Olduvaiblog: Musings on the coming collapse

Home » Posts tagged 'Civil liberties'

Tag Archives: Civil liberties

Here’s What The Richest Man In The World Thinks About Snowden And NSA Surveillance | Zero Hedge

Here’s What The Richest Man In The World Thinks About Snowden And NSA Surveillance | Zero Hedge.

Submitted by Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

So Bill Gates recently gave an interview to Rolling Stone magazine. The vast majority of the interview focused on his philanthropic efforts, with a particular focus on poverty and climate change. However, several questions were brought up on illegal NSA surveillance in general, and Edward Snowden in particular.

His answers reveal one of the biggest problems facing America today, which is the fact that the billionaire class as a whole does not question or rock the boat whatsoever. They criticize only when it is convenient or easy to do so, never putting themselves at risk for the sake of civil liberties and the Constitution.

In mosts cases, this is due to the fact that they themselves are the characters pulling the strings of the political class in Washington D.C. So when it comes down to it, their policies ultimately become our policies.

It is also important to note that Microsoft was a particularly eager participant in NSA spying from the very beginning. For example, according to the following PRISM slide provided by Edward Snowden, we see that Gates’ company was the first to become involved. In fact, they were participating a full six months before Yahoo!, while Apple didn’t join until a year after Steve Jobs died.

What a tangled web we have weaved. Now from Rolling Stone:

Question: When people think about the cloud, it’s not only the accessibility of information and their documents that comes to mind, but also their privacy – or lack of it.

Gates: Should there be cameras everywhere in outdoor streets? My personal view is having cameras in inner cities is a very good thing. In the case of London, petty crime has gone down. They catch terrorists because of it. And if something really bad happens, most of the time you can figure out who did it. There’s a general view there that it’s not used to invade privacy in some way. Yet in an American city, in order to take advantage of that in the same way, you have to trust what this information is going to be used for.

Do they really catch terrorists because of it in London? Because in the U.S., the NSA chief already admitted that the entire spy program has stopped essentially zero terrorist attacks. It certainly didn’t stop the Boston bombings. So what are we giving up our privacy for exactly?

Question: Thanks to Edward Snowden, who has leaked tens of thousands of NSA documents, we are. Do you consider him a hero or a traitor?

Gates: I think he broke the law, so I certainly wouldn’t characterize him as a hero. If he wanted to raise the issues and stay in the country and engage in civil disobedience or something of that kind, or if he had been careful in terms of what he had released, then it would fit more of the model of “OK, I’m really trying to improve things.” You won’t find much admiration from me.

Sorry Billy boy, but we have had many whistleblowers in the past who went through the system and they ended up in jail or their lives were ruined. For example, the only person imprisoned for torture in the USA is the guy who exposed the torture program, John Kiriakou.

Question: Even so, do you think it’s better now that we know what we know about government surveillance?

Gates: The government has such ability to do these things. There has to be a debate. But the specific techniques they use become unavailable if they’re discussed in detail. So the debate needs to be about the general notion of under what circumstances should they be allowed to do things.

First of all, without the Snowden revelations, there would be no “debate.” As it stands, the intelligence complex and Obama don’t seem to have much interest in changing a single thing anyway.

Before Snowden proved us right, those who accurately claimed the NSA was doing all of these things were labeled paranoid conspiracy theorists. Moreover, how can anyone seriously defend these “techniques” in light of the recent revelations that show activities so egregious that security experts think they threaten the infrastructure of the entire internet?

Gates goes on to ponder…

Should surveillance be usable for petty crimes like jaywalking or minor drug possession? Or is there a higher threshold for certain information?Those aren’t easy questions.

How are those not easy questions? They are exceedingly easy questions for a civilized society. The answer is no. Unless you want to toss even more citizens in jail for non-violent offenses, because having 25% of the world’s prison population and only 5% of its population is not inhumane enough.

More from Gates…

The U.S. government in general is one of the better governments in the world. It’s the best in many, many respects. Lack of corruption, for instance, and a reasonable justice system.

Seriously, what country is Gates living in? I suppose when you are the richest man in the world it’s pretty easy to live in a bubble. He is so obsessed with the problems of the outside world and the fact that they are more corrupt than we are, that he is completely blind to the very dangerous trends happening in America.

What a joke.

The entire interview can be read here.

Here's What The Richest Man In The World Thinks About Snowden And NSA Surveillance | Zero Hedge

Here’s What The Richest Man In The World Thinks About Snowden And NSA Surveillance | Zero Hedge.

Submitted by Mike Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

So Bill Gates recently gave an interview to Rolling Stone magazine. The vast majority of the interview focused on his philanthropic efforts, with a particular focus on poverty and climate change. However, several questions were brought up on illegal NSA surveillance in general, and Edward Snowden in particular.

His answers reveal one of the biggest problems facing America today, which is the fact that the billionaire class as a whole does not question or rock the boat whatsoever. They criticize only when it is convenient or easy to do so, never putting themselves at risk for the sake of civil liberties and the Constitution.

In mosts cases, this is due to the fact that they themselves are the characters pulling the strings of the political class in Washington D.C. So when it comes down to it, their policies ultimately become our policies.

It is also important to note that Microsoft was a particularly eager participant in NSA spying from the very beginning. For example, according to the following PRISM slide provided by Edward Snowden, we see that Gates’ company was the first to become involved. In fact, they were participating a full six months before Yahoo!, while Apple didn’t join until a year after Steve Jobs died.

What a tangled web we have weaved. Now from Rolling Stone:

Question: When people think about the cloud, it’s not only the accessibility of information and their documents that comes to mind, but also their privacy – or lack of it.

