Police are Creating Fake Social Media Accounts to Monitor You — Here’s How to ID a Fake Account

The American Intelligence Report

Police departments around the nation have taken predictive crime prevention to a new level by building fake user accounts, as well as posing as genuine people to gather information about local events, Tech.Mic reports.

Local agents put on a “digital mask” and pose as “members of the community,” allowing them to gather personal information about suspects they consider a high risk of being involved in a future crime or have existing charges.

In a social media guide for law enforcement officials published by the Justice Department, the document details, officers create fraudulent profiles even though Facebook officially bans the practice. 

Departments are also beginning to use predictive analytical policing software, allowing authorities to patrol local neighborhoods based on social networking posts. If people are emotionally upset and publish it on social media networks, the software program labels the neighborhood high risk alerting law enforcement to occupy those areas.

In a recent article published by Business Insider one police officer answered a LexisNexis survey that he “was looking for a suspect related to drug charges for over a month. When I looked him up on Facebook and requested him as a friend from a fictitious profile, he accepted,” and “he kept ‘checking in’ everywhere he went, so I was able to track him down very easily.”

Another respondent wrote, “Social media is a valuable tool because you are able to see the activities of a target in his comfortable stage. Targets brag and post … information in reference to travel, hobbies, places visited, appointments, circle of friends, family members, relationships, actions, etc.” 

Out of 1,221 federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies that use social media today, more than 80% of the responding officials said social media was a powerful tool for crime-fighting and that “creating personas or profiles on social media outlets for use in law enforcement activities is ethical.”

The NYPD has even gone to the extreme to use photos of young attractive women on Facebook to spy on gang members, the New York Times reported.

No one seems to know if agencies use these photos with or without the consent of the person photographed. 

Bradley Shear, an attorney and expert in social media and the law, is not quite sure how the justice system will handle challenges made to this style of policing. However, noting that “police often pose as prostitutes or drug dealers to catch criminals.”

We also know the government hires agents to sway political opinion under its notorious Operation Mocking Bird Program.

How to identify a fake user account…

1. Account was made recently 2015, 2016.
2. Account has no history published for earlier years, but Facebook says they have been a member since 2009, etc.
3. Most fake accounts have 1 image or no real profile photo of the person. Some may only have a select few photos over a long span of time. A well seasoned user would have more photos posted over a long period of time. A fake account may have 7-10 photos posted on the same day.
4. User has very few friends in common and or friends in general.
5. There is little to no interaction on their page with friends, no comments, likes or responses over their long time line.
6. Profile picture seems to good to be true, that hot model added you today! They even messaged you and are interested in you!
7. When in doubt use reverse image search. Take their image and see if it is a real person or not.
8. When in doubt deny, deny, deny.

Published by The American Intelligence Report. 

Man Gets Prison Sentence For Collecting Rainwater On His Property

Against Crony Capitalism

 

Missed this one. Here you go. Good luck to this guy.

In places this country appears to be going nuts. This was not an industrial operation. This was about sustainable living. But some people in our government seem increasingly in agreement with Benito Mussolini who said, “All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.”

Even rainwater.

(From YourNewsWire)

Gary Harrington of Eagle Point, Ore., says he plans to appeal his conviction in Jackson County (Ore.) Circuit Court on nine misdemeanor charges under a 1925 law for having what state water managers called “three illegal reservoirs” on his property – and for filling the reservoirs with rainwater and snow runoff.

“The government is bullying,” Harrington told CNSNews.com in an interview Thursday.

Read more

The Cult of Killary: Her followers blindly overlook her sociopathic behavior and complete lack of qualifications for president

Camille Paglia
Salon

What is it with the Hillary cult?

As a lifelong Democrat who will be enthusiastically voting for Bernie Sanders in next week's Pennsylvania primary, I have trouble understanding the fuzzy rosy filter through which Hillary fans see their champion. So much must be overlooked or discounted—from Hillary's compulsive money-lust and her brazen indifference to normal rules to her conspiratorial use of shadowy surrogates and her sociopathic shape-shifting in policy positions for momentary expedience.

Hillary's breathtaking lack of concrete achievements or even minimal initiatives over her long public career doesn't faze her admirers a whit. They have a religious conviction of her essential goodness and blame her blank track record on diabolical sexist obstructionists. When at last week's debate Hillary crassly blamed President Obama for the disastrous Libyan incursion that she had pushed him into, her acolytes hardly noticed. They don't give a damn about international affairs—all that matters is transgender bathrooms and instant access to abortion.

I'm starting to wonder, given the increasing dysfunction of our democratic institutions, if the Hillary cult isn't perhaps registering an atavistic longing for monarchy. Or perhaps it's just a neo-pagan reversion to idolatry, as can be felt in the Little Italy street festival scene of The Godfather, Part II, where devout pedestrians pin money to the statue of San Rocco as it is carried by in procession. There was a strange analogy to that last week, when Sanders supporters satirically showered Hillary's motorcade with dollar bills as she arrived at George Clooney's luxe fund-raiser in Los Angeles.

The gushy indulgence around Hillary in the Manhattan media was typified by Vanessa Friedman's New York Times piece, "Hillary Clinton's Message in a Jacket," after last week's debate. Evidently oblivious to how she was undermining the rote sexism plank in the Clinton campaign platform, Friedman praised Hillary for "playing the clothing card" against Sanders: Hillary's long white jacket made her look like "New York's white knight," riding to the rescue.

Gee, that sure wasn't my reaction. My first thought was: "Why is Hillary wearing a lab coat?" My second was: "Isn't this a major gaffe—reminding people of abortion clinics?" My third was: "The big belted look is not recommended for those broad in the beam." For all the complaints about an alleged higher scrutiny suffered by women candidates, affluent politicians like Hillary can afford glam squads of stylists and an infinite range of clothing choices, hairstyles, and cosmetic aids. Male candidates with their boring cropped hair and sober suits fade into the woodwork when the queen bee flies in.

The protective major media phalanx around Hillary certainly extends to her health issues, which only the Drudge Report has had the courage to flag. In assessing possible future occupants of the White House, the public has an inalienable right to know. I was incredulous at the passive gullibility of the media, including the New York Times, last July, when a woman internist, identified as Hillary's doctor, released a summary letter about her health that was lacking in the specifics one would normally expect in medical records. Does anyone really think that world-renowned Hillary, whose main residence for years has been in Washington and not Chappaqua, has as her primary physician an obscure young internist in Mount Kisco, New York? It's ludicrous on the face of it.

And what about that persistent cough? "Allergy season," the hacking Hillary claimed on a New York radio show this week. ("You all right? Any mouth to mouth CPR?" joked a host.) I'm just a Ph.D., not an M.D., but I'll put my Miss Marple hat on here. Am I the only one who noticed Hillary's high-wrap collar, pallid, puffy face, and bulging eyes during her choleric New Hampshire primary concession speech in February? (Another unusually high collar followed the next morning.)

My tentative theory is that Hillary may have sporadic flare-ups of goiter, worsened under stress. Coughing is a symptom. High collars mask a swollen throat. In serious cases, an operation may be necessary. Is this chronic thyroid condition disqualifying in a presidential candidate? Certainly not in my view, but I don't like being lied to—by candidates, campaign staffs, or their media sycophants.

Hillary's road map to the Democratic nomination was written by "Tricky Dick" Nixon, who after his acrimonious defeat in the 1962 California gubernatorial race, doggedly restored his standing in the GOP by doing the "rubber-chicken circuit," building up the grass-roots connections that allowed him to win the White House six years later. Similarly, Hillary has spent the years since her 2008 loss to Obama in deepening and tightening her relationships with state and local Democratic politicians, community leaders, and urban ministers nationwide—for whom she has assets of infinite largesse.

When pro-Hillary media taunt Bernie Sanders about what his campaign has or has not financially contributed to lower-level Democratic races, they are foolishly exposing Hillary's modus operandi. Nixon's rubber chicken has turned into one mighty gilded bird. 

The Brussels Terror Attacks: Fake Videos and Images. “The Man in the Hat”

Prof Michel Chossudovsky 
Global Research

After a month of exhaustive police investigations, the Belgian authorities have identified and arrested the alleged (surviving) terror mastermind of the airport bombing, the “man in the hat” Mohamed Abrini. The other four alleged terrorists involved in the kamikaze bombing attacks at the airport and the metro station are reported dead. 

According to reports, Abrini was identified on a Brussels airport still photo released by one or more airport video security surveillance CCTV cameras.

This photo –which identifies three of the terror suspects– has become a central piece of evidence in the police investigation.

In this still photo, the mystery “man in the hat” allegedly Mohamed Abrini is seen accompanying the two alleged suicide bombers, who according to reports blew themselves up in Brussels airport.

Moreover, Abrini happens to be, according to French police investigators, the main surviving suspect of the Paris November attacks.

The official story is that the attacks in both Paris and Brussels were ordered by the ISIS, which just so happens to be supported by Turkey and Saudi Arabia in close liaison with Washington and NATO headquarters in Brussels. (The issue of US-NATO-Israel support of the Islamic State is amply documented).

According to media reports:

The revelation that a Paris attacks suspect escorted two of the Brussels bombers to their deaths at the city’s airport is the strongest sign yet that the Islamic State attackers who brought mayhem to both European cities — killing a total of 162 people — were intimately linked. (See Guardian April 9, 2016)

Abrini is said to have confessed “his presence at the crime scene,” according to the official communique.

The Authenticity of the Still Photo of the Three alleged Terrorists at Brussels Airport 

Our analysis below will largely focus on the authenticity of the still photo allegedly from the Brussels airport CCTV surveillance cameras.  CCTV systems are able to to take high resolution images on a time lapse basis.  The still picture could also have taken by closed-circuit digital photography (CCDP), which is used to generate still digital images.

Read more

See also:

The Brussels Attacks: What is True, What is Fake? Three Daesh Suspects at Brussels AirportBy Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 25, 2016 
Fake Video Used in News Coverage of Brussels Terror Attacks By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 22, 2016 
Media Manipulation: More Fake Video Reports of the Brussels Terror Attacks By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, March 23, 2016

Washington’s Fake War on ISIS “Moves” to Libya

New Eastern Outlook

Libya is one place the “Islamic State’s” sponsors believe Russia can’t get them… In 2011, a NATO coalition led by the United States used its own engineered regional campaign of political destabilization, the “Arab Spring,” as a pretext to militarily intervene in first Libya directly, and in a more indirect way, Syria. US and European forces also “quietly” intervened in several other nations, including Mali and the Ivory Coast amid this regional conflagration.

Even in 2011, it was clear to geopolitical analysts that military intervention in Libya was an attempt to divide and destroy the country, giving the US and its collaborators a base of operations to further disrupt and reorder the Middle East and North Africa region (MENA). Almost immediately after US-led strikes on Libya coordinated with terrorist factions on the ground successfully overthrew the Libyan government, weapons and fighters were sent to Syria via NATO-member Turkey. CNN’s 2012 article, “Libya rebels move onto Syrian battlefield,” would report that:

Their war for freedom in Libya may be over, but almost a year after they won the battle for the Libyan capital, a group of fighters have a new battlefield: Syria. Under the command of one of Libya’s most well known rebel commanders, Al-Mahdi al-Harati, more than 30 Libyan fighters have made their way into Syria to support the Free Syrian Army rebels in their war against President Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

It is difficult to believe CNN’s inaccuracy in its report was not intentional. Far from a “war for freedom,” it is clear that Al-Mahdi al-Harati led just one of many proxy armies raised by the United States and its Persian Gulf allies. The group espouses an extremist tinge propagated by US-ally Saudi Arabia, and in no way represents either the Libyan people, nor the people of Syria it claimed to be fighting on behalf of. Al-Harati is now “mayor” of Tripoli, and is just one example which goes a long way in explaining the continuous chaos that has engulfed the country. Quite literally, foreign-funded terrorists are running the country. Ironically, the same CNN that in 2012 celebrated the spreading “war for freedom,” would report in a more recent article titled, “ISIS fighters in Libya surge as group suffers setbacks in Syria, Iraq,” that:

There may now be up to 6,500 ISIS fighters in Libya, twice the number previously thought, according to several U.S. intelligence officials.  They attributed the increase to the U.S. analysis that ISIS is diverting more fighters to Libya from Syria — and from Turkey when they cannot get into Syria.

It is ironic because the so-called “Islamic State” (IS) is using precisely the same logistical, financial and political networks to flow back into Libya that CNN’s “freedom fighters” used to get to Syria in the first place. In fact, it is quite clear Libya is simply reabsorbing the mercenary forces organized and sent to Syria in part through direct US-backing in the Libyan terror capital of Benghazi since late 2011 onward.

Read more

Israel's psychopathic society: "Death to the Arabs" rally draws thousands in support of soldier who murdered wounded Palestinian

Israeli medic: "He's not dead, shoot him in the head" 

***

Sott.net via The Electronic Intifada

In Tel Aviv's Yitzhak Rabin Square on Tuesday evening, thousands of Israelis rallied in support of Elor Azarya, the soldier filmed executing a gravely wounded Palestinian last month.

Rally-goers shouted anti-Arab slogans and attacked persons perceived as being leftists or journalists.

Hours earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu issued a call for leniency for the soldier.
Times of Israel reporter Judah Ari Gross tweeted that an activist from B'Tselem, the human rights group that released the video of Azarya shooting and killing Abd al-Fattah al-Sharif, had to be escorted out of Rabin Square by police in order to "protect his life."
Journalist attacked

Reporter David Sheen, a contributor to The Electronic Intifada, was set upon by a mob and then ordered to leave the area by police after he was accused of association with B'Tselem.

Sheen told The Electronic Intifada he arrived at Rabin Square before the rally began but as several hundred people had already gathered. Some asked him to film them with their signs supporting Azarya.

At that point, Sheen said, a man began asking him why he was filming. Other members of the crowd quickly began joining in, shouting at Sheen, "Are you B'Tselem? Go to Gaza!"
Sheen said he tried to remain calm and exit the square but the increasingly agitated mob followed him and began to surround and kick him.
He was then grabbed by a police officer and extracted. Sheen said police took his camera equipment and questioned him. After he told them he was a journalist, they said he either had to leave immediately or face a night in jail. Sheen said he chose to leave and that police returned his equipment.
The police were effectively acting accomplices to the mob, Sheen observed, ensuring the removal of journalists who could document what occurred.

Read more 

 

Obama Went From Condemning Saudis for Abuses to Arming Them to the Teeth

The Intercept

 

In the 2002 speech against the Iraq War that helped propel him to the presidency, then-state Sen. Barack Obama denounced not just the looming invasion of Iraq, but also human rights abuses by our “so-called allies” in Saudi Arabia:

Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

And he spoke out against the U.S.’s role as weapons supplier to the world:

Let’s fight to make sure … that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

Thirteen years later, Obama is making his fourth trip to Riyadh, having presided over record-breaking U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia while offering only muted criticism of the kingdom’s human rights violations.

And don’t expect the president to speak up while he’s there. Obama last traveled to Saudi Arabia in January 2015, cutting short his trip to India after the passing of the former Saudi king, Abdullah ibn-Abdulaziz al-Saud. During that visit, Obama was criticized for not speaking out against the flogging of prominent Saudi blogger and dissident Raif Badawi. In 2014, Badawi was sentenced to 10 years in prison and 1,000 lashes for “insulting Islam” and “going beyond the realm of obedience,” with the first flogging session taking place weeks before Obama arrived.

In January, after a record-setting year for Saudi beheadings, Saudi authorities set off protests by executing Shia cleric and regime critic Nimr al-Nimr. U.S. response was muted. The State Department merely said the execution “risks exacerbating sectarian tensions at a time when they urgently need to be reduced” – and then fell silent on the repression of the following protests.

Last year, amazingly enough, Saudi Arabia became the head of the 47-member U.N. Human Rights Council. When a State Department spokesman was asked for his reaction, he responded: “Frankly, we would welcome it. We’re close allies.”

Obama administration officials have not offered on-the-record explanations for why Saudi human rights abuses don’t play a greater role in U.S. policy. But in the trove of documents released from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server, Clinton acknowledges that the U.S. government holds the Saudis to a different standard.

In one email chain, dated June 22, 2011, aide Cheryl Mills forwarded Clinton a New York Times opinion column in which Maureen Dowd mused that it would “have been thrilling” if Clinton, on a recent trip to Saudi Arabia, had “smacked around the barbaric Saudi men who force women to huddle under a suffocating black tarp.” Clinton asked Mills what she thought about the column and Mills remarked that “we/DOS/USG may have different standards we apply when it is pushing Saudi.” “No doubt about that!” Clinton responded.

Obama’s visit this week will be taking place in the shadow of an ongoing U.S.-supplied, Saudi-led campaign in Yemen, where Saudi airstrikes have killed thousands of civilians.

Since the Saudi coalition began its campaign last March, it has relied on U.S.-produced aircraft, “smart bombs,” guided missiles, and internationally banned cluster bombs. A recent report from Human Rights Watch, for instance, found evidence that the coalition used American bombs in a March 15 attack on a market in northwestern Yemen where nearly a hundred civilians were killed. As Iona Craig reported in November, Yemen’s architectural history is also being destroyed by bombs sold to Saudi Arabia by the United States. 

According to a new poll released earlier this month, 82 percent of Yemenis between the ages of 18 and 24 now view the United States as an enemy.

On Wednesday, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., introduced a bill blocking arms transfers unless the State Department certifies that Saudi military is taking every “feasible precaution to reduce the risk of harm to civilians.”

But arms sales in general – and specifically to Saudi Arabia – have been a consistent element of Obama’s tenure.

“Many Americans would be surprised to learn that his administration has brokered more arms deals than any administration of the past 70 years, Republican or Democratic,” said William Hartung, a senior advisor to Secure Assistance Monitor, a progressive group that tracks arms sales.

The primary vehicle for international arms transfers is the Pentagon’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program; in 2015, the FMS program hit a record high of $46.6 billion.

The Saudis have been major clients. “During the first six years of the Obama administration, the United States entered into agreements to sell over $190 billion in weapons and training to Saudi Arabia. And in 2015, the administration announced its intention to sell another $22 billion to the Kingdom, parts of which have yet to be embedded in formal agreements,” Hