person alive with a high power microwave weapon, or burning the skin of the target or making the target burp or fart every few minutes to events occurring in the life of the target (including e.g. opening a website on a computer, saving a file, cars passing by the window, etc. ).
Some authors refer to the development and use of these weapons as the pain business. I would like to make a correction, please call it the maximum pain business.
After accepting that there are really such sick and disgusting creatures actually developing and applying these methods and torture, you also have to accept that it is not about just pressing a button, but also about the way how this torture is applied.
Zapping your eyes red to make you look bad, cooking biceps to prevent you from swimming, cooking your throat to prevent you from singing, inducing heart problems and toothaches to prevent you working or sports. More horror, these methods and procedures could not have been highly developed without being tested on humans, on real persons.
And again more horror, these methods are often used with gang stalking (organized stalking) methods.
Like they cook your ankle with insane intensities making your foot very painful, and when you go outside all kinds of people with leg problems are crossing your path, people limping, in a wheelchair, sometimes even someone without a leg.
Or, they start sawing wood somewhere and when the saw enters the wood cook your body with high intensity microwave.
This torture is applied 24/7, not once every hour but more like once every minute/every 5 minutes. Horrible torture that can be called torturing a person to death.
Special Case: The Heart Attack
Damaging your body can be done in several ways. One vital organ is the heart. They can attack the heart very effective with:
Microwave weapons, cooking the heart area slowly
High Power Microwave (HPM) weapons, cooking the heart area in a second
Ultrasonic weapons, pressurizing the heart area
Heart frequency manipulation weapons
These weapons can damage your heart in a split second, you may not survive such a attack, but can also be used to slowly damage your heart. Slowly cook your heart area so will get a strange feeling and in fact your heart is really damaged.
This makes the Heart Attack Gun that the CIA was forced to admit having
look positively archaic: During Senate testimony in 1975 into illegal activities by the CIA, it was revealed that the agency had developed a dart gun capable of causing a heart attack
Then there is also the frequency manipulation attack, your heart may feel pulsing, blobbing like crazy.
Cook heart area from the front, often together with a cook beam from left behind. Slow damage, horrible feeling
Flash your heart with very high power microwave. Instant damage.
Pressurize your chest, even takes your breath away if applied with enough power
Pulsate your body/heart area with low frequencies
These effects will give you a very realistic heart attack or heart problem feeling feeling. Your heart may start pounding very loud, may feel very painful, the heart area may feel strange, cooked.
If applied with enough power, this really damages your heart and heart area. Your heart is cooked like meat in a microwave oven.
Can you recover from these attacks? In general they will not murder you or leave evidence, your heart may feel very painful for several days after they stop their attacks.
It can take weeks until all pain in the area has disappeared. I am not sure about permanent damage caused by these attacks.
Can you die from such an attack? Yes, if the intensity of the beam is high enough your heart can be damaged or temporarily disturbed in such a way that you will die.
How can you recognize a ‘normal’ heart problem from a ‘induced’ heart problem? You yourself are the best judge of what you feel. If you believe something really is wrong with your heart then visit a doctor. If you are certain your heart is attacked then avoid visiting a doctor as this will confirm a heart problem in case you collapse or die, case closed.
Impossible to Protect Yourself
The human body appears to be extremely vulnerable to electromagnetic irradiation of all kind of frequencies. The human body also is a electromagnetic transmitter and sensitive (radio) equipment can pick up and decode the signals that are generated e.g. when speaking, thinking.
In contrast to a knife or a bullet, electromagnetic signals are not blocked by walls, compare your cell phone.
Limited protection is possible using sheet metal, metal plates, water, vacuum, but if you really are a target the attackers increase intensities (if necessary to insane levels), change frequency, attack from different angles etc.
Also remember that these weapons can hit a person without hitting the person sitting next to this person. They can be aimed and the diameter of the beam can be made small enough to hit only the target.
Anybody Can be a Target
Electronic weapons make it very easy to eliminate persons, to get persons (temporarily) out of the way, to murder persons, etc. all without evidence, and most of the time even the target does not know he is zapped, cooked, burned with electronic weapons. The ones owning and controlling this technology now can get everything they want in a very easy way.
They can get their football player into the national team by temporarily cut out the competitor for the same position in the team.
This could be done with other means as well but it is very easy with electronic weapons. Just cook a person’s ankle and foot during the night and the damage is done. To influence a tennis match you could cook a player by heating the body with microwaves (compare microwave oven).
He will just feel overheated and sick and loose the game.
These are just two examples to demonstrate what can be done. You can imagine almost anybody can become a target. Some people because they are more visible then others, because they have something the sick network wants, because they know something the sick network does not want to be exposed, because they are too intelligent for the sick network, ust for personal reasons because may be they made a remark about someone, etc.
The Phoenix Program Continues Today
The Phoenix Program was a program designed, coordinated, and executed by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), United States special operations forces, US Army intelligence collection units from MACV, special forces operatives from the Australian Army Training Team Vietnam (AATTV), and the Republic of Vietnam's (South Vietnam) security apparatus during the Vietnam War.
The Program was designed to identify and "neutralize" (via infiltration, capture, counter-terrorism, interrogation, and assassination) the infrastructure of the National Liberation Front of South Vietnam (NLF or Viet Cong).
The CIA described it as "a set of programs that sought to attack and destroy the political infrastructure of the Viet Cong". The major two components of the program were Provincial Reconnaissance Units (PRUs) and regional interrogation centers. PRUs would kill or capture suspected NLF members, as well as civilians who were thought to have information on NLF activities.
Many of these people were then taken to interrogation centers where many were allegedly tortured in an attempt to gain intelligence on VC activities in the area. The information extracted at the centers was then given to military commanders, who would use it to task the PRU with further capture and assassination missions.
The program was in operation between 1965 and 1972, and similar efforts existed both before and after that period. By 1972, Phoenix operatives had neutralized 81,740 suspected NLF operatives, informants and supporters, of whom between 26,000 and 41,000 were killed.
Electronic Weapons Can Kill a Person
Besides using electronic weapons to monitor, drive into suicide, cause temporary injuries, they can also be used to kill a person.
Killing is possible by sending wrong signals to the heart making it pulse in abnormal ways, or by increasing intensity and cooking the heart area, damaging the heart slowly. Very high power laser weapons or HPM (= High Power Microwave) weapons can damage your heart in a second.
Although little is known at this time about the effects of long term irradiation, it is not difficult to imagine that this will cause all kinds of diseases as electromagnetic irradiation destroys your DNA (cell with damaged DNA are called cancer). Again all these horrible things can be done, and are done today, without evidence.
How do You Know You are a Target of Electronic Harassment?
It is often very difficult to distinghuish between normal body behaviour and induced body behaviour if there no signs of burning or cooking. For example, would you know the difference between normal diareah and induced diareah?
Yes, you are able to decide what is not normal by comparing your diareah with previous experiences.
It may start and disappear very sudden, may cause other effects like water bubbles leaving your anus, etc. Also, the diareah may be linked to a certain event, like picking up your child, appearance in court, etc.
Always ask yourself what it is you are feeling, did you feel this before? Does it go away when you turn your body 180 degrees? Does it go away when you walk in the streets or drive your car? You are the best judge of what you are feeling.
Your Car May be Tagged
When you are a target you will experience harassment everywhere every time. If you have a car they will tag your car (these are words I learned from a ’so-called target’).
This means they will equip your car with electronic weapons not only to monitor you but also to cook and/or burn your body while driving.
They may also harass the target covert and use the following beams:
Sleep beam, to make the driver very sleepy
Eye beam, slowly cooking they eyes, so tears come out and visibility reduces
Just to confirm, all this is done to cause the (mental or physical) death of the target.
Harassment from (Neighbour) Houses, Cars, Handbags, Airplanes, Satellites
Most of the electronic harassment comes from close neighbor houses. When you walk in the the streets you are probably attacked by electronic weapons (directed energy weapons) from houses (they may be remote controlled or controlled by operator at these locations.
If there are no locations for their equipment, they use these weapons from their cars. You may also be hit from airplanes. This is not difficult to believe if you accept a reach several hundreds of meters. Some targets write about satellites being the source of their electronic harassment. In general I do not believe this is true.
Example of Current State-of-Technology:
You can be hit by very accurate equipment. For example, when you are running on the streets or in the woods you may be ’shot’ with a very high power microwave weapon in your calf from an airplane. The intensity can be such that this causes instant injury.
Your calf is cooked within a split second and your muscles almost instantly tear apart. Making running / walking almost impossible.
Electronic harassment can also be done from small devices carried in e.g. shopping bags in shops or on the street.
You need only a small battery to give the target a single burst that makes him burp or fart. This is enough to depress the target: nowhere safe from this horrible harassment.
Satellites probably play a big role in exchanging information about a target, e.g. you can have a subvocal speech decoding PC in the house next to target, but it is more easy (and safe) to transfer the undecoded information to a central computer system, and return the decoded words. But it may be done on site, PC’s have enough power today to do this decoding themselves.
You May be Attacked by Persons (Family, Friends, co-Workers) Who are Covertly Attacked by Electronic Harassment
The aim of the attackers is to drive the target insane. To speed up things they aim their electronic weapons covertly at family, friends, co-workers, etc. to make them react in several ways to what the target is doing or saying.
Some (easy) methods used to covertly attack other persons:
Scratch beam, to make a person scratch his head
Sneeze beam, to make a person sneeze
Cough beam, to make a person cough
Urge to urinate beam, to make a person go to the toilet
They beam persons around the target on the head so everywhere around the target people are scratching their heads
They beam the target’s head very hard and then beam the head of a friend so that this friend will start scratching his head immediately very visible for the target to see
When the target and partner are in the same, then every time the target opens a website on his PC (not visible for the partner), they beam the throat of the partner causing the partner to cough almost immediately
When the target is beamed in the stomach during work, they make a co-worker sneeze at the same time
When the target is beamed in the stomach, they beam her child in the stomach as well, making the child cry and saying it has stomach pain (this is confirmed by multiple victims)
Once again illegal and (beyond imagination) horrible crimes by our national secret services.
Elite and Secret Services Control our Politicians
It is not amazing that these weapons exist, I studied computer science myself, if you have enough money it is not that special. It is also not amazing that there are actually sick and disgusting creatures walking around free applying this kind of electronic harassment to cause the physical or mental death of a person.
What is amazing is that a lot of high ranked politicians and other influential persons are fully aware of the existence and use of these weapons but do not speak out. What does this say about these persons? I believe you can say that the idea we live in a democracy has disappeared completely.
Elite and Secret Services are Trapped by Their Crimes in Vicious Circles of More Violence Against the People of the World
The ones facilitating, outsourcing and performing this cruel electronic harassment and torture is not just a group of people, these attacks are very well designed and applied by people trained to cause maximum pain but leave no evidence.
The ones I am referring to are our secret services, including military. They are tightening their grip on society, not because they have to protect us against the terrorists in the world, but because they are getting more and more afraid what will happen when the truth about them is exposed.
They are trapped in some sort of vicious circle. To maintain themselves they must commit more and more horrible crimes. And to avoid their crimes are exposed they have to perform new horrible crimes, etc. etc.
So here we have the elite, creating wars to maintain themselves, and their armies, the secret services both trapped in their own lies and deceit. And the horror for us, the people of the world is that we will be taken from (created) threat to (created) war because that is the only way out for the (criminal) elite and (criminal) secret services.
People Cookers and Secret Services
I introduced the word people cookers in 2007 for the creatures facilitating, outsourcing, performing electronic harassment and electronic torture. Main reason is of course that people cooking comes closest to what they are doing.
Most of the harassment and torture is done by microwave irration which causes heating of the skin and your inside just like a microwave oven cooks meat.
There are no words to justify these illegal and horrendous crimes. The ones involved are disgusting creatures, an author called them ‘the failed human beings’ and that is just what they are. They were born human, choose the wrong path in life and degenerated into pieces of shit.
I believe people cooking and gang stalking (organized stalking) are the perfect example of how sick our national secret services have become. They now commit the perfect murder, in their language meaning murder without evidence. And they now steal, torture and murder just because it has become so easy to steal, torture and murder.
Electronic Harassment and Electronic Torture List - December 24, 2009
Below is the list of all (most) effects I experienced from these horrible electronic weapons. Few times I may not correctly describe the source of the effects. It is sometimes difficult to point to microwave or ultrasound.
Both can be very damaging. High Power Microwave cooks your body cells while high power ultrasound simply destroys your body cells. But in the end the result is the same, a damaged body.
Special equipment is used to detect muscle contractions like the ones a person uses when speaking out loud. When spoken to itself these muscle movements can be detected by advanced equipment and translated into words and sentences. As most people talk to themselves when ‘thinking’ this resembles mind reading.
How it is applied
They read your subvocal speech and react to it
Unbelievable at first, then you get depressed because the last thing you thought was private appears not to be private anymore. Then you accept that you probably are even more popular and watched then the big stars in the world and sometimes use it to deceive the bastards. Horrible torture
Why it is applied
To drive you insane
Seeing through your eyes
Although some targets claim that they can see what you see. I have not (yet) experienced this. But they do everything to suggest that they can do this. E.g. on the highway you are bursted with the burp beam every time a favorite model car passes in the opposite direction. They are looking at you from some camera build inside your car or from another car. They are looking at your eyes to see what you are looking at. I experienced a few times I was bursted BEFORE I saw the favorite car. A lot of research in this area is going on, I will keep you updated.
Special advanced equipment is used to beam voices, or in fact any sound, into your head.
How it is applied
They make you hear voices that you should not hear. For example, they let you hear voices from people far away very clear as if they are standing next to you. This an amazing experience. There are a lot of reports of people who claim they are attacked by voices
Why it is applied
To drive you insane
Top of your head beam
The top of your head is very sensitive. They will burn the top with some laser or microwave weapon
How it is applied
They put the beam on your head and wait for you to move
Can be very painfull if applied with enough intensity. You cannot do much with this beam on your head. Horrible torture
If applied with high intensity it may take several days for the painful feeling to disappear
Why it is applied
Prevent you from working, doing your thing
Should you worry
Yes, long term irradition may cause brain damage, tumors
They just beam your head somewhere. The normal reaction is your will start scratching your head.
How it is applied
Mostly applied when other people can see you. If they do this everytime with the same people they may wonder whats wrong with you. They also apply this and have random people scratch their heads and then burn you
Not very painfull, mostly a short pulse, although they may keep the beam on your head and remove it after you start scratchin your head
Why it is applied
Drive you out of your mind, drive you into attacking other people
This beam gives you a headache. It is some kind of high intensity low frequency beam. The headache appears suddenly and also disapears suddenly
Can be very painful
The feeling is that you feel a little bit dizzy, see thing a little foggy.
How it is applied
They may apply this when you drink your first glass of beer, wine, etc. or when you have a cold, or are sensitive to hay fever
They put the microwave beamer on your head and your head is heated. They may do this after you drink a glas of wine, but also after you turn on the central heating of your appartment. You will feel hot, sick, slow.
Ear short burst
Your ear is bursted, the idea is to hit your eardrum. With your eardrum cooked/damaged you have a strange feeling.
Ear continous beam
Your ear is beamed for very long time just to present you pain, they want you to move.
It appears your eardrum and surrounding area is very sensitive. This is very painful.
Your eye is bursted and you have instant blurred vision. Often your eye will start tearing
How it is applied
Some kind of miocrowave burst, see also Phasr and other similar military weapons used to blind the enemy
Not really painfull but you cannot do much as you are used to two eyes.
Why it is applied
Prevent you from working
Should you worry
Yes, this is very damaging for your eyes
Your eye is bursted with some kind of laser beam
Like they drive a needle into your eye. Very painful
Why it is applied
Just below eye, tremble
They beam at they area below your eye and the flesh below it starts trembling. They can do this in shops and through wall
Burn (beard) hair
They burn away hair at certain locations, e.g. your moustache hair just below your nose holes to create the illusion of a leaking nose
How it is applied
This is just a laser hair removal procedure, like performed in many beauty parlors
You are bursted and must sneeze. This is a tinglin sensation that can make you sneeze in an instant
How it is applied
You can turn your head in the other direction or hold your hand before your nose to make sure the attack is caused by electronic weapons
Why it is applied
To make your body react to something
You have a runny nose but do not have a cold. You may start thinking you have some kind of strange cold but you have not. Once you are out of the beam, the runny nose disappears.
How it is applied
I am not sure if this is done only by electronic weapon or by a combination of some drug and electronic weapon
Your throat is bursted with a high intensity burst and you start coughing instantly. This coughing does not look like normal coughing. You will have a sore throat immediately afterwards.
Like something fluid/moisture sticks in your lungs, or sometimes your throat. When you breath you hear/feel a rasping sound. You must cough very hard to throw it out.
Using a low frequency beam they induce a toothache, this really is a horrrible feeling. It is like a true toothache but now when you move out of the beam it disappears.
Why it is applied
Prevent you from doing anything, just plain torture
Your throat is sowly cooked and you will almost immediately notice less volume and after some time pain while speaking
How it is applied
They can do this in just one or two hours by aiming a high power beam at your throat.
Why it is applied
Prevent you from speaking loud, prevent you to sing
This is very high intensity burst on your head. There is no pain but it feels like the result having been hit on the head very hard. You feel a bit dizzy and your ears are ringing
On top of shoulder
A very painfull beam on the top of your shoulder
Why it is applied
I call this beam: through-body-beam. You are really cooked by this beam. If applied with enough intensity you will feel a burning sensation on the back (where it enters), then feel the beam cook your insde, then you start burping, then you feel a burning sensation on the other part of your body where the beam leaves your body
How it is applied
This beam can be applied everywhere, form the house next to yours, from cars. When they beam you outside the intensity often is higher as they want to make sure are hit properly
You feel like being microwaved. Very painfull, horrible torture
They put the microwave beamer on your body for a long time and you have the feeling you are cooked alive which in effect is a very accurate description of what is being done
You feel like being cooked alive, horrible torture
This is a low power sophisticated version of the chest/lungs cook beam. It is difficult to locate the source direction.
How it is applied
It takes approx. 2-3 seconds to make you burp, make your body react to events. They also may apply low intensity, so you get an irresistable urge to burp but cannot
Why it is applied
To make you suffer. This applied sometimes once every five minutes, but sometimes also several times a minute to let your body react to events like cars passing your window, etc. Horrible torture.
Heart attack incl. extra beam from left behind
This is a low frequency high power beam aimed at your heart, mostly from a position somewhere in front of you. To maximze the effect they simultaneously beam you from the left behind position with a microwave cook beam.
How it is applied
As they may apply the from behaind beam for a long period your flesh around the heart area may get cooked and the whole area may feel painfiul and stiff
This really gives you the feeling of having a heart problem, and in fact you have! The difference is that this one is applied by murderers. Horrible torture
It may take several days before you recover (if they stop the beam)
Should you worry
Yes, your heart is vital
Heart attack high power burst
This is a very high power burst of very short duration, 1 second or less, that will give you immediately an extremely painful heart (area). This beam is really amazing: I believe it can kill you in an instant
How it is applied
They can do this through wall anytime
It may take several days before your body recovers and it all feels normal again
This may be done seperate from other heart attacks. Your heart may start feel pulsing funny, the feeling is very massive, it also feels like bubling, like the heart lost control of normal operation and just pulses somewhat
How it is applied
Not only frightening but also very painful
They put a pressure beam on your chest this will take your breath away and you may think your are having a heart problem. This can have various intensities
They burn the skin of your back. This can be low intensity or high intensity. The feeling is you have a sun burn, in case of high intensities it will also color your back a little red.
How it is applied
This almost instant skin cooking. Refer to ADS (Active Denial System) for details
Why it is applied
Present pain. To move you out of the way, to make you leave the swimming pool, etc.
This is an overwhelming effect. This is like a shower but not with water but with electronic pulses.
The temperature of your body is increased giving you the feeling you have a flu or some kind of illness.
Beaming in your side gives you the idea you have spleen pain
How it is applied
They often do this during high intensity sport activities. The idea is to make you belive you have real spleen pain and will stop your exercise
They cook your biceps to reduce their power , make them feel painful when you load them during e.g. swimming. This may be done to prevent you from doing your sports.
muscle weakening in hand
They beam your hands. The result is that you can not hold a pen between thumb and finger like you used to, also you can not put you fingers against each other (like making a cup with your hand). They may do this to prevent you from working or doing your sports e.g. swimming.
They put a beam on your stomach and the stomach begins to bubble like something is cooking inside.
How it is applied
They often do this at night.
Should you worry
Yes, long term irradition may cause stomach cancer, tumors
With some kind of ultrasound beam they attack your kidneys. The feeling is like you have been kicked over and over in your sides. This is like the feeling that is described by patients that have their kidney stones crushed by ultrasound.
Intestines cooking, urge to defecate
They cook your intestines and you feel you have to fart but cannot.
They cook your intestines and it will start bubbling. After some time you will have to fart
blind gut attack
they cook the area around your tail bone. After a short period, depending on the intensity this may take 60 seconds or more, you will feel horrible cramps.
This pain makes you crawl on the floor. Horrible torture
It takes at least one hour before the horrible cramps get a litle less painful.
How to detect
With normal cramps you will have other parts of your body react as well, like heavy sweating. In this case there is just intense pain.
They cook your intestines and you have a very strong feeling to go to the toilet. By continously beaming you have very heavy diarreah
Why it is applied
Keep you out of important events, e.g. A lawsuit where you havve to defend yourself
This beam makes your erection go away, if you are a man of course. This can be done in 20-30 seconds. Depending on the direction of the beam your intestines may start bubbling though not very loud
Urge to urinate
They beam your lower body so you will feel the urge to urinate. It is difficult to ignore and there will come a moment you will have to do this when the beam continues.
The feeling is that your movement is blocked. You must take care not to fall or make a strange move
This will cause pain to your knee
High intensity beaming
The put the beamer on your knee and make sure it stays there for hours. The location may vary ut just above the knee cap can cause a lot of pain. This will result in very much pain and a very sensitive knee.
How it is applied
After a few days your knee hurts a lot when walking. They may apply this also when biking to make you think something is wrong with your knee
Very painful, horrible torture
They apply low intensity, low power beam to your legs, e.g. When you are in bed. Your muscles, legs feel stif the next morning. They may start cooking the calfs after you finished running, and after some time before you want to go running to prevent you from running
How it is applied
What happens when you increase load on cooked muscles? They tear apart
Very painful, horrible torture
Why it is applied
Prevent you from running, other sports
This beam is in fact a very high power burst and can cook your calf from hundreds of meters in a split second. If you are running your cooked muscles will tear apart and you have instant injury. See also Heart attack high power burst. You may notice the following feeling: a needle going in and out of your calf within a second
Very painful, horrible torture
Why it is applied
Prevent you from runningm, other sports
They cook the skin of your shin with very high intensities. When you are running, the shin injury is a well-known. They may start cooking the skin of of your shin after you finished running, and after some time (days) before you want to go running to prevent you from running
Very painful, horrible torture
Why it is applied
Prevent you from running, other sports
The cook your heel muscle. This muscle does not contain much nerves so it is difficult to detect before the damage has been done. Then you will think back and remember there was something wrong the previous day or days.
Walking can be painful.
Why it is applied
Prevent you from running, other sports
They cook your ankles, just to cause you pain. You feel the beam and it is difficult to keep your leg in the same position because of the pain. This is often a applied for a long period of time, several hours.
May take several days to disappear when applied with high intensities
They beam very hard in the center of your foot
Very painful, horrible torture
They burst the center of your foot with max power very short burst beam, only once while walking even in a crowded place. This causes insane pain and you may fall immediately, because the foot is not functioning anymore.
Extremely painful, horrible torture
They pick a single toe and beam it for several days in a row
They burst your toes with with max power very short burst beam, and do this several times. This causes insane pain.
How it is applied
They may do this while riding your bike, horrible torture
Ultrasonic beam to block the movement of a foot. If you are not prepared for this block you may fall.
Your whole body starts shaking like being in a aircraft in bad weather. The frequency is around 5 Hz. The intensity may amaze you.
They apply a scratch beam to any part of your body. This beam is very hard to resist. Before you know it you may start scratching yourself like crazy
Some high power acoustic beamer is aimed at your leg and after some time your leg feels non-cooperative, not part of your body anymore
They beam you with a frequency that makes you really feel sleepy. You will start yawning and cannot keep your eyes open. This efect starts very suddenly and often ends very abrupt.
How it is applied
They may also do this by devices built into your car
Not a very pleasant feeling but not veru disturbing or damaging
See the world turning
You feel dizzy and see the world turing like when you are very very tired. This effect is not really very real. The moment you are out-of-the-beam you are not turning anymore. Still it is amazing that this can be done.
With this well-known beam they will keep you awake, prevent you from sleeping. This way they wear you out, may be the next day you have an important meeting or must finish important work.
Sweating, nauseous, vomit feeling
You start sweating suddenly, you feel dizzy, you think you may have to vomit. When applied with enough intensity you will start to vomit, you will need at least 30 minutes to recover a little bit from this attack, but it will take hours before your body is acting a bit like before the attack.
How it is applied
They may do this when you are with a friend. Google: navy vomit beam
You have strange dreams about things but the dreams are not like dreams you had before. The dreams may refer to very recent events in your life, like a person you met, a movie yu saw, it is another form of reacting to events in your life
How it is applied
Some people in your environment might tell you they have wild dreams that night trying to get you talking about your experience
The only way to save the world is to stop your national secret services. Breaking laws and violating human rights in horrible ways has become a way of life. They are responsible for most problems in your neighborhood, in your city, in your country, in the world. Make them responsible for what they are doing.
Let them account for in detail, force them to open up their organizations for thorough investigations. Stop their funding if they do not co-operate. Replace directors and staff immediately by normal people for starters.
Whatever You Do, Do Not Use Google "Allo": Snowden
September 27 2016 | From: RT
Google Allo, the new “smart” chat app launched on Wednesday, is ‘dangerous’ and should be avoided, according to whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Allo, designed to unseat chat pack leader WhatsApp, promises to deliver quick conversations with features like; “Smart Reply” that can guess your answers and respond to messages with just the tap of a button, and “Google Assistant”, which answers your questions and helps you search for things directly in your chat.
How does Allo plan on predicting your every word and witty emoji, you ask? “The more you use it, the more it improves over time,” which basically means they’ll collect and store as much of your data as possible and then use artificial intelligence to guess your replies.
However, the efficiency of time-saving typing may end up costing customers their already compromised privacy.
When Google first announced the introduction of Allo earlier this year they, too, had planned end-to-end-encryption in “Incognito Mode” and assured they would only store messages transiently, rather than indefinitely.
However, it now appears that Google won’t be doing that after all. Wednesday’s announcement revealed Google plans to store all conversations that aren’t specifically started in “incognito mode” by default.
As Snowden pointed out, last year every single one of the NSA and FBI’s 1,457 surveillance requests was granted by the US foreign intelligence surveillance court… and Allo’s stored data (i.e. your data) will be fair game too.
In contrast, all of WhatsApp’s chats are encrypted and unreadable - although they did announce last month that they will now be sharing your contacts and who you talk to with Facebook.
Oliver Stone Warns Moviegoers: Beware Of Your Smartphones, 'This Will Be Our Undoing'
September 21 2016 | From: Sott Oliver Stone, director of the upcoming film Snowden, will deliver a dark warning to moviegoers at the start of the movie: turn your phone off, and keep it off.
In an ominous one-minute clip, Stone appears in a decadent den with a smartphone in his hand. He discusses the benefits of the technology, compete with a cut to cute cats, before warning that users are giving all their information to "them."
""That's not all it does," Stone says as the tone of the PSA intensifies.
"It allows certain parties to track your every move every time you make a call or send a text. We are giving them access. The information you've put out into the world voluntarily is enough to burn your life to the ground. This will be our undoing."
Stone then looks into the camera and states, "Do the rest of the people in the audience a big favor: turn off your phone during the movie."
A narrator then jumps in with a disclaimer that, "Oliver Stone's views are not necessarily that of this theater, or its owners, you're welcome to turn your phone back on after the movie."
In a statement to Ars Technica, PR firm Submersive Media, acting on behalf of the film's production company Open Road Films, added that Stone would like people to turn their phones off permanently.
"Oliver Stone would like you to shut off your cell phone during the movie, and then shut it off forever," the statement reads.
Speaking in San Diego at Comic-Con last month, Stone also spoke out against Google and Pokemon GO, calling the wildly popular game "a new level of invasion."
"I'm hearing about it too, it's a new level of invasion. Once the government had been hounded by Snowden, of course the corporations went into encryption, because they had to for survival, right? But the search for profits is enormous here. Nobody has ever seen, in the history of the world, something like Google, ever," Stone told the crowd.
"It's the biggest, new, fastest-growing business ever, and they have invested huge amounts of money into what surveillance is, which is data-mining."
The Oscar-winning director warned that, by using technology, governments can manipulate behavior, creating "robot" societies under totalitarian regimes.
"They're data-mining every person in this room for information as to what you're buying, what you like, and above all, your behaviour. Pokémon GO kicks into that. But this is everywhere. It's what some people call surveillance capitalism. It's the newest stage.
It's not for profit in the beginning, but it becomes for profit in the end," the director continued. "It manipulates your behavior. It has happened already quite a bit on the internet, but you'll see it everywhere—you'll see a new form of, frankly, a robot society, where they will know how you want to behave and they will make the mockup that matches how you behave and feed you. It's what they call totalitarianism."
Snowden will be released in theaters in the US on September 16.
Not So Smart Technology: Safety Inspector Blows The Whistle On Fire Hazards Of 'Smart' Electronics
September 20 2016 | From: Sott / If you think your "smart" appliances are the "cat's whiskers," then please think again! Actually, in my opinion, they are the dumbest things ever invented that have been able to buffalo consumers into spending their hard-earned money to purchase, but have the greatest potential for causing consumers harm and grief.
Recently, I received an email from one of my readers who had to attend a fire safety training session for 'their' job. That instructional course was given by none other than a Delaware County, Pennsylvania Fire Investigator, who was quite explicit in his presentation about certain fire causes.
Here's what the email said for which this sender gave permission to share:
“He [the trainer] mentioned in the beginning of his presentation how fire deaths were down, but house fires were up dramatically across the nation. [CJF emphasis added]
Later during the Q&A, I asked him in front of the whole group [what were] the causes of these fires. He mentioned all the electronics - WiFi/Bluetooth gadgets, cheap phone chargers, iPads, wide screen TVs, etc.
I interrupted to say "how about smart meters" to which he replied: Anything "smart" is a fire hazard.
This [smart] technology is so new, and they haven't tested or developed it adequately enough yet.
He went on to poke fun at "smart" wired houses having everything linked and what a hazard that can cause.
Then after the presentation, I commented how I heard that as this technology ages, it becomes even more potentially hazardous, which he affirmed, and also mentioned that
More car fires occur because of all the electronic gadgetry now.”
All the above information is yet another confirmation with implications for Consumer Protection Law(s) at local and state levels regarding "smart" consumer appliances and fires, which insurance companies - especially AMI Smart Meter fires - are declining coverage for!
But there is even more serious damage happening every minute of the day from microwave technology, which smart appliances operate on. It's called electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs/RFs) that emit non-ionizing radiation which cause adverse health effects known as "non-thermal" effects.
Comment: Dr. Barrie Trower, a British physicist has acquired a great deal of expertise in the microwave field, extending his research to common electronic systems, including cell phones, iPods, computer games and microwave ovens. His research has shown that microwave radiation is extremely hazardous, especially to pregnant women and young children.
The risks are so great that the use of WiFi can lead to permanent genetic damage to our children and subsequent generations.
Consumers, when they really learn the downside of "smart technology," obviously will have to beef up their activism to get the protection they need for their health and properties, as the industries involved - and more sadly - states public utility commissions - really don't give a hoot about the harms caused, otherwise they would be enacting legislation to deal with them.
And then there's this information that I received from readers whose privacy I respect and honor, but will share their information. In sharing information like the following from a reader in Canada, it is that consumers become aware, physically safer plus empowered:
“People need to be getting documentation about all of these fires. Media articles are often the starting point, but they are anecdotal. Once there is what sounds like a smart meter fire, request and obtain the official fire report from the state or provincial fire commissioner.
Find out what the legal reporting and investigating requirements are. If the fire is believed to be electrical, who does the investigation and how is he informed about the fire? Are the laws being followed?
Are meters being removed? It takes time and digging but I can't find anyone else who is getting this sort of info for fires in their areas. It is only when this documentation is obtained for many fires and patterns are found that things will be taken seriously.
In the US the Consumer Affairs Dept.  has agreed to gather reports on smeter fires. I have sent her a few because the ITRON meters we use are the same used in many places in the US. But in Canada our meters are not considered "consumer" goods since the utilities own them.
This agency should be informed but it requires full documentation - not just media reports."
Note that here's what I think our kind and thoughtful Canadian neighbor is referring to:
“The US Consumer Products Safety Commission (CPSC) is a federal agency that will take complaints on utility smart meters from all US states. If you have or had smart meter electrical or fire problems CALL: (800) 638-2772 Monday through Friday from 8:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. ET or submit your complaint by email. "
However, I must caution a consumer that, if or when you experience an AMI Smart Meter ('smeter') fire, immediately after the fire has been extinguished and it is safe to do so, take photographs with your cell phone and a regular camera, so you can have "secured" documentation because things can get 'lost' in cyberspace! Remember to attach copies of those photos with the smeter fire report you file with the US Consumer Products Safety Commission.
Additionally, I must share that I've heard stories that the power company immediately removes the fire-damaged meter and does not allow consumers access to it or to keep a fire-damaged meter as 'proof' for insurance purposes. It seems that 'games' are being played, and insurance companies 'buy' into them too!
Fire safety regarding all 'smart' technology should be enforced by consumer products safety commissions, municipalities and code enforcement departments at local and state levels. Obviously they are not doing that when it comes to AMI Smart Meters made with heat-sensitive plastic parts. Analog meters were made of glass and steel parts.
Learn how to protect yourself from smart technology EMFs/RFs and fire hazards.
New Zealand Intelligence And Security Bill September 3 2016 | From: TheContrail
This draconian Bill, currently in the process of being passed by our Parliament, effectively merging the GCSB and SIS intelligence agencies, and giving them greatly increased surveillance powers with the police - operating independently of the normal judicial system; has all happened before and is further linked to the Kim Dotcom appeal trial at the High Court in Auckland at present.
Basically it is transferring the entire country into a police surveillance state, such as was previously operated in Nazi Germany.
New Zealand Intelligence and Security Bill - First Reading
While this process is happening in many other countries at present as well, that is no excuse for us here in NZ to be indifferent about it.
I thought I would briefly summarize what is happening using a brief timeline of short YouTube clips:
On September 2012, after Kim Dotcom had been illegally arrested through the SIS and GCSB spying on him on behalf of the American NSA, he attended the New Zealand Parliament hearing on a new intelligence Bill grilling John Key about it.
In July 2013, Kim Dotcom, while his extradition battle was continuing, spoke to Parliament’s Intelligence and Security Select Committee & NZ PM John Key arguing against the increased draconian extension of GCSB powers.
Here is a brief clip of the Kim Dotcom Protest and his speech July 27, 2013:
Here is the Campbell Live TV program dissecting the GCSB Bill with Kim Dotcom Scandal. (This is in part why John Campbell is no longer employed on NZ public television!):
Hitler’s police state gained so much evil power by merging the SS and Gestapo (secret intelligence agencies and private police) (as is recommended in this evil NZ Bill).
This allowed them
to arrest anyone SEPARATE from the normal judicial system which, was allowed to continue to operate and coexist making Germans think they were still living in a democracy when the truth was it was a brutal dictatorship.
Following the merger of the intelligence agencies under the SS, they were then linked with the Gestapo (private secret police) who arrested anyone they liked, and brought them before a new, special court called the People’s Court (Volksgerichtshof) in Berlin.
This court wickedly condemned thousands of good people to death as “Volk Vermin” for even briefly criticizing Hitler. That is what they are trying to do with Kim Dotcom and his colleagues now by having them extradited to the United States where they will be tried by a kangaroo court.
Fascism is very cunning isn’t it? We often think Germans en mass were incredibly stupid to follow Hitler and Fascism. But now, we, the WW2 victor nations, are doing it ourselves. What a pack of idiots!
The New Zealand Prime Minister, John Key, is the son of a Jewish Holocaust Survivor [supposed son, supposed holocaust]. What a disgrace. He, above all of us, should know more about the full implications of what he is doing!
In Nazi Germany, the great paradox was that many of those who were most loyal to the Fuhrer were the first to get a bullet in the back of the head, not only the Jews.
On both counts, the New Zealand Prime Minister should know better. This is what a career in banking does to the mind. Other than filthy lucre – severe amnesia!
So yes. Just carry on watching the football on TV you men, and Soaps on TV you women and one chilling evening [should they have their way] there might be a brisk knock on your door from the new resurrected SS or New World Order Gestapo to take you or your children away forever, for being a threat to “national security” using the new GCSB / SIS draconian warrants.
This is the option they want to be able to exercise.
Inquisition 2.0: The Internet Is Being Taken Hostage By The NWO September 2 2016 | From: Infowars
The globalists may have officially obtained total control of the internet?
Let’s go over the mounting evidence that the internet as we know it will be commandeered by globalist censors beginning midnight October 1st, when an entirely new era of the internet will begin.
Originally, President Obama promised that the Fed’s handover of the antitrust protected Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers or ICANN would not involve the United Nations.
Was this, yet again, a naive move by an incompetent President of the United States?
Or has this been the plan all along?
Kim Dotcom Wins Bid To Livestream On YouTube His Extradition Appeal September 1 2016 | From: TVNZ
Internet entrepreneur Kim Dotcom has won a bid to livestream on YouTube his battle against extradition to the United States.
The 42-year-old Megaupload founder has this week returned to court to appeal a decision allowing him to be extradited from New Zealand over criminal copyright charges.
Comment: The final outcome of this court case here in New Zealand right now ultimately will decide the freedom of the entire global Internet as we know it!
On top of that, at issue is national sovereignty, and whether multinational corporations can be allowed to manipulate the sovereign laws of one country or through international trade agreements etc. to take precedence over the sovereign laws of another independent country – in this case New Zealand.
Incredibly, against strong opposition from the US Government yesterday, the judge is allowing this appeal trial to be live-streamed to the world on YouTube, starting today, but as yet, I haven’t been able to find it.
So all this means, if the live-streaming goes ahead, the multinational corporate media cannot CENSOR the truth about the case as they have been.
Today, the presiding judge gave permission for the entire six weeks of the appeal hearing to be broadcast on YouTube by a cameraman hired by Dotcom.
Between the direct effect on millions of Megaupload users as well as the precedent the case would set, the public interest merited complete coverage standard media channels could not provide, Dotcom's lawyer, Ron Mansfield, had argued at the High Court in Auckland.
“This is a case of the internet age," he said.
Lawyers for the United States oppose the livestream, saying Dotcom was not sufficiently accountable for the coverage - as a media organisation would be - and that the footage could prejudice a criminal case in the US if the extradition went ahead.
But Justice Murray Gilbert allowed the stream to go ahead, on the grounds the comments and live-chat features for the video were disabled, the video was taken down after the trial and the broadcast was delayed for 20 minutes to avoid publishing of sensitive material.
"This is breaking new ground. New Zealand at the forefront of transparent justice! Leadership!" Dotcom tweeted moments later.
The livestream will start tomorrow. In December, Judge Nevin Dawson ruled Dotcom and his three associates - Mathias Ortmann, Finn Batato and Bram van der Kolk - had criminal charges to face in the US over their part in running file-sharing website Megaupload.
The four men face charges of conspiracy to commit racketeering, conspiracy to commit money laundering, wire fraud and two kinds of criminal copyright infringement based on an FBI investigation going back to 2010.
If extradited and found guilty in the US, the men could be up for decades in jail.
Australia Becomes First Country To Begin Microchipping Its Public August 31 2016 | From: NeonNettle
Australia is to become the first country in the world to microchip its public. NBC news predicted that all Americans would be microchipped by 2017, but it seems Australia may have beaten them to the post. These idiots must be some of the most stupid people alive.
News.com.au reports: It may sound like sci-fi, but hundreds of Australians are turning themselves into super-humans who can unlock doors, turn on lights and log into computers with a wave of the hand.
Shanti Korporaal, from Sydney, is at the centre of the phenomenon after having two implants inserted under her skin.
Now she can get into work and her car without carrying a card or keys, and says her ultimate goal is to completely do away with her wallet and cards.
“You could set up your life so you never have to worry about any password or PINs” she told news.com.au.
“It’s the same technology as Paypass, so I’m hoping you’ll be able to pay for things with it.
With Opal you get a unique identification number that could be programmed into the chip. Any door with a swipe card... it could open your computer, photocopier. Loyalty cards for shops are just another thing for your wallet.”
The microchips, which are the size of a grain of rice, can act like a business card and transfer contact details to smartphones, and hold complex medical data.
Shanti has had some messages from ultra-conservative Christians on Facebook telling her she’s going to hell, but the reaction has mainly been one of intrigue.
“My nana wants one,” laughs Shanti. “I’ve had more opposition to my tattoos than I’ve ever had to the chip. My friends are jealous.”
When the 27-year-old realised just how coveted the implants were, she set up an Australian distribution service called Chip My Life with her husband, Skeeve Stevens.
It costs between $80 and $140 depending on the sophistication of the technology, and (while you can do it at home) they work with doctors who charge $150 to insert the implant.
“They do minor surgery, Botox and so on,” says Shanti. “They give you a local, an injection and a quick ultrasound to make sure it’s in place.”
The biohacking couple both have RFID (radio-frequency identification) chips in their left hands and NFC (near-field communication) chips in the right. The implant is almost impossible to spot, leaving a mark as small as a freckle.
Shanti is appearing at today’s Sydney launch of cyborg-themed video game Deus Ex Mankind Divided alongside US implantable technology pioneer Amal Graafstra.
Amal considers himself a guinea-pig for human augmentation, making headlines in the US last week with a prototype of the world’s first implant-activated smart gun.
He became one of the world’s first RFID implantees in 2005, and has since founded an online store to sell the “at home” kits to people who want to “upgrade their body”. He’s written a book, spoken at TEDx and appeared in documentaries.
“On a psychological level, this is completely different to a smartphone or a Fitbit, because it goes in you,” he told news.com.au.
“Your kidneys are working hard but you’re not thinking about them, it’s not something you have to manage.
It’s given me the ability to communicate with machines. It’s literally integrated into who I am.”
He is aware of the ethical and security concerns, but points out that the data is encrypted, and most of your access cards are not secure anyway. This is simply a case of “computing in the body.”
Rather than worry about people being forced to be microchipped, he’s now busy advocating for the rights of citizens who use them.
He believes the destruction of the chip could in some cases classify as assault (as with a pacemaker) and other dangers might be governments forcibly extracting implants or data from them.
“I want to make sure it’s treated as part of the body, like an organ,” he says.
One firm in Sweden has allowed employees to choose chips over a work pass, with 400 taking up the offer, but Amal says he more often hears from interested individuals who want to try it out.
“At the moment, it’s mainly access - house, computer motorcycle. But in the future there’s the potential to use it for transit, payment. You could get rid of your keys and maybe your wallet.”
Other uses might include children tapping to let parents know they are at school safely, refugees checking in at camps or women at shelters.
It can share diet, exercise and sleep inform
ation with you and your doctor, and the next generation could even release medicine as and when you need it. For Shanti, adding an extra dimension to life is a childhood fantasy come true.
“Ever since watching movies like the Terminator, Matrix and Minority Report I wondered if we could actually live like that. I always wondered why we all weren’t living as ‘super-humans’.”
The NSA Leak Is Real, Snowden Documents Confirm August 23 2016 | From: TheIntercept
Last Monday a group calling itself the “ShadowBrokers” announced an auction for what it claimed were “cyber weapons” made by the NSA. Based on never-before-published documents provided by the whistleblower Edward Snowden, The Intercept can confirm that the arsenal contains authentic NSA software, part of a powerful constellation of tools used to covertly infect computers worldwide.
The provenance of the code has been a matter of heated debate this week among cybersecurity experts, and while it remains unclear how the software leaked, one thing is now beyond speculation: The malware is covered with the NSA’s virtual fingerprints and clearly originates from the agency.
The evidence that ties the ShadowBrokers dump to the NSA comes in an agency manual for implanting malware, classified top secret, provided by Snowden, and not previously available to the public.
The draft manual instructs NSA operators to track their use of one malware program using a specific 16-character string, “ace02468bdf13579.” That exact same string appears throughout the ShadowBrokers leak in code associated with the same program, SECONDDATE.
Its release by ShadowBrokers, alongside dozens of other malicious tools, marks the first time any full copies of the NSA’s offensive software have been available to the public, providing a glimpse at how an elaborate system outlined in the Snowden documents looks when deployed in the real world, as well as concrete evidence that NSA hackers don’t always have the last word when it comes to computer exploitation.
But malicious software of this sophistication doesn’t just pose a threat to foreign governments, Johns Hopkins University cryptographer Matthew Green told The Intercept:
"The danger of these exploits is that they can be used to target anyone who is using a vulnerable router. This is the equivalent of leaving lockpicking tools lying around a high school cafeteria. It’s worse, in fact, because many of these exploits are not available through any other means, so they’re just now coming to the attention of the firewall and router manufacturers that need to fix them, as well as the customers that are vulnerable.
So the risk is twofold: first, that the person or persons who stole this information might have used them against us. If this is indeed Russia, then one assumes that they probably have their own exploits, but there’s no need to give them any more. And now that the exploits have been released, we run the risk that ordinary criminals will use them against corporate targets."
The NSA did not respond to questions concerning ShadowBrokers, the Snowden documents, or its malware.
A Memorable SECONDDATE
The offensive tools released by ShadowBrokers are organized under a litany of code names such as POLARSNEEZE and ELIGIBLE BOMBSHELL, and their exact purpose is still being assessed. But we do know more about one of the weapons: SECONDDATE.
SECONDDATE is a tool designed to intercept web requests and redirect browsers on target computers to an NSA web server. That server, in turn, is designed to infect them with malware. SECONDDATE’s existence was first reported by The Intercept in 2014, as part of a look at a global computer exploitation effort code-named TURBINE. The malware server, known as FOXACID, has also been described in previously released Snowden documents.
Other documents released by The Intercept today not only tie SECONDDATE to the ShadowBrokers leak but also provide new detail on how it fits into the NSA’s broader surveillance and infection network. They also show how SECONDDATE has been used, including to spy on Pakistan and a computer system in Lebanon.
The top-secret manual that authenticates the SECONDDATE found in the wild as the same one used within the NSA is a 31-page document titled “FOXACID SOP for Operational Management” and marked as a draft. It dates to no earlier than 2010. A section within the manual describes administrative tools for tracking how victims are funneled into FOXACID, including a set of tags used to catalogue servers. When such a tag is created in relation to a SECONDDATE-related infection, the document says, a certain distinctive identifier must be used:
The same SECONDDATE MSGID string appears in 14 different files throughout the ShadowBrokers leak, including in a file titled SecondDate-3021.exe. Viewed through a code-editing program (screenshot below), the NSA’s secret number can be found hiding in plain sight:
All told, throughout many of the folders contained in the ShadowBrokers’ package (screenshot below), there are 47 files with SECONDDATE-related names, including different versions of the raw code required to execute a SECONDDATE attack, instructions for how to use it, and other related files.
After viewing the code, Green told The Intercept the MSGID string’s occurrence in both an NSA training document and this week’s leak is “unlikely to be a coincidence.”
Computer security researcher Matt Suiche, founder of UAE-based cybersecurity startup Comae Technologies, who has been particularly vocal in his analysis of the ShadowBrokers this week, told The Intercept “there is no way” the MSGID string’s appearance in both places is a coincidence.
Where SECONDDATE Fits In
This overview jibes with previously unpublished classified files provided by Snowden that illustrate how SECONDDATE is a component of BADDECISION, a broader NSA infiltration tool. SECONDDATE helps the NSA pull off a “man in the middle” attack against users on a wireless network, tricking them into thinking they’re talking to a safe website when in reality they’ve been sent a malicious payload from an NSA server.
According to one December 2010 PowerPoint presentation titled “Introduction to BADDECISION,” that tool is also designed to send users of a wireless network, sometimes referred to as an 802.11 network, to FOXACID malware servers.
Or, as the presentation puts it, BADDECISION is an “802.11 CNE [computer network exploitation] tool that uses a true man-in-the-middle attack and a frame injection technique to redirect a target client to a FOXACID server.” As another top-secret slide puts it, the attack homes in on “the greatest vulnerability to your computer: your web browser.”
One slide points out that the attack works on users with an encrypted wireless connection to the internet.
That trick, it seems, often involves BADDECISION and SECONDDATE, with the latter described as a “component” for the former. A series of diagrams in the “Introduction to BADDECISION” presentation show how an NSA operator “uses SECONDDATE to inject a redirection payload at [a] Target Client,” invisibly hijacking a user’s web browser as the user attempts to visit a benign website (in the example given, it’s CNN.com).
Executed correctly, the file explains, a “Target Client continues normal webpage browsing, completely unaware,” lands on a malware-filled NSA server, and becomes infected with as much of that malware as possible - or as the presentation puts it, the user will be left “WHACKED!” In the other top-secret presentations, it’s put plainly: “How do we redirect the target to the FOXACID server without being noticed”? Simple: “Use NIGHTSTAND or BADDECISION.”
The sheer number of interlocking tools available to crack a computer is dizzying. In the FOXACID manual, government hackers are told an NSA hacker ought to be familiar with using SECONDDATE along with similar man-in-the-middle wi-fi attacks code-named MAGIC SQUIRREL and MAGICBEAN. A top-secret presentation on FOXACID lists further ways to redirect targets to the malware server system.
To position themselves within range of a vulnerable wireless network, NSA operators can use a mobile antenna system running software code-named BLINDDATE, depicted in the field in what appears to be Kabul.
The software can even be attached to a drone. BLINDDATE in turn can run BADDECISION, which allows for a SECONDDATE attack:
Elsewhere in these files, there are at least two documented cases of SECONDDATE being used to successfully infect computers overseas: An April 2013 presentation boasts of successful attacks against computer systems in both Pakistan and Lebanon.
In the first, NSA hackers used SECONDDATE to breach “targets in Pakistan’s National Telecommunications Corporation’s (NTC) VIP Division,” which contained documents pertaining to “the backbone of Pakistan’s Green Line communications network” used by “civilian and military leadership.”
SECONDDATE is just one method that the NSA uses to get its target’s browser pointed at a FOXACID server. Other methods include sending spam that attempts to exploit bugs in popular web-based email providers or entices targets to click on malicious links that lead to a FOXACID server.
One document, a newsletter for the NSA’s Special Source Operations division, describes how NSA software other than SECONDDATE was used to repeatedly direct targets in Pakistan to FOXACID malware web servers, eventually infecting the targets’ computers.
A Potentially Mundane Hack
Snowden, who worked for NSA contractors Dell and Booz Allen Hamilton, has offered some context and a relatively mundane possible explanation for the leak: that the NSA headquarters was not hacked, but rather one of the computers the agency uses to plan and execute attacks was compromised.
In a series of tweets, he pointed out that the NSA often lurks on systems that are supposed to be controlled by others, and it’s possible someone at the agency took control of a server and failed to clean up after themselves. A regime, hacker group, or intelligence agency could have seized the files and the opportunity to embarrass the agency.
The Raid: In Bungled Spying Operation, NSA, GCSB & SIS Targeted Pro-Democracy Campaigner August 22 2016 | From: TheIntercept
Tony Fullman ia a middle-aged former tax man and a pro-democracy activist. But four years ago, a botched operation launched by New Zealand spies meant he suddenly found himself deemed a potential terrorist - his passport was revoked, his home was raided, and he was placed on a top-secret National Security Agency surveillance list.
The extraordinary covert operation, revealed Sunday by Television New Zealand in collaboration with The Intercept, was launched in 2012 after New Zealand authorities believed they had identified a group planning to violently overthrow Fiji’s military regime.
As part of the spy mission, the NSA used its powerful global surveillance apparatus to intercept the emails and Facebook chats of people associated with a Fijian “thumbs up for democracy” campaign. The agency then passed the messages to its New Zealand counterpart, Government Communications Security Bureau, or GCSB.
One of the main targets was Fullman, a New Zealand citizen, whose communications were monitored by the NSA after New Zealand authorities, citing secret evidence, accused him of planning an “an act of terrorism” overseas.
But it turned out that the claims were baseless - Fullman, then 47, was not involved in any violent plot. He was a long-time public servant and peaceful pro-democracy activist who, like the New Zealand and Australian governments at that time, was opposed to Fiji’s authoritarian military ruler Frank Bainimarama.
Details about the surveillance are contained in documents obtained by The Intercept from NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. More than 190 pages of top-secret NSA logs of intercepted communications dated between May and August 2012 show that the agency used the controversial internet surveillance system PRISM to eavesdrop on Fullman and other Fiji pro-democracy advocates’ Gmail and Facebook messages.
Fullman is the first person in the world to be publicly identified as a confirmed PRISM target.
At the time of the spying, New Zealand’s surveillance agency was not permitted to monitor New Zealand citizens. Despite this, it worked with the NSA to eavesdrop on Fullman’s communications, which suggests he is one of 88 unnamed New Zealanders who were spied on between 2003 and 2012 in operations that may have been illegal, as revealed in an explosive 2013 New Zealand government report.
In response to questions for this story, the NSA declined to address the Fullman case directly. A spokesperson for the agency, Michael Halbig, said in a statement to The Intercept that it “works with a number of partners in meeting its foreign-intelligence mission goals, and those operations comply with U.S. law and with the applicable laws under which those partners operate.”
Antony Byers, a spokesperson for New Zealand’s intelligence agencies, said he would not comment:
"On matters that may or may not be operational.” The country’s spy agencies “operate within the law,” Byers said, adding: “We do not ask partners to do things that would circumvent the law, and New Zealand gets significant value from our international relationships.”
A Fijian military soldier stands guard on Parliament grounds
Fullman was born in Fiji in 1965 and emigrated to New Zealand when he was about 21. He became naturalized as a New Zealand citizen and spent most of his working life in the country, including more than 20 years in various roles at the government’s tax department, where he was based out of offices first in Auckland and later in the capital city of Wellington.
In his spare time, Fullman worked as an amateur boxing judge and referee and helped out once a month at a Wellington soup kitchen run by a Christian charity. Between 2001 and 2003, he attended graduate school, earning two masters degrees: one in public management, the other in information systems. And in 2009, he decided to return to Fiji after he was offered a job as chief executive of the Fiji Water Authority.
The move back to Fiji, however, led to a dramatic and unexpected twist in the course of his life - partly due to an old childhood friend.
Fullman had grown up in Fiji in the port town of Levuka. There, during the 1960s, his mother had worked as secretary to Kamisese Mara, an influental local politician who went on to serve as Fiji’s prime minister between 1970 and 1992. Kamisese had a young son - Ratu Tevita Mara - who was about the same age as Fullman. The two boys became best friends, together attending school, playing rugby, and going on trips.
"Weekends we would go fishing or go up to his mother’s farm, help out on the farm,” Fullman recalled in an interview with The Intercept. “We spent a lot of time together. He was like a brother to me.”
When Fullman left Fiji for New Zealand in his early 20s, he kept in contact with Mara through phone and email. And by the time Fullman returned to Fiji in 2009 to take the water authority job, Mara had become a powerful military officer, serving as the Fijian army’s chief of staff.
But the political situation in Fiji was now highly unstable, and Mara was at the center of some of the tensions. The country had experienced three military coups between 1987 and 2006 that were rooted in ethnic and religious divisions.
Following the latest coup in 2006, which had brought authoritarian ruler Bainimarama to power, the military government and police were accused of systematically cracking down on freedom of speech and arresting critics and human rights defenders.
Fullman (left) and Mara having dinner in Fiji, December 2005
Mara was dissatisfied with the leadership and, in May 2011, he became embroiled in a high-profile dispute with the Bainimarama regime.
He was accused of plotting to overthrow the government and charged with uttering a seditious comment.
He was hauled before a court, where he was threatened with imprisonment for allegedly uttering the words, “This government is fuck all.”
Mara was freed on bail while the case against him remained ongoing. But he was concerned about the prospect of ultimately receiving a lengthy jail term.
He decided to take a drastic course of action - and fled Fiji, escaping on a boat to nearby Tonga
Following Mara’s dramatic getaway, Fullman was questioned by the Fijian military. It had found records of phone calls between him and Mara dated from shortly before Mara had left. Facing potential punishment over allegations that he helped Mara escape, Fullman decided that he too would have to promptly leave Fiji.
The NSA surveillance file shows a photo of Fullman that he uploaded to Facebook
By 2012, Fullman had moved to Sydney, Australia, where he was living with his sister and her family. Alongside Mara and other former Fiji residents, he was working with a group called the Fiji Movement for Freedom and Democracy, which was campaigning against the Bainimarama regime.
In early July 2012, Fullman and Mara traveled to New Zealand, where they held meetings with some of the group’s supporters in Auckland. The meetings appear to have attracted the attention of New Zealand’s spies- and culminated in an extraordinary sequence of events: Fullman’s home was raided, his passport revoked, and both he and Mara were put under top-secret NSA surveillance.
A New Zealand government source familiar with the operation that targeted the democracy group, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss classified information, told The Intercept that an investigation was launched after New Zealand’s equivalent of the FBI, the Security Intelligence Service, bugged telephone calls in which it believed it heard people discussing a plot to violently overthrow Bainimarama.
Ratu Tevita Mara pictured in a video made for the pro-democracy campaign
According to the source, security officials were “very excited,” thinking they “finally had some baddies, real live terrorists in New Zealand.”
At the time, the New Zealand government had been keeping close tabs on the political situation in Fiji, which consists of some 333 small islands located about a three-hour flight north of Auckland.
Fiji has historically maintained strong trading and tourism links with New Zealand, but the relationship had soured in the aftermath of the 2006 military coup.
The New Zealand government expressed its opposition to the Bainimarama regime’s takeover, placing sanctions on Fiji and calling for the restoration of democracy. By mid-2012, however, relations between the countries were beginning to thaw.
New Zealand government officials were openly discussing the possibility of ending the sanctions, in part because they may have been concerned that Fiji seemed to be moving closer to forming an allegiance with China and other Asian nations.
At 7am on July 17, 2012, about a week after Fullman had returned to Australia from the trip to New Zealand, a team of more than a dozen Australian security agents and two Australian federal police detectives arrived at his sister’s home in Sydney looking for weapons and other evidence of the suspected plot.
They seized computers, phones and documents from the premises and confiscated Fullman’s passport on behalf of the New Zealand authorities.
Teams of New Zealand Security Intelligence Service officers and police simultaneously raided Fullman’s former apartment in the Wellington suburb of Karori and the homes of at least three other Fiji Freedom and Democracy movement supporters in Auckland, seizing their computers and other property.
The same day that the raids took place, New Zealand Minister of Internal Affairs Chris Tremain signed a notice canceling Fullman’s passport. The notice said the minister had canceled the passport based on secret details provided by the Security Intelligence Service:
"The majority of [the] information is classified but in summary I have good reason to believe that … you are involved in planning violent action intended to force a change of Government in a foreign state; and you intend to engage in, or facilitate, an act of terrorism overseas.”
Fullman was baffled by the allegations, which he denied, and sought legal advice to challenge them. At the same time, unknown to him, he had also entered onto the radar of the world’s most powerful surveillance agency: the NSA.
Between early July and early August 2012, New Zealand spies appear to have requested American assistance to obtain the emails and Facebook communications of Fullman and Mara, including from a “democfiji” email address used by Fullman to organize events for the campaign group, whose slogan was “thumbs up for democracy.”
The NSA’s documents contain a “priority list” that names the two men as “Fiji targets” alongside their Gmail addresses and an account number identifying Fullman’s Facebook page.
The documents indicate that the NSA began intercepting messages associated with Mara’s accounts on about the July 9, 2012 and on August 3 started spying on Fullman’s messages. The agency also obtained historic messages from the two men dating back to the beginning of May 2012.
A slide from a leaked NSA document about PRISM, published by the Washington Post in 2013
To conduct the electronic eavesdropping, the NSA turned to one of its most controversial surveillance programs: PRISM. The agency uses PRISM to secretly obtain communications that are processed by major technology companies like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Yahoo, as the Washington Post and The Guardian first reported in 2013.
Almost all of the more than 190 pages of intercepted Gmail and Facebook messages from Fullman and Mara is headed “US-984XN,” the code for surveillance that is carried out under PRISM. The pages reveal that the legal justifications NSA cited for the surveillance were selected inconsistently. Most of Fullman’s emails and Facebook messages were obtained as “foreign government” targets, while others such as his bank statements and Facebook photographs were collected under the category of “counter-terrorism.”
The classification markings on some of the files - “REL TO USA/NZ” - make clear that the intercepted communications were to be released to New Zealand spies.
In one of the files showing Fullman’s intercepted emails and Facebook chats, the NSA explicitly noted that the intercepted material had been forwarded to its New Zealand intelligence counterpart, the GCSB.
(New Zealand is a member of the Five Eyes, a surveillance alliance that also includes electronic eavesdropping agencies from the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, and Australia.)
The NSA collected Fullman’s bank records (Reproduced here with Fullman’s consent)
The NSA surveillance, however, produced no evidence of a plot. The intercepted messages contained personal information and typical Facebook chit chat. The NSA collected Fullman’s bank statements, which were attached to his emails and showed his visits to a coffee shop, a pharmacy, and purchases at a shoe store.
There was correspondence about Fullman working to establish a tourism venture on an island in Tonga, emails about a birthday party, many communications about the Fijian pro-democracy group’s blog posts, and details about alleged abuses committed by Fijian military officials.
There were discussions about an unwell mother and a young relative with a confidential health problem. A top-secret intelligence document even reproduced a photograph of Fullman’s silver Mitsubishi station wagon alongside details of its precise location. But there was not a single hint of any plans for violence or other clandestine activity.
It would soon become clear that there was no evidence to support the New Zealand authorities’ suspicions. And gradually, their case would fall apart.
On 16 April, 2013, the internal affairs minister, Tremain, wrote again to Fullman. Contrary to the earlier notice he had issued, Tremain now said that “based on advice” provided by the Security Intelligence Service, there were “no longer national security concerns” about Fullman.
The cancellation of his passport was lifted “without requiring an application for a replacement, or payment of a fee.” The change of position followed Fullman initiating legal action against the New Zealand government in the Wellington High Court two months earlier.
Another of the pro-democracy members whose home was raided during the operation was former Fiji sports minister and then-grocery store owner Rajesh Singh. After his home was searched by police and security agents, Singh complained to New Zealand’s inspector general of intelligence and security, Andrew McGechan, who questioned the officers involved and reviewed the investigation.
His report said the Security Intelligence Service had applied for a domestic intelligence warrant “against a number of individuals” because of “suspicions of a plan to inflict violence.”
But McGechan identified neither unlawful behavior by Singh nor evidence of the supposed terrorist plot. His May 2014 report said:
"There is nothing in the issue of the Warrant itself or in the questions and answers that followed… which comes even near to approaching proof of criminal activity or participation in terrorism.”
He noted that “no police activity has resulted, or charges been laid.”
The Intercept asked Fullman if he or Mara had ever heard of - or been involved in - discussions about overthrowing or assassinating Bainimarama.
Far from denying it, he said that sort of talk happened frequently within Fijian pro-democracy circles. However, he said it was just angry ranting, when the alcohol was flowing, something completely different from real plans.
"People would say things like, ‘Please can we just hire the Americans to send one drone to Fiji to get rid of those bastards’, or ‘Let me go back to Fiji and I’ll just get a knife and stab him!’” Fullman said.
“It’s venting. It’s our way of maintaining sanity - we just sit and bitch about everything. We don’t want violence. We want something where there’s control, a planned approach.
More to the effect where it’s the people who protest and say, ‘Enough is enough. This is wrong. We want to go back to the old constitution and have elections.’”
The New Zealand security agency may not have recognized the difference between eavesdropped venting and an actual plot, prematurely launching its raids and broad secret surveillance operation without any clear evidence.
Four days after the raids on Fullman and his fellow campaigners, New Zealand foreign minister Murray McCully traveled to Fiji for trade talks. Fullman believes that the timing was no coincidence - and that the raids targeting the pro-democracy group were used by the New Zealand government as a bargaining chip to curry favor with the Bainimarama regime.
“The minister can go to Fiji and say, ‘look we saved you, let’s be friends again, let’s start talking about how we can help each other again’,” Fullman says. “It was part of the frame up.”
No charges were ever brought against any of the Fiji campaigners, yet the ramifications of the case are still felt. Fullman says he gets pulled out of airline queues for security searches every time he travels, and he has had trouble finding work since news reports following the raids in 2012 linked him to a Fiji assassination plan.
He told The Intercept that he was never notified that his private communications had been monitored by New Zealand with the help of American counterparts at the NSA - possibly illegally - nor did he ever receive an apology or compensation for his treatment.
As he recalls the saga, there is no anger in Fullman’s voice, only disappointment. Since the affair, he has not felt like returning to live in New Zealand and plans to stay in Australia for the foreseeable future.
"To be betrayed by your own country, it’s really hard,” he says, letting out a sigh. “It puts a sour taste in your mouth.”
And Now The Government Are Coming For Whistleblowers: New Law Targets People Who Leak Classified Information August 18 2016 | From: TheDailyBlog / NewZealandHerald
The National Government will imprison whistleblowers - if your enemy is people telling the truth, then you have deep deep deep problems. It just got far, far worse.
The new spy powers don’t just allow the SIS and GCSB vast new access to your Government files, gives them warrantless spying for 24 hours which allows them to break into our homes, plant cameras and spy on us and all they need is the pretence of national security to do it all.
The SIS won’t be allowed to break into your computers remotely and the GCSB won’t be able to break into your house, BUT (and here’s the joke) if they are operating under a joint warrant, they can do all those things.
These new powers follow up the mass surveillance legislation National rammed through Parliament that allowed agencies to ask the GCSB to spy on NZers. These new powers allows the GCSB to do that all on their own.
A department that has been caught being racist in private will have huge unchecked powers – but it gets so much worse.
Now any whistleblower detailing illegal spying to the media will be punished with up to 5 years in prison.
[This reeks of a tantrum-like response from a government that is on the back foot because people are waking up to institutionalised criminality and they are losing control of information and the ability to control the narrative.]
Nicky Hager would have been prosecuted. [Nicky Hager was the person who exposed the existence of the GCSB. Until he did so it was completely secret] Andrea Vance could have been prosecuted. Jon Stephenson could have been prosecuted. This blog could have been prosecuted.
The National Government will imprison whistleblowers - if your enemy is people telling the truth, then you have deep deep deep problems.
No Government Left or Right should ever be given this level of power. Using terrorism to justify this erosion of our civil liberty is unacceptable.
Once more for the breach of data dear friends, once more for the breach.
We simply can not and must not allow this to stand, it’s a direct threat to the media’s role of holding the Government to account. Losing that would damage our democracy far more than a lone wolf fanatic going on a rampage.
Protest actions will start being planned now.
New Law Targets People Who Leak Classified Information
People who leak Government information will be targeted with a new offence that carries a maximum sentence of five years in jail.
Prime Minister John Key has announced legislation that will also let the Government Communications Security Bureau spy on New Zealanders' private information.
The bill comes in the same week that information leaked by former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden resulted in media reports about the GCSB's monitoring of a Fiji democracy activist.
The Government denied the new power to target whistle blowers was related to the Snowden leaks.
Its introduction is a response to a broad-sweeping intelligence review by Sir Michael Cullen and Dame Patsy Reddy, released in March with 107 recommendations.
A new offence will be created for people who hold a government security clearance, or those given access to classified information, who wrongfully communicate, retain or copy it. Intelligence agency employees who encounter evidence of wrong-doing can make a protected disclosure to the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security.
But if they give information to others or the media they face a prison sentence of up to five years in jail.
The new legislation will cover both the SIS and GCSB, and accepts one of the most controversial recommendations - allowing the GCSB to spy on Kiwis. That breaks a longstanding split between the SIS and GCSB, under which the GCSB could only spy on foreigners and the SIS on New Zealanders.
The current law already allows the GCSB to spy on behalf of other agencies, with an approved warrant.
However, in releasing his review in March, Sir Michael said the GCSB had become hesitant to legally assist other agencies in such spying. That happened after it was found to have possibly unlawfully spied on New Zealanders due to confusion over its powers when acting on behalf of other agencies.
The review recommended a single warranting regime that would have resulted in the SIS and GCSB having the same powers to collect intelligence.
The new legislation does not go quite that far - it will limit the GCSB to conduct remote searches of a computer, for example, while the SIS will be permitted to carry out a physical search of a private property. If the agencies are operating under a joint warrant they will both be able to carry out all activities, including interception of communications, searching including of private premises, seizure and surveillance.
The new law would establish a single warranting framework for both agencies. New Zealanders will be targeted only to protect national security or where they are an agent of a foreign power.
A "Type 1" intelligence warrant would be needed to target New Zealanders using otherwise unlawful activities, such as intercepting phone calls.
It would need approval from the Attorney-General and a Commissioner of Intelligence Warrants and will be subject to review by the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security. This has been called a "triple lock" process.
There will also be new flexibility in terms of getting warrants, including allowing warrants for classes of people and "purpose-based" warrants. The Government gave the example of the intelligence agencies being alerted to a group of unidentified New Zealanders in Syria. A group warrant would allow them to target those people without having exact information on their identities.
A purpose-based warrant would specify the type of information sought - for example, a warrant to intercept communications to find out if New Zealanders are fighting with Isis in Syria.
Finally, urgent warrants can be sought in special cases, including where someone's life is at stake or there is a serious threat to New Zealand's national security. In such cases, a warrant must still be applied for within 24 hours and if it is not authorised all information collected would be destroyed.
While allowing the GCSB to spy on New Zealanders, the Government says both it and the SIS will only be allowed to do so on the grounds of national security.
Labour leader Andrew Little said the definition of national security was too broad and "must be narrowed down to actual threats to security and government". The party will support the legislation at the first hurdle, but wants that and other changes before it would support it further.
Little said it was also concerning that the legislation appeared to have ignored recommendations related to protections for personal information.
“These are vital and must be a part of the legislation. In today's world it is too easy to ignore privacy concerns and we have seen what happens in the past when protections aren't clear."
Under the legislation, intelligence agencies would have direct access to other Government database information including birth, death, marriage, name change, citizenship, immigration and Customs information.
A warrant is needed to access IRD records, numbers assigned to tertiary students and driver licence photos. The SIS wants to access private student numbers so they can catch spies posing as international students.
Key, who cited the threat from terrorism during a press conference on the changes, said political parties needed to think carefully about opposing the changes.
“It is going to be very difficult for political parties if they don't vote for this legislation and there was ultimately an issue in New Zealand, then clearly fingers would be pointed about whether we could have done more to stop it."
The legislation will be introduced to the House on Thursday.
Something Very Strange Is Going On And Alternative News Readers Are Being Targeted - Have You Noticed Any Of These Symptoms? August 4 2016 | From: AllNewsPipeline
Three days ago a very interesting and disturbing series of comments were noted here at ANP, unrelated to the actual article itself, but that in and of itself is not abnormal as debates progress and lead into other areas of discussion.
But the originating question that started the side-topic and the responses, as well as how many of the comments automatically went into moderation, pending approval before they could be seen when ANP does not moderate comments before they post, all led me to the conclusion that there is something very strange going on.
Note: Each comment shown will be linked to the comment itself because clicking over to the original comment only shows a small fraction of the discussion that stemmed from it unless one goes to the article and scrolls to the end of the comments and continues to reload until they hit that segment of the thread.
The original question was "Have a question for you all. Anybody else having trouble thinking? I have been speaking English for many years, but just the last few days my vocabulary is having 'holes'. I am almost 45, we try eating healthy, no fluoride or meds."
Another commentator, Dar, noted "Almost everyone I talk with as in friends, customers, etc have memory problems. Not just elderly but all ages."
In response to the first question, Tyler stated "Actually, yes I have. Like a lot lately. I've had a really hard time formulating thoughts over the last about 2 weeks, including things I know a lot about. And came out of nowhere too. Even right now, my mind feels very like clouded."
Driving home after work down the freeway, it appeared that all vehicles I all lanes in front of me were...drunk. In the same area, they all drifted across the right marker into other lanes. When I got to that area, it felt as if my mind was zapped, strongly I might add, by what felt as microwaves.
My brain instantly felt numb, swollen, back of my neck hurt...and I felt very strong vertigo and dizziness. Then I felt like I was going to pass out while driving. I had to physically change my position, straighten up in my seat and practically slap myself to maintain.
The rest of the trip home felt a little better, but I had something like hot flashes just wave through me (I'm not a woman, so can't speak to exactly how those feel). Also strong ringing and "plugged" feeling in my right ear only. When I got home, I explained what happened and was told that she didn't feel right all day as well...... Read the rest here.
Another point of interest - In that same portion of the thread, the original poster noted that when trying to post her comments she was being given the message that they were pending moderation.
When we noted that, we checked the moderation dashboard and sure enough, only comments related to that topic we being listed as "pending" and not showing until we manually approved them.
Again, we do not moderate comments before they post and have a very limited "filter" set up to try to catch spammers and nothing in those "pending" comments contained anything in our filters, nor any type of spam.
US Government Mind Control Experiements
Mockers and scoffers often see the words "mind control" and instantly tune out, thinking it is science fiction, so lets address the documented fact that the U.S. Goverment, has experimented with mind control throughout the decades, dating back to the 1950's with the CIA project MK ULTRA, supposedly halted in 1973, congressionals hearings were had in 1977 after an FOIA request uncovered a cache of 20,000 documents relating to the U.S. Government project. In July 2001, more information was declassified. - Source
Does anyone truly believe any government would spend two decades and untold amounts of money experimenting with mind control and would simply stop, even though many tests were deemed successful?
The U.S. governments mind control experiments are a fact and it took over 20 years from the date they started for congress to investigate and for the public to be told... makes one wonder what we learn 20 years from now as to what kind of experiments the government is conducting on us right this very second.
GWEN (Ground Wave Emeregency Network)
Since one of the comments above did bring up the GWEN towers, we'll address that here. GWEN stands for Ground Wave Emergency Network, which was a command and control communication system intended for use by the United States government to facilitate military communications before, during and after a nuclear war.
Specifically, GWEN was constructed to survive the effects of a high-altitude nuclear explosion-generated electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) to ensure that the United States President or his survivors could issue a launch order to strategic nuclear bombers.
The network was conceived as an array of approximately 300 radio transceivers distributed across the continental USA which operated in the Low frequency (LF) radio band. Later revised for 126 towers, plans again changed to include 56 radio towers linking 38 terminals; it was later expanded to 96 towers linking 49 terminals. Final network towers numbered 58. - Source
It is notable that "conspiracy theorists," often claimed the GWEN towers had "different functions, including controlling the weather, mind, behavior and mood control of the populace."
I will remind readers that for decades those that believed the government was conducting mind control experiements on citizens of the U.S. were also called "conspiracy theorists" as well, until MK ULTRA was revealed to the public, and some deny still to this day what the project was and what the U.S. government did, despite the Senate hearings into the project and the documentation released.
We also note that after so much funding being pumped into GWEN, that when it was "terminated," the US Coast Guard began outfitting some GWEN sites to house their National Differential GPS system because "Existing equipment fit the needs of the NDGPS".... in other words, the towers are still up all across the United States. There are currently 85 NDGPS sites in the US network, administered by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Navigation Center, according to Wiki.
Electronic Harassment, aka psychotronic torture, or electromagnetic torture, is also waved away as "conspiracy," of people that believe the government uses electromagnetic radiation (such as the microwave auditory effect), radar, and surveillance techniques to transmit sounds and thoughts into people's heads, affect people's bodies, and harass people.
It is widely know that the government does indeed use technology called "directed energy weapons," which emits highly focused energy, transferring that energy to a target to damage it. The energy used includes: Electromagnetic radiation, including radio frequency, microwave, lasers and masers; Particles with mass, in particle-beam weapons, and; Sound, in sonic weapons.
In researching this article, I ran across an article which led me to a Washington Post article, dated January 2007, buried on page W22, which reported on electronic harassment and voices in the head, and in the article we see that the Pentagon has continued to pursue a weapon that can do just that.
But there are hints of ongoing research: An academic paper written for the Air Force in the mid-1990s mentions the idea of a weapon that would use sound waves to send words into a person's head:
The signal can be a 'message from God' that can warn the enemy of impending doom, or encourage the enemy to surrender,"the author concluded.
In 2002, the Air Force Research Laboratory patented precisely such a technology: using microwaves to send words into someone's head.
That work is frequently cited on mind-control Web sites. Rich Garcia, a spokesman for the research laboratory's directed energy directorate, declined to discuss that patent or current or related research in the field, citing the lab's policy not to comment on its microwave work.
In response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed for this article, the Air Force released unclassified documents surrounding that 2002 patent – records that note that the patent was based on human experimentation in October 1994 at the Air Force lab, where scientists were able to transmit phrases into the heads of human subjects, albeit with marginal intelligibility.
Research appeared to continue at least through 2002. Where this work has gone since is unclear – the research laboratory, citing classification, refused to discuss it or release other materials.
The official U.S. Air Force position is that there are no non-thermal effects of microwaves. Yet Dennis Bushnell, chief scientist at NASA's Langley Research Center, tagged microwave attacks against the human brain as part of future warfare in a 2001 presentation to the National Defense Industrial Association about "Future Strategic Issues."
That work is exceedingly sensitive" and unlikely to be reported in any unclassified documents, he says.
Quoted portions above can be found on page 4 and page 5 of the online version of that WAPO 2007 article.
Knowing the type of technology the U.S. government is pursuing, what they have done in the past with mind control experiments, the fact that they are continuing to research and create energy weapons, what stops them from turning those weapons on the American people?
Is it a coincidence that the very people that read alternative news sites such as ANP, such as Christians, veterans, constitutionalists, preppers, survivalists, etc... are the very same people that the Obama administration has labeled as "extremists," and as "dangerous," and coincidentally are the very same people experiencing the symptoms described at the top of this article?
If readers are experiencing strange symptoms, noting weird behaviors in those around you.... leave a comment describing them, because there is definitely something strange going on.
Gestapo In The USA: FCC Intimidates Press And Kills Free Speech At 5G Rollout August 1 2016 | From: TakeBackYourPower
In a public meeting at FCC headquarters on July 14, the agency which once served the people instead acted like tyrannical thugs, in an escalating series of remarkable events.
First, they prevented wireless science advocates from displaying a simple sign, violating their First Amendment rights in a public venue. Then, a security guard forcefully prevented a t-shirt from being taken out of a bag, by a former Congressional candidate with opposing views [See the full video at the end of this article, or links to the relevant clips from the images below].
Next, a Bloomberg reporter had his credentials confiscated - almost unbelievably - for merely talking with the former Congressional candidate.
Following these incidents, the reporter, Todd Shields, was visibly irate with FCC Commissioner Tom Wheeler - who also happens to be the former president of CTIA, the wireless industry’s lobbying organization.
“Moments ago I was attempting to talk to to some people who came to attend the meeting and have concerns about radiation and 5G. And your security force intervened - told the guy he couldn’t show me the t-shirt he wished to display at the meeting, forced him to put it away, and confiscated my FCC-issued ID. Is this consonant with the discussion that ought to be taking place here, and what’s your reaction to this action by your staff?”
-Todd Shields, Bloomberg reporter, to FCC Chair Wheeler [on video above]
Bloomberg reporter Todd Shields had his credentials confiscated - for talking with a former Congressional candidate about 5G and health concerns
And in the Q&A that followed, the former Congressional candidate Kevin Mottus successfully added another dose of truth the narrative.
“Hey Tom, with the NTP study showing wireless causes cancer sub-thermally, how can you proceed with more wireless expansion, with FCC standards only recognizing thermal effects - ignoring thousands of studies showing cancerous effects, neurological effects, reproductive harm, immune system disorders… people are being electrosensitive…”
-Kevin Mottus, former Congressional candidate, to Wheeler [on video above]
After about 20 seconds of yielding the floor to Mottus, Wheeler interrupted, dodged this very appropriate question, and diverted to an FCC-compliant journalist:
“Lydia, do you have a question?]
(Which, on the video, almost sounds like a Wheeler Freudian slip: “Litigate. Do you have a question?”)
There have been thousands of published peer-reviewed studies that indicate the proliferation of microwave (wireless) technologies is not safe to biological life. (See meta-study links here, here, here and here.)
Why is the FCC resorting to Gestapo-like tactics of suppression and outright intimidation?
The issue here, is that the Federal Communications Commission just rubber-stamped their rollout of “5G” cellular technology, which while increasing throughput, would blanket all planetary life with ultra-high microwave frequencies - 24Ghz and up. The fact that these frequencies have never been tested as safe is not stopping corporate-government plans for an unleashing of “massive infrastructure”.
But there have been thousands of published peer-reviewed studies that indicate the proliferation of microwave (wireless) technologies is not safe to biological life. (See meta-study links here, here, here and here.)
So, because there’s a lot of money in a wireless economy and the data-harvesting that comes with it - trillions, in fact - Big Industry has bought the science, bought lawmakers, ruled the proliferation of microwaves as “safe”, and infiltrated the FCC along with most international health agencies.
And in the face of this willful, for-profit negligence, instead of employing conscience and responsibility, they’re actively silencing all opposition. You know, those of the human species that pay attention to passé concepts like science and reason.
Here’s some snippets from FCC Chair Wheeler, at his June 20 press conference:
“5G will use much higher frequency bands [24 to 100+ GHz]… antennas that can aim and amplify signals… massive deployment of small cells… tens of billions of dollars in economic activity… hundreds of billions of microchips… if something can be connected, it will be connected… unlike other countries… we won’t wait for the standards…”
– Tom Wheeler, FCC Chair [on video above]
Paraphrased:“We can’t let life get in the way of profit. We want to make billions from all of you, and control everything. And in doing so, we’re not only going to willfully ignore science, we’re going to remove the idea of standards and initiate a free-for-all.”
FCC Chair and former industry lobbyist Tom Wheeler announces proliferation of 5G microwave technology, privatizes rollout and removes oversight and standards. “Nobody quits the CTIA. Once you’re CTIA, you’re family – for life.”
If unchecked, what could this lead to?
The implications of all of this are very far-reaching. How far? Well, to find out, let’s start with what we know.
It’s pretty clear at this point that we have a government that has been taken over by corporate interests. In order to increase their power and control even more, they plan to exponentially ramp-up the deployment of technology everywhere, which a vast body of science clearly says is harmful.
If unchecked, this will almost certainly lead to an increase in cancer and other ailments associated with exposure to electromagnetic radiation. Haven’t we had enough of for-profit agendas putting profits before health?
From a surveillance standpoint, we already know there is a sinister spying agenda operating behind the scenes. The rollout of “5G” technology - especially in the standardless, profit-centered way Wheeler describes — would indeed open up a considerable new threat to basic rights.
If everything is connected, you can bet that as many details as possible about our actions will be tracked and stored somewhere - like the $2B NSA facility in Blufdale, Utah. And there is extraordinary market value in this. A director at NARUC stated that the value of data harvested just by “smart” utility meters will likely be worth a lot more than electricity itself, which is a $2.2 trillion market globally.
But besides being creepy and making the 1% even richer, there are clear warning signs that a control-oriented governing system could easily take an indexed catalog of all of your actions and use it against you in a multitude of ways.
For example, increasingly-instrusive “pre-crime” operations are already planned in Miami. And insurance providers are checking their customers’ facebook data to influence premiums and even coverage availability. So it’s really not unreasonable to see how a governing body concerned primarily with staying in power, could restrict rights or remove “privileges” for behavior that is deemed to be not aligned with national interests.
So, tracking is not ok unless we are absolutely convinced that the governing body of that system truly respects individual rights and has the best interests of the people in mind. And right now, we are not even close to having such leadership in our governments.
Wheeler’s vision of 5G would significantly enable those who are motivated by power and money to use technology to rule over everyone else. In order to protect our lives and future, we must not allow that to happen.
While we would all like to have fast internet, we must now look closely at the downside of this technology, and take constructive action. This can understandably be difficult, due to the considerable attachment that we have to both our devices and the sense of immediate gratification that we obtain from using them.
While solutions to out planet’s problems are being actively prevented, steering human culture into a virtual/augmented reality seems to be the insane game of the technocrats. Perhaps “The Matrix” was not far off, after all
How we will save our world: Individual responsibility, accountability and liability
In addition to an interview with Kevin Mottus, last Sunday I skyped with Dafna Tachover, an Israel-based attorney who was present at “G-Day”, last Thursday.
Tachover, who is among millions now who have directly experienced microwave radiation harm after becoming sensitized to it, says that the only way forward is individual accountability and liability. In my view, she is obviously right.
Dafna Tachover is the CEO of We Are The Evidence, an organization which advocates for the rights of those who has been injured by wireless technology:
“Until there’s personal accountability and liability, this systematic problem that repeats itself will happen again, and again, and again, and it has been. So, we learned that the tobacco industry was lying to the public, bluntly - to the public, to the government, to health organizations - without any hesitation…. Was anyone sued? No. Was anyone found personally accountable? No. So that’s actually what enables this kind of behavior to happen again and again.”
“This is the action we should take: we should make it clear to those government people - or you know, if we talk about wi-fi in schools, the school principals, who do have personal responsibility and liability to protect children’s health - to make sure they know they will be found personally liable for the harms they cause. They have a position of trust, and they betrayed that trust. And they should be found liable. It should be civil liability and criminal liability.”
Former Congressional candidate Kevin Mottus spoke about the urgency of the situation.
Kevin Mottus is meeting with reps on the ground in Washington DC, Sept 6 – Oct 6. To meet up with him there, reach him at email@example.com.
“My background is as a medical social worker. And when I was in the hospitals I saw young salesman and lawyers coming in with brain tumors, and healthy otherwise, other than the tumor - and doctors asking them about their cell phone use. So I was clued in very early with these heavy users and the tumors it was causing.”
“Schools are now our most dangerous places to be. You have 20-40 wireless transmitters in their iPads and wireless laptops, and then you have 2-3 commercial-grade wireless routers…. So you have, really, the setting of the most significant exposure in our country, and the most vulnerable population being exposed are small children - which we know are 3 to 4 times as sensitive to all environmental hazards.”
“We are microwaving our population and wondering why our cancer is going through the roof and chronic disease is going through the roof. It’s really very sad.”
“I spoke to Congressman Grayson from Florida, and while I was talking with him, one of his staffers, Joe, came up to me. And he said, ‘What are you talking about?’ I said, ‘I’m talking about wireless cell phones causing brain tumors.’ He said, ‘That’s interesting, because I had a brain aneurysm and I’m lucky to be alive. It’s also interesting because my buddy just died from a brain tumor.’”
“So, people are definitely getting sick. And you need to ask them, ‘Does your face tingle when you use your cell phone?…. Do you have difficulty sleeping? Have you ever gotten nauseous using the phone? Do you feel funny when you’re around wi-fi, or getting close to it?’ And you’ll be surprised - people are getting sick.”
“For instance, I spoke to Congressman Rush. Congressman Rush has a salivary gland tumor, which Israel has associated with cell phone use….”
“We need to stop this before they [FCC] auction the [ultra-high frequency] spectrum.”
If you are reading this from the United States you can find links about actions you can take within your country at the end of the original article at TakeBackYourPower.
The new 5G system they plan on introducing following trials in 2017, described in your info and in the video, are planned to operate between 28GHz – 100GHz is interestingly the SAME FREQUENCY in the Extremely High Frequency (EHF) (30GHz – 300GHz or, wavelengths 10mm – 1mm) spectrum that are already being used in the ACTIVE DENIAL SYSTEM (ADS) non-lethal, directed energy weapon developed by the US military produced by Raytheon – designed for perimeter security and crowd control.
It was also used in Afghanistan War. The US Police use it already, and in 2010 the Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department announced that they were going to use reduced versions of it in detention centers to break up prisoner fights etc.
From Prof Olle Johansson interview on the Alzheimer's and Dementia Summit
"If you go back to [EMF] impact on brain function, you have all the pieces that you would look for, in for instance Alzheimer’s and dementia. There are studies regarding loss of concentration capacity, loss of short term memory, impacts on cellular function, including cell death in various rodent models… leakage of the so-called blood-brain barrier, connected also to damage and cell death of nerve cells…. behavioral impacts… impact on sleep quality… various forms of learning tasks…."
"The [blood-brain barrier] effect was seen after a short exposure, namely a 1-minute mobile phone call – and also at an exposure level that was five thousand times below the official guideline...."
"This is the largest full-scale experiment with mankind, ever, on this planet."
Oliver Stone: Pokemon Go Is A New Stage In “Totalitarism” And “Surveillance Capitalism” July 26 2016 | From: VigilantCitizen Film director Oliver Stone believes that Pokemon Go is a tool capable of collecting massive amounts of data about its users and represents a step towards “robot society”.
The director of Platoon, Wallstreet and JFK was at Comic-Con 2016 in San Diego to discuss his new movie Snowden. Considering the topic of the movie, the panel were discussing the NSA, online privacy and government surveillance.
A question from a fan lead Oliver Stone to lash out against today’s newest worldwide phenomenon: Pokemon Go.
“It’s a new level of invasion,” Stone said of the game. “Nobody has ever seen, in the history of the world, something like Google, ever. It’s the fastest-growing business ever, and they have invested huge amounts of money into what surveillance is, which is data-mining.
They’re data-mining every person in this room for information as to what you’re buying, what it is you like, and above all, your behavior.”
- CBS News, Oliver Stone: Pokemon Go is “totalitarianism”
Oliver Stone claims that Pokemon Go is yet another step towards “surveillance capitalism”.
“Pokemon Go kicks into that. It’s everywhere. It’s what some people call surveillance capitalism. It’s the newest stage,” he said. “You’ll see a new form of, frankly, a robot society, where they will know how you want to behave and they will make the mockup that matches how you behave and feed you. It’s what they call totalitarianism.”
Shortly after the game launch, observers worried about the massive amount of permissions requested by Pokemon Go upon installation. The game indeed requested full access to user’s Google Accounts on iOS. Although game developer Niantic claims to have fixed this issue, the app still collects massive amounts of data.
“Niantic may collect - among other things - your email address, IP address, the web page you were using before logging into Pokémon Go, your username, and your location. And if you use your Google account for sign-in and use an iOS device, unless you specifically revoke it, Niantic has access to your entire Google account.
And you can bet the game’s extreme popularity has made it a target for hackers. Given the number of children playing the game, that’s a scary thought.) You can check what kind of access Niantic has to your Google account here.
It also may share this information with other parties, including the Pokémon Company that co-developed the game, “third-party service providers,” and “third parties” to conduct “research and analysis, demographic profiling, and other similar purposes.” It also, per the policy, may share any information it collects with law enforcement in response to a legal claim, to protect its own interests, or stop “illegal, unethical, or legally actionable activity.”
Now, none of these privacy provisions are of themselves unique. Location-based apps from Foursquare to Tinder can and do similar things. But Pokémon Go’s incredibly granular, block-by-block map data, combined with its surging popularity, may soon make it one of, if not the most, detailed location-based social graphs ever compiled."
– Buzzfeed News, “You Should Probably Check Your Pokémon Go Privacy Settings”
Senator Al Franken, the top Democrat on the Senate Privacy and Technology Subcommittee recently sent a letter to Niantic expressing concerns about privacy.
“The letter notes that Pokémon Go collects profile and account information, location data, and data “obtained through Cookies and Web Beacons.”
The game also asks permission to do things like control vibration and prevent the phone from sleeping. Franken wants to know what information and functions exist to support and improve services, and what’s being gathered for “other purposes.”
While this release is undoubtedly impressive, I am concerned about the extent to which Niantic may be unnecessarily collecting, using, and sharing a wide range of users’ personal information without their appropriate consent”.
– arstechnica, Sen. Franken asks Pokémon Go creator: Why all the privacy problems?
Some might claim that a bunch of apps already collect all of that information and that there is nothing new under the sun.
That is correct. Pokemon Go is simply yet another incremental step towards high tech control, where users are lured to specific locations and tracked during the entire time. In short, it is yet another level of heat in the pot.
“If you drop a frog in a pot of boiling water, it will of course frantically try to clamber out. But if you place it gently in a pot of tepid water and turn the heat on low, it will float there quite placidly.
As the water gradually heats up, the frog will sink into a tranquil stupor, exactly like one of us in a hot bath, and before long, with a smile on its face, it will unresistingly allow itself to be boiled to death."
Pokémon Go Is A Government Surveillance Psyop Conspiracy? July 14 2016 | From: Gawker / Infowars
Less than a week after Pokémon Go’s launch, our streets are already filled with packs of phone-wielding, Weedle-catching zombies.
But worst of all, Pokémon Go is turning us all into an army of narcs in service of the coming New World Order.
Allow me to explain.
More Like Privacy Poli-See Everything
Lots of apps have sketchy privacy policies, that’s nothing new. But the first set of alarms go off as soon as you realize that Pokémon Go’spolicy does seem a bit more liberal than most, because not only are you giving Pokémon Go access to your location and camera, you’re also giving it full access to your Google account (assuming you use that to sign in).
Most Orwellian of all is this line:
“We may disclose any information about you (or your authorized child) that is in our possession or control to government or law enforcement officials or private parties.”
As TechCrunch explained, Pokémon-loving millennials are far less likely to object to a few extra permissions when its Squirtle staring them in the face as they abandon their every god-given freedom than they do when Google reads their email.
Pokémon Go Comes Directly - Directly - From the Intelligence Ccommunity
And it’s not like Pokémon Go itself doesn’t already have a direct(-ish) line to the CIA. After all, Pokémon Go was created by Niantic, which was formed by John Hanke.
Now, Hanke also just so happened to help found Keyhole. What does Keyhole do, you ask? I’d tell you to go to Keyhole’s website - but you can’t. It just takes you straight to Google Earth. That’s because Keyhole was acquired by Google back in 2004.
Before that, though, Keyhole received funding from a firm called In-Q-Tel, a government-controlled venture capital firm that invests in companies that will help beef up Big Brother’s tool belt.
Still unsure if Pokémon Go’s creator is a government spook? Check out this excerpt from the NGA’s in-house publication, Pathfinder Magazine:
Companies obtain customer information through avenues such as social media, mobile apps, and customer relationship-management software. They might as well be talking about Pokémon Go itself.
We’re All Government Pawns
So what exactly is the New World Order planning to do with our precious and meticulously collected data? They could take a few different paths, though they all boil down to the fact that we’re all cogs in Professor Willow’s great, big government machine.
Considering that one of Big Brother’s favorite pastimes is watching its citizens at all times always and forever, Pokémon Go is an ideal vessel for its many, many eyes. It’s addicting (kids, adults, and conspiracy-loving bloggers for Gawker.com can’t seem to put the thing for more than ten minutes at a time). And it has access to pretty much our entire phone, meaning tons of personal data and monster tracking capabilities:
Granted, Pokémon Go has a perfectly legitimate reason to want access to things like your location and camera.
It needs the former to put you on the right map and the latter to make use of its augmented reality feature.
But with those allowances, Pokémon Go (or rather, its parent company Niantic) not only knows where millions of people are at any given point, they could also very well figure out who they’re with, what’s going on around them, and where they’re likely headed next.
Obviously intelligence agencies have gained a lot of info from google maps and its street view, but this data was collected easily with driving cars.
Intel agencies may see google maps and street view as just an outline or a skeleton of the whole picture.
Getting more data, particularly that off the street and inside buildings, requires tons of man hours and foot work. a logistical nightmare.
Enter Pokemon GO, where if you are an intel agency and you want photos of the inside of a home or business, you just spawn desirable pokemon or related objects there, and let totally unaware and distracted citizens take the photos for you, with devices they paid for, and those citizens pay for the experience.
imagine all these photos going back to some database (with the augmented Pokemon removed obviously. all these photos are probably GPS tagged, as well as having the phones internal gyro embed x/y/z orientation of the camera angle in the phone. these photos could be put together, much like google street view.
So as you’re “catching ‘em all” with all the other sheep, you very well may be creating a cache of high-res, data-rich images to get siphoned directly into the CIA’s greedy little pockets. Just picture it, a year from now when Trump-appointed CIA Director Liam Neeson is trying to figure out who helped The Washington Post reporters escape from prison, all he has to do is call over to Deputy Director Sutherland. “
Check the Pokédex,” he’ll say, and up springs a Google Street View-esque simulation of every building, nook, and closet within a five-mile radius - all updated in real time.
As user fight_for_anything explains, “What if that local church is a mosque they suspect of terrorist activity? And they want photos of it, or photos of the cars around it and their plates, or photos of the people coming in and out...” Meaning that, should Director Neeson need eyes somewhere, all he as to do is tell the game to stick a Pikachu in the room and some unassuming schlub will send him a photo in no time.
But I Want to Play
If, after all this, you’re still jonesing to go Pidgey hunting despite the Truth, Reddit user leocusmus has a few safety tips:
Just like ingress. Either use a spare phone or buy a cheap used one off eBay. Set up your main phone with a VPN, turn I Wi-Fi hotspot, and play from your spare phone with a dummy gmail account.
Which is more likely to keep you hidden from Big Brother’s prying eyes, sure, but it’s important to remember that, even then, you’re still not really safe.
You’re never really safe.
Secret Pokémon GO Character Discovered!
Watch Alex on his quest to catch 'em all:
Alex Jones stumbles across a brand new undiscovered Pokémon GO character!
The Hunter: He Was A Hacker For The NSA And He Was Willing To Talk - I Was Willing To Listen July 5 2016 | From: TheIntercept
The message arrived at night and consisted of three words: “Good evening sir!” The sender was a hacker who had written a series of provocative memos at the National Security Agency.
His secret memos had explained - with an earthy use of slang and emojis that was unusual for an operative of the largest eavesdropping organization in the world - how the NSA breaks into the digital accounts of people who manage computer networks, and how it tries to unmask people who use Tor to browse the web anonymously.
Outlining some of the NSA’s most sensitive activities, the memos were leaked by Edward Snowden, and I had written about a few of them for The Intercept.
There is no Miss Manners for exchanging pleasantries with a man the government has trained to be the digital equivalent of a Navy SEAL. Though I had initiated the contact, I was wary of how he might respond.
The hacker had publicly expressed a visceral dislike for Snowden and had accused The Intercept of jeopardizing lives by publishing classified information. One of his memos outlined the ways the NSA reroutes (or “shapes”) the internet traffic of entire countries, and another memo was titled “I Hunt Sysadmins.” I felt sure he could hack anyone’s computer, including mine.
The only NSA workers the agency has permitted me to talk with are the ones in its public affairs office who tell me I cannot talk with anyone else. Thanks to the documents leaked by Snowden, however, I have been able to write about a few characters at the NSA.
There was, for instance, a novelist-turned-linguist who penned an ethics column for the NSA’s in-house newsletter, and there was a mid-level manager who wrote an often zany advice column called “Ask Zelda!” But their classified writings, while revealing, could not tell me everything I wanted to know about the mindset of the men and women who spy on the world for the U.S. government.
I got lucky with the hacker, because he recently left the agency for the cybersecurity industry; it would be his choice to talk, not the NSA’s. Fortunately, speaking out is his second nature. While working for the NSA, he had publicly written about his religious beliefs, and he was active on social media.
So I replied to his greeting and we began an exchange of cordial messages. He agreed to a video chat that turned into a three-hour discussion sprawling from the ethics of surveillance to the downsides of home improvements and the difficulty of securing your laptop.
"I suppose why I talk is partially a personal compulsion to not necessarily reconcile two sides or different viewpoints but to just try to be honest about the way things are,” he told me. “Does that make sense?”
The hacker was at his home, wearing a dark hoodie that bore the name of one of his favorite heavy metal bands, Lamb of God. I agreed not to use his name in my story, so I’ll just refer to him as the Lamb. I could see a dime-store bubble-gum machine behind him, a cat-scratching tree, and attractive wood beams in the ceiling.
But his home was not a tranquil place. Workmen were doing renovations, so the noise of a buzz saw and hammering intruded, his wife called him on the phone, and I could hear the sound of barking. “Sorry, my cats are taunting my dog,” he said, and later the animal in question, a black-and-white pit bull, jumped onto his lap and licked his face.
The Lamb wore a T-shirt under his hoodie and florid tattoos on his arms and smiled when I said, mostly in jest, that his unruly black beard made him look like a member of the Taliban, though without a turban. He looked very hacker, not very government.
When most of us think of hackers, we probably don’t think of government hackers. It might even seem odd that hackers would want to work for the NSA - and that the NSA would want to employ them. But the NSA employs legions of hackers, as do other agencies, including the FBI, CIA, DEA, DHS, and Department of Defense.
Additionally, there are large numbers of hackers in the corporate world, working for military contractors like Booz Allen, SAIC, and Palantir. The reason is elegantly simple: You cannot hack the world without hackers.
In popular shows and movies such as “Mr. Robot” and “The Matrix,” hackers tend to be presented as unshaven geeks loosely connected to collectives like Anonymous, or to Romanian crime syndicates that steal credit cards by the millions, or they are teenagers who don’t realize their online mischief will get them into a boatload of trouble when Mom finds out.
The stereotypes differ in many ways but share a trait: They are transgressive anti-authoritarians with low regard for social norms and laws. You would not expect these people to work for The Man, but they do, in droves. If you could poll every hacker in the U.S. and ask whether they practice their trade in dark basements or on official payrolls, a large number would likely admit to having pension plans. Who knows, it could be the majority.
This may qualify as one of the quietest triumphs for the U.S. government since 9/11: It has co-opted the skills and ideals of a group of outsiders whose anti-establishment tilt was expressed two decades ago by Matt Damon during a famous scene in Good Will Hunting. Damon, playing a math genius being recruited by the NSA, launches into a scathing riff about the agency serving the interests of government and corporate evil rather than ordinary people.
Sure, he could break a code for the NSA and reveal the location of a rebel group in North Africa or the Middle East, but the result would be a U.S. bombing attack in which “1,500 people that I never met, never had a problem with, get killed.” He turns down the offer.
In recent years, two developments have helped make hacking for the government a lot more attractive than hacking for yourself. First, the Department of Justice has cracked down on freelance hacking, whether it be altruistic or malignant. If the DOJ doesn’t like the way you hack, you are going to jail.
Meanwhile, hackers have been warmly invited to deploy their transgressive impulses in service to the homeland, because the NSA and other federal agencies have turned themselves into licensed hives of breaking into other people’s computers. For many, it’s a techno sandbox of irresistible delights, according to Gabriella Coleman, a professor at McGill University who studies hackers.
"The NSA is a very exciting place for hackers because you have unlimited resources, you have some of the best talent in the world, whether it’s cryptographers or mathematicians or hackers,” she said. “It is just too intellectually exciting not to go there.”
Revealingly, one of the documents leaked by Snowden and published by The Intercept last year was a classified interview with a top NSA hacker (not the Lamb) who exulted that his job was awesome because “we do things that you can’t do anywhere else in the country … at least not legally.
We are gainfully employed to hack computers owned by al-Qa’ida!” Asked about the kind of people he works with at the NSA, he replied, “Hackers, geeks, nerds … There’s an annual event for hackers in Las Vegas called DEF CON, and many of us attend. When there, we feel as though we are among our bretheren! [sic] We all have a similar mindset of wanting to tear things apart, to dig in, to see how things work.”
In 2012, Gen. Keith Alexander, the NSA director at the time, even attended DEF CON wearing blue jeans and a black T-shirt that bore the logo of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, an anti-surveillance organization that is beloved by hackers and other good citizens of the world.
To coincide with Alexander’s visit, the NSA had created a special webpage to recruit the hackers at DEF CON. “If you have a few, shall we say, indiscretions in your past, don’t be alarmed,” the webpage stated. “You shouldn’t automatically assume you won’t be hired.” Alexander’s personal pitch was even more direct: “In this room right here is the talent we need.”
If you are willing to become a patriot hacker, Uncle Sam wants you.
As a teenager, the Lamb was a devout Christian who attended church two or three times a week, yet he also participated in online forums for Satanists and atheists. He wanted to learn what others believed and why they believed it, and he wanted to hear their responses to questions he raised. If his beliefs could not withstand challenges from opposing ones, they might not be worth keeping.
"As a Christian, I believe the Bible, and one of the things it says is if you seek the truth, you should find it,” he told me. “If I started to come across facts that contradicted what I believed and contradicted the way that I thought about things, I had to be open to confronting them and determining how I would integrate them into my life and my thought system.”
Before he became a hacker, the Lamb had the restless spirit of one. After high school, he attended a Christian university for a year but dropped out and joined the military as a linguist. He was assigned to the NSA, and although he told me his computer skills were modest at the time, he was intrigued by the mysteries inside the machines.
"I started doing some basic computer training, like ‘Oh, here’s how computers talk to each other and network’ and that sort of stuff,” he said. “I enjoyed that far more than trying to maintain a language that I rarely used.”
He devoured books on computers and experimented on his own time, using an application called Wireshark to see how network data was moving to and from his own computer.
He picked up a bit of programming knowledge, and he asked agency veterans for tips. As he wrote in one of his memos, “If you want to learn crazy new things… why not walk around NSA, find people in offices that do things you find interesting, and talk to them about how they do what they do.”
Screenshot from NSA document
Like Snowden, he did not need a formal education to succeed. Snowden, after all, dropped out of high school and mastered computers through self-education. As an NSA contractor, he rose to a position that gave him access to broad swaths of the agency’s networks.
While Snowden was a systems administrator, the Lamb became an expert in network analysis and was well-versed in the crucial trick of shaping traffic from one place to another - for instance, sending it from an ISP in a foreign country to an NSA server.
The Lamb’s work was important, but his memos are remarkably irreverent, even cocky. I’ve read a fair number of NSA documents, and not one contains as much hacker and internet lingo as his; he used words like “skillz” and “internetz” and “ZOMG!” and phrases like “pwn the network” and “Dude! Map all the networks!!!” Some of what he wrote is just cheerily impudent, like the opening line of one memo: “Happy Friday my esteemed and valued intelligence Community colleagues!” Another memo began, “Welcome back, comrade!”
While poking gentle fun at the government hackers he worked with, the Lamb dismissed the amateur hackers on the outside. He identified himself and his highly trained colleagues at the NSA as a breed apart - a superior breed, much in the way that soldiers look down on weekend paintballers. Perhaps this shouldn’t be altogether surprising, because arrogance is one of the unfortunate hallmarks of the male-dominated hacker culture.
At the NSA, this hubris can perhaps serve as an ethical lubricant that eases the task of hacking other people: They are not as special as you are, they do not have the magical powers you possess, they are targets first and humans second.
As the Lamb wrote in one of his memos;
"When I first went to Blackhat/Defcon, it was with the wide-eyed anticipation of ‘I’m going to go listen to all of the talks that I can, soak up all of the information possible, and become a supar-1337-haxxor.’ What a let-down of an experience that was.
You find the most interesting topics and briefings, wait in lines to get a seat, and find yourself straining your ears to listen to someone that has basically nothing new to say. Most of the talks get hyped up exponentially past any amount of substance they actually provide.”
When I asked the Lamb where he was in the hierarchy of hackers at the NSA, he just smiled and said, “I got to the point where more people would ask me questions than I asked other people questions.” He would not delve into the classified specifics of his job - he despises Snowden for leaking classified information - but I knew a lot through his memos.
Although network analysis, the Lamb’s area of expertise, is interesting from a technical perspective, he was one step removed from the most challenging and menacing type of government hacking - executing finely tuned attacks that infiltrate individual computers.
Nonetheless, he offered this characterization of his NSA work: “They were just ridiculously cool projects that I’ll never forget.”
One of the quandaries of technology is that “cool” does not necessarily mean “ethical.”
Surveillance tools that are regarded as breakthroughs can be used to spy on innocent people as well as terrorists. This is a key part of the debate on the NSA, the concern that its formidable powers are being used, or can be used, to undermine privacy, freedom, and democracy.
The Lamb’s memos on cool ways to hunt sysadmins triggered a strong reaction when I wrote about them in 2014 with my colleague Ryan Gallagher. The memos explained how the NSA tracks down the email and Facebook accounts of systems administrators who oversee computer networks.
After plundering their accounts, the NSA can impersonate the admins to get into their computer networks and pilfer the data flowing through them. As the Lamb wrote;
"Sys admins generally are not my end target. My end target is the extremist/terrorist or government official that happens to be using the network… who better to target than the person that already has the ‘keys to the kingdom’?”
Another of his NSA memos, “Network Shaping 101,” used Yemen as a theoretical case study for secretly redirecting the entirety of a country’s internet traffic to NSA servers. The presentation, consisting of a PowerPoint slideshow, was offbeat at times, with a reference to throwing confetti in the air when a hack worked and jokey lines like, “The following section could also be renamed the ‘I’m pulling my hair out in the fetal position while screaming “Why didn’t it work?!”’ section.”
The Lamb also scribbled a hand-drawn diagram about network shaping that included a smiley face in the middle next to the phrase, “YEAH!!! MAKE DATA HAPPEN!” The diagram and slideshow were both classified as top secret.
NSA diagram on network shaping - click on the image to view a larger version in a new window
His memos are boastful, even cackling. At the end of one of the sysadmin memos, the Lamb wrote, “Current mood: scheming,” and at the end of another, “Current mood: devious.” He also listed “juche-licious” as one of his moods, ironically referring to the official ideology of North Korea.
Another memo he wrote, “Tracking Targets Through Proxies & Anonymizers,” impishly noted that the use of identity-obscuring tools like Tor “generally makes for sad analysts” in the intelligence community; this was followed by a sad face emoji. The tone of his classified writing was consistent with some of his social media posts - the Lamb’s attitude, in public as well as in private, was often outspoken and brash.
What if the shoe was on the other foot, however? When I wrote about the sysadmin memos in 2014, I wondered how their author would feel if someone used the same devious rationale to hack his computer and his life. Nearly two years later, I had the chance to find out.
"If I turn the tables on you,” I asked the Lamb, “and say, OK, you’re a target for all kinds of people for all kinds of reasons. How do you feel about being a target and that kind of justification being used to justify getting all of your credentials and the keys to your kingdom?”
The Lamb smiled. “There is no real safe, sacred ground on the internet,” he replied. “Whatever you do on the internet is an attack surface of some sort and is just something that you live with. Any time that I do something on the internet, yeah, that is on the back of my mind.
Anyone from a script kiddie to some random hacker to some other foreign intelligence service, each with their different capabilities - what could they be doing to me?”
He seemed to be putting the blame for NSA attacks on the victims - if they were too dimwitted to protect themselves from hunters like him, it was their fault.
"People don’t want to think about being targets on the internet, in spite of the fact that at this point in the game, everybody is,” he added. “Every country spies.”
He was dead serious, no smiles any longer.
“As much as we’d like to say we will all beat our swords into plowshares and become a peaceful people, it’s not going to happen,” he continued.
“Intelligence agencies around the world are being asked questions by their governments, and government officials don’t want to hear, ‘That’s hard to solve.’ They just say, ‘Can you solve this and can you get me the intel I’m asking for?’ Which is nation agnostic, whether that’s the NSA, the FSB, the PLA or whoever.”
The Lamb’s political ideology evoked the cold-blooded realpolitik of Henry Kissinger. There is the idyllic digital world we would like to live in, there is the dog-eat-dog digital world we actually live in - and the Lamb, as I understood it, was intensely focused on winning in the latter.
"You know, the situation is what it is,” he said. “There are protocols that were designed years ago before anybody had any care about security, because when they were developed, nobody was foreseeing that they would be taken advantage of.…
A lot of people on the internet seem to approach the problem [with the attitude of] ‘I’m just going to walk naked outside of my house and hope that nobody looks at me.’ From a security perspective, is that a good way to go about thinking? No, horrible…
There are good ways to be more secure on the internet. But do most people use Tor? No. Do most people use Signal? No. Do most people use insecure things that most people can hack? Yes. Is that a bash against the intelligence community that people use stuff that’s easily exploitable? That’s a hard argument for me to make.”
But it wasn’t a hard argument for me to make, so I tried. Back in the 1990s, in the early days of the web, the uses and hopes for the internet were thought to be joyous and non-commercial. The web would let us talk to one another and would decentralize power and revolutionize the world in good ways.
Those were the years when the Lamb spent hours and hours in chatrooms with Satanists and atheists - just the sort of connect-us-to-each-other activity that made everyone so excited about the future. At the time, few people thought the internet would become, as Bruce Schneier describes it, a surveillance platform.
So I asked whether the Lamb felt conflicted, as Snowden did, working for an organization that turned the web further and further away from its original potential as a global platform for speaking and thinking freely.
He responded by noting that he is, by nature, a defiant type and attracted to hard problems. That’s how, without a lot of formal instruction, he became an NSA hacker - he was curious about how computers worked and he wanted to figure them out. “Technically challenging things are just inherently interesting to me,” he said. “If you tell me, ‘This can’t be done,’ I’m going to try and find a way to do it.”
I mentioned that lots of people, including Snowden, are now working on the problem of how to make the internet more secure, yet he seemed to do the opposite at the NSA by trying to find ways to track and identify people who use Tor and other anonymizers. Would he consider working on the other side of things?
He wouldn’t rule it out, he said, but dismally suggested the game was over as far as having a liberating and safe internet, because our laptops and smartphones will betray us no matter what we do with them.
"There’s the old adage that the only secure computer is one that is turned off, buried in a box ten feet underground, and never turned on,” he said.
“From a user perspective, someone trying to find holes by day and then just live on the internet by night, there’s the expectation [that] if somebody wants to have access to your computer bad enough, they’re going to get it.
Whether that’s an intelligence agency or a cybercrimes syndicate, whoever that is, it’s probably going to happen.”
The Lamb was comfortable with the side he joined in the surveillance wars, and this sets him apart from the most common stereotypes of the men and women who devote their lives to spying on others.
Spies who do nothing but eavesdrop, slipping into computers and conversations without a trace, have a reputation in popular culture of being troubled in ways that conventional spies are not. Think of Gene Hackman in The Conversation, or Ulrich Mühe in The Lives of Others - these surveillers are haunted, as it seems they should be.
Gene Hackman in The Conversation
Conventional spies are seen as journeying into hostile lands and committing heroic or devious acts; they are men and women of action, not thought. But the people who watch, listen, or hack are not as distracted by danger or adrenaline.
They mostly labor in tranquility, in temperature-controlled offices without windows, risking bodily harm no worse than carpal tunnel syndrome, and they have an abundance of time to think about the lurking that is their occupation and the people on whom they practice it.
I have a bias against the watchers, I suppose. I have been concerned about the bureaucracies of surveillance since the 1980s, when I was a student in the Soviet Union and felt like hunted prey. The telephone in the dreary lobby of my dormitory on the banks of the Neva River in Leningrad (now St. Petersburg) was assumed to be bugged, and if the KGB’s devices weren’t working, the dezhurnaya who sat nearby was sure to be listening.
This was my anti-surveillance Rosebud, I guess. When I visited Russian friends, I stayed silent as I walked in their ill-lit stairwells, so that the accent of my Russian would not give away the fact a foreigner was visiting them. The walls had ears.
This was one of the great contrasts between the Soviet Union and America, where I could speak to my friends without worrying about the government listening.
The Soviet Union is long gone, but in 2016 we live under the specter of far more surveillance than anything the KGB could have dreamed of with its rudimentary bugs and fearful informers. Not just government surveillance - law enforcement can easily obtain our phone and internet records with a warrant from the nearly always compliant courts - but corporate surveillance, too.
It’s not just Google and Facebook that might know more details about our lives and friends than the KGB could have imagined in its most feverish dreams of information dominance, but even Zipcar and Amazon.
There are precautions one can take, and I did that with the Lamb. When we had our video chat, I used a computer that had been wiped clean of everything except its operating system and essential applications. Afterward, it was wiped clean again.
My concern was that the Lamb might use the session to obtain data from or about the computer I was using; there are a lot of things he might have tried, if he was in a scheming mood.
At the end of our three hours together, I mentioned to him that I had taken these precautions - and he approved.
"That’s fair,” he said. “I’m glad you have that appreciation… From a perspective of a journalist who has access to classified information, it would be remiss to think you’re not a target of foreign intelligence services.”
He was telling me the U.S. government should be the least of my worries. He was trying to help me.
Former CIA Agent: It's Time To Talk About What’s Really Causing Terrorism & Elites Openly Calling To Rise Up Against 'Ignorant Masses" July 3 2016 | From: TheAntiMedia
In the wake of yet another terrorist attack, a former CIA counterterrorism agent has shared her insight into what causes such tragic, intentional carnage. Amaryllis Fox spoke for the first time publicly with Al Jazeera Plus (AJ+) about terrorism, misguided narratives on why it happens, and the underlying motivators driving it - ultimately urging Americans and those in power to adopt a different approach in combating the ongoing violence.
“If I learned one lesson from my time with the CIA, it is this: everybody believes they are the good guy,” says Fox, who is currently “in the process of getting her CIA cover rolled back,” AJ+ reports. She is now a peace activist and runs Mulu, “an e-commerce company supporting at-risk communities around the world.”
Fox worked as a counterterrorism and intelligence official for the clandestine services during the 2000s. In her first public statement on her time there, she discussed the limitations on the American public’s perception of the war on terror:
"The conversation that’s going on in the United States right now about ISIS and about the United States overseas is more oversimplified than ever. Ask most Americans whether ISIS poses an existential threat to this country and they’ll say yes. That’s where the conversation stops.”
Indeed, while a majority of Americans fear terrorism, reaching a consensus on how to tackle ISIS has proved contentious. Fox explained the simplicity of the way the conflicts are viewed on both sides:
"If you’re walking down the street in Iraq or Syria and ask anybody why America dropped bombs, you get: ‘They were waging war on Islam.’”
In America, the question is: “Why were we attacked on 9/11?”
Fox says if you pose this question, “You get: they hate us because we’re free.”
However, she contests the validity of these assumptions, pointing to the powerful forces that drive conflict in the first place:
"Those are stories manufactured by a really small number of people on both sides who amass a great deal of power and wealth by convincing the rest of us to keep killing each other.”
Indeed, both sides of the conflict expend significant effort campaigning to prove their crusades are justified. In the United States, after decades of prolonged conflict, the populace is largely desensitized to war and often ignorant of its current manifestations.
Fox challenges this paradigm:
"I think the question we need to be asking, as Americans examining our foreign policy, is whether or not we’re pouring kerosene on a candle. The only real way to disarm your enemy is to listen to them.
If you hear them out, if you’re brave enough to really listen to their story, you can see that more often than not, you might have made some of the same choices if you’d lived their life instead of yours.”
Rather, they focus, understandably, on the wrong done to their nation. But Fox offered a unique perspective that lends insight to the “enemy.”
"An Al-Qaeda fighter made a point once during debriefing,” she recounted.
“He said all these movies that America makes - like Independence Day, and the Hunger Games, and Star Wars - they’re all about a small scrappy band of rebels who will do anything in their power with the limited resources available to them to expel an outside, technological advanced invader. ‘
And what you don’t realize,’ he said, ‘is that to us, to the rest of the world, you are the empire, and we are Luke and Han. You are the aliens and we are Will Smith.’”
However, she also challenged the Al-Qaeda fighter’s take, arguing that on both sides of conflict, those fighting on the ground often provide the same reasons for doing so:
"But the truth is that when you talk to people who are really fighting on the ground, on both sides, and ask them why they’re there, they answer with hopes for their children, specific policies that they think are cruel or unfair,” she says.
“And while it may be easier to dismiss your enemy as evil, hearing them out on policy concerns is actually an amazing thing, because as long as your enemy is a subhuman psychopath that’s gonna attack you no matter what you do, this never ends. But if your enemy is a policy, however complicated - that we can work with.”
As terror attacks become an increasingly normal occurrence in the West - and as Western intervention trudges ahead unabated - hearing out enemies’ concerns may, at this point, be the most effective counterterrorism gesture the United States can make; that is, if it is truly determined to bring an end to the violence.
Elites Openly Calling To Rise Up Against 'Ignorant Masses"
In this video Luke Rudkowski covers the brazen admission from James Traub a CFR member and heir to the Bloomingdale empire.
Traub recently wrote an article for ForeignPolicy openly calling for the elites to rise up against the "fist shaking, mindless, angry, ignorant, know nothing masses.
The Secret Government Rulebook For Labeling You A Terrorist June 26 2016 | From: TheIntercept The Obama administration has quietly approved a substantial expansion of the terrorist watchlist system, authorizing a secret process that requires neither “concrete facts” nor “irrefutable evidence” to designate an American or foreigner as a terrorist, according to a key government document obtained by The Intercept.
The “March 2013 Watchlisting Guidance,” a 166-page document issued last year by the National Counterterrorism Center, spells out the government’s secret rules for putting individuals on its main terrorist database, as well as the no fly list and the selectee list, which triggers enhanced screening at airports and border crossings.
The new guidelines allow individuals to be designated as representatives of terror organizations without any evidence they are actually connected to such organizations, and it gives a single White House official the unilateral authority to place entire “categories” of people the government is tracking onto the no fly and selectee lists.
It broadens the authority of government officials to “nominate” people to the watchlists based on what is vaguely described as “fragmentary information.” It also allows for dead people to be watchlisted.
Over the years, the Obama and Bush Administrations have fiercely resisted disclosing the criteria for placing names on the databases - though the guidelines are officially labeled as unclassified. In May, Attorney General Eric Holder even invoked the state secrets privilege to prevent watchlisting guidelines from being disclosed in litigation launched by an American who was on the no fly list.
In an affidavit, Holder called them a “clear roadmap” to the government’s terrorist-tracking apparatus, adding:
“The Watchlisting Guidance, although unclassified, contains national security information that, if disclosed… could cause significant harm to national security.”
The rulebook, which The Intercept is publishing in full, was developed behind closed doors by representatives of the nation’s intelligence, military, and law-enforcement establishment, including the Pentagon, CIA, NSA, and FBI. Emblazoned with the crests of 19 agencies, it offers the most complete and revealing look into the secret history of the government’s terror list policies to date.
It reveals a confounding and convoluted system filled with exceptions to its own rules, and it relies on the elastic concept of “reasonable suspicion” as a standard for determining whether someone is a possible threat.
Because the government tracks “suspected terrorists” as well as “known terrorists,” individuals can be watchlisted if they are suspected of being a suspected terrorist, or if they are suspected of associating with people who are suspected of terrorism activity.
“Instead of a watchlist limited to actual, known terrorists, the government has built a vast system based on the unproven and flawed premise that it can predict if a person will commit a terrorist act in the future,” says Hina Shamsi, the head of the ACLU’s National Security Project.
“On that dangerous theory, the government is secretly blacklisting people as suspected terrorists and giving them the impossible task of proving themselves innocent of a threat they haven’t carried out.” Shamsi, who reviewed the document, added, “These criteria should never have been kept secret.”
The document’s definition of “terrorist” activity includes actions that fall far short of bombing or hijacking. In addition to expected crimes, such as assassination or hostage-taking, the guidelines also define destruction of government property and damaging computers used by financial institutions as activities meriting placement on a list. They also define as terrorism any act that is “dangerous” to property and intended to influence government policy through intimidation.
This combination - a broad definition of what constitutes terrorism and a low threshold for designating someone a terrorist - opens the way to ensnaring innocent people in secret government dragnets. It can also be counterproductive.
When resources are devoted to tracking people who are not genuine risks to national security, the actual threats get fewer resources - and might go unnoticed.
“If reasonable suspicion is the only standard you need to label somebody, then it’s a slippery slope we’re sliding down here, because then you can label anybody anything,” says David Gomez, a former senior FBI special agent with experience running high-profile terrorism investigations.
“Because you appear on a telephone list of somebody doesn’t make you a terrorist. That’s the kind of information that gets put in there.”
The fallout is personal too. There are severe consequences for people unfairly labeled a terrorist by the U.S. government, which shares its watchlist data with local law enforcement, foreign governments, and “private entities.”
Once the U.S. government secretly labels you a terrorist or terrorist suspect, other institutions tend to treat you as one. It can become difficult to get a job (or simply to stay out of jail). It can become burdensome - or impossible - to travel. And routine encounters with law enforcement can turn into ordeals.
A chart from the “March 2013 Watchlisting Guidance”
In 2012 Tim Healy, the former director of the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Center, described to CBS News how watchlists are used by police officers.
“So if you are speeding, you get pulled over, they’ll query that name,” he said.
“And if they are encountering a known or suspected terrorist, it will pop up and say call the Terrorist Screening Center. So now the officer on the street knows he may be dealing with a known or suspected terrorist.”
Of course, the problem is that the “known or suspected terrorist” might just be an ordinary citizen who should not be treated as a menace to public safety.
Until 2001, the government did not prioritize building a watchlist system. On 9/11, the government’s list of people barred from flying included just 16 names.
Today, the no fly list has swelled to tens of thousands of “known or suspected terrorists” (the guidelines refer to them as KSTs). The selectee list subjects people to extra scrutiny and questioning at airports and border crossings.
The government has created several other databases, too. The largest is the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment (TIDE), which gathers terrorism information from sensitive military and intelligence sources around the world.
Because it contains classified information that cannot be widely distributed, there is yet another list, the Terrorist Screening Database, or TSDB, which has been stripped of TIDE’s classified data so that it can be shared.
When government officials refer to “the watchlist,” they are typically referring to the TSDB. (TIDE is the responsibility of the National Counterterrorism Center; the TSDB is managed by the Terrorist Screening Center at the FBI.)
In a statement, a spokesman for the National Counterterrorism Center told The Intercept that:
“The watchlisting system is an important part of our layered defense to protect the United States against future terrorist attacks” and that “watchlisting continues to mature to meet an evolving, diffuse threat.”
He added that U.S. citizens are afforded extra protections to guard against improper listing, and that no one can be placed on a list solely for activities protected by the First Amendment. A representative of the Terrorist Screening Center did not respond to a request for comment.
The system has been criticized for years. In 2004, Sen. Ted Kennedy complained that he was barred from boarding flights on five separate occasions because his name resembled the alias of a suspected terrorist.
Two years later, CBS News obtained a copy of the no fly list and reported that it included Bolivian president Evo Morales and Lebanese parliament head Nabih Berri. One of the watchlists snared Mikey Hicks, a Cub Scout who got his first of many airport pat-downs at age two. In 2007, the Justice Department’s inspector general issued a scathing report identifying “significant weaknesses” in the system.
And in 2009, after a Nigerian terrorist was able to board a passenger flight to Detroit and nearly detonated a bomb sewn into his underwear despite his name having been placed on the TIDE list, President Obama admitted that there had been a “systemic failure.”
Obama hoped that his response to the “underwear bomber” would be a turning point. In 2010, he gave increased powers and responsibilities to the agencies that nominate individuals to the lists, placing pressure on them to add names. His administration also issued a set of new guidelines for the watchlists.
Problems persisted, however. In 2012, the U.S. Government Accountability Office published a report that bluntly noted there was no agency responsible for figuring out “whether watchlist-related screening or vetting is achieving intended results.” The guidelines were revised and expanded in 2013 - and a source within the intelligence community subsequently provided a copy to The Intercept.
“Concrete Facts are not Necessary”
The five chapters and 11 appendices of the “Watchlisting Guidance” are filled with acronyms, legal citations, and numbered paragraphs; it reads like an arcane textbook with a vocabulary all its own. Different types of data on suspected terrorists are referred to as “derogatory information,” “substantive derogatory information,” “extreme derogatory information” and “particularized derogatory information.”
The names of suspected terrorists are passed along a bureaucratic ecosystem of “originators,” “nominators,” “aggregators,” “screeners,” and “encountering agencies.” And “upgrade,” usually a happy word for travellers, is repurposed to mean that an individual has been placed on a more restrictive list.
The heart of the document revolves around the rules for placing individuals on a watchlist. “All executive departments and agencies,” the document says, are responsible for collecting and sharing information on terrorist suspects with the National Counterterrorism Center.
It sets a low standard - ”reasonable suspicion“ - for placing names on the watchlists, and offers a multitude of vague, confusing, or contradictory instructions for gauging it. In the chapter on “Minimum Substantive Derogatory Criteria” - even the title is hard to digest - the key sentence on reasonable suspicion offers little clarity:
“To meet the REASONABLE SUSPICION standard, the NOMINATOR, based on the totality of the circumstances, must rely upon articulable intelligence or information which, taken together with rational inferences from those facts, reasonably warrants a determination that an individual is known or suspected to be or has been knowingly engaged in conduct constituting, in preparation for, in aid of, or related to TERRORISM and/or TERRORIST ACTIVITIES.”
The rulebook makes no effort to define an essential phrase in the passage - ”articulable intelligence or information.” After stressing that hunches are not reasonable suspicion and that “there must be an objective factual basis” for labeling someone a terrorist, it goes on to state that no actual facts are required:
“In determining whether a REASONABLE SUSPICION exists, due weight should be given to the specific reasonable inferences that a NOMINATOR is entitled to draw from the facts in light of his/her experience and not on unfounded suspicions or hunches.
Although irrefutable evidence or concrete facts are not necessary, to be reasonable, suspicion should be as clear and as fully developed as circumstances permit.”
While the guidelines nominally prohibit nominations based on unreliable information, they explicitly regard “uncorroborated” Facebook or Twitter posts as sufficient grounds for putting an individual on one of the watchlists.
“Single source information,” the guidelines state, “including but not limited to ‘walk-in,’ ‘write-in,’ or postings on social media sites, however, should not automatically be discounted…
the NOMINATING AGENCY should evaluate the credibility of the source, as well as the nature and specificity of the information, and nominate even if that source is uncorroborated.”
There are a number of loopholes for putting people onto the watchlists even if reasonable suspicion cannot be met.
One is clearly defined: The immediate family of suspected terrorists - their spouses, children, parents, or siblings - may be watchlisted without any suspicion that they themselves are engaged in terrorist activity.
But another loophole is quite broad - ”associates” who have a defined relationship with a suspected terrorist, but whose involvement in terrorist activity is not known. A third loophole is broader still - individuals with “a possible nexus” to terrorism, but for whom there is not enough “derogatory information” to meet the reasonable suspicion standard.
Americans and foreigners can be nominated for the watchlists if they are associated with a terrorist group, even if that group has not been designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government.
They can also be treated as “representatives” of a terrorist group even if they have “neither membership in nor association with the organization.” The guidelines do helpfully note that certain associations, such as providing janitorial services or delivering packages, are not grounds for being watchlisted.
The nomination system appears to lack meaningful checks and balances. Although government officials have repeatedly said there is a rigorous process for making sure no one is unfairly placed in the databases, the guidelines acknowledge that all nominations of “known terrorists” are considered justified unless the National Counterterrorism Center has evidence to the contrary.
In a recent court filing, the government disclosed that there were 468,749 KST nominations in 2013, of which only 4,915 were rejected–a rate of about one percent. The rulebook appears to invert the legal principle of due process, defining nominations as “presumptively valid.”
Profiling Categories of People
While the nomination process appears methodical on paper, in practice there is a shortcut around the entire system. Known as a “threat-based expedited upgrade,” it gives a single White House official the unilateral authority to elevate entire “categories of people” whose names appear in the larger databases onto the no fly or selectee lists. This can occur, the guidelines state, when there is a “particular threat stream” indicating that a certain type of individual may commit a terrorist act.
This extraordinary power for “categorical watchlisting” - otherwise known as profiling - is vested in the assistant to the president for homeland security and counterterrorism, a position formerly held by CIA Director John Brennan that does not require Senate confirmation.
The rulebook does not indicate what “categories of people” have been subjected to threat-based upgrades. It is not clear, for example, whether a category might be as broad as military-age males from Yemen. The guidelines do make clear that American citizens and green card holders are subject to such upgrades, though government officials are required to review their status in an “expedited” procedure.
Upgrades can remain in effect for 72 hours before being reviewed by a small committee of senior officials. If approved, they can remain in place for 30 days before a renewal is required, and can continue “until the threat no longer exists.”
“In a set of watchlisting criteria riddled with exceptions that swallow rules, this exception is perhaps the most expansive and certainly one of the most troubling,” Shamsi, the ACLU attorney, says.
“It’s reminiscent of the Bush administration’s heavily criticized color-coded threat alerts, except that here, bureaucrats can exercise virtually standard-less authority in secret with specific negative consequences for entire categories of people.”
The National Counterterrorism Center declined to provide any details on the upgrade authority, including how often it has been exercised and for what categories of people.
Pocket Litter and Scuba Gear
The guidelines provide the clearest explanation yet of what is happening when Americans and foreigners are pulled aside at airports and border crossings by government agents. The fifth chapter, titled “Encounter Management and Analysis,” details the type of information that is targeted for collection during “encounters” with people on the watchlists, as well as the different organizations that should collect the data.
The Department of Homeland Security is described as having the largest number of encounters, but other authorities, ranging from the State Department and Coast Guard to foreign governments and “certain private entities,” are also involved in assembling “encounter packages” when watchlisted individuals cross their paths. The encounters can be face-to-face meetings or electronic interactions - for instance, when a watchlisted individual applies for a visa.
In addition to data like fingerprints, travel itineraries, identification documents and gun licenses, the rules encourage screeners to acquire health insurance information, drug prescriptions, “any cards with an electronic strip on it (hotel cards, grocery cards, gift cards, frequent flyer cards),” cellphones, email addresses, binoculars, peroxide, bank account numbers, pay stubs, academic transcripts, parking and speeding tickets, and want ads.
The digital information singled out for collection includes social media accounts, cell phone lists, speed dial numbers, laptop images, thumb drives, iPods, Kindles, and cameras. All of the information is then uploaded to the TIDE database.
Screeners are also instructed to collect data on any “pocket litter,” scuba gear, EZ Passes, library cards, and the titles of any books, along with information about their condition - ”e.g., new, dog-eared, annotated, unopened.” Business cards and conference materials are also targeted, as well as “anything with an account number” and information about any gold or jewelry worn by the watchlisted individual.
Even “animal information” - details about pets from veterinarians or tracking chips - is requested. The rulebook also encourages the collection of biometric or biographical data about the travel partners of watchlisted individuals.
The list of government entities that collect this data includes the U.S. Agency for International Development, which is neither an intelligence nor law-enforcement agency. As the rulebook notes, USAID funds foreign aid programs that promote environmentalism, health care, and education.
USAID, which presents itself as committed to fighting global poverty, nonetheless appears to serve as a conduit for sensitive intelligence about foreigners. According to the guidelines, “When USAID receives an application seeking financial assistance, prior to granting, these applications are subject to vetting by USAID intelligence analysts at the TSC.”
The guidelines do not disclose the volume of names provided by USAID, the type of information it provides, or the number and duties of the “USAID intelligence analysts.”
A USAID spokesman told The Intercept that “in certain high risk countries, such as Afghanistan, USAID has determined that vetting potential partner organizations with the terrorist watchlist is warranted to protect U.S. taxpayer dollars and to minimize the risk of inadvertent funding of terrorism.”
He stated that since 2007, the agency has checked “the names and other personal identifying information of key individuals of contractors and grantees, and sub-recipients.”
Death and the Watchlist
The government has been widely criticized for making it impossible for people to know why they have been placed on a watchlist, and for making it nearly impossible to get off. The guidelines bluntly state that “the general policy of the U.S. Government is to neither confirm nor deny an individual’s watchlist status.” But the courts have taken exception to the official silence and footdragging: In June, a federal judge described the government’s secretive removal process as unconstitutional and “wholly ineffective.”
The difficulty of getting off the list is highlighted by a passage in the guidelines stating that an individual can be kept on the watchlist, or even placed onto the watchlist, despite being acquitted of a terrorism-related crime.
The rulebook justifies this by noting that conviction in U.S. courts requires evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas watchlisting requires only a reasonable suspicion. Once suspicion is raised, even a jury’s verdict cannot erase it.
Not even death provides a guarantee of getting off the list. The guidelines say the names of dead people will stay on the list if there is reason to believe the deceased’s identity may be used by a suspected terrorist–which the National Counterterrorism Center calls a “demonstrated terrorist tactic.” In fact, for the same reason, the rules permit the deceased spouses of suspected terrorists to be placed onto the list after they have died.
For the living, the process of getting off the watchlist is simple yet opaque. A complaint can be filed through the Department of Homeland Security Traveler Redress Inquiry Program, which launches an internal review that is not subject to oversight by any court or entity outside the counterterrorism community.
The review can result in removal from a watchlist or an adjustment of watchlist status, but the individual will not be told if he or she prevails. The guidelines highlight one of the reasons why it has been difficult to get off the list - if multiple agencies have contributed information on a watchlisted individual, all of them must agree to removing him or her.
If a U.S. citizen is placed on the no fly list while abroad and is turned away from a flight bound for the U.S., the guidelines say they should be referred to the nearest U.S. embassy or consulate, which is prohibited from informing them why they were blocked from flying.
According to the rules, these individuals can be granted a “One-Time Waiver” to fly, though they will not be told that they are traveling on a waiver.
Back in the United States, they will be unable to board another flight.
The document states that nominating agencies are “under a continuing obligation” to provide exculpatory information when it emerges. It adds that the agencies are expected to conduct annual reviews of watchlisted American citizens and green card holders. It is unclear whether foreigners - or the dead - are reviewed at the same pace.
As the rulebook notes, “watchlisting is not an exact science.”
The Decentralized Web Summit was held from June 8-9 in San Francisco, and envisions a web not controlled by governments.
Tim Berners-Lee, the creator of the World Wide Web (WWW), is exploring the idea of a new decentralised version of the web, along with other internet scientists, reports the New York Times (See below also).
The Decentralized Web Summit was held from June 8-9 in San Francisco, and envisions a web which is not controlled by corporations or governments across the world.
“It’s (Web) been great, but spying, blocking sites, repurposing people’s content, taking you to the wrong websites - that completely undermines the spirit of helping people create,” Tim Berners-Lee told NYT.
Other than Tim Berners-Lee, the Decentralised Web Summitt saw the participation of Mozilla Project’s Mitchell Baker, Vint Cerf who is widely seen as one of the “Fathers of the Internet”, and is vice president and Chief Internet Evangelist for Google. Cerf is co-creator of the TCP/IP protocols.
Also on the panels were Cory Doctorow, an author, journalist, and Special Advisor at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, along with Brewster Kahle, who is the founder and Digital Librarian of the Internet Archive, which is the largest digital library in the world.
As the NYT article notes, the idea behind the summit is to ensure digital memory is preserved, and the web isn’t controlled by governments or certain big cloud services.
“It lacks a memory, a way to preserve our culture’s digital record through time. The Decentralized Web aims to make the Web open, secure and free of censorship by distributing data, processing, and hosting across millions of computers around the world, with no centralised control.”
The Project, which is still in the early days envisions a truly open web, compared to the current one, which is subject to government control.
As the NYT article points out the world wide web is one of the means for accessing the internet. The latter is the network path and infrastructure connecting the world’s computers.
Because the web is not full decentralised, censorship means that access to some of these pages on the Internet can be blocked. For example’s China’s Great Firewall blocks access to quite a few websites, including Google, Facebook and Twitter.
A group of top computer scientists gathered in San Francisco on Tuesday to discuss a new phase for the web
It has since become the world’s most powerful medium for knowledge, communications and commerce - but that doesn’t mean Mr. Berners-Lee is happy with all of the consequences.
“It controls what people see, creates mechanisms for how people interact,” he said of the modern day web.
“It’s been great, but spying, blocking sites, repurposing people’s content, taking you to the wrong websites - that completely undermines the spirit of helping people create.”
So on Tuesday, Mr. Berners-Lee gathered in San Francisco with other top computer scientists - including Brewster Kahle, head of the nonprofit Internet Archive and an internet activist - to discuss a new phase for the web.
So what might happen, the computer scientists posited, if they could harness newer technologies - like the software used for digital currencies, or the technology of peer-to-peer music sharing - to create a more decentralized web with more privacy, less government and corporate control, and a level of permanence and reliability?
“National histories, the story of a country, now happen on the web,” said Vinton G. Cerf, another founder of the internet and chief internet evangelist at Google, in a phone interview ahead of a speech to the group scheduled for Wednesday.
“People think making things digital means they’ll last forever, but that isn’t true now.”
The project is in its early days, but the discussions - and caliber of the people involved - underscored how the World Wide Web’s direction in recent years has stirred a deep anxiety among some technologists.
The revelations by Edward J. Snowden that the web has been used by governments for spying and the realization that companies like Amazon, Facebook and Google have become gatekeepers to our digital lives have added to concerns.
Brewster Kahle, founder and digital librarian of the Internet Archive, center left, and Tim Berners-Lee, who invented the World Wide Web, center right, with other attendees at the Decentralized Web Summit
On Tuesday, Mr. Berners-Lee and Mr. Kahle and others brainstormed at the event, called the Decentralized Web Summit, over new ways that web pages could be distributed broadly without the standard control of a web server computer, as well as ways of storing scientific data without having to pay storage fees to companies like Amazon, Dropbox or Google.
Efforts at creating greater amounts of privacy and accountability, by adding more encryption to various parts of the web and archiving all versions of a web page, also came up. Such efforts would make it harder to censor content.
“Edward Snowden showed we’ve inadvertently built the world’s largest surveillance network with the web,” said Mr. Kahle, whose group organized the conference.
“China can make it impossible for people there to read things, and just a few big service providers are the de facto organizers of your experience. We have the ability to change all that.”
Many people conflate the internet’s online services and the web as one and the same - yet they are technically quite different. The internet is a networking infrastructure, where any two machines can communicate over a variety of paths, and one local network of computers can connect with other networks.
The web, on the other hand, is a popular means to access that network of networks. But because of the way web pages are created, managed and named, the web is not fully decentralized. Take down a certain server and a certain web page becomes unavailable. Links to pages can corrode over time.
Censorship systems like China’s Great Firewall eliminate access to much information for most of its people. By looking at internet addresses, it is possible for governments and companies to get a good idea of who is reading which web pages.
In some ways, the efforts to change the technology of creating the web are a kind of coming-of-age story. Mr. Berners-Lee created the World Wide Web while working at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, as a tool for scientists. Today, the web still runs on technologies of the older world.
Consider payments. In many cases, people pay for things online by entering credit card information, not much different from handing a card to a merchant for an imprint.
The Internet Archive hosted the Decentralized Web Summit in an old church building in San Francisco
At the session on Tuesday, computer scientists talked about how new payment technologies could increase individual control over money. For example, if people adapted the so-called ledger system by which digital currencies are used, a musician might potentially be able to sell records without intermediaries like Apple’s iTunes. News sites might be able to have a system of micropayments for reading a single article, instead of counting on web ads for money.
“Ad revenue is the only model for too many people on the web now,” Mr. Berners-Lee said.
“People assume today’s consumer has to make a deal with a marketing machine to get stuff for ‘free,’ even if they’re horrified by what happens with their data. Imagine a world where paying for things was easy on both sides.”
Mr. Kahle’s Internet Archive, which exists on a combination of grants and fees from digitizing books for libraries, operates the Wayback Machine, which serves as a record of discontinued websites or early versions of pages.
To make that work now, Mr. Kahle has to search and capture a page, then give it a brand new web address. With the right kind of distributed system, he said;
“The archive can have all of the versions, because there would be a permanent record located across many sites.”
The movement to change how the web is built, like a surprising number of technology discussions, has an almost religious dimension.
Some of the participants are extreme privacy advocates who have created methods of building sites that can’t be censored, using cryptography. Mr. Cerf said he was wary of extreme anonymity, but thought the ways that digital currencies permanently record transactions could be used to make the web more accountable.
Still, not all the major players agree on whether the web needs decentralizing.
“The web is already decentralized,” Mr. Berners-Lee said.
“The problem is the dominance of one search engine, one big social network, one Twitter for microblogging. We don’t have a technology problem, we have a social problem.”
One that can, perhaps, be solved by more technology.
Utility Smart Meters - A Probable Terrorist Connection Unveiled? June 11 2016 | From: ActivistPost
All throughout the USA - plus globally - informed and concerned citizens are refusing AMI smart meters for electric, natural gas, and municipal water utility services, which are provided using a Marxist-draconian-like edict and rollout by utility companies that want to cash in on the funding they can receive from the feds to institute what amounts to an apparent ‘first leg’ push for the global smart grid and Internet of Things (IoT)
The IoT is designed to track everyone’s every interaction at all times - in your car (transponders and E-Z Pass); on your computers - specifically Windows 10 backdoors that apparently allow the feds access to your computer; through your ‘smart’ home appliances - especially TVs; plus a human RFID microchip surgically imbedded somewhere inside your body to enforce a cashless society, tracking, and an obvious ultimate control mechanism over every human!
That IoT sure beats what Karl Marx, Adolph Hitler, and Joseph Stalin visualized and enforced! Why aren’t consumers waking up to what’s being done to us?
Furthermore, does the Draco-like (7th-century Athenian statesman and lawmaker, or his code of laws, which prescribed death for almost every offence) push for vaccines starting as soon as a fetus exits the womb until one reaches advanced old age play a part in any of this, especially vaccine nanoparticles?
However, one specific aspect of the dumb ‘smart’ technology came into daylight recently because of what’s been going on in Seattle, Washington - terrorism associated with hacking smart systems. Hopefully, that aspect finally will register enough concern in the hearts, minds, and souls of humans to enable us to recognize, and seriously ponder, that we are being downsized into zombies or human robots!
The issue that’s raised security concerns, plus hackles, at corporate levels is the fact that utility companies’ smart meter technology is being equated with terroristic capabilities! Read that again and let it sink into the very depths of your being.
All those dumb ‘smart’ gadgets we can’t live without, and everyone has bought into, pose severe capabilities for terrorists’ hacking, plus a total takeover of the grid! How do you like ‘them’ apples?
The quintessential Pandora’s Box is nothing compared with smart technology and its capabilities of being hacked at every level of communication. How do we know that?
Well, it’s been revealed that when Seattle City Light, a public power utility in Washington State, was asked by an activist for their smart meter and grid details, etc., in order to find out what kind of safety and security safeguards were built in by smart meter suppliers Landis+Gyr and Sensus USA, that request wound up in a rather bizarre legal battle!
Here’s the story of activist Phil Mocek’s request for smart meter information that ran into legal troubles. However, I’d like to cut to what may be the real deal about not releasing those plans, etc:
“The smart meter suppliers objected to the release of the information on the grounds that the unredacted documents would disclose their trade secrets and open the public to terrorist attacks on their infrastructure."
As a result of smart meter suppliers/manufacturers legal actions, this is where the issue currently stands:
“Mocek was given a mix of unredacted and redacted documents by the city, the meter makers complained, whereas he should only have received and published files they had censored.
Seattle officials said they were not skilled enough to know for sure which parts to redact, so left it to the suppliers to edit the files – yet, unredacted information managed to make its way into Mocek’s hands and onto the internet.
Landis+Gyr and Sensus promptly sued the city, Mocek and Muckrock, and filed for an injunction: ultimately, the suppliers wanted the documents taken down, and the unredacted copies banned from public view.
On Thursday, a temporary restraining order was granted by the King County Superior Court in Washington – and Muckrock founder Michael Morisy confirmed the unredacted documents have been taken down pending the outcome of the case."
However, there seems to be some element of naivety involved regarding all this, I offer, and the following leads me to that conclusion:
“In the meantime, however, Mocek also has some additional problems to deal with, thanks to the legal wrangling. Though he has filed similar information requests in the past, he says he has never had to face a lawsuit simply because he wanted to look at public records and keep a local utility honest.
“I don’t think [Seattle City Light] are going to put a device on my house to spy on me,” he quipped. “I think they are being bamboozled by vendors who want to make a lot of money by replacing thousands of meters.”
To which I offer: I think Mr. Mocek and everyone else needs to reconsider the “spy on me” aspect. How naïve are we, if we don’t put two and two together and come up with the correct answer? Utility companies are providing customers’ smart meter information to others, as a California utility admits:
“This data is very valuable because it can reveal patterns about what you do and when. California utility companies admitted they are providing smart meter data to the government and third parties."
There’s a 4.3 minute video explaining what smart meters really can and do, regarding surveillance of customers’ homes in this website. It’s found under “Privacy invasion.”
However, I need to tell readers that my computer surveillance package won’t allow me to copy and paste that video URL into this article! Interesting? No - my computer is compromised as, apparently, all computers are of those who do the type of work I do.
CIA Director Calls Smart Grid “Stupid” Due to Security Problems
If the Smart Grid is that “stupid”, then there must be some ulterior Faustian reason for it to be mandated and installed, wouldn’t you say? No one can be that damn dumb to mandate a system that can cause more harm, especially in the area of personal privacy and national security. Haven’t we learned anything from nine-eleven?
You no doubt have heard about people who live in glass houses and their vulnerabilities.
Well, your house, no matter what it’s made of, will become a crystal clear, see-through structure to all who want to know about your every moment, movement, occupancy times, and use of smart gadgets and, in turn, broadcast that information via hackable cell phone technology in smart meters and, ultimately, sell that personal information without your knowledge and permission to third parties; plus open your privacy, life, and home to burglars, thieves, and government or foreign hackers.
Is that the price we are willing to pay for buying into all the dumb smart technology being forced upon us?
I think every homeowner should file a formal complaint with their utility company and public utility commission informing them that they must obtain an official court order in order to be able to access your personal information via a smart meter.
Basically, it’s a surveillance device! Enforce your lawful rights!
In a recent interview to the Columbia Journalism Review, former NS contractor, Edward Snowden spoke of the extent to which journalism has shifted from its main focus.
He said that the media is the strongest now, more than ever before, since its existence but now is the time it is the farthest from its goal of serving the people. The relationship between the media and the masses has undergone a lot of change and the media’s ‘capitalistic greed’ is to be blamed for it.
The aim is to keep the news flow going and staying ahead of competitors by reporting first, rather than reporting the accurate or the important. He says;
"When the reporting of facts takes a back seat, the media isn’t doing its only job.”
Instead of breaking a good story, competitors write against a story that has been started by a media house. He spoke of the recent case of the Drone Papers in this regard and pointed at the New York Times as the biggest offender. He said;
"You don’t take your child into the dentist thinking it will be the last time you see them alive. You should feel comfortable and safe at the doctor or dentist office – never scared for your child’s life."
“The Intercept recently published The Drone Papers, which was an extraordinary act of public service on the part of a whistleblower within the government to get the public information that’s absolutely vital about things that we should have known more than a decade ago… But the majors – specifically The New York Times – don’t actually run the story, they ignore it completely.”
According to Snowden, the media has now drifted far away from its purpose of pointing out what is contrary to the public good to becoming a tool of strengthening the elite and supporting the government.
Speaking about the major news outlets in countries like the US, Snowden said; ‘If the government said, “Look, this is secret for a reason, this is classified for a reason,” journalists would leave it at that’. However, he also believes that with so many technological tools at hand, now is the best time to revolt against such monopoly.
He says the media could be the strongest check on the hegemony moves of a government or its biggest weapon. Reports of incidents such as the NSA’s blanket spying program called PRISM could deal severe blows to the government.
Snowden explains that these changes in the media’s role became more vivid particularly after the 9/11 attacks when the social media emerged as a more powerful form of reporting. However, he warns saying that these trends just hand over more power to new media ‘malicious actors’ to gain control of the ‘media narrative’ in novel ways.
The trouble with these media outlets is, whoever has the loudest voice always wins – irrespective of the accuracy of their statements. He explains saying;
"The director of the FBI can make a false statement or some kind of misleading claim in congressional testimony. I can fact-check and I can say this is inaccurate. Unless some entity with a larger audience, for example, an established institution of journalism, sees that themselves, the value of these sorts of statements is still fairly minimal.”
So what difference did the NSA leaks bring about really? Snowden says it covered the distance between allegation and fact. He says:
"What happened in 2013 is we transformed the public debate from allegation to fact. The distance between allegation and fact, at times, makes all the difference in the world’. "
It did create an impact on the government by making it believe that more transparency could be demanded from it. Staying in exile in Russia, Snowden feels whistle blowing should be the purpose of the media but more important is that people realise they have the right to know what their government is doing.
Censored, Surveilled, Watch Listed And Jailed: The Absurdity Of Being A Citizen In A Police State
April 29 2016 | From: InformationClearingHouse
In the police state, the price to be paid for speaking truth to power (also increasingly viewed as an act of treason) is surveillance, censorship, jail and ultimately death.
However, where many go wrong is in assuming that you have to be doing something illegal or challenging the government’s authority in order to be flagged as a suspicious character, labeled an enemy of the state and locked up like a dangerous criminal.
MIn fact, as I point out in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, all you really need to do is use certain trigger words, surf the internet, communicate using a cell phone, drive a car, stay at a hotel, purchase materials at a hardware store, take flying or boating lessons, appear suspicious, question government authority, or generally live in the United States.
With the help of automated eyes and ears, a growing arsenal of high-tech software, hardware and techniques, government propaganda urging Americans to turn into spies and snitches, as well as social media and behavior sensing software, government agents are spinning a sticky spider-web of threat assessments, flagged “words,” and “suspicious” activity reports aimed at snaring potential enemies of the state.
It’s the American police state’s take on the dystopian terrors foreshadowed by George Orwell, Aldous Huxley and Phillip K. Dick all rolled up into one oppressive pre-crime and pre-thought crime package.
What’s more, the technocrats who run the surveillance state don’t even have to break a sweat while monitoring what you say, what you read, what you write, where you go, how much you spend, whom you support, and with whom you communicate.
Computers now do the tedious work of trolling social media, the internet, text messages and phone calls for potentially anti-government remarks - all of which is carefully recorded, documented, and stored to be used against you someday at a time and place of the government’s choosing.
While this may sound like a riff on a bad joke, it’s a bad joke with “we the people” as the punchline.
The following activities are guaranteed to get you censored, surveilled, eventually placed on a government watch list, possibly detained and potentially killed.
Laugh at your own peril.
Use harmless trigger words like cloud, pork and pirates:
Simply by using a cell phone, you make yourself an easy target for government agents - working closely with corporations - who can listen in on your phone calls, read your text messages and emails, and track your movements based on the data transferred from, received by, and stored in your cell phone.
Mention any of the so-called “trigger” words in a conversation or text message, and you’ll get flagged for sure.
Drive a car:
Unless you’ve got an old junkyard heap without any of the gadgets and gizmos that are so attractive to today’s car buyers (GPS, satellite radio, electrical everything, smart systems, etc.), driving a car today is like wearing a homing device: you’ll be tracked from the moment you open that car door thanks to black box recorders and vehicle-to-vehicle communications systems that can monitor your speed, direction, location, the number of miles traveled, and even your seatbelt use.
Once you add satellites, GPS devices, license plate readers, and real-time traffic cameras to the mix, there’s nowhere you can go on our nation’s highways and byways that you can’t be followed.
Attend a political rally:
Enacted in the wake of 9/11, the Patriot Act redefined terrorism so broadly that many non-terrorist political activities such as protest marches, demonstrations and civil disobedience were considered potential terrorist acts, thereby rendering anyone desiring to engage in protected First Amendment expressive activities as suspects of the surveillance state.
Operation Vigilant Eagle, the brainchild of the Dept. of Homeland Security, calls for surveillance of military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan, characterizing them as extremists and potential domestic terrorist threats because they may be “disgruntled, disillusioned or suffering from the psychological effects of war.”
Disagree with a law enforcement official:
A growing number of government programs are aimed at identifying, monitoring and locking up anyone considered potentially “dangerous” or mentally ill (according to government standards, of course). For instance, a homeless man in New York City who reportedly had a history of violence but no signs of mental illness was forcibly detained in a psych ward for a week after arguing with shelter police.
As a result of a nationwide push to certify a broad spectrum of government officials in mental health first-aid training (a 12-hour course comprised of PowerPoint presentations, videos, discussions, role playing and other interactive activities), more Americans are going to run the risk of being reported for having mental health issues by non-medical personnel.
For instance, one 37-year-old disabled man was arrested, diagnosed by police and an unlicensed mental health screener as having “mental health issues,” apparently because of his slurred speech and unsteady gait.
Appear confused or nervous, fidget, whistle or smell bad:
According to the Transportation Security Administration’s 92-point secret behavior watch list for spotting terrorists, these are among some of the telling signs of suspicious behavior: fidgeting, whistling, bad body odor, yawning, clearing your throat, having a pale face from recently shaving your beard, covering your mouth with your hand when speaking and blinking your eyes fast.
Allow yourself to be seen in public waving a toy gun or anything remotely resembling a gun, such as a water nozzle or a remote control or a walking cane, for instance:
No longer is it unusual to hear about incidents in which police shoot unarmed individuals first and ask questions later.
John Crawford was shot by police in an Ohio Wal-Mart for holding an air rifle sold in the store that he may have intended to buy. Thirteen-year-old Andy Lopez Cruz was shot 7 times in 10 seconds by a California police officer who mistook the boy’s toy gun for an assault rifle.
Appear to be pro-gun, pro-freedom or anti-government:
You might be a domestic terrorist in the eyes of the FBI (and its network of snitches) if you: express libertarian philosophies; exhibit Second Amendment-oriented views; read survivalist literature, including apocalyptic fictional books; show signs of self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies); fear an economic collapse; buy gold and barter items; voice fears about Big Brother or big government; or expound about constitutional rights and civil liberties.
Attend a public school:
Microcosms of the police state, public schools contain almost every aspect of the militarized, intolerant, senseless, overcriminalized, legalistic, surveillance-riddled, totalitarian landscape that plagues those of us on the “outside.”
Long before Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden were being castigated for blowing the whistle on the government’s war crimes and the National Security Agency’s abuse of its surveillance powers, it was activists such as Martin Luther King Jr. and John Lennon who were being singled out for daring to speak truth to power.
These men and others like them had their phone calls monitored and data files collected on their activities and associations. For a little while, at least, they became enemy number one in the eyes of the US government.
There’s always a price to pay for standing up to the powers-that-be.
Yet as this list shows, you don’t even have to be a dissident to get flagged by the government for surveillance, censorship and detention.
All you really need to be is a citizen of the police state.
When Idiots Control Technology, This Is What Happens April 23 2016 | From: Geopolitics / Sputnik Here on this planet exists one giant multi-layered corporation comprising of thousands sub-corporations, with each layer promoting and protecting each own interests which when summed up lead only to one definite conclusion, i.e. self-destruction.
We are part of that multi-layered corporation, whether by sheer ignorance, or through lies and deception.
However methods used that brought us together up to this giant control structure, we don’t have any excuse whatsoever why we should not correct the present trajectory before this present path reach its disastrous end.
We are aware of one of the most obvious misapplications of science and technology which is the continued establishment of surveillance system far bigger than its predecessors. This is to be used to merge humanity to machines to facilitate AI control later on.
The Colossal Costs of Building UK’s Monster Surveillance Network
The proposal, which the Home Office wants to rush through the House of Commons just after Easter, will cost the country billions of pounds. The centers will be required to keep large databases of all the connections made by UK Internet users for one year - and to share them automatically with the UK’s government and intelligence agencies.
The government is bracing itself for the vote as the news arrives that the only other country in the world to have ever tried a similar approach - Denmark - has just decided to abandon the plan, for the second time in ten years.
The first Danish “session logging” system was put into place in 2007, but was abandoned in 2013 after the country’s police and security services found it to be practically useless - besides being very expensive for Internet providers to install and operate.
Another attempt to build an improved system, carried out by the Danish Ministry of Justice at the start of March 2016 also appears to have foundered.
Before the final decision was taken, the Danish government asked accounting firm Ernst & Young to ascertain how much the new surveillance network would cost.
The experts found that total expenses would be around one billion Danish Krone (US$150 million). The Danish government decided that the costs were too high for the country and its tech sector.
In the UK, the costs are likely to be much-much higher. If in Denmark - a country of 5.6 million people - the government estimated that each citizen would produce about 62,000 records every year, in Britain, whose population is about ten times the size of Denmark’s, the final annual database would have to include about four trillion a year.
Other estimates suggest that the sheer amount of records could even hit tens of trillions every year. That is because each of those records, as per the law, would have to contain: a customer account reference or device identifier; the date and time of the event; the duration; the source and destination IP and port number of each session; the domain name or linked URL; the volume of data; and the name of Internet service you connected to.
The UK will have to find a way to store an enormous amount of information every day — even if each record’s weight was brought down to 100 bytes, on a yearly level, we are talking exabytes (thousands of petabytes).
The only surefire way to deal with this information is by building new massive data centers, which will need at least US$140 million in equipment to handle each exabyte. Add the building, as well as cooling and electricity management and you have only started understanding the eventual costs of the UK’s new monster surveillance plans.
That’s Fust the Tip of The Iceberg
The AI control mechanism itself requires the merging of different sciences which when all tied in together also explains the physics behind all the myths, legends and conspiracies that ultimately define our present reality as it is today.
If you are not turned off by its title, the video above will surely reinforce what you’ve learned so far, and hopefully convince you that all the madness that is still going on around the world today needs to end.
More importantly, don’t allow yourself to get distracted over by any Gladio type operations wherever they may occur. Just stay within the course of your own evolution.
Self-evolution is the most powerful revolution.
NSW Bar Association Warns Against New Police Powers April 20 2016 | From: AustralianNationalReview The New South Wales Bar Association has warned against a move to give more powers to the police at the detriment of citizens’ independence.
The new powers could see bans being placed on citizens in New South Wales. They could also face restrictions on movement and face curfews without even having committed a crime. The association said that the proposals would create a ‘rival criminal justice system’ that could harm people on mere suspicion.
The NSW government had made the proposals as part of introducing new powers to the police. Called serious crime prevention orders, it would offer unprecedented rights to the police to interfere in the affairs of the citizen, the bar association claimed.
If such powers are given to the police, they would be able to invoke the same powers to seek and impose control over alleged criminals as they do on terrorism suspects. That the police would have so much power in their hands without needing to prove the crime of a suspect makes the law dangerous and amenable to manipulation.
Police would be able to restrain any citizen and interfere with his/her basic rights. Even when a person is acquitted of a criminal offence, police could still seek such an order to treat him or her as per the provisions of the controversial rule.
The penalty for breaching an order could be up to five years’ imprisonment or AUD33,000 as fine for an individual. In the case of corporate entities, the fine would be AUD165,000.
In a submission, the NSW Bar Association criticised the government’s hurry in pushing through the legislation. It said:
“No evidence has been cited as to the ineffectiveness of the administration of criminal justice by a process of trial for ‘reducing serious and organised crime’ in New South Wales.
The bill effectively sets up a rival to the criminal trial system and interferes unacceptably in the fundamental human rights and freedoms of citizens of NSW.”
The association also said that it was at loss to explain why the government wanted the new norms in the place of long-settled principles.
Police minister, Troy Grant, said that the measures were aimed at reducing serious and organised crime. The new provisions would allow the NSW police, the NSW Crime Commission and the NSW director of public prosecutions to seek orders from a judge to impose the restrictions on citizens or corporations.
The judge must be satisfied there are “reasonable grounds” for the request. However, the bar association said that while the laws could be applied to individuals who had been convicted of a serious criminal offence, they would also be applicable to behaviour that was considered “serious crime-related activity.”
It went on to allege that the new rules interfered with rights of the citizens and had doubtful constitutional validity.
Finger In Every Pie: How CIA Produces Our ‘News’ And Entertainment April 14 2016 | From: 21stCenturyWire / Sputnik In so many respects, ‘our’ media is not our own. In the past, 21WIRE has detailed various aspects of Operation Mockingbird and other CIA-related media pursuits, as well as many other bogus news stories which appear on a regular basis.
Claire Danes as Carrie Mathison in Homeland
Previously, we showed how the Hollywood hit ZeroDarkThirty was a completely fabricated piece of fiction which was passed on to the public as a “true story”. Also, the popular TV series, Homeland, is one of the most obvious propaganda productions in recent years, designed to reinforce many flawed assumptions and false believes about the world outside of the United States.
Did you know that the CIA has actually produced a number of high-profile ‘history’ TV programs that appear on US and world media channels?
Yes, it’s true…
Finger in Every Pie: How CIA Became Involved in Entertainment Business
The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) has a finger in every pie including… the entertainment business: it turns out that the CIA has played a role in producing at least 22 entertainment projects; investigative journalist Adam Johnson argues that by doing this the US intelligence agency puts American media workers at risk.
Related: Maybe She’s Born With It? CIA Funds DNA-Collecting Skincare Line
It seems that the US Central Intelligence Agency follows the theory that says that there are no little or insignificant things. The intelligence agency has long been keeping an eye on the Western entertainment industry and has even had a role in producing popular fiction movies and documentaries.
In his article for Fair.org media watchdog investigative journalist Adam Johnson argues that this type of collaboration may cast a shadow over the image of US media workers and even put them at risk.
"For years, artists from across the entertainment industry - actors, authors, directors, producers, screenwriters, and others - have been in touch with the CIA to gain a better understanding of our intelligence mission," the CIA public website reads.
According to the website, the CIA's goal in engaging with the industry is to ensure "an accurate portrayal of the men and women of the CIA, and the skill, innovation, daring, and commitment to public service that defines them."
Johnson cites the recent article by Jason Leopold of VICE News who shed some light on how deep the CIA's Office of Public Affairs (OPA) has been involved in US popular entertainment projects.
"Vice's Jason Leopold has uncovered documents showing the CIA had a role in producing up to 22 entertainment 'projects,' including History Channel documentary Air America: The CIA's Secret Airline, Bravo's Top Chef: Covert Cuisine, the USA Network series Covert Affairs and the BBC documentary The Secret War on Terror-along with two fictional feature films about the CIA that both came out in 2012," Johnson narrates.
He points out that the CIA has a long history of "helping" to produce films and documentaries.
"The Agency, for example, secretly bought the rights to Animal Farm after Orwell's death in 1950 and produced an animated adaptation centered on demonizing the Soviet Union rather than capturing Orwell's broader critiques of power," the investigative journalist underscores.
And, yes, the CIA and other intelligence agencies are also recruiting prominent media figures.
In September 2015 the conservative group Judicial Watch released a 2012 CIA inspector general's audit covering the CIA's OPA cooperation with the entertainment industry.
The report specifically criticizes the CIA's OPA for excessive engaging with the media figures, in particular for inviting entertainment industry workers to secret briefings and other events.
"There was an instance in which the CIA allowed an entertainment industry representative to attend a CIA event in which information classified at the SECRET level was discussed," the document reads.
Johnson emphasizes that it is no secret that Hollywood players took part in various covert operations. He refers to the fact that legendary film producer Arnon Milchan worked for years for Israeli intelligence dealing arms and obtaining sensitive technical information for defense programs.
Sydeny Pollack in 'Eyes Wide Shut'
Remarkably, in his interview with BBC in 2013 Milchan admitted that Academy Award-winning director Sydney Pollack had also been involved in covert intelligence operations.
"In such revelations, an important point is often overlooked: The CIA assisting or posing as filmmakers, journalists and other creative roles-a practice the Agency reserves the right to partake in to this day-puts actual filmmakers, journalists and other creators at risk overseas," Johnson emphasizes.
According to the investigative journalist, it is dangerous to "blur" the lines between covert intelligence and legitimate media activities, because it puts the media workers at risk of being considered CIA associates.
"The spectacle of Hollywood teaming up with US intelligence agencies to make propaganda - especially given the dodgy historical context - no doubt stokes the fears of countries already hostile to Americans within their borders," he explains.
"Every time this type of behavior is normalized, or shrugged off, or made sexy, real journalists and real filmmakers overseas are put further at risk," Johnson concludes.
Related: The American Media Is A CIA Front - Paul Craig Roberts
I reported honestly the facts of the US coup that overthrew the elected Ukrainian government in 2014 (see my columns in February and March 2014). However, the US print and TV media, led by the New York Times, lied through their teeth.
Indeed, the “mainstream” US media functioned as agent and propagandist for the Washington neoconservatives who destroyed Ukrainian democracy and imposed massive suffering and death on Ukrainians.
There is no crime that the American presstitutes will not commit and no lie that they will not tell.
Yesterday (April 11, 2016) Robert Parry held the sordid presstitutes accountable:
Tyranny And Free Speech March 30 2016 | From: BreakingViews Do you support free speech? How about free speech for climate change skeptics? For homophobes? For racists? For sexists? For white males? For even Donald Trump?
Those who defend free speech, as did the American Founding Fathers, understand it is not about defending speech you agree with, but defending speech you disagree with. Without free speech, there is no liberty.
The State Department diversity officer, John Robinson, has just warned the staff that they may be penalized for engaging in “microaggressions,” which include jokes or other comments that someone who hears them may find offensive.
In a recent letter, he referred to a definition of microaggressions as:
"Everyday verbal, nonverbal and environmental slights, snubs or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory or negative messages to target persons.”
In other words, whatever you hear may be considered a microaggression if you choose to be offended.
Such vague and infinitely elastic laws and regulations are the bread and butter of all totalitarian regimes.
Lavrentiy Beria (Joseph Stalin’s head of the NKVD, a predecessor of the KGB) was quoted as saying to Stalin:
"You name the person and I will find the crime.”
The “crime” of microaggression has already been used to stifle and prosecute speech by those who have contrary views in several left-leaning universities, and now it is coming to the federal government.
The climate change lobbyists have been increasingly aggressive in their attacks on free speech.
They seek to silence their critics, who have committed the “sin” of noting their many failed predictions.
George Mason University meteorologist Jagadish Shukla was the lead signatory of the letter sent to the president and attorney general asking them to use RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) laws to prosecute;
"Corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.”
Mr. Shukla “paid himself and his wife $1.5 million from government climate grants for part-time work.”
Other prominent global warming fear-mongers, who are on the government teat, have also called for “war crimes trials” and even the “execution” of some critics.
Even Attorney General Loretta Lynch said last week she has looked at the possibility of pursuing civil actions against so-called “climate change deniers.”
The message: Don’t look to the Obama administration to protect free speech. Which do you find more offensive, a person advocating socialism or a person telling jokes about one-eyed people?
Socialism is an ideology that has resulted in governments killing more than 200 million of their own citizens in the last century. It is based on coercion rather than liberty. It demands involuntary servitude. Socialist Bernie Sanders promises “free” stuff to his supporters to be paid for by the involuntary servitude of others - to which there will be no end.
Having spent considerable time in socialist countries and seen the human wreckage that results, I am offended by the ignorance or venality of those who engage in the microaggression of advocating socialism. Several decades ago, I lost an eye, and in the years since I have been told hundreds of “one-eyed” jokes, even by people who do not know me.
Rather than being offended, I have chosen to enjoy them. Offensive speech is totally subjective, and making it a crime is incompatible with a free society.
The Guardian, a left-wing British newspaper, published an article last year by a woman author titled;
"Why do women lie more than men?”
It reported on a new poll that “suggests that women are twice as likely to lie as men.”
The article goes on to say: “It may be irritating to be told, yet again, that women are more morally slippery than men (just as in Genesis).”
The article goes on to cite several reasons why this may be true - including differences “between masculine and feminine brains.”
All of this may or may not be nonsense, but in cases of women complaining about men engaging in “offensive” speech, it is most often assumed, without evidence, that the woman is telling the truth and the man is lying. In fact, men are frequently not allowed to know who their accuser is or what she claimed was said.
One of the most basic protections of liberty is the right of the accuser to know the specific charges against him or her and by whom. As a result, many innocent men are not given a fair hearing by the human resource departments in organizations and even sometimes by the courts.
The late well-regarded feminist, Joan Kennedy Taylor, argued in her book “What to Do When You Don’t Want to Call the Cops: Or a Non-Adversarial Approach to Sexual Harassment” (Cato Institute) that it is important to understand that men and women perceive things quite differently, and that non-legal strategies which she describes can be far more effective and less damaging than legal remedies.
Law professor Catherine Ross has just written an important book, “Lessons in Censorship” (to be discussed at a Cato book forum on March 16), in which she argues that “the failure of schools to respect civil liberties betrays their educational function and threatens democracy.”
The popularity of the verbally crude Donald Trump might, in part, be a reaction to the political correctness of the political class and timid leaders of organizations who have failed to defend freedom of speech.
Clinton Email Reveals: Google Sought Overthrow Of Syria's Assad + Robert Kennedy Jr. Just Dropped A Truth Bomb: 'Pipeline War' Is At The Roots Of Syrian Crisis
March 23 2016 | From: WashingtonExaminer / Infowars
Google in 2012 sought to help insurgents overthrow Syrian President Bashar Assad, according to State Department emails receiving fresh scrutiny this week.
Messages between former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's team and one of the company's executives detailed the plan for Google to get involved in the region.
A story largely ignored by the corporate media reveals the tech company Google offered to help Secretary of State Clinton overthrow Bashar al-Assad by developing an app to track defections from the Syrian government.
Jared Cohen, the head of what was then the company's "Google Ideas" division, wrote in a July 2012 email to several top Clinton officials.
“Please keep close hold, but my team is planning to launch a tool... that will publicly track and map the defections in Syria and which parts of the government they are coming from."
"Our logic behind this is that while many people are tracking the atrocities, nobody is visually representing and mapping the defections, which we believe are important in encouraging more to defect and giving confidence to the opposition,"Cohen said, adding that the plan was for Google to surreptitiously give the tool to Middle Eastern media.
"Given how hard it is to get information into Syria right now, we are partnering with Al-Jazeera who will take primary ownership over the tool we have built, track the data, verify it, and broadcast it back into Syria," he said.
The message was addressed to deputy secretary of state Bill Burns; Alec Ross, a senior Clinton advisor; and Clinton's deputy chief of staff, Jake Sullivan. Sullivan subsequently forwarded Cohen's proposal to Clinton, describing it as "a pretty cool idea."
Cohen worked as a member of the secretary of state's policy planning staff from 2006 to 2010, when he was hired to lead Google Ideas, but was tied to using social media to incite uprisings even before he left the department.
He once reportedly asked Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey to hold off of conducting system maintenance that officials believed could have impeded a brief 2009 uprising in Iran, and Julian Assange, who founded the secret-leaking website WikiLeaks, has for years referred to Cohen as Google's "director of regime change."
In her book No Higher Honor Condoleezza Rice spoke fondly of Cohen, describing him as a “young gun” and said his work in social media;
“Would pay off handsomely… when Twitter and Facebook became accelerants of democratic change in the Middle East.”
Social media played a predominant role in the so-called “Arab Spring,” the concerted effort by the State Department, the Endowment for Democracy, USAID, the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House to violently overthrow governments in the Middle East and North Africa.
In addition to Google, Facebook and Twitter were also involved in the effort to undermine governments in the region.
The exchange on Syria was highlighted by Wikileaks on Saturday. Earlier in the week, the site posted more than 30,000 emails that Clinton sent or received during her tenure leading the State Department.
Robert Kennedy Jr. Just Dropped A Truth Bomb: 'Pipeline War' Is At The Roots Of Syrian Crisis
The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst. It rejects even the assumption that human creatures could espouse a philosophy which must ultimately destroy all that is good and decent.
Radio Sputnik discusses the origins of the Syrian crisis with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., attorney and nephew of US President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Kennedy writes that the US decided to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power after he refused to back a Qatari gas pipeline project. Sputnik also touched upon US foreign policy, the refugee crisis and why Donald Trump would be a better president than Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.
Nicky Hager’s attention is turning towards Westpac Bank’s handing over of his bank records after watching police smash 213 times a hard drive containing his material.
About 17 months after police raided the Dirty Politics author’s home, Mr Hager and one of his lawyers, Steven Price, watched a hard drive and memory card containing copies of seized data get destroyed in the High Court at Auckland.
The pair also collected a computer and other equipment taken by police during what Mr Hager called a “Rambo” raid, after it was last year ruled unlawful.
Mr Hager fought for two months to get permission for the media to watch the copies being destroyed, without success.
But afterwards, he said it was an “amazing day” and he felt like he was “watching history.”
“We went down to the basement of the High Court building here, into this little narrow room, without lights on, and the police held torches around while one of the detectives, in fact the detective who was in charge of removing stuff from my house was there, while he destroyed the materials they had copied from the house.”
Mr Hager says the detective took to the hard drive 213 times with a hammer, before cutting holes in it with a bolt-colter.
But while he is “absolutely confident” the material was not tampered with while sitting at court, his attention now turns to other areas where he says the police were “tricky.”
Mr Price says there will likely be a further hearing later this year regarding further aspects of the case.
“The main thing that’s going on is the question whether it’s lawful for the police to go to banks and get them to turn over someone’s bank records, as they did with Nicky, without a court order.
That’s something that might affect thousands of people.”
Keith Locke: Hard To Spy Gains From Five Eyes March 22 2016 | From: KeithLocke
This article of mine [Keith Locke - former Green MP] was published in the New Zealand Herald on 15 March 2016. It was in response to the report of Intelligence and Security Agencies Review, released on 9 March.
The intelligence services report by Sir Michael Cullen and Dame Patsy Reddy sheds more light on the GCSB’s work with the Five Eyes network, but it also leaves several questions unanswered. Since the Snowden revelations there has been a concern that our Government Communications Security Bureau is involved in “mass surveillance”. The Government has denied that it is.
Cullen and Reddy describe how the GCSB collects communications from the geo-stationary satellites visible from its station at Waihopai, near Blenheim.
First; the bureau:
"Intercepts a set of communications, most of which will be of no relevance and will be discarded without ever being examined by the [GCSB] analyst. This is the haystack in which the needle must be found.”
“The GCSB filters intercepted material for relevance using search terms.”
These search terms could be subjects or groups and could take in lot of people, some of whom would be New Zealanders.
Although the GCSB is supposed to be targeting “foreign intelligence” it is not illegal for it to retain Waihopai’s intercept intelligence on New Zealanders if it was “incidentally obtained intelligence”, that is, if the New Zealanders weren’t a specific target, and the intelligence was relevant to the GCSB’s security objectives.
In addition, many New Zealanders can legally be targeted by the GCSB as “foreign persons” if they are active in “foreign organisations”, the definition of which is broad enough to include Greenpeace or the New Zealand subsidiary of a multi-national corporation. Former Prime Minister Jenny Shipley qualifies as a “foreign person” because she is on the board of the China Construction Bank.
The Cullen/Reddy report removes the problem of “mass surveillance” by saying it “suggests a kind of active monitoring of the general population that does not occur”.. [not true].
However, I don’t think any critic of government surveillance has ever envisaged the surveillance going that far [not true].
An over-the-top definition of mass surveillance avoids the reality of a mass collection of communications data at Waihopai and the possibility that the international phone calls or emails of any New Zealander could be caught in the net, accidentally or not. In theory, their communications could be subsequently analysed by a GCSB operative.
The next question is what happens to the “haystack” of communications collected at the Waihopai spy station. The report says that most of these communications “will be of no relevance and will be discarded without ever being examined by an analyst”.
They may be discarded by the analyst, but to what extent are they stored, either here or overseas, for later mining by the GCSB or its Five Eyes partners? We know that the US National Security Agency has access to raw communications from its Five Eyes partners, and that it stores billions of communications for later analysis.
This is relevant to the concern, correctly raised by Cullen and Reddy, that close co-operation with Five Eyes partners “creates a risk of some loss of independence, both operationally and potentially also in relation to our intelligence, defence and foreign policy settings”. Our national interests “do not and cannot exactly coincide with those of any other country”.
The reality is that when New Zealand is sharing raw communications data with other Fives Eyes partners some of the intelligence they glean from it will be used for foreign policy objectives which are not the same as New Zealand’s.
But this seems to be a secondary consideration to the net benefit Cullen and Reddy say New Zealand receives from Five Eyes intelligence sharing. It is hard to judge this as any benefits are largely invisible to the public.
Have any terrorist plots been found? Not as far as we know. Have our trade interests been advanced? No one has pointed out how. Has our diplomacy been assisted? I can’t see any evidence.
Yet the downside of New Zealand’s participation in Five Eyes surveillance is substantial. There was a cool reception in Beijing when the Snowden papers revealed the GCSB’s spying on China. Joining intelligence forces with America against China is hardly the way to optimise our trade with that important country.
New Zealand’s ambassador was called in to the Brazilian foreign ministry when it was revealed the GCSB had been gathering Five Eyes intercept data on Brazilian Roberto Azevedo in an unsuccessful attempt to stop him heading off our Trade Minister Tim Groser to become Director-General of the WTO.
Yes, we need to be concerned about possible terrorist activity. But do we need to be in the Five Eyes to detect any plots? The reality is that the police and intelligence forces of friendly nations share information on terrorism (and other international crime) regardless of who is in or out of the Five Eyes.
I don’t think Cullen and Reddy make much of a case for us to stay in this five-nation spy network.
The New Mind Control: “Subliminal Stimulation”; Controlling People Without Their Knowledge March 16 2016 | From: GlobalResearch
The internet has spawned subtle forms of influence that can flip elections and manipulate everything we say, think and do.
Over the past century, more than a few great writers have expressed concern about humanity’s future. In The Iron Heel (1908), the American writer Jack London pictured a world in which a handful of wealthy corporate titans – the ‘oligarchs’ – kept the masses at bay with a brutal combination of rewards and punishments. Much of humanity lived in virtual slavery, while the fortunate ones were bought off with decent wages that allowed them to live comfortably – but without any real control over their lives.
In We (1924), the brilliant Russian writer Yevgeny Zamyatin, anticipating the excesses of the emerging Soviet Union, envisioned a world in which people were kept in check through pervasive monitoring.
The walls of their homes were made of clear glass, so everything they did could be observed. They were allowed to lower their shades an hour a day to have sex, but both the rendezvous time and the lover had to be registered first with the state.
In Brave New World (1932), the British author Aldous Huxley pictured a near-perfect society in which unhappiness and aggression had been engineered out of humanity through a combination of genetic engineering and psychological conditioning.
And in the much darker novel 1984 (1949), Huxley’s compatriot George Orwell described a society in which thought itself was controlled; in Orwell’s world, children were taught to use a simplified form of English called Newspeak in order to assure that they could never express ideas that were dangerous to society.
These are all fictional tales, to be sure, and in each the leaders who held the power used conspicuous forms of control that at least a few people actively resisted and occasionally overcame.
But in the non-fiction bestseller The Hidden Persuaders (1957) – recently released in a 50th-anniversary edition – the American journalist Vance Packard described a ‘strange and rather exotic’ type of influence that was rapidly emerging in the United States and that was, in a way, more threatening than the fictional types of control pictured in the novels.
According to Packard, US corporate executives and politicians were beginning to use subtle and, in many cases, completely undetectable methods to change people’s thinking, emotions and behaviour based on insights from psychiatry and the social sciences.
Most of us have heard of at least one of these methods: subliminal stimulation, or what Packard called ‘subthreshold effects’ – the presentation of short messages that tell us what to do but that are flashed so briefly we aren’t aware we have seen them.
In 1958, propelled by public concern about a theatre in New Jersey that had supposedly hidden messages in a movie to increase ice cream sales, the National Association of Broadcasters – the association that set standards for US television – amended its code to prohibit the use of subliminal messages in broadcasting.
In 1974, the Federal Communications Commission opined that the use of such messages was ‘contrary to the public interest’.
Legislation to prohibit subliminal messaging was also introduced in the US Congress but never enacted.
Both the UK and Australia have strict laws prohibiting it.
Subliminal stimulation is probably still in wide use in the US – it’s hard to detect, after all, and no one is keeping track of it – but it’s probably not worth worrying about.
Research suggests that it has only a small impact, and that it mainly influences people who are already motivated to follow its dictates; subliminal directives to drink affect people only if they’re already thirsty.
Packard had uncovered a much bigger problem, however – namely that powerful corporations were constantly looking for, and in many cases already applying, a wide variety of techniques for controlling people without their knowledge.
He described a kind of cabal in which marketers worked closely with social scientists to determine, among other things, how to get people to buy things they didn’t need and how to condition young children to be good consumers – inclinations that were explicitly nurtured and trained in Huxley’s Brave New World.
Guided by social science, marketers were quickly learning how to play upon people’s insecurities, frailties, unconscious fears, aggressive feelings and sexual desires to alter their thinking, emotions and behaviour without any awareness that they were being manipulated.
By the early 1950s, Packard said, politicians had got the message and were beginning to merchandise themselves using the same subtle forces being used to sell soap. Packard prefaced his chapter on politics with an unsettling quote from the British economist Kenneth Boulding:
"A world of unseen dictatorship is conceivable, still using the forms of democratic government."
Could this really happen, and, if so, how would it work?
The forces that Packard described have become more pervasive over the decades. The soothing music we all hear overhead in supermarkets causes us to walk more slowly and buy more food, whether we need it or not. Most of the vacuous thoughts and intense feelings our teenagers experience from morning till night are carefully orchestrated by highly skilled marketing professionals working in our fashion and entertainment industries.
Yes, New Zealand has a national chain of supermarkets that are actually called New World... where you can take your New World grocery Order - oh the irony
Politicians work with a wide range of consultants who test every aspect of what the politicians do in order to sway voters: clothing, intonations, facial expressions, makeup, hairstyles and speeches are all optimised, just like the packaging of a breakfast cereal.
Fortunately, all of these sources of influence operate competitively. Some of the persuaders want us to buy or believe one thing, others to buy or believe something else. It is the competitive nature of our society that keeps us, on balance, relatively free.
But what would happen if new sources of control began to emerge that had little or no competition? And what if new means of control were developed that were far more powerful – and far more invisible – than any that have existed in the past? And what if new types of control allowed a handful of people to exert enormous influence not just over the citizens of the US but over most of the people on Earth?
To understand how the new forms of mind control work, we need to start by looking at the search engine – one in particular: the biggest and best of them all, namely Google. The Google search engine is so good and so popular that the company’s name is now a commonly used verb in languages around the world.
To ‘Google’ something is to look it up on the Google search engine, and that, in fact, is how most computer users worldwide get most of their information about just about everything these days.
They Google it.
Google has become the main gateway to virtually all knowledge, mainly because the search engine is so good at giving us exactly the information we are looking for, almost instantly and almost always in the first position of the list it shows us after we launch our search – the list of ‘search results’.
That ordered list is so good, in fact, that about 50 per cent of our clicks go to the top two items, and more than 90 per cent of our clicks go to the 10 items listed on the first page of results; few people look at other results pages, even though they often number in the thousands, which means they probably contain lots of good information.
Google decides which of the billions of web pages it is going to include in our search results, and it also decides how to rank them. How it decides these things is a deep, dark secret – one of the best-kept secrets in the world, like the formula for Coca-Cola.
Because people are far more likely to read and click on higher-ranked items, companies now spend billions of dollars every year trying to trick Google’s search algorithm – the computer program that does the selecting and ranking – into boosting them another notch or two. Moving up a notch can mean the difference between success and failure for a business, and moving into the top slots can be the key to fat profits.
Late in 2012, I began to wonder whether highly ranked search results could be impacting more than consumer choices. Perhaps, I speculated, a top search result could have a small impact on people’s opinions about things. Early in 2013, with my associate Ronald E Robertson of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology in Vista, California, I put this idea to a test by conducting an experiment in which 102 people from the San Diego area were randomly assigned to one of three groups.
In one group, people saw search results that favoured one political candidate – that is, results that linked to web pages that made this candidate look better than his or her opponent. In a second group, people saw search rankings that favoured the opposing candidate, and in the third group – the control group – people saw a mix of rankings that favoured neither candidate. The same search results and web pages were used in each group; the only thing that differed for the three groups was the ordering of the search results.
To make our experiment realistic, we used real search results that linked to real web pages. We also used a real election – the 2010 election for the prime minister of Australia. We used a foreign election to make sure that our participants were ‘undecided’. Their lack of familiarity with the candidates assured this. Through advertisements, we also recruited an ethnically diverse group of registered voters over a wide age range in order to match key demographic characteristics of the US voting population.
All participants were first given brief descriptions of the candidates and then asked to rate them in various ways, as well as to indicate which candidate they would vote for; as you might expect, participants initially favoured neither candidate on any of the five measures we used, and the vote was evenly split in all three groups.
Then the participants were given up to 15 minutes in which to conduct an online search using ‘Kadoodle’, our mock search engine, which gave them access to five pages of search results that linked to web pages. People could move freely between search results and web pages, just as we do when using Google. When participants completed their search, we asked them to rate the candidates again, and we also asked them again who they would vote for.
We predicted that the opinions and voting preferences of 2 or 3 per cent of the people in the two bias groups – the groups in which people were seeing rankings favouring one candidate – would shift toward that candidate. What we actually found was astonishing.
The proportion of people favouring the search engine’s top-ranked candidate increased by 48.4 per cent, and all five of our measures shifted toward that candidate. What’s more, 75 per cent of the people in the bias groups seemed to have been completely unaware that they were viewing biased search rankings. In the control group, opinions did not shift significantly.
Google's own by-line was a piss take
This seemed to be a major discovery. The shift we had produced, which we called the Search Engine Manipulation Effect (or SEME, pronounced ‘seem’), appeared to be one of the largest behavioural effects ever discovered. We did not immediately uncork the Champagne bottle, however. For one thing, we had tested only a small number of people, and they were all from the San Diego area.
Over the next year or so, we replicated our findings three more times, and the third time was with a sample of more than 2,000 people from all 50 US states. In that experiment, the shift in voting preferences was 37.1 per cent and even higher in some demographic groups – as high as 80 per cent, in fact.
We also learned in this series of experiments that by reducing the bias just slightly on the first page of search results – specifically, by including one search item that favoured the other candidate in the third or fourth position of the results – we could mask our manipulation so that few or even no people were aware that they were seeing biased rankings. We could still produce dramatic shifts in voting preferences, but we could do so invisibly.
Still no Champagne, though. Our results were strong and consistent, but our experiments all involved a foreign election – that 2010 election in Australia. Could voting preferences be shifted with real voters in the middle of a real campaign? We were skeptical. In real elections, people are bombarded with multiple sources of information, and they also know a lot about the candidates. It seemed unlikely that a single experience on a search engine would have much impact on their voting preferences.
To find out, in early 2014, we went to India just before voting began in the largest democratic election in the world – the Lok Sabha election for prime minister. The three main candidates were Rahul Gandhi, Arvind Kejriwal, and Narendra Modi. Making use of online subject pools and both online and print advertisements, we recruited 2,150 people from 27 of India’s 35 states and territories to participate in our experiment. To take part, they had to be registered voters who had not yet voted and who were still undecided about how they would vote.
Participants were randomly assigned to three search-engine groups, favouring, respectively, Gandhi, Kejriwal or Modi. As one might expect, familiarity levels with the candidates was high – between 7.7 and 8.5 on a scale of 10. We predicted that our manipulation would produce a very small effect, if any, but that’s not what we found.
This prick is all over the place
On average, we were able to shift the proportion of people favouring any given candidate by more than 20 per cent overall and more than 60 per cent in some demographic groups. Even more disturbing, 99.5 per cent of our participants showed no awareness that they were viewing biased search rankings – in other words, that they were being manipulated.
SEME’s near-invisibility is curious indeed. It means that when people – including you and me – are looking at biased search rankings, they look just fine. So if right now you Google ‘US presidential candidates’, the search results you see will probably look fairly random, even if they happen to favour one candidate. Even I have trouble detecting bias in search rankings that I know to be biased (because they were prepared by my staff).
They can't get rid of you Donald
Yet our randomised, controlled experiments tell us over and over again that when higher-ranked items connect with web pages that favour one candidate, this has a dramatic impact on the opinions of undecided voters, in large part for the simple reason that people tend to click only on higher-ranked items.
This is truly scary: like subliminal stimuli, SEME is a force you can’t see; but unlike subliminal stimuli, it has an enormous impact – like Casper the ghost pushing you down a flight of stairs.
We published a detailed report about our first five experiments on SEME in the prestigious Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in August 2015. We had indeed found something important, especially given Google’s dominance over search.
Google has a near-monopoly on internet searches in the US, with 83 per cent of Americans specifying Google as the search engine they use most often, according to the Pew Research Center. So if Google favours one candidate in an election, its impact on undecided voters could easily decide the election’s outcome.
Keep in mind that we had had only one shot at our participants. What would be the impact of favouring one candidate in searches people are conducting over a period of weeks or months before an election? It would almost certainly be much larger than what we were seeing in our experiments.
Other types of influence during an election campaign are balanced by competing sources of influence – a wide variety of newspapers, radio shows and television networks, for example – but Google, for all intents and purposes, has no competition, and people trust its search results implicitly, assuming that the company’s mysterious search algorithm is entirely objective and unbiased.
This high level of trust, combined with the lack of competition, puts Google in a unique position to impact elections. Even more disturbing, the search-ranking business is entirely unregulated, so Google could favour any candidate it likes without violating any laws. Some courts have even ruled that Google’s right to rank-order search results as it pleases is protected as a form of free speech.
Does the company ever favour particular candidates? In the 2012 US presidential election, Google and its top executives donated more than $800,000 to President Barack Obama and just $37,000 to his opponent, Mitt Romney.
And in 2015, a team of researchers from the University of Maryland and elsewhere showed that Google’s search results routinely favoured Democratic candidates.
Are Google’s search rankings really biased? An internal report issued by the US Federal Trade Commission in 2012 concluded that Google’s search rankings routinely put Google’s financial interests ahead of those of their competitors, and anti-trust actions currently under way against Google in both the European Union and India are based on similar findings.
In most countries, 90 per cent of online search is conducted on Google, which gives the company even more power to flip elections than it has in the US and, with internet penetration increasing rapidly worldwide, this power is growing.
In our PNAS article, Robertson and I calculated that Google now has the power to flip upwards of 25 per cent of the national elections in the world with no one knowing this is occurring.
In fact, we estimate that, with or without deliberate planning on the part of company executives, Google’s search rankings have been impacting elections for years, with growing impact each year. And because search rankings are ephemeral, they leave no paper trail, which gives the company complete deniability.
Power on this scale and with this level of invisibility is unprecedented in human history. But it turns out that our discovery about SEME was just the tip of a very large iceberg.
Recent reports suggest that the Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is making heavy use of social media to try to generate support – Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Snapchat and Facebook, for starters. At this writing, she has 5.4 million followers on Twitter, and her staff is tweeting several times an hour during waking hours. The Republican frontrunner, Donald Trump, has 5.9 million Twitter followers and is tweeting just as frequently.
Is social media as big a threat to democracy as search rankings appear to be?
When new technologies are used competitively, they present no threat. Even through the platforms are new, they are generally being used the same way as billboards and television commercials have been used for decades: you put a billboard on one side of the street; I put one on the other. I might have the money to erect more billboards than you, but the process is still competitive.
What happens, though, if such technologies are misused by the companies that own them? A study by Robert M Bond, now a political science professor at Ohio State University, and others published in Nature in 2012 described an ethically questionable experiment in which, on election day in 2010, Facebook sent ‘go out and vote’ reminders to more than 60 million of its users.
The reminders caused about 340,000 people to vote who otherwise would not have. Writing in the New Republic in 2014, Jonathan Zittrain, professor of international law at Harvard University, pointed out that, given the massive amount of information it has collected about its users, Facebook could easily send such messages only to people who support one particular party or candidate, and that doing so could easily flip a close election – with no one knowing that this has occurred. And because advertisements, like search rankings, are ephemeral, manipulating an election in this way would leave no paper trail.
Are there laws prohibiting Facebook from sending out ads selectively to certain users?
Absolutely not; in fact, targeted advertising is how Facebook makes its money.
Is Facebook currently manipulating elections in this way? No one knows, but in my view it would be foolish and possibly even improper for Facebook not to do so. Some candidates are better for a company than others, and Facebook’s executives have a fiduciary responsibility to the company’s stockholders to promote the company’s interests.
The Bond study was largely ignored, but another Facebook experiment, published in 2014 in PNAS, prompted protests around the world. In this study, for a period of a week, 689,000 Facebook users were sent news feeds that contained either an excess of positive terms, an excess of negative terms, or neither.
Those in the first group subsequently used slightly more positive terms in their communications, while those in the second group used slightly more negative terms in their communications. This was said to show that people’s ‘emotional states’ could be deliberately manipulated on a massive scale by a social media company, an idea that many people found disturbing. People were also upset that a large-scale experiment on emotion had been conducted without the explicit consent of any of the participants.
Facebook’s consumer profiles are undoubtedly massive, but they pale in comparison with those maintained by Google, which is collecting information about people 24/7, using more than 60 different observation platforms – the search engine, of course, but also Google Wallet, Google Maps, Google Adwords, Google Analytics, Chrome, Google Docs, Android, YouTube, and on and on.
Certainly, if Google set about to fix an election, it could first dip into its massive database of personal information to identify just those voters who are undecided. Then it could, day after day, send customised rankings favouring one candidate to just those people. One advantage of this approach is that it would make Google’s manipulation extremely difficult for investigators to detect.
Extreme forms of monitoring, whether by the KGB in the Soviet Union, the Stasi in East Germany, or Big Brother in 1984, are essential elements of all tyrannies, and technology is making both monitoring and the consolidation of surveillance data easier than ever.
By 2020, China will have put in place the most ambitious government monitoring system ever created – a single database called the Social Credit System, in which multiple ratings and records for all of its 1.3 billion citizens are recorded for easy access by officials and bureaucrats. At a glance, they will know whether someone has plagiarised schoolwork, was tardy in paying bills, urinated in public, or blogged inappropriately online.
As Edward Snowden’s revelations made clear, we are rapidly moving toward a world in which both governments and corporations – sometimes working together – are collecting massive amounts of data about every one of us every day, with few or no laws in place that restrict how those data can be used.
When you combine the data collection with the desire to control or manipulate, the possibilities are endless, but perhaps the most frightening possibility is the one expressed in Boulding’s assertion that an ‘unseen dictatorship’ was possible ‘using the forms of democratic government’.
Since Robertson and I submitted our initial report on SEME to PNAS early in 2015, we have completed a sophisticated series of experiments that have greatly enhanced our understanding of this phenomenon, and other experiments will be completed in the coming months. We have a much better sense now of why SEME is so powerful and how, to some extent, it can be suppressed.
We have also learned something very disturbing – that search engines are influencing far more than what people buy and whom they vote for. We now have evidence suggesting that on virtually all issues where people are initially undecided, search rankings are impacting almost every decision that people make.
They are having an impact on the opinions, beliefs, attitudes and behaviours of internet users worldwide – entirely without people’s knowledge that this is occurring.
This is happening with or without deliberate intervention by company officials; even so-called ‘organic’ search processes regularly generate search results that favour one point of view, and that in turn has the potential to tip the opinions of millions of people who are undecided on an issue. In one of our recent experiments, biased search results shifted people’s opinions about the value of fracking by 33.9 per cent.
Perhaps even more disturbing is that the handful of people who do show awareness that they are viewing biased search rankings shift even further in the predicted direction; simply knowing that a list is biased doesn’t necessarily protect you from SEME’s power.
Remember what the search algorithm is doing: in response to your query, it is selecting a handful of webpages from among the billions that are available, and it is ordering those webpages using secret criteria.
Seconds later, the decision you make or the opinion you form – about the best toothpaste to use, whether fracking is safe, where you should go on your next vacation, who would make the best president, or whether global warming is real – is determined by that short list you are shown, even though you have no idea how the list was generated.
Meanwhile, behind the scenes, a consolidation of search engines has been quietly taking place, so that more people are using the dominant search engine even when they think they are not. Because Google is the best search engine, and because crawling the rapidly expanding internet has become prohibitively expensive, more and more search engines are drawing their information from the leader rather than generating it themselves.
Looking ahead to the November 2016 US presidential election, I see clear signs that Google is backing Hillary Clinton. In April 2015, Clinton hired Stephanie Hannon away from Google to be her chief technology officer and, a few months ago, Eric Schmidt, chairman of the holding company that controls Google, set up a semi-secret company – The Groundwork – for the specific purpose of putting Clinton in office. The formation of The Groundwork prompted Julian Assange, founder of Wikileaks, to dub Google Clinton’s ‘secret weapon’ in her quest for the US presidency.
We now estimate that Hannon’s old friends have the power to drive between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes to Clinton on election day with no one knowing that this is occurring and without leaving a paper trail. They can also help her win the nomination, of course, by influencing undecided voters during the primaries. Swing voters have always been the key to winning elections, and there has never been a more powerful, efficient or inexpensive way to sway them than SEME.
We are living in a world in which a handful of high-tech companies, sometimes working hand-in-hand with governments, are not only monitoring much of our activity, but are also invisibly controlling more and more of what we think, feel, do and say.
The technology that now surrounds us is not just a harmless toy; it has also made possible undetectable and untraceable manipulations of entire populations – manipulations that have no precedent in human history and that are currently well beyond the scope of existing regulations and laws. The new hidden persuaders are bigger, bolder and badder than anything Vance Packard ever envisioned. If we choose to ignore this, we do so at our peril.
Unleashing GCSB To Spy On Kiwis One More Step On Road To Police State March 15 2016 | From: TheDailyBlog
The Anti-Bases Campaign is appalled by the recommendations made in the newly-released Intelligence Agencies review.
The authors have proposed overthrowing a basic tenet of spy operations in this country and paved the way for a massive expansion in surveillance of NZ citizens.
This is just another retrograde step on the road to a police state.
Previous restrictions on domestic spying by the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) are to be removed; the basic democratic protection against the spies turning their cutting edge mass surveillance machinery on domestic life is to be eliminated.
The report justifies the increasing power of the agencies by proposing more transparency and oversight.
Ironically, Sir Michael Cullen, the key author of the report, is the man who exemplifies the inadequacy of trying to monitor these organisations as he was the person who, when he was in Government, continually gave false assurances denying illegal activity in the past.
The glaring deficiency in the review is the complete lack of consideration of the activities of the Five Eyes system which are the major part of the GCSB activities.
The super-secret group carries out operations designed to give Washington the means to manipulate political, economic and diplomatic activities around the world.
NZ’s part in this is despicable and reprehensible.
Any suggestion that oversight by a handful of Kiwi commissioners will reveal the truth about the operations being carried out by Five Eyes is laughable.
New Zealand, instead, needs to follow the example of Canada, one of our four Big Brothers in Five Eyes. Canada has suspended sharing Canadians’ metadata with its Five Eyes partners until it is satisfied about safeguards.
NZ can only restore its reputation in the world by closing down the Waihopai spy base and pulling out of the Five Eyes system.
Plus it needs to close down the SIS and transfer its functions to the Police who (theoretically at least) have to justify their actions in a court of law.
Oliver Stone Reveals Clandestine Meetings With Edward Snowden, NSA Worries March 15 2016 | From: HollywoodReporter “We moved to Germany, because we did not feel comfortable in the U.S.,” the director says about his upcoming movie about government whistle-blower Edward Snowden, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt.
Fears of interference by the National Security Agency led Oliver Stone to shoot Snowden, his upcoming movie about government whistle-blower Edward Snowden, outside the United States.
"We moved to Germany, because we did not feel comfortable in the U.S.,” Stone said on March 6, speaking before an audience at the Sun Valley Film Festival in Idaho, in a Q&A moderated by The Hollywood Reporter’s Stephen Galloway.
"We felt like we were at risk here. We didn’t know what the NSA might do, so we ended up in Munich, which was a beautiful experience.”
Even there, problems arose with companies that had connections to the U.S., he said: “The American subsidiary says, ‘You can’t get involved with this; we don’t want our name on it.’ So BMW couldn’t even help us in any way in Germany.”
While in Sun Valley, the three-time Oscar winner held a private screening of Snowden for an invited audience of around two dozen. Those who attended the screening, at the former home of Ernest Hemingway, included actress Melissa Leo, who plays documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras.
Guests were required to sign non-disclosure agreements, but that did not prevent three of them from speaking to this reporter. All praised the work-in-progress. “What he did that’s so brilliant is, he gave this kid’s whole back story, so you really like him,” said one audience member.
When Stone (whose films include Platoon, Born on the Fourth of July and Wall Street) was first approached to make the movie, he hesitated. He had been working on another controversial subject, about the last few years in the life of Martin Luther King Jr., and did not immediately wish to tackle something that incendiary again.
“Glenn Greenwald [the journalist who worked with Poitras to break the Snowden story] asked me some advice and I just wanted to stay away from controversy,” he said.
“I didn’t want this. Be that as it may, a couple of months later, the Russian lawyer for Snowden contacts me via my producer. The Russian lawyer told me to come to Russia and wanted me to meet him. One thing led to another, and basically I got hooked.”
In Moscow, Stone met multiple times with Snowden, who has been living in exile in Russia since evading the U.S. government’s attempts to arrest him for espionage.
“He’s articulate, smart, very much the same,” he said. “I’ve been seeing him off and on for a year - actually, more than that. I saw him last week or two weeks ago to show him the final film.”
He added: “He is consistent: he believes so thoroughly in reform of the Internet that he has devoted himself to this cause… Because of the Russian hours, he stays up all night. He’s a night owl, and he’s always in touch [with the outside world], and he’s working on some kind of constitution for the Internet with other people. So he’s very busy.
And he stays in that 70-percent-computer world. He’s on another planet that way. His sense of humor has gotten bigger, his tolerance. He’s not really in Russia in his mind - he’s in some planetary position up there. And Lindsay Mills, the woman he’s loved for 10 years - really, it’s a serious affair - has moved there to be with him.”
Spending time with Snowden, and researching what happened to him, Stone said, “It’s an amazing story. Here’s a young man, 30 years old at that time, and he does something that’s so powerful. Who at 30 years old would do that, sacrificing his life in that way? We met with him many times in Moscow, and we did a lot more research, and we went ahead.” He added, “I think he’s a historical figure of great consequence.”
Despite the director’s involvement in the movie, which stars Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Snowden and Shailene Woodley as Mills, “No studio would support it,” he said.
“It was extremely difficult to finance, extremely difficult to cast. We were doing another one of these numbers I had done before, where preproduction is paid for by essentially the producer and myself, where you’re living on a credit card.”
Eventually, financing came through from France and Germany. “The contracts were signed, like eight days before we started,” he noted.
“It’s a very strange thing to do [a story about] an American man, and not be able to finance this movie in America. And that’s very disturbing, if you think about its implications on any subject that is not overtly pro-American.
They say we have freedom of expression; but thought is financed, and thought is controlled, and the media is controlled. This country is very tight on that, and there’s no criticism allowed at a certain level. You can make movies about civil rights leaders who are dead, but it’s not easy to make one about a current man.”
Snowden opens in the U.S. on September 16.
U.S. Military Spending Millions To Make Cyborgs A Reality March 10 2016 | From: CNN
The U.S. military is spending millions on an advanced implant that would allow a human brain to communicate directly with computers.
If it succeeds, cyborgs will be a reality. The Pentagon's research arm, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), hopes the implant will allow humans to directly interface with computers, which could benefit people with aural and visual disabilities, such as veterans injured in combat.
The goal of the proposed implant is to "open the channel between the human brain and modern electronics" according to DARPA's program manager, Phillip Alvelda.
In January, DARPA announced it plans to spend up to $62 million on the project, which is part of its Neural Engineering System Design program. The implant would be small -- no larger than one cubic centimeter, or roughly the size of two stacked nickels -- according to DARPA.
The implantable device aims to convert neurons in the brain into electronic signals and provide unprecedented "data-transfer bandwidth between the human brain and the digital world," according to a DARPA statement announcing the new project.
DARPA sees the implant as providing a foundation for new therapies that could help people with deficits in sight or hearing by "feeding digital auditory or visual information into the brain."
A spokesman for DARPA told CNN that the program is not intended for military applications.
But some experts see such an implant as having the potential for numerous applications, including military ones, in the field of wearable robotics -- which aims to augment and restore human performance.
Conor Walsh, a professor of mechanical and biomedical engineering at Harvard University, told CNN that the implant would "change the game," adding that "in the future, wearable robotic devices will be controlled by implants."
Walsh sees the potential for wearable robotic devices or exoskeletons in everything from helping a medical patient recover from a stroke to enhancing soldiers' capabilities in combat.
Yep, they're doing Terminators too. And they aren't all so camp
The U.S. military is currently developing a battery-powered exoskeleton, the Tactical Assault Light Operator Suit, to provide superior protection from enemy fire and in-helmet technologies that boost the user's communications ability and vision.
The suits' development is being overseen by U.S. Special Operations Command.
In theory, the proposed neural implant would allow the military member operating the suit to more effectively control the armored exoskeleton while deployed in combat.
However, Steven Pinker, a cognitive scientist and professor of psychology at Harvard, was skeptical of the proposed innovation, calling the idea a "bunch of hype with no results." He told CNN, "We have little to no idea how exactly the brain codes complex information" and cited the problems from foreign objects triggering brain inflammation that can cause serious neurological issues.
And this weird shit - a Terminator cow?
Pinker described "neural enhancement" for healthy brains as being a "boondoggle," but he suggested that there could be some benefit for people suffering from brain-related diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as Lou Gehrig's disease.
In its announcement, DARPA acknowledged that an implant is still a long ways away, with breakthroughs in neuroscience, synthetic biology, low-power electronics, photonics and medical-device manufacturing needed before the device could be used.
DARPA plans to recruit a diverse set of experts in an attempt to accelerate the project's development, according to its statement announcing the project.
Pinker remained skeptical, however, telling CNN: "My guess is that it's a waste of taxpayer dollars."
Cashless Crisis: “With Digital Payments, Civilization Comes To An End Until Power Is Restored” February 28 2016 | From: SHTFPlan As most of the Western world is pushed into abandoning cash and embracing a fully digital cashless grid, it is apparent how vulnerable populations will become in times of crisis.
If the power grid were to go down in a storm or an attack, it is readily apparent that the system of commerce would go down with it; payments would stop and desperate people would line up for help.
“Cash is being displaced by credit and debit cards, which are themselves beginning to be displaced by new digital currencies and payment systems…
But despite all the advances brought about by the digital revolution, there are still quite a few drawbacks. The most obvious is that it is reliant on electricity. One major hurricane knocking out power, a mid-summer brownout, or a hacker attack on the power grid could bring commerce to a halt.
With cash, transactions are still possible. With digital payments, civilization comes to an end until power is restored. Unless you have food stored or goods with which to barter, you’re out of luck. Just imagine a city like New York with no power and no way to buy or sell anything. It won’t be pretty.
With digital currencies such as Bitcoin, there is the problem that they are created out of thin air. One bitcoin represents the successful completion of a cryptographic puzzle, but all that means is that some computing power was used up to create a unique electronic file. That’s all it is, just a series of ones and zeros.
There is nothing tangible about Bitcoin and, indeed, if you lose the hard drive on which you stored your bitcoins, those bitcoins are lost forever."
On top of that, the potential for manipulation and the built-in assault of surveillance and tracking is enough to cripple liberties in the world that is cementing its patterns around this new technology.
What happens when online platforms don’t like your speech or your rights? What happens if their policy blocks you from buying something – like a gun – that you have the right to buy, or prevents you from spending your money, potentially freezing your account without notice. Again, the Menger Center makes the point:
“Take a look at PayPal, for instance. PayPal’s terms of service forbid use of the service to buy or sell firearms, firearms parts, or firearms accessories. Many individuals who have used PayPal to sell firearms parts find their accounts frozen or shut down by PayPal.
Similar things have happened to gun stores having their bank accounts frozen or having their credit card payment processors refuse to process…
Cases such as this will only be more widespread in the future, especially as governments continue to pursue the war on cash. If cash is eliminated and electronic systems become the only way anyone can pay for anything, all it will take is a little bit of government pressure on payment system operators to stop processing payments for X or Y and voila, you can longer buy X or Y.
What good is money in the bank if you can’t use it to buy what you want? In fact, governments may dispense with pressure on payment systems and just monitor transactions as they occur, automatically rejecting payments for goods they don’t want …
Every transaction made electronically can be tracked and traced. If every purchase you make is done electronically, your entire purchase history is open to scrutiny."
The powerful banking lobby, of course, wants a digital cashless system, because it will enrich them with transaction fees and penalties, continue and expand fractional reserve lending, and give them the power to monitor all the transactions, at detailed levels with data for every purchase. But despite this monitoring, money and transactions will not necessarily be more secure.
You cannot “hold” your money, you must be able to access it, and that depends upon authorization of the system. It can be hacked or erased in a split second.
And how would America under the digital grid – perhaps 10x worse than Greece when the ATM's are shut down, the banks closed, the grid off and cash eradicated, while the population is forced under the yoke.
Not only is this grid vulnerable, but it is also becoming unavoidable.
The case involves an iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters, Syed Farook. Farook’s iPhone, which was given to him by his government employer, is locked and the FBI says they can’t get into it unless they get help from Apple.
So what exactly is the FBI asking for?
To be clear, Apple cannot extract information directly from Farook’s - or anyone else’s - iPhone. That is because all data on an iPhone is encrypted.
The security measures for iOS 8, which rolled out in 2014, ensure that no one, not even Apple, can access information on an iPhone by sneaking through a software “backdoor.”
Now a federal judge says Apple has to create that backdoor. Apple says they fight this all the way to the Supreme Court.
John McAfee is the creator of McAfee security software and is one of the foremost cyber security experts in the world. I spoke to him by Skype, and he says this fight is really over encryption as a whole.
“The problem is that once you put a backdoor into a piece of software, every hacker in the world is going to find it and use it, and [then] we’re in a world of hurt,” he says.
McAfee says that if the FBI is telling the truth about their intentions and they really need to get into just this one, then he and his team of hackers have agreed to hack that San Bernardino shooter’s phone for the FBI for free. And he says they can do it in less than three weeks.
“But what I have done is said, look, you know, if in fact you are sincere in wanting to get access to just that one phone, my team and I will do it,” he says.
“We can crack it - easily. I guarantee it. There is no un-crackable encryption. We all know that.
They have not responded [to my offer] and I do not think they will because it’s not just that one phone they want. They want a key to everyone’s phone.”
McAfee does say there is a bigger issue at hand, because what the FBI and the federal government is actually doing here is a move that will destroy encryption. In an op-ed he writes;
“After years of arguments by virtually every industry specialist that back doors will be a bigger boon to hackers and to our nation’s enemies than publishing our nuclear codes.
“We all say the same thing,” McAfee says. “You can’t do it and keep us safe as a nation. . . . And you can’t do it and keep us safe as individuals. ‘Cause I guarantee that once that backdoor goes in, all of our bank accounts are going to be emptied by the the bad hackers. All of our social security numbers are going to be known.”
What you need to know is that if McAfee is right, the FBI can demonstrate their true intentions easily. Let the nation’s best hackers open that one phone. But if this move is as many people believe - actually a move to force Apple to end encryption - then the ramifications are much bigger than government and terrorists.
Breaking encryption will impact every American’s privacy, banking, finances and online identity. Encryption isn’t the tool that bad guys use to hide. It is the only thing that actually can make you safe online.
Mark Zuckerberg Is Claimed To Be David Rockefeller’s Grandson - Facebook Started With $500 Million From The C.I.A. February 24 2016 | From: GoldSilver / TapNewsWire
With all the talk about Facebook of late and the most recent bans / blocking / censorship I thought I would add my 2 cents and perhaps let people know a bit about this lad.
You know when this guy popped on the scene I was curious how he could do such a big start up. So I checked him out.
Mark Kuckerberg was revealed by the TapNewsWire. His two grandfathers are David Rockefeller and Maurice (Hank) Greenberg of AIG fame. He has an agenda, in service to the Cabal. Hell, Bill Clinton is apparently the greatgrandson of JD Rockefeller.
The change of name is I am sure deliberate to hide who he is as well as his arrest for pot. It doesn’t mean anything to me I was just curious and now with all the new nonsense I wanted to see if anyone else knew this?
The Face on Facebook belongs to Mark Zukerberg the alleged homosexual from upstate New York. But what is the most important is that his Grandfather is the 100 year old David Rockefeller. You know the one from the Trilateral Commision, The Bilderberg Group, Owner of the Chase Manhatten Bank, Council on Foreign Relations.
You read this guys bio and its like a who’s who of the NWO planners. The Likes of Henry Kissenger, who refers to us as useless eaters, Allen Dulles who was implicated in the Kennedy assasination. Board of Directors of Exxon, J P Morgan Chase.
This guy is friends with every piece of trash that wants us all dead. And then we have his son David who’s son is Mark Zukerberg whos net worth is estimated at 35.7 BILLION. Sick yet? Why he has a different name I have no idea.
A search does not reveal the names of his parents. It does list his wife Pricella Chan. So he’s 31 years old with bags full of money and the son of David Rockefeller. I have known this for a long time and I just assumed everyone else knew. So if you did forgive me if you didn’t it should make a few balls fall into place.
Zuckerberg means ‘sugar mountain’. That’s their secret word for Facebook no doubt. A mountain of information from which they can extract billions. Bill Gates comes from a multibillionaire eugenicist family, which was kept well hidden in the early years of Microsoft. The same families control it all. Yet is this story true?
It has been revealed that Mark Zuckerberg is the grandson of David Rockefeller. His true name is Jacob Greenberg, also grandson to Hank Greenberg. He is royalty.
Some police records show a Jacob Greenberg was arrested for possession of marijuana when a much younger man. His mugshot was taken, which looks like a younger FaceBook icon with 99% reliability. It was later revealed that this could indeed be the man the world knows as Mark Zuckerberg.
Also, the Rothschilds own 8% of FaceBook shares. The hidden agenda for the FaceBook social network is to aid the growth of the police state and one world government movement.
Jacob Rothschild and David Rockefeller
According to the TAP Blog, the venture Facebook was funded with $500 million from a CIA owned bank. One can only wonder if the other giant Googlehas similar disguised progeny. The adopted name Zuckerberg means sugar mountain in German.
The fast rising social network is indeed a mountain of information from which they can extract $billions. In recent weeks, the face of FaceBook has been revealed, as numerous members making comments about their support for gun ownership have had their FB accounts frozen, Big Brother at work.
The Tap Blog is a collective of motivated researchers and writers who join forces to distribute information and voice opinions avoided by the world’s media. Unless you wish to provide the nefarious leadership crew a constant trail for your life, complete with various control gates, close your FaceBook account.
See the YouTube video that sheds more light on Big Brother . For years the Jackass has refused all invitations, since many of them are actually generated from the FB kitchen in false manner, verified numerous times. FaceBook attempts to expand from computer derived invitations, not human ones, like an electronic cancer. Refusals for LinkedIn and other social media networks are also routinely done.
The Jackass would like to add some other famous family lines. Jimmy Carter was fathered by Joe Kennedy Sr. Thus he is half brother to John, Robert, and Edward from Camelot.
It seems that Miss Lillian the mother was Joe’s secretary, with more than dictation being taken by the woman when under the elder’s employ. That explains why Jimmy never had a father revealed during his presidency. Not to be outdone, William Jefferson Clinton is great grandson to John D Rockefeller the oil magnate.
John D Rockefeller
Bill Clinton was selected, due to his penchant for bond fraud and keen interest in cocaine binges. After his election and residence at the Arkansas governor mansion, the AirForce base nearby to Little Rock had its runway lengthened three-fold by the CIA. It was then suitable to accommodate the larger aircraft that transported narcotics to Panama.
The hidden Camelot US Royalty of elite scum goes on.
Stop Censorship: Time For Us All To Finally Break Google, Facebook and Twitter? February 23 2016 | From: TheLastGreatStand
As much as I hate to read that there are other people on the various different social platforms like Google, Facebook, and Twitter who are having the same kinds of problems I am facing when it comes to censorship, reading both the articles referenced below almost provided a sense of satisfaction that I’m not imagining things.
As the video and articles below detail, the level of censorship being used by Google, Facebook, and Twitter today is bordering on simply “unbelievable” to anyone who isn’t experiencing it first hand.
When trying to explain to a person who isn’t being censored, the extent to which many of us are being silenced daily, often times we’re looked at like we have five heads.
The news media’s job is to report “news,” and yet despite social media giants like Google, Facebook, and Twitter silencing an entire nations of people on social media, the mainstream media says nothing. Why? Because they’re all part of the same giant machine pushing for socialism.
The United States is truly entering very troubling times right now, as we head full throttle towards the next iteration of a failed socialist state. Never before in history has a country the size of the United States had any measure of success under socialist principles, but that fact is completely lost on so many of today’s Americans whose only concern seems to be, “What can you do for ME?”
Thanks to the uber liberal Department of Indoctrination… excuse me… I mean Department of Education… our school system has become an abject failure. It shocks the conscious that young people are graduating from universities today with so little “knowledge” of history, that they are flocking to Bernie Sanders in droves because he’s promising them “free college tuition.”
They lack the critical thinking skills that would enable them to see past the instant gratification “wants” that idiots like Obama, or Clinton, or Sanders provide for them. As a society, we have failed these young people. How is it that an entire generation cannot grasp the fact that, “there is no such thing as a free lunch?”
Last century alone, the utopia promised by Socialist / Marxist / Communist politicians who promised a more “fair” and “equitable” lifestyle for their people came at a cost of almost 100 MILLION dead human beings. The notion that, “it will be different this time,’” is only further proof we’ve failed the youth and our education system is broken. George Santayana once famously said:
“When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
In the following video, the narrator discusses a topic that is becoming all to familiar to some Americans. Luke Rudkowski talks about the shocking and sad news about Twitter’s new algorithm along with their new “Trust and Safety Council” that will be used to censor any conservative leaning voices on what was once a platform of free speech.
In the video above, Rudkowski refers to what he calls the “Death of Twitter.” Much like Facebook, and other social mediums he explains how Twitter is no longer interested in what YOU want to get information about. Instead, Twitter is now using brand new ad friendly and brand friendly algorithms that will TELL you what you should be interested in.
If your belief system or values don't align with those of a far left persuasion, and you decide to voice those beliefs, you can expect to get your account suspended or thrown in the “Twitter Gulag” for some indefinite amount of time.
Keep in mind, Twitter’s suspension ban, and locking notifications do not inform users which rule they have supposedly broken, instead Twitter simply states that the user has somehow impinged on the the terms of service, and their account is suspended.
Finding out the reason an account has been punished is generally impossible on Google, Facebook, or Twitter. After first receiving an email from Facebook with a survey saying I was one of their “most valuable advertisers,” I responded asking:
“As one of Facebook’s “most valuable advertisers,” why is it that every time ask for Facebook’s policy on posting in groups, so I can make certain I am not in violation of it, none of my emails are responded to?"
Here's the reality: If you openly favor conservative ideals like pro-life, the Second Amendment, or criticize the government’s violation of the Constitution, expect your posts to be censored heavily, or your account banned all together. Everywhere you look, Free Speech is being annihilated.
Per a Department of Defense training manual obtained by Judicial Watch in a Freedom of Information Act request, we learned that the criteria a SECRET UNELECTED OBAMA OFFICIAL has for determining a “domestic extremist” is as follows:
“Americans who are ‘reverent of individual liberty,’ and ‘suspicious of centralized federal authority’ are possible ‘extreme right-wing’ terrorists.
The document linked above also lists people who embrace “individual liberties” and honor “states’ rights,” among other characteristics, as potential “extremists” who are likely to be members of “hate groups.”
Finally, the document goes on to call the Founding Fathers, “extremists.”
Writing at Liberty Unyielding on Saturday, retired Naval Intelligence officer J. E. Dyer said that it’s time to “break” the Internet as we know it, starting with the big three social media and search engine sites, namely, Google, Facebook and Twitter.
“They’re all implementing policies to shut down the voices of freedom in their forums,” she said. “It’s one thing to police obscenity and personal attacks. It’s another thing entirely to define the word ‘gun’ as an offense, and bias content-oriented algorithms against it.”
"It’s ridiculous to “suspend” users for posting politically conservative content – and yet, in the blogger forums I correspond with, such suspensions are now commonplace. “I’m in Facebook jail” for X number of days has become a constant refrain.
We’re not talking about people who use expletives or make threats online. We’re talking about people who merely post conservative sentiments and memes, and links to (very mainstream) conservative websites.
The social media and browsing giants are private companies. They can run things the way they want; it’s their dime. But that’s why they need to be broken. They can’t be allowed to become a vehicle for marginalizing non-compliant voices. The default model for social media and browsing needs to be variety, diversity, and freedom – not intellectual conformity. Freedom is what needs to pay off."
She makes a sound argument, citing the weekend’s explosion over Twitter’s arbitrary suspension of blogger Robert Stacy McCain.
Twitter, she notes, has a new policy where speech is monitored and controlled by a “Trust and Safety Council,” which is run by such distinguished enemies of free speech as “Feminist Frequency and the Dangerous Speech Project.”
Orwellian? That’s putting it mildly.
Twitter, she adds, is a private company and “can live by delusional bias if it wants to; it should just have to pay a steep price for doing so.”
Twitter is also engaging win what’s known as “shadowbanning.” According to Breitbart’s Milo Yiannopoulos, it’s very real:
"Shadowbanning, sometimes known as “Stealth Banning” or “Hell Banning,” is commonly used by online community managers to block content posted by spammers.
Instead of banning a user directly (which would alert the spammer to their status, prompting them to create a new account), their content is merely hidden from public view. . .
However, Twitter isn’t merely targeting spammers.
For weeks, users have been reporting that tweets from populist conservatives, members of the alternative right, cultural libertarians, and other anti-PC dissidents have disappeared from their timelines."
A similar phenomenon is happening at Facebook, Dyer adds:
"Something similar to shadowbanning has been evident at Facebook in the last several weeks, to anyone who runs a conservative Facebook page.
The trend that’s been especially noticeable to me is this one: meme images of the type that used to quickly get thousands of shares and likes, and dozens or hundreds of comments, can now go for days and gather only a few dozen shares and likes.
What these images have in common is that they’re eye-catching, funny, meme-tastic – and pro-gun rights.
The conclusion is that such memes aren’t getting exposure, because Facebook’s algorithms have been biased against them. This is probably related to Facebook’s recent banning of private, non-dealer gun sales, and presumably is not inadvertent.
She goes on to warn of a sort of “weaponised” Internet where those who do not opt in to the Orwellian thought-control can and ultimately will be made invisible and tracked like criminals.
“There was a time when it was enough for conservatives to have success with news and opinion content online. But the Internet is being transformed at a much less visible level now: at the level of basic browsing and social media algorithms, the dynamic but obscure arrangements that enable us to ‘see’ and connect with each other to exchange information,” she said.
To deal with this, she said, we must develop an “alternet,” but that will require resources and the will to create something where freedom remains.
I’ve written time and again about the abuses meted out to users by Facebook. Facebook - recently called the world’s most dangerous censor - is already working to shape and control language in Europe, with the blessings of European governments.
“I know there are potential inventors and investors out there,” Dyer said in conclusion.
“The market need is obvious, and will only become more so. Get your thinking caps on, and let’s break this thing.”
"What we need now is, literally, alternatives to the existing social media and browsing giants. The giants, acting as administrators of quasi-public spaces, are becoming hostile to intellectual freedom, in a way that will soon turn into predation against it.
The model of “all the world” connecting via Facebook is going to have to be shattered, and replaced by a different model in which competition will penalize censorship."
Breaking The Web
The good news is that we have a big, disruptive watershed coming up, possibly this year, when the central organization of the Internet is taken out of the hands of the United States government. This is (re)scheduled to happen on 1 October 2016, and it very well might.
This will be an unmitigated disaster for today’s Internet freedom, if it does happen. The attacks on Web freedom will begin immediately (although they will be less visible in the U.S.). The shift will start small, but it will be real, and relentless.
Within a short time – probably weeks, maybe even days – browsing, providing Internet service, and operating websites will become a significantly different experience for those in more-authoritarian as opposed to less-authoritarian countries.
America won’t be immune. Without a publicly accountable department of the U.S. federal government in charge, more and more things will begin to happen that hardly anyone knows about, but that will affect everyone. Being surprised and confused that our Web experience is changing is something we can expect within months of the transfer date.
So why do I say this is good news? Because it will force us to develop a true “alternet.” The technology is there, but the motivation has been lacking. The day is coming when it won’t be lacking anymore.
The outlines of an Internet weaponized against us are already visible: an Internet by which we can be marginalized and punished, and over which we exert less and less discretion as to how much we want to interact with it. But that weaponizable Internet depends on being monolithic, and having the authorization-vetoes of governments hanging over it.
It’s time for a new paradigm of the Internet, one without the infrastructure features we have come to assume are inevitable. The role of the FCC, for example, needs to be fundamentally rethought. I’m not convinced we even need 95% of what the FCC does.
A lot has to break to get to a new paradigm – but a lot is going to break. The reason for a customer revolt is scheduled on the calendar, and the giant companies are helping out by trying to make college-campus censorship the standard of dialogue on the Web.
I know there are potential inventors and investors out there. The market need is obvious, and will only become more so. Get your thinking caps on, and let’s break this thing.
US Intelligence Chief: We Might Use The Internet Of Things To Spy On You February 13 2016 | From: TheGuardian
James Clapper did not name specific agency as being involved in surveillance via smart-home devices but said in congressional testimony it is a distinct possibility
The US intelligence chief has acknowledged for the first time that agencies might use a new generation of smart household devices to increase their surveillance capabilities.
As increasing numbers of devices connect to the internet and to one another, the so-called internet of things promises consumers increased convenience – the remotely operated thermostat from Google-owned Nest is a leading example. But as home computing migrates away from the laptop, the tablet and the smartphone, experts warn that the security features on the coming wave of automobiles, dishwashers and alarm systems lag far behind.
In an appearance at a Washington thinktank last month, the director of the National Security Agency, Adm Michael Rogers, said that it was time to consider making the home devices “more defensible”, but did not address the opportunities that increased numbers and even categories of connected devices provide to his surveillance agency.
However, James Clapper, the US director of national intelligence, was more direct in testimony submitted to the Senate on Tuesday as part of an assessment of threats facing the United States.
"In the future, intelligence services might use the [internet of things] for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials,” Clapper said.
Clapper did not specifically name any intelligence agency as involved in household-device surveillance. But security experts examining the internet of things take as a given that the US and other surveillance services will intercept the signals the newly networked devices emit, much as they do with those from cellphones.
Amateurs are already interested in easily compromised hardware; computer programmer John Matherly’s search engine Shodan indexes thousands of completely unsecured web-connected devices.
Online threats again topped the intelligence chief’s list of “worldwide threats” the US faces, with the mutating threat of low-intensity terrorism quickly following. While Clapper has for years used the equivocal term “evolving” when asked about the scope of the threat, he said Tuesday that Sunni violent extremism “has more groups, members, and safe havens than at any other point in history”.
The Islamic State topped the threat index, but Clapper also warned that the US-backed Saudi war in Yemen was redounding to the benefit of al-Qaida’s local affiliate.
"Homegrown extremists” are the greatest terrorist threat, rather than Islamic State or al-Qaida attacks planned from overseas. Clapper cited the San Bernardino and Chattanooga shootings as examples of lethal operations emanating from self-starting extremists “without direct guidance from [Isis] leadership”.
US intelligence officials did not foresee Isis suffering significant setbacks in 2016 despite a war in Syria and Iraq that the Pentagon has pledged to escalate. The chief of defense intelligence, Marine Lt Gen Vincent Stewart, said the jihadist army would “probably retain Sunni Arab urban centers” in 2016, even as military leaders pledged to wrest the key cities of Raqqa and Mosul from it.
Contradicting the US defense secretary, Ashton Carter, Stewart said he was “less optimistic in the near term about Mosul”, saying the US and Iraqi government would “certainly not” retake it in 2016.
The negative outlook comes as Carter traveled on Tuesday to meet with his fellow defense chiefs in Brussels for a discussion on increasing their contributions against Isis.
On the Iran nuclear deal, Clapper said intelligence agencies were in a “distrust and verify mode”, but added: “We have no evidence thus far that they’re moving toward violation.”
Clapper’s admission about the surveillance potential for networked home devices is rare for a US official. But in an overlooked 2012 speech, the then CIA director David Petraeus called the surveillance implications of the internet of things “transformational … particularly to their effect on clandestine tradecraft”.
During testimony to both the Senate armed services committee and the intelligence panel, Clapper cited Russia, China, Iran, North Korea and the Islamic State as bolstering their online espionage, disinformation, theft, propaganda and data-destruction capabilities. He warned that the US’s ability to correctly attribute the culprits of those actions would probably diminish with “improving offensive tradecraft, the use of proxies, and the creation of cover organizations”.
Clapper suggested that US adversaries had overtaken its online capabilities: “Russia and China continue to have the most sophisticated cyber programs.”
The White House’s new cybersecurity initiative, unveiled on Tuesday, pledged increased security for nontraditional networked home devices. It tasked the Department of Homeland Security to “test and certify networked devices within the ‘Internet of Things’.” It did not discuss any tension between the US’s twin cybersecurity and surveillance priorities.
Connected household devices are a potential treasure trove to intelligence agencies seeking unobtrusive ways to listen and watch a target, according to a study that Harvard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society released last week. The study found that the signals explosion represented by the internet of things would overwhelm any privacy benefits by users of commercial encryption – even as Clapper in his testimony again alleged that the growth of encryption was having a “negative effect on intelligence gathering”.
The report’s authors cited a 2001 case in which the FBI had sought to compel a company that makes emergency communications hardware for automobiles – similar by description to OnStar, though the company was not named – to assist agents in Nevada in listening in on conversations in a client’s car.
In February 2015, news reports revealed that microphones on Samsung “smart” televisions were “always on” so as to receive any audio that it could interpret as an instruction.
"Law enforcement or intelligence agencies may start to seek orders compelling Samsung, Google, Mattel, Nest or vendors of other networked devices to push an update or flip a digital switch to intercept the ambient communications of a target,” the authors wrote.
Waihopai Spy Base Protesters Talk GCSB, Five Eyes And Democracy In Marlborough January 29 2016 | From: MarlboroughExpress
An annual protest has drawn a colourful crowd to Marlborough to protest against mass surveillance.
About 60 people from across New Zealand gathered in Marlborough on Saturday to take a peaceful stand against Waihopai Station, southwest of Blenheim.
The day began with a march through the centre of Blenheim, with one marcher dressed as Uncle Sam and another wearing an oversized mask in the likeness of Prime Minister John Key.
Green Party co-leader and intelligence spokesperson Metiria Turei spoke at the march about the Government Security Communications Bureau.
"The GCSB has acted illegally. Our spy agencies are being used for political purposes like helping ministers get international jobs, New Zealanders in the Pacific are being spied on and the SIS lacks a proper compliance system," Turei said.
"We cannot let their arrogance erode our civil liberties away."
The protest moved to the Waihopai spy base about 1.30pm where six police officers took shifts standing in the 30 degree Celsius heat between the protesters and the spy base.
Teacher Adrian Leason, one of the 'Waihopai three', calls for the Waihopai spy base to be closed.
Anti-Bases Campaign spokesman Murray Horton said the spy base was controlled by the United States, adding even New Zealand's prime minister knew little about its operations.
"Five Eyes is the reason for the existence of both the GCSB and Waihopai ... Its satellite interception dishes intercept a huge volume of civilian telephone calls, email and computer data communications," he said.
"The collection of private information was anti-democratic and destructive", he said.
Aros Diodi travelled from Coromandel to help raise awareness at the protest.
"People need to know. It's like a big secret," she said.
There were about seven people from Marlborough at the protest.
"Marlborough does not get in behind this the way it should," Horton said.
One man jumped the fence to give police a close-up view of his placard, but there were no arrests.
"We will keep coming here as long as that [spy base] is still there. So book the overtime, boys," Horton said to police at the protest's conclusion.
Again, we are featuring another summary of the information that’s already been in this site and some new information detailing the personalities involved that should facilitate the understanding of what’s been going on for at least the last eight years.
Big Squeeze Now On Khazarian Mafia
This article builds on past articles on this subject. For those who haven’t read those, reading this article is likely a waste of time and it will be difficult to fit this information into their heads.
This is a long article and is written as a two-tiered piece. Those short of time can read the bold print and pass over the rest, and then finish with the conclusion. Many thanks to my sources, some still living but most passed. None have been associated with Veterans Today in any way. I do not enjoy writing this type of article for a number of reasons not appropriate to be discussed here. But I do feel an obligation to get this information out. ]
Numerous nations around the World have now ganged up on the Khazarian Mafia (KM).
It is cornered and it is losing power by the day. Expect increased surveillance and harassment by local police who take orders from Homeland Security (DHS) and receive their ridiculous conjured up Domestic Terror Watch Lists.
How much real power does the Khazarian Mafia have left and for how long can it hold out? Is the Khazarian Mafia still powerful enough to start another major war in the Mideast, or even a nuclear WW3 to serve as a covering event for their impending loss of World hegemony?
There are recent reports from China that the Chinese Government has ordered that its international cargo shipping in both the Pacific and the Atlantic be restricted.
One source with connections to mainland Chinese sources has verified this claim that China has given an ultimatum that there will be a big reduction in their cargo ships unloading any products until the USG begins to honor the Secret Reset Agreement they entered into in 2013 during G-20 meetings.
The Baltic Dry Shipping Index is way down, less than half of what it was at its peak. Crude oil has dropped to $30 a barrel or less, and in Canada shale oil is even as low at $10 a barrel. American retail sales were low during Christmas and many retail chains plan to close stores at multiple locations, including the notorious Walmart.
And oil derivatives of the big Wall Street Banks are under extreme stress due to these oil prices which has now placed several of the largest in jeopardy. The US Petro Dollar is now under stress as never before and the massive continued issuing and printing after the bailouts (repetitive Quantitative Easings, #7 and counting), the secret US Treasury Exchange Stabilization Fund (ESF) direct foreign bank bailouts of trillions, and the secret direct USG Plunge Protection Team stock purchases in mass no longer seem to mitigate this slide.
Several foreign nations have asked for their Gold back that has been stored at the Federal Reserve, but only a portion has been shipped because the vaults are now apparently empty.
Chinese and Russian purchases of massive quantities of Gold and Silver are fact, not theory, giving them a huge advantage as the Federal Reserve System’s Ponzi scheme approaches collapse.
Comex paper Gold which is supposed to be backed 100% by real Gold is not. This is just another part of the Federal Reserve System’s massive Ponzi scheme which has probably already hit the iceberg and is taking on water.
The Khazarian Mafia’s top leadership is being squeezed and now seems cornered. They claim to each other to work directly for Lucifer who they describe as their new “rising god” (they call this “Lucifer Rising”). Others in this small circle describe Lucifer as a renegade Third Force who will cut these folks loose in a NY Minute as soon as they serve no useful purpose anymore. And that is what now seems to be happening. Looks like their “god” is going to let them down. Oh well, should they have expected less from pure evil?
When you dance with the devil, you are going to get burned. That’s the function of Doofus Cutouts that are propelled to the top and given power, status and riches beyond imagination. They are there to serve as disposables when it’s all said and done and they are no longer needed. They will never see it coming when they are abandoned and “cut-loose”.
If there is going to be new monetary system set up for the World and that’s the way it looks, and it likely will not include the Khazarian Mafia Kingpins.
As best we can determine before Chinese cargo shipping decreased, China was demanding that their Renminbi be included in a basket of currencies.
And we know that the Renminbi will be backed by Gold and this basket of currencies will replace the current exclusiveness of the US Petro Dollar which functions as the World’s Reserve Currency.
This same source has claimed that the Japanese Government has just agreed to be part of the Chinese created Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). If these reports are accurate then this means that Khazarian Mafia is being squeezed economically.
For the G-20 nations and especially the USA to honor this Secret Reset Agreement made in 2013, the Khazarian Mafia must be removed from its position controlling the World’s Central Banking.
It also apparently requires the acceptance of the Chinese Renminbi based on Gold and Silver as a part of an international basket of currencies and the removal of the US Petro Dollar as the World’s Reserve Currency.
Looks like the Khazarian Mafia is now being squeezed from many directions. And it is rapidly losing control which makes it desperate and dangerous.
When the World’s largest Organized Crime Syndicate the Khazarian Mafia feels cornered one would expect that it would become desperate to re-establish control and take even more drastic actions that it has in the past, unless too much force is arrayed against them from more than one enemy.
And now for the first time numerous enemies have arisen against the Khazarian Mafia. And two of them are quite powerful.
The first and most powerful enemy appears to be the Russian Federation.
Putin and the Russian Federation have now completely checkmated the Khazarian Mafia both in the Ukraine and in Syria and is now annihilating ISIS by deployment of its superior air power.
The second most powerful appears to be the American People, a very well-armed sleeping giant that is now rapidly awaking.
This new exigent power of the American Masses is due to the Alternative Media of the Internet. The Internet has provided incredible speed and the fact that so many Americans are finally figuring out everything out of our elected Politicians’ mouths via the CMMM is their propaganda, big lies and false-narratives.
And the recent dire economy, and massive unemployment since 2008 brought about by all these traitorous Free Trade Agreements and two illegal, unConstitutional “Wall Street Bailouts” have created a spontaneously emerging populism in the American Masses.
This massive populism is not only unprecedented but it is now accompanied by a rising anger towards the DC “doofus” career politicians and this new populism is increasingly powerful.
The Khazarian Mafia has deployed false-flag attacks all around the World and in America using Cutouts. Some were mass-shootings in gun-free zones hyped in the Controlled Major Mass Media (CMMM), and others were major bombings like at the Murrah Building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995 or the World Trade Center in NYC on 9-11-01.
The purpose is always to justify more power to central government in order to help the Khazarian Mafia protect itself and its Evil Agenda.
But now that the Khazarian Mafia is being squeezed from all sides, will we see increased harassment of investigative journalists, known truth tellers and dissidents who run counter to the Khazarian Mafia’s propaganda, big lies and false-narratives they dispense through their CMMM?
Might we start seeing mysterious and increasingly frequent disappearances like what occurred in the South American Death Squads? After all these Death Squads were all trained by the US Military and the CIA inside the USA, and these schools for torture and murder are still active.
And recently Chicago was caught running a black site for DHS to disappear Targeted Individuals. Other cities have these too. And the Pentagon and the CIA still run the Black Prison sites in East European nations and also have black prison ships which are still active. Check this for more information.
We should expect the DHS to put out increasingly negative smear reports to the local Police Departments creating increased fear of known truth tellers, dissidents, patriots and gun owners? This will include folks who have been illegally placed on Domestic terror Watch lists with instructions to begin increased surveillance and harassment against them?
We now know for certain that the Khazarian Mafia’s actions in the past in America have included the Bombing of the Murrah Building, first attempted bombing of the NYC Twin towers by the FBI setting up and supplying the Blind Sheikh. This was actually an acoustics test to establish needs for the devices the Khazarian Mafia used in Twin Towers attack on 9-11-01.
And the FBI (with help of the CIA and crooked US Customs agents) placed a stolen barrel of cyanide stolen from Louis Champon’s Natural Cherry Flavoring Company in Boca Raton Florida through a tunnel under the street by Wackem’out World Security.
This was done to see what the effects on folks near the blast in the basement parking ramp would be. Actually the blast destroyed the toxicity of the cyanide.
Naturally the FBI tried to secretly and wrongly frame Louis Champon for this and only failed through the incredible detective work of James Rothstein (NYCPD Gold Shield, police Intel and key part of the infamous NY State Crime Commission Secret 15 man Intel Task Force - now long retired for arresting Frank Sturgis aka Frank Fiorini in NYC for trying to terminate Marita Lorenz right before her secret appearance at the HSCA and turning over of photos with Ruby, Sturgiss, Oswald at the motel the night before the JFK Assassination and more).
Detective Rothstein, a German Catholic, is the only member of this secret 15 man task force who has survived (most were terminated with extreme prejudice by the CIA) to suppress what they found out. Detective Rothstein is one of the greatest American Heroes in Law Enforcement we have ever had anywhere in America.
His investigations led to more prosecutions of CIA pedophiles, their pedophile murders, and the CIA drug dealers than any other LE person in the history of America and his record still stands.
None of this ever was allowed into the CMMM of course. Rothstein’s astoundingly frank book is expected to be published this year and it will be very interesting. His long term efforts to bring St. John’s Abbey to justice for the pedophile sheep-dipped, rat-lined ex-Nazi priests that have been kept there and protected from prosecution are well known, and he is still at it.
Too bad the local police are crooked, and the FBI continues to look the other way and do their usual assigned job, cover up for the “Process”.
So this World’s largest organized Crime Syndicate the Khazarian Mafia is truly capable of untold evil against the American people as well as the whole World as long as it is allowed to exist and occupy and parasitize the USG for its own purposes.
Every large urban police dept. and the alphabets, especially the FBI has an Intel plant embedded there to run cover-ups for the “Process” Satanic Cult and the CIA drug trafficking, both protected by being deputized as agents of National Security”.
Inside America the Khazarian Mafia has controlled the Alphabets including the FBI, its main cover up agency and entrapment/setup agency and the BATF, as well as the CIA; and they have always done a lot of the Khazarian Mafia’s illegal dirty work.
And of course after the Khazarian Mafia attacked America on 9-11-01 to create a New Pearl Harbor event, they were now in a position to establish Homeland Security (DHS) the foundation of the long planned American Police State.
This plan to establish DHS was already written and ready to push through Congress awaiting a major catalytic event such as the major terrorist attack of 9-11-01 which was run by the Khazarian Mafia and its stateside assets deep inside the Administration and the Pentagon.
The attack on America of 9-11-01 was designed to consolidate all American Law Enforcement under one central command directly controlled by the Khazarian Mafia, a known foreign based power, and justify becoming a nation based on preemptive wars of aggression.
The secret agenda of DHS is to transform America into a total surveillance society, a Police State rivaling East Germany under the Stasi. That is why Marcus Wolfe (former head of the Stasi) was hired as a consultant to set up DHS two years before he mysteriously died.
The ultimate end game here is for the Khazarian Mafia to use DHS to transform America into GAZA II, the World’s largest open-air prison camp and to make Americans the New Palestinians. This is all part of the “Greater Israel Plan” which is no longer theory but established fact.
And the “Greater Israel Plan” is the cover story used by the Khazarian Mafia’s top leadership (aka the “Select Few”) to use its Cutouts and main action agent the American-Israeli “Israeli-first” Dual Citizen Traitors and the Likudists in Israel to do their dirty work.
The American Controlled Major Mass Media (CMMM) has been losing its credibility for years, and its popularity is at an all-time low.
Since the CMMM is the main mouthpiece and propaganda/mind-kontrol agent for the Khazarian Mafia, its demise poses a big loss of power for the Khazarian Mafia. And we now know for certain its demise is being engendered by the increasing popularity of the Alternative News of the Internet.
The Khazarian Mafia is now cornered and you can bet that Homeland Security (DHS) is busy at work creating smear reports at their fusion centers to send to local police with the instructions to increase the harassment of suspected domestic terrorists.
Expect greatly increased surveillance and spying on all Americans even the Khazarian Mafia’s underling yes men and women and major doofuses who have been appointed to high positions of power and to provide a twisted sort of inside humor to the very top controllers that run the Khazarian Mafia System.
Spying and Intel collection has become remarkably advanced and will continue to increase in frequency, scope and intrusiveness.
Much of it is used for banal entertainment by bored “no longer give a damn” NSA and NRO employees who dig watching and listening to bedroom type scenes. The NSA and NRO are collecting far more raw data than they can adequately process effectively, and it has become mostly a money-making means to asset strip more and more money from We The People and make a big show of power by the Khazarian Mafia.
Some deep black and top secret technologies include; use of one’s own AC house wiring, smart TV’s, personal especially laptop and handheld computers, cell phones, wired phones, remote phones, smart TV’s and smart appliances; remote outdoor to indoor thermometers and weather meters and stations for homeowners; some TV remote controls with voice activation; really spooky new methods like driving by and shooting a special micro-transceiver nail in the siding that is matched for color and texture; wall penetrating drive-by radar systems (also used along major highways in unmarked white step vans and 18-wheelers; vehicle, aircraft, and satellite based special infrared sensors); high powered close-by receivers for picking up brain waves and decoding thought and emotional states; …
…embedded transceiver chips in all cell phones ad auto GPS and blue-tooth communication and “seek help” systems which can be remotely activated and easily traced and used a GPS tracking and used for microphones; orbital super HD electronic day and night vision cameras than can sense an ant on the ground and many license plates; deep black variable and synthetic aperture ground penetrating radar, advance gamma ray and neutron particle sensors and other even more secret means involved ground, truck, tower and satellite antennas designed to pick up brainwave transmissions which have been altered by ingested nano-particles in the atmospherically sprayed aerosol chem-trails and gasoline which include nano-particles of aluminum and barium and other magnetic and electrical compounds which can be flashed, id’ed and used to alter brainwave transmissions for external monitoring (referred to as the “prime freak”).
There are other even more advance psi-power means that are so far down the rabbit-hole they would be too discrediting to discuss in this article. But they do exist and can be effective in many situations.
More on those in another article perhaps.
But even worse DHS uses the special deniable contractor squads and retired miltel, FBI and CIA to gang-stalk, do personal surveillance, walk-bys, and moving in next door or as close as possible to key targeted individuals who are deemed as first line threat to their system of lies.
Paranoid yet? Haha
And as if that wasn’t enough, these special squads have specialists that deploy advanced psychotronic warfare against USG, Intel, military and corporate whistle-blowers on behalf of the Khazarian Mafia kingpins that is designed to cause chronic health problems, lethal medical disorders and suppression of thinking and acting.
Some of these devices are cell tower activated, some by doppler weather radar, some closely custom placed transmitters triangulated in from close-by spy cell and corporate proprietaries. For those that claim this is all pure fantasy and bs I can strongly reply you are wrong, dead wrong. How can I say that?
Well I have personally swept Mark Novitsky’s residence with sensors used by the German Health Department and found it way over the allowable European accepted limits with some equipment red-lined. Some sources inside the home were disabled or removed, and we found strong external sources.
As we started tracing and triangulating their location of external transmissions, they were suddenly turned off preventing location. Novitsky is as important in what he knows and has attempted to disclose as Snowden. 60 Minutes was going to do a big story on him but backed out at the last minute because they said it had become too complicated.
Other top Federal and Intel whistle-blowers have told Novitsky what he knows about is above their pay grade. Most avoid him like the plague. All his local Senators and Congresspersons were notified by Novitsky (evidence in writing I have seen) and all deny it and did nothing, except for Governor Mark Dayton who was a Senator at the time.
Dayton has a good reputation with his staff and when terrorism struck in DC he immediately placed the safety of his staff first. He did what he could for Novitsky and We The People but was stepped on hard.
Now Dayton is the Governor of Minnesota and appears to be doing his best to get the the states decaying infrastructure repaired. Novitsky has been placed on the top secret DHS “No Work under any Circumstances List” by the FBI, which follows him around and tells any employer where he applies that he is a Domestic Terrorist, “please do not hire him, he is on our Domestic Terror Watch List and under surveillance - you wouldn’t want to be put on our Watch List now, would you?”
The one good job Novitsky had in a non-Intel related area after leaving the Teletech Holdings related company he worked for was ruined when the FBI showed up and delivered a National Security Letter (NSL) which his employer was allowed to read but not keep, and which threatened a $10,000 fine and up to 10 years in a federal prison if he ever disclosed anything about this NSL letter or why he was going to have to separate Novitsky.
And Mark has had strange but very real recent medical problems and his first doctors were either dirty, Khazarian Mafia worker bees, Sayanims or just plain uncaring and medically lousy.
The lab was either dirty or had folks inside that tampered with his blood work. Finally, he was able to find a top physician who is 100% ethical with a top academic reputation and will not kowtow to illegal government manipulations.
And who are DHS’s listed domestic terrorists? Gun owners, Ron Paul supporters, Veterans, libertarians, Christians, Islamics, Patriots, anti-war activists, dissidents and alternative media reporters and journalists and many many more individuals and groups that can be placed on the list by any supervisory agent after even one complaint of any kind and these watch lists have no oversight or appeal process. Once you are on these Watch Lists you are doomed to be on forever.
Even Senator Ted Kennedy was put on the “No Fly List” by mistake and despite expensive legal efforts and big political muscle he could never get off of it. Why you wonder?
Because these Terror Watch lists are creations of the Khazarian Mafia Kingpins. They are visible indicators of their unbridled twisted, sick, evil power produced by their infiltration and hijacking of America through their private pernicious usury debt-note private Fiat counterfeit Ponzi-type central banking system.
We may see increased harassment and abuse of phony domestic terror watch lists.
We may see increased harassment by local police, alphabets as ordered by DHS, according to their whacked out “watch lists” that include almost everyone but the real domestic terrorists who are the Khazarian Mafia leaders and the top officials of DHS, whose job is to terrorize Americans into subservience and compliance and take away all our Constitutional Rights.
On the other hand, we may see such a rapid loss of functional day to day power by the Khazarian Mafia and their police state mechanism, DHS, that we do not see a big increase in surveillance and harassment. Maybe we will even see less now that the Khazarian Mafia is cornered and being pressed from all sides by the World and by We The People.
The confidential domestic terror “Watch Lists” lists were personally prepared under the watchful direction of Janet Napolitano while she was head of DHS.
These were leaked and published on the Internet by DHS insiders who thought she and DHS was a joke but wanted to keep their pay and benefits, so we know for certain they exist and what is on them. Even though she resigned her position at DHS, she is being sued by subordinate men for sexual harassment and for moving their office into the men’s lavatory, among other things.
A couple of nights ago while driving at night in the early evening, I was pulled over and needlessly rousted by a local police Officer, who claimed I crossed over the line three times on a stretch of road with no other traffic close by.
This fine very young lady police officer tailed me for a couple miles and then pulled me over. I don’t drink, use drugs, speed or drive carelessly, nor did I did not cross over any lines.
After the usual license and insurance check, the Officer let me go with no ticket. But she asked me a question about something irrelevant that could she have only known about from information gained by a local stingray tap or from the local DHS Fusion Center. Not very professional. She was rousting me, and it was a message that I received and am now responding to.
A Deal with the Devil at Langley?
In this same Department some years back, the prior Police Chief was provided a free trip to Langley for a special meeting. During that meeting, he was asked by the CIA to sign a secret Jurisdictional Agreement on behalf of his Department in which he agreed to submit jurisdiction on any case to the Feds that they requested.
Major amounts of military grade equipment was to be provided in exchange, including two armored cars, grenade launchers, full-auto real assault rifles and machine guns, body armor, bullet proof barriers and lots of military grade ammo.
The Chief was an honorable man with integrity and refused to sign the agreement. Did he develop a strange neurological condition soon after that and have to resign?
Did the CIA keep secretly working with a couple corrupt officers to distribute illegal drugs to high school kids from “DEA controlled deliveries”, a local smaller “feeder airport” through a seafood import “proprietary”, with a local drug task force (with special license plates to identify each other) either looking the other way or involved. Betcha this hasn’t stopped.
The department got a new Chief and now has the equipment offered. You can be sure that this secret transaction has already been successfully made in almost every large Urban Police Department. So far, a significant number of Sheriff’s offices have refused. The County Sheriff is the supreme law enforcement officer in any county and has authority even over the Feds.
Be clear about this, these deals with the Devil at Langley to get jurisdiction over your loca