Gates: Should there be cameras everywhere in outdoor streets? My personal view is having cameras in inner cities is a very good thing. In the case of London, petty crime has gone down. They catch terrorists because of it. And if something really bad happens, most of the time you can figure out who did it. There’s a general view there that it’s not used to invade privacy in some way. Yet in an American city, in order to take advantage of that in the same way, you have to trust what this information is going to be used for.

Do they really catch terrorists because of it in London? Because in the U.S., the NSA chief already admitted that the entire spy program has stopped essentially zero terrorist attacks. It certainly didn’t stop the Boston bombings. So what are we giving up our privacy for exactly?

Question: Thanks to Edward Snowden, who has leaked tens of thousands of NSA documents, we are. Do you consider him a hero or a traitor?

Gates: I think he broke the law, so I certainly wouldn’t characterize him as a hero. If he wanted to raise the issues and stay in the country and engage in civil disobedience or something of that kind, or if he had been careful in terms of what he had released, then it would fit more of the model of “OK, I’m really trying to improve things.” You won’t find much admiration from me.

Sorry Billy boy, but we have had many whistleblowers in the past who went through the system and they ended up in jail or their lives were ruined. For example, the only person imprisoned for torture in the USA is the guy who exposed the torture program, John Kiriakou.

Question: Even so, do you think it’s better now that we know what we know about government surveillance?

Gates: The government has such ability to do these things. There has to be a debate. But the specific techniques they use become unavailable if they’re discussed in detail. So the debate needs to be about the general notion of under what circumstances should they be allowed to do things.

First of all, without the Snowden revelations, there would be no “debate.” As it stands, the intelligence complex and Obama don’t seem to have much interest in changing a single thing anyway.

Before Snowden proved us right, those who accurately claimed the NSA was doing all of these things were labeled paranoid conspiracy theorists. Moreover, how can anyone seriously defend these “techniques” in light of the recent revelations that show activities so egregious that security experts think they threaten the infrastructure of the entire internet?

Gates goes on to ponder…

Should surveillance be usable for petty crimes like jaywalking or minor drug possession? Or is there a higher threshold for certain information?Those aren’t easy questions.

How are those not easy questions? They are exceedingly easy questions for a civilized society. The answer is no. Unless you want to toss even more citizens in jail for non-violent offenses, because having 25% of the world’s prison population and only 5% of its population is not inhumane enough.

More from Gates…

The U.S. government in general is one of the better governments in the world. It’s the best in many, many respects. Lack of corruption, for instance, and a reasonable justice system.

Seriously, what country is Gates living in? I suppose when you are the richest man in the world it’s pretty easy to live in a bubble. He is so obsessed with the problems of the outside world and the fact that they are more corrupt than we are, that he is completely blind to the very dangerous trends happening in America.

What a joke.

The entire interview can be read here.

Activist Post: Final Goal of the Surveillance State

Activist Post: Final Goal of the Surveillance State.

Jon Rappoport
Activist Post

Surveillance is coming at us from all angles. Chips, drones, TSA checkpoints, smart meters, back-doored electronic products, video cameras, spying home appliances; our phone calls and emails and keystrokes and product purchases are recorded.

The government and its allied corporations will know whatever they want to know about us.

What then?

What happens when all nations are blanketed from stem to stern with surveillance?

Public utilities, acting on government orders, will be able to allot electricity in amounts and at times it wishes to. This is leading to an overarching plan for energy distribution to the entire population. 

Claiming shortages and limited options, governments will essentially be redistributing wealth, in the form of energy, under a collectivist model.

National health insurance plans (such as Obamacare) offer another clue. Such plans have no logistical chance of operating unless every citizen is assigned a medical ID package, which is a de facto identity card. In the medical arena, this means cradle-to-grave tracking.

Surveillance inevitably leads to: placing every individual under systems of control. It isn’t just “we’re watching you” or “we’re stamping out dissent.” It’s “we’re directing your participation in life.”

As a security analyst in the private sector once told me, “When you can see what every employee is doing, when you have it all at your fingertips, you naturally move on to thinking about how you can control those patterns and flows of movement and activity. It’s irresistible. You look at your employees as pieces on a board. The only question is, what game do you want to play with them?”

Every such apparatus is ruled, from the top, by Central Planners. When it’s an entire nation, upper-echelon technocrats revel in the idea of blueprinting, mapping, charting, and regulating the flows of all goods and services and people, “for the common good.”

Water, food, medicine, land use, transportation—they all become items of a networked system that chooses who gets what and when, and who can travel where, and under what conditions.

This is the wet dream of technocrats. They believe they are saving the world, while playing a fascinating game of multidimensional chess.

As new technologies are discovered and come on line, the planners decide how they will be utilized and for whose benefit.

In order to implement such a far-reaching objective, with minimal resistance from the global population, manufactured crises are unleashed which persuade the masses that the planet is under threat and needs “the wise ones” to rescue it and us.

We watch (and fight in) wars and more wars, each one exacerbated and even invented. We are presented with phony epidemics that are falsely promoted as scourges.

The only response, we are led to believe, is more humane control over the population.

On top of that, we are fed an unending stream of propaganda aimed at convincing us that “the great good for the greatest number” is the only humane and acceptable principle of existence. All prior systems of belief are outmoded. We know better now. We must be good and kind and generous to everyone at all times.

Under this quasi-religious banner, which has great emotional appeal, appears The Plan. Our leaders allocate and withhold on the basis of their greater knowledge. We comply. We willingly comply, because we are enlisted in a universal army of altruistic concern.

This is a classic bait and switch. We are taught to believe that service for the greater good is an unchallengeable goal and credo. And then, later, we find out it has been hijacked to institute more power over us, in every way.

The coordinated and networked surveillance of Earth and its people is fed into algorithms that spit out solutions. This much food will go here; that much water will go there; here there will be medical care; there medical care will be severely rationed. These people will be permitted to travel. Those people will be confined to their cities and towns.

Every essential of life—managed with on-off switches, and the consequences will play out.

An incredibly complex system of interlocking decisions will be hailed as messianic.

Surveillance; planning; control.

This is the vision.

It isn’t ours. It never was. But we are not consulted.

Instead we are made witness to watershed events: the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing; the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center; the 2001 assault on the Trade Center and the Pentagon. These ops paralleled the unleashing of better and more far-ranging methods of surveillance.

We are profiled down to the threads on our clothing and DNA in our cells. But what is our profile of the technocrats and their bosses?

They are divorced from human life. They live in a vacuum. They take pleasure from that vacuum.

In 1982, I interviewed Bill Perry, who had just left his job as PR chief at Lawrence Livermore Labs, where scientists design nuclear weapons. Perry had been given the kind of job PR people long for. But one day, when he passed the desk of a researcher and listened to his complaints about budget limitations, Perry said, “Listen, America already has the means to blow up the whole planet eight times. What more do you need?”

The researcher looked up at him with a genuinely puzzled expression. He said, “You don’t understand, Bill. This is a problem in physics.”

In the same detached sense, the technocrats who want to calculate and direct our future, move by move, minute by minute, see us as components of a complex and very interesting problem.

Yes, they indeed expect to exercise power and control. But they also live in an abstraction. They deal their answers from that realm. They exercise cool passion. They see, for example, that not every single twitch of thought of every person on earth is yet mapped, so they want to finish constructing the means by which they can chart those “missing elements.” They want to complete the formula.

They view their research as a wholly natural implication of the mathematics they can manipulate. They swim in technology and they want to extend its architecture. To abandon the program would be tantamount to denying their own intelligence. They climb the mountain because it is there.

They do perceive that one factor does not fit their algorithms: the free individual. It’s the wild card. Therefore, they are compelled to analyze freedom and break it down into DNA functions and brain processes. They assume, because they must, that the free individual is an illusory idea that flows from some older configuration of synaptic transmission, at a time in our evolution when we needed it. But now, they suppose, the engineering of human activity and thought has superseded such quaint notions. Now we all can be tracked, traced, and studied on a different and wider scale. Now we can be seen for what we really are: a hive.

Therefore, we must be instructed, within tight limits, about our various functions.

Today’s technocrats flourish with great optimism as they design the future world and its single society. If they run out of pieces of their puzzle to study, they’ll try to track the motion of every atom and electron and quark in the universe. They’ll delight in it.

Knowing all this, we know the terms of the war we are in.

The Central Planners have an equation: “free=uncontrolled=dangerous.”

By the gross terms of that equation, they lump us in with thugs and murderers and terrorists. They even see the normal functioning of the brain as a threat, as an intrinsically defective process, and they have long since decided that organ must be corrected with drugs.

We, on the other hand, must assert, in every way possible, that freedom is real and inviolable, and we must back that up with our actions.

Jon Rappoport is the author of two explosive collections, The Matrix Revealed and Exit From the Matrix, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free emails at www.nomorefakenews.com

Activist Post: 4 Things the ‘Powers-That-Be’ Don’t Want You to Know About Anarchy

Activist Post: 4 Things the ‘Powers-That-Be’ Don’t Want You to Know About Anarchy.

“None are more enslaved than those who believe they are free.” – Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

Gary ‘Z’ McGee
Activist Post

There are few subjects as controversial and taboo as the concept of anarchy. It mostly leaves a bad taste in people’s mouth due in no small part to years of psychological conditioning, backwards reasoning, and smoke & mirror political propaganda. But, as Voltaire ingeniously suggested, “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.” By explaining what anarchy truly is, we indirectly end up criticizing the powers-that-be, revealing the emperor is not only naked, but insecure and weak at the prospect of free men and women. Here then are four things the powers-that-be don’t want you to know about anarchy.

#1. Anarchy ≠ Chaos

“Anarchy doesn’t mean out of control; it means out of their control.” – Jim Dodge

Anarchy does not equal chaos. Anarchy has been the natural order of human beings since time immemorial. There’s a reason why tribal and nature-based societies have survived the trials and tribulations of millions of years of evolution, because they governed themselves in a healthy way: through natural anarchy. It’s actually hierarchal and state-run society’s that equal chaos. It all comes down to a matter of power.

Here’s how: hierarchal and state-run societies have centralized institutions with the monopoly on the use of violence. This large concentration of power attracts a particular type of leader: politicians who crave power. And since “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely” then such power almost always leads to war. Such wars naturally lead to more power, and so the vicious cycle continues, while keeping the powers-that-be continuously in power.

This is not to say that anarchic societies don’t have hierarchy, they just have considerably less hierarchy. But even anarchic societies with hierarchies are less likely to monopolize power, because they are engineered in such a way that groups never get to the point of concentrated centers of power. They are engineered so that brutes, or even groups of brutes, cannot rise to power. The checks and balances inherent within the anarchic system, along with the polarizing effect of self-governance, maintains a healthy equilibrium within a society.

When it comes down to it, anarchists are peaceful people who just want to govern themselves. Anarchism does not imply nihilism. Anarchism implies only adherence to, and respect for, the natural order of things: a healthy respect for the unpredictability and improbability of the cosmos, the interconnectedness of nature and the immense diversity of the biosphere, and the holistic inclusion of mankind as a social being with great powers that, thereby, requires an even greater amount of responsibility. To say that anarchy only ever leads to chaos is not only ignorance of the natural world, but ignorance of the nature of the human condition itself.

#2. Anarchy = Freedom

“You don’t become completely free by just avoiding being a slave; you also need to avoid becoming a master.” -Naseem Nicholas Taleb

Simply put, anarchy prefers dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery. It prefers uncomfortable truth over comfortable lies. It prefers the pain of knowledge over the bliss of ignorance. As was written in the Bhagavadgita:

“Better to live on beggar’s bread with those who love alive. Than taste their blood in rich feasts spread and guiltily survive.”

A common argument against anarchy is that there is no governance. But a society without a government isn’t necessarily a society without governance. Really, there is no such thing as a society without governance. A society with no sense of order is oxymoronic; it isn’t a “society” at all. A society (a group of people who agree to live among each other) that allows its people to govern themselves is an anarchic society. A group of people allowed to govern themselves is a free society (anarchy). A group of people who are not allowed to govern themselves is an unfree society (tyranny). The question is what type of order is preferable: liberty or tyranny. Most reasonable people will choose liberty. And liberty is, by nature, anarchic. As H.L. Mencken wrote, “I believe that any man who takes the liberty of another into his keeping is bound to become a tyrant, and that any man who yields up his liberty, in however slight the measure, is bound to become a slave.”

#3. Anarchy ≠ Slavery

“If I want the slave to become conscious of his servitude, it is both in order not to be a tyrant myself and in order that new possibilities might be opened to the liberated slave and through him to all men. To want existence, to want to disclose the world, and to want men to be free are one and the same will.” -Simone De Beauvoir

The Confederacy of Dunces is always ballyhooing, “But, but, but don’t we need leaders” implying that an anarchic system of governance would be leaderless. But what these dunces fail to realize is that they are confusing domination with leadership, in the first place. Raised, as these dunces are, under the tyranny of the state, they cannot see that they are subordinate it. They are under the false notion that the state is a benign institution which satisfies their need for leadership. When, actually, the state is nothing more than a malignant institution of coercive authority that is satisfying its own need for power. This is domination, not leadership. The fact that these dunces vote is just smoke and mirrors, the illusion of freedom, but is not actually freedom itself. It’s important to note that anarchists do not reject all authority, only that which is unhealthy or unjust. They don’t have a problem with rules, but with rulers. Like Simone De Beauvoir wrote, “A freedom that is interested only in denying freedom must be denied.”

If human beings are the most intelligent animal on the planet then why do we need to pay other people to think for us while we slave away for them? No other animal is stupid enough to do this, probably because no other animal is stupid enough to invent such a thing as money. That aside, the current economic slavery perpetuated by the state is unprecedented in the history of mankind. We live in an authoritarian society that most of us are not even aware of because we’ve been conditioned to except it. We are daily being preached to by propagandized advertisements on the one side and polarizing bipartisan politics on the other: conform, buy this, be afraid of “the other,” you must be approved of by others, be less than you are. It turns out that the best slaves are the ones that don’t even know they’re slaves. As Naseem Nicholas Taleb wrote, “Those who do not think that employment is systematic slavery are either blind or employed.”

#4. Anarchy = Harmony

“Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works.” –Carl Sagan

If, as Nietzsche wrote, “The Übermensch is the meaning of the earth… I beseech you, my brothers, remain faithful to the earth, and do not believe those who speak to you of otherworldly hopes” then it stands to reason that since anarchy is the way the earth governs itself, then it’s also the way that mankind ought to govern itself. This is the power of Nietzsche’s Übermensch: responsibility to the earth and to the natural order of things. And so it should also be the duty of the anarchist to subsume such power. The only thing preventing the anarchist from his/her responsibility to the earth is the smoke and mirrors of the state.

The state perpetuates the psyche-cosmos split. It aggrandizes mankind over nature itself. It dissociates us from the natural order of things so that it can maintain its power over us. One of the ways the state does this is by claiming that human nature is inherently corrupt and therefore must be governed. But human nature is not fixed. It changes according to its environment. The idea that humans are naturally evil and greedy creatures by default is a complete farce. If we live in an environment that perpetuates militarization, violence, greed and power, then we will behave in militarized, violent, greedy and power-mongering ways. If we live in an environment of compassion, empathy, love and prestige, then we will behave in compassionate, empathic, loving, prestigious ways. It really is that simple. This has been proven time and time again by nature-based cultures the world over.

The difficult part is seeing through the mess of it all. To be truly free is both very easy and very difficult. But if we can keep our moral compass focused on the principles of liberty, peace, love, and the ethics of reciprocity, then it will point the way, True North, toward a truly free society. It will reveal a society that preserves the moral Golden Mean and the middle-way, as opposed to the immoral, suffocating greed of state politics. It will uncover a society that exemplifies the Golden Ratio of nature, as opposed to the state’s expropriation of nature and nature-based cultures. It will bring to light a society that realizes that by hanging the “greater villain,” in the first place, neither man nor woman would ever have to steal the goose from off the common.

“They hang the man and flog the woman who steals the goose from off the common, but leave the greater villain loose who steals the common from under the goose.” -Anonymous

This article first appeared at WakingTimes.com

Gary ‘Z’ McGee, a former Navy Intelligence Specialist turned philosopher, is the author of Birthday Suit of God and The Looking Glass Man. His works are inspired by the great philosophers of the ages and his wide awake view of the modern world.

Activist Post: ACLU Seeks Information on FBI’s Secretive “Port Readers”

Activist Post: ACLU Seeks Information on FBI’s Secretive “Port Readers”.

image source

Derrick Broze
Activist Post

On Wednesday the American Civil Liberties Union filed aFreedom of Information Act request with the Federal Bureau of Investigations in an effort to find out details on a little known tool the Bureau uses to assist the National Security Agency in gathering data about Americans.

The tool, known as “port readers”, are capable of copying emails and instant messages in real time. The tool is supposed to delete the contents of the emails and leave only the “metadata” for the government. The FBI is currently working to install port readers on the networks of large telecommunications companies. In the ACLU’s request they asked for more information on the port readers. Specifically, the civil liberties group is seeking information on what metadata is being collected, how many Internet and phone service providers have installed them, how much information is collected so far, and whether or not the FBI can guarantee that information is not permanently stored by the government.

While the ACLU attempts to force the government to release pertinent information on the technology, we can gather a sense of what is being collected. The port readers were first described in August 2013 when CNET reported that a former government official stated that within the Bureau the software was known as a “harvesting program”. Another industry insider told CNET that the readers were “an interception device by definition.”  AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, Comcast, and Sprint declined to comment on the topic.

Foreign Policy also reported on the readers , stating that the FBI collects 13 separate fields of metadata. The exact fields and types of information are publicly unknown. We do know that the data can include the route a message takes over a network, IP addresses, and port numbers.

Hanni Fakhoury of the Electronic Frontier Foundation said, “The biggest fear is that the boxes are secretly storing something, or that they’re doing more than just simply allowing traffic to sift through and pulling out the routing information.”

So how do the port readers and the data collection happen without even a secret FISA court approval?

Using what are known as pen register and trap and trace orders large amounts of data can be intercepted with very little judicial oversight. The only requirement of a law enforcement officer making such an order is that the officer certify the results will be “relevant” to an investigation. Judges have stated in the past that they have almost no ability to deny pen register and trap and trace requests, and instead act as a rubber stamp for whatever is being requested.

The metadata collected can include IP addresses, Facebook correspondence, web site history, and more. However, with a pen register not all metadata is LEGALLY accessible. Although federal law says law enforcement can grab only “dialing, routing, addressing, or signaling information” without getting a court-approved wiretap, industry sources state that the FBI has configured its port reader to collect all metadata. This data collection would then render the programs, likely, illegal. This is yet another precarious legal gray area where data collection is concerned.

Although not much is known about port readers themselves there is some available data on the branch of the FBI carrying out the collection of information. Located at the Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia is the home of the FBI’s Operational Technology Division. Inside this compound is a mysterious organization called the Data Intercept Technology Unit or DITU. DITU handles the interception of data using the port readers.

Another interesting note is how the FBI and DITU assist the NSA with spying on Americans. The NSA is officially supposed to focus on international threats and not monitor activities of Americans. Whistleblower Edward Snowden obviously destroyed that myth last summer. However, DITU and the FBI still provide access to information that the NSA may not be able to access “legally”. Once the FBI’s port readers do their job, and DITU dissects the information, anything seen to be helpful can then be passed along to the NSA for further dissection and dissemination. All this seems to be operating under the guise of barely legal or outright flaunting of the law, both public law and leaked secret proceedings.

We live in an age where governments and private entities are becoming more and more engaged in monitoring and cataloguing of all aspects of daily life. Recent revelations have made it glaringly obvious to anyone paying attention that very little of our lives are “private” anymore. Free people should not be forced to sacrifice privacy in order to live and participate in the modern world. Stay vigilant and continue to spread awareness on the growing Surveillance State.

For More Information on the ACLU’s FOIA Request:  
https://www.aclu.org/national-security/fbi-port-reader-freedom-information-act-request

Recently by Derrick Broze:

Derrick Broze is an investigative journalist, community activist, gardener and promoter from Houston, Texas. He is the co-founder of The Houston Free Thinkers, and co-host of Free Thinker Radio. Broze also hosts and produces a weekly podcast under the name the Conscious Resistance Live. His writing can be found on TheConsciousResistance.com, The Liberty Beat, the Anti-Media, Intellihub, Activist Post, and other independent media sources.

Activist Post: Eyes in the Sky: New Surveillance Technology to Watch Over Us

Activist Post: Eyes in the Sky: New Surveillance Technology to Watch Over Us.

Lily Dane
Activist PostNew surveillance camera technology may be flying over your city soon. The new cameras are mounted on fixed-wing aircraft and can monitor an area the size of a small city for hours on end.

The Washington Post reported on this new generation of surveillance cameras:

A new, far more powerful generation is being quietly deployed that can track every vehicle and person across an area the size of a small city, for several hours at a time. Although these cameras can’t read license plates or see faces, they provide such a wealth of data that police, businesses and even private individuals can use them to help identify people and track their movements.

Even the name of the company that created this technology sounds ominous: Persistent Surveillance Systems. Ross McNutt, the president of the Ohio-based company, told the Post how the cameras could help reduce crime:

A single camera mounted atop the Washington Monument, McNutt boasts, could deter crime all around the Mall. He said regular flights over the most dangerous parts of Washington — combined with publicity about how much police could see — would make a significant dent in the number of burglaries, robberies and murders. His 192-megapixel cameras would spot as many as 50 crimes per six-hour flight, he estimated, providing police with a continuous stream of images covering more than a third of the city.

While taking measures to reduce crime is admirable, it seems that some, like Dayton Police Chief Richard Biehl, have other ideas about how the technology can be used. Biehl wants to invite the public to see the cameras in action, because it may scare them into behaving:

I want them to be worried that we’re watching. I want them to be worried that they never know when we’re overhead.

Civil liberties advocates say that while surveillance can help solve crime, privacy is at risk.

Joel Pruce, a University of Dayton postdoctoral fellow in human rights, told the Post:

There are an infinite number of surveillance technologies that would help solve crimes…but there are reasons that we don’t do those things, or shouldn’t be doing those things.

You know where there’s a lot less crime? There’s a lot less crime in China.

Jan Stanley, a privacy expert with the American Civil Liberties Union, said of the technology:

If you turn your country into a totalitarian surveillance state, there’s always some wrongdoing you can prevent. The balance struck in our Constitution tilts toward liberty, and I think we should keep that value.

Here, Craig Timberg of The Washington Post explains the technology:

Be sure to look up and wave hello if you see one of these surveillance planes hovering over your area!

Lily Dane is a staff writer for The Daily Sheeple, where this first appeared. Her goal is to help people to “Wake the Flock Up!”

Activist Post: Indiana House Committee Approves Anti-Drone Bill by a 6-1 Vote

Activist Post: Indiana House Committee Approves Anti-Drone Bill by a 6-1 Vote.

Today, an Indiana state house committee gave preliminary approval to a bill which would severely restrict the use of drones within the state.

Introduced by Rep. Eric Allan Koch (R-65), House Bill 1009 (HB1009) “Prohibits the use of unmanned aerial vehicles and tracking devices to conduct warrantless searches,” with very limited exceptions.

HB1009 was referred to the State House Committee on Courts and Criminal Code where a hearing was held this morning. After a short discussion, the bill passed by a vote of 6-1. Voting yes were committee chair, Rep. Jud McMillin (R-68), along with Reps. Pierce, McNamara, Harman, Mahan and Rhoads. The lone no vote was cast by Rep. DeLaney (D-86).

The legislation does include some narrow exceptions to the warrant requirement to allay the fears of law enforcement officials who did not want to be hamstrung in emergency situations when a drone’s use might spell life or death.

Even so, the bill also sets strict standards governing the use of a drone when authorized. It also “prohibits the placement of cameras or electronic surveillance equipment on private property to conduct warrantless searches.” Evidence obtained in violation of the act would be “inadmissable as evidence in an administrative or judicial proceeding.”

The ACLU has weighed in on the issue on a national level, warning that “unregulated drone use could pose serious threats to our privacy.”

Tenth Amendment Center national outreach director Amanda Bowers noted that Indiana could join a growing chorus of states putting strict limited on drones. “Already, a number of states have passed similar bills into law, and we are expecting more in the coming weeks and months,” she said. “From California to Washington State, and from New York to Missouri, legislators and the general public from left to right want to see a dangerous future stopped before it happens.”

Bills were signed into law in 2013 in Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas and Virginia. Last earlier this month, the South Carolina House passed a similar bill by a vote of 100-0.

HB1009 is expected to move to the full State House for a debate and vote. If it passes by a majority, it will be sent to the Senate, where it will need to pass out of committee before the Senate can vote to concur.

TAKE ACTION
If you live in Indiana: Click HERE to find out what steps you can take to support HB1009
If you live in another state: Take action to limit drone use in your state HERE.

Please visit and support the Tenth Amendment Center where this release first appeared.

Activist Post: Is Self-Reliance a Threat to Society?

Activist Post: Is Self-Reliance a Threat to Society?.

Youtube

For decades, Eustace Conway has lived an independent, sustainable life, building shelter for himself on his land, growing his own food, setting up outhouse facilities, composting, and allowing others to learn these methods first-hand so that we may once again have a populous versed in the healthy manner of primitive survival skills.

After a preliminary visit from the local Planning & Inspections department, several independent local government agencies together performed a raid on Mr. Conway’s property, and now the Watauga County Health Department has ordered a cease & desist on Mr. Conway’s educational activities.

Activist Post: Judge Napolitano: NSA Spies On All Members Of Congress

Activist Post: Judge Napolitano: NSA Spies On All Members Of Congress.

Youtube

Activist Post: 11 Signs of a False Flag

Activist Post: 11 Signs of a False Flag.

Dees Illustration

Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post

Throughout history, versions of the false flag attack have been used successfully by governments in order to direct the force of the people toward whatever end the ruling class may be seeking. At times, that end may be war, or it may be the curtailing of domestic civil liberties and basic human rights. In others, it is an economic agenda.

Indeed, false flags are themselves capable of taking on a wide variety of forms – domestic or foreign, small or large, economic or political, and many other designations that can often blur into one another. Each may serve a specific purpose and each may be adjusted and tailored for that specific purpose as societal conditions require.

For instance, the chemical weapons attack which took place inside Syria in August, 2013 serve as an example of a foreign false flag designed to whip up American fervor for war, on the platform of Responsibility to Protect similar to the Gulf of Tonkin.

Domestically speaking, a large-scale false flag such as 9/11, can be used to whip up both a massive public support for war and a popular willingness to surrender civil liberties, constitutional procedure, and constitutional/human rights. Economic false flags may take the form of manufactured “government shutdowns” or “government defaults” designed to create a demand for austerity or other pro-Wall Street solutions. Lastly, smaller-scale domestic false flags such as Sandy Hook orAurora, often involve the implementation of gun-control measures or a greater police state.

There are, of course, many different versions of false flag attacks and none fit into a tightly crafted classification beyond the generalized term “false flag.” As stated above, some false flags may indeed embrace an element of each of the different versions listed previously both in terms of methodology and purpose.

With that in mind, it is also true that, while massive false flag attacks are always a possibility, it has been the small-scale false flags coming in the form of “shooters” (most often of the “lone gunmen” variety), that have been used most effectively by the ruling class and its mouthpiece media outlets in recent years. While the scale of the attacks have diminished, their frequency has rapidly increased.

However, due to a growing competent alternative media and researching community, as fast as the false flag attacks are launched, a volley of deconstructions of the official narratives are being provided. While many criticisms of the official version of events are wildly incredible, bordering on paranoia and impossibility, there are capable outlets and researchers who are able to expose the false flag for what it is. Indeed, it is for this reason that the false flag has suffered serious setbacks in terms of its effectiveness as of late and why it continues to do so.

Because the false flag attack is designed to instill fear, panic, and a guided response from the general public, it is important to deconstruct the narrative of that attack as it is presented. However, we cannot simply be consumed by attempting to expose and deconstruct every false flag attack that comes our way. We cannot ignore the greater issues, the winnable battles, and the demands we must be making simply to expose each and every false flag. We cannot ignore the forest fire to extinguish the occasional burning bush. The false flag, after all, is only the symptom of the disease.

For that reason, it is important to enable the general public to recognize the false flag itself, not simply the questionable elements of a particular false flag which will soon be overtaken by a new one. We must train both ourselves and the public to recognize the signs of the false flag when it happens and thus render the attack neutral.

The following is a list of some of the most common elements of the false flag attack which should immediately be looked at in the event of some other incident that pulls at the heartstrings and emotions of the general public.

1. High Profile Event: The first question to ask would be “Is this a high profile incident?” The answer, of course, is fairly obvious. If an attack takes place at the World Trade Center complex causing the buildings to explode and collapse, or if it takes place at the White House, or Pentagon, it is clearly high profile. Thus, the location can be factored in. In other circumstances, however, the act itself may be the major factor such as the case in Sandy Hook Elementary School, a nationally unimportant location but a horrific act that made national news nonetheless. The most important factor, of course, is media attention. Regardless of location or the act, if the media picks up the story and runs it simultaneously on all major mainstream channels, the incident can be considered a “high profile event.”

2. Changing Stories: In informed researching circles, it is well-known that the information that comes out shortly after the event is usually the most reliable. This is not to discount the existence of confusion related to panicked reports coming from eyewitnesses and the like. However, the information coming out early on has not yet been subjected to the top-down media revision that will inevitably take place as the story becomes molded to fit the narrative pushed by the individuals who either directed the attack at the higher levels or at least have connections with those who are able to control the manner in which various media outlets report the event.

For instance, in times of false flag attacks, the initial reports may point to 5 gunmen. Very shortly after, reports may only mention two. Only a few hours after the attack, however, all references to more than one gunmen are removed entirely, with only the “lone gunman” story remaining. Any other mention of additional gunmen after this point is ridiculed as “conspiracy theory.”

3. Simultaneous Drills: One hallmark of the false flag operation is the running of drills shortly before or during the actual attack. Many times, these drills will involve the actual sequence of events that takes place during the real life attack . These drills have been present on large scale false flags such as 9/11 as well as smaller scale attacks like the Aurora shooting.

For instance, as Webster Tarpley documents in his book 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made In USA, at least 46 drills were underway in the months leading up to 9/11 and on the morning of the attack. These 46 drills were all directly related to the events which took place on 9/11 in some way or other.[1] Likewise, the 7/7 bombings in London were running drills of exactly the same scenario that was occurring at exactly the same times and locations.

Although one reason may take precedence over the other depending on the nature and purpose of the operation drills are used by false flag operators for at least two reasons. One such purpose is the creation of intentional confusion if the drill is taking place during the actual attack. The other, more effective aspect, however, is using the drill as a cloak to plan the attack or even “go live” when it comes time to launch the event. Even more so, it gives the individuals who are involved in the planning of the event an element of cover, especially with the military/intelligence agency’s tight chain of command structure and need-to-know basis. If a loyal military officer or intelligence agent stumbles upon the planning of the attack, that individual can always be told that what he has witnessed is nothing more than the planning of a training exercise. This deniability continues all the way through to the actual “going live” of the drill. After the completion of the false flag attack, Coincidence Theory is used to explain away the tragic results.[2]

4. Cui Bono? The most important question to ask immediately after any high profile incident is “cui bono?” or “Who benefits?” If one is able to see a clear benefit to any government, corporation, or bank, then the observer becomes capable of seeing through the false flag attack immediately. Many of these questions can be answered by taking a closer look at the behavior of these organizations prior to the attack and shortly thereafter.[3]

For instance, the presence of legislation which would stand little chance of being passed before the attack but which is quickly passed (or at least heavily pushed) afterwards is one clue that the conveniently timed attack was actually a false flag. Patriot Act style legislation was actually written before 9/11 but stood little chance of passing in Congress due to the political climate in the United States at the time. After 9/11, however, the Patriot Act was fast-tracked through both Houses of Congress with virtually no debate and with the blessing of the American people.

Returning to 9/11, it is a fact that a number of individuals who were in positions of power within the US government during the time the attack occurred had desperately wanted to invade several Middle Eastern countries.[4] After the attacks, a war psychosis gripped the ruling class of the United States and the American public followed right along.

After the Underwear Bombing, we saw the rollout of the TSA full-body scanners, a technology which would not have been readily accepted prior to the incident and subsequent propaganda campaign. However, the scanners had been purchased one year earlier by a firm owned by Michael Chertoff, the former head of Homeland Security.

Likewise, in terms of the LAX shooting, TSA purchased 3.5 million dollars worth of ammunition in August. Yet, in August, TSA was not an armed agency. After the LAX shooting, however, talk has turned to arming the agency, thus indicating possible foreknowledge on the part of someone higher up in the governmental structure.

Of course, the same can be said for the explosion of crazed lone-gunman shooting sprees that took place all across the United States amid propaganda pushes for increased gun control measures.

5. Unanswered Questions: Another hallmark of the false flag operation is relatively obvious – the presence of unanswered questions regarding the details of the attack, the perpetrators, the motive and so on. Although the media narrative that takes shape soon after the attack will ignore these questions, they will inevitably remain if observers are able to think for themselves and focus only on the information. An example of such questions would be Building 7 on 9/11 or the questions of additional shooters at Aurora and Sandy Hook.

6. Case is quickly closed: Once an acceptable patsy and cover story is chosen by the media, all other opinions and questions are refused air time. Nothing that even slightly contradicts the official story is acknowledged as legitimate. Once this happens, the patsy, if still alive (in rare circumstances) is charged, prosecuted, and convicted in a largely secret or shadowy proceeding. In most cases, the suspect is killed in the process or shortly after the fact thus negating any first hand contradiction of the official narrative. Either way, the case is closed very soon after the event.

7. Suspects’ Connection to CIA, FBI, or Other Intelligence Agencies: One key aspect suggesting a false flag that should be looked for soon after the attack is any possible connection the suspect or group of suspects may have had with intelligence agencies. A connection to any one of these organizations and institutions may go some length in explaining how the attack was coordinated, the motivation of the perpetrators, the actual involvement (or not) of the suspects, and who actually directed the operation. For instance, on 9/11, many of the alleged hijackers had previously had close contact with the FBI, CIA, and other high-level intelligence agencies (both home and abroad).[5] Likewise, the Tsarnaev brothers who have been accused of masterminding and carrying out the Boston Bombing had ties to the FBI before the attack.

In many instances, connections to certain military agencies and communities should serve as the same red flag as connections to intelligence agencies since these institutions have largely been blended together.

8. Convenient Scapegoat: One clue leading an informed observer to suspect a false flag attack is the existence of the convenient scapegoat. Any false flag operation will have a carefully crafted narrative complete with a group of individuals set up for demonization. The OKC bombing had McVeigh and thus, “right-wing extremists” and “militias.” On 9/11, the group was Muslims. In many of the domestic shooting sprees, the demonization was set for gun owners. With the recent LAX shooting, the “perpetrator” was an “anti-government conspiracy theorist.” In the instance of the false flag, a readily identified pasty will exhibit all or most of the aspects of the group and social demographic set to be demonized.

9. Media Promotes A Narrative Against Scapegoat Groups and/or An Agenda To Take Liberties: One clue suggesting a false flag is that, immediately after the attack and after the perpetrators have been “identified” by “officials” and the media, corporate media outlets begin not only demonizing the demographic group to which the “perpetrator” belongs, but begins promoting “solutions” in order to prevent such an attack from ever happening again. This narrative will always involve the erosion of liberties, the greater implementation of a police state, a specific economic policy, or a march to war.

Simply put, the media promotes the PROBLEM, allows for and guides the REACTION, and then provides the pre-determined SOLUTION.

10. Government Begins to “Take Action” Against the Scapegoat or Moves Along the Lines of the Media Narrative: After a healthy dose of propaganda from mainstream media outlets regurgitating the terror of the attack, the perpetrator, and the police state solutions, the Government then begins to take action. Political speeches are given in order to capitalize on the fear and anger felt by the public and in order to reinforce the idea that government is there to act as protector. Political solutions are then offered as bills, executive orders, or political mandates whether it is the curtailment of the 4th Amendment, gun control, or military strikes on a foreign country.

11. Clues in pop media: Pop media clues, more accurately described as predictive programming, is more easily identified in hindsight. This often involves the portrayal of the very incident occurring in a movie or television show. In other instances, it may involve the conspicuous or even inconspicuous placement of random details of the attack into movies and television. For instance,The Lone Gunman, a short-lived spinoff of the X-Files carried a storyline in which a passenger plane was hijacked via remote control and was being flown into the World Trade Center towers. In The Dark Knight Rises, a very curious reference was made to Sandy Hook with a map of Newtown, Connecticut on the wall.

Conclusion

Although it is extremely important to educate the general public as to the nature and purpose of false flags, education cannot be a goal in and of itself. The public not only needs to know the truth surrounding specific false flag events as they appear, they need to understand the methodology of identifying them on their own and in real time.

Creating a culture in which the general public is able to recognize the false flag attack as it is happening, without the need for a massive push by alternative media sources, researchers, or activists, is the first step in not only rendering the tactic useless, but in corralling the force of the people toward true action or, at the very least, creating a culture in which that force cannot be corralled by the ruling class.

While false flag attacks must be addressed, we must not allow ourselves to be so easily diverted off a path of political action, mass mobilization, and the making of real attainable demands.

Notes:

[1] Tarpley, Webster Griffin. 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made In USA. 5th Edition. Progressive Press. 2011.
[2] Tarpley, Webster Griffin. 9/11 Synthetic Terror: Made In USA. 5th Edition. Progressive Press. 2011.
[3] Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11. Interlink Publishing Group. 1stEdition. 2004.
[4] Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11. Interlink Publishing Group. 1st Edition. 2004.
[5] Griffin, David Ray. The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11. Interlink Publishing Group. 1st Edition. 2004.

Recently from Brandon Turbeville:

Brandon Turbeville is an author out of Florence, South Carolina. He has a Bachelor’s Degree from Francis Marion University and is the author of six books, Codex Alimentarius — The End of Health Freedom7 Real ConspiraciesFive Sense Solutions and Dispatches From a Dissident, volume 1and volume 2, and The Road to Damascus: The Anglo-American Assault on Syria. Turbeville has published over 275 articles dealing on a wide variety of subjects including health, economics, government corruption, and civil liberties. Brandon Turbeville’s podcast Truth on The Tracks can be found every Monday night 9 pm EST at UCYTV.  He is available for radio and TV interviews. Please contact activistpost (at) gmail.com. 

 

%d bloggers like this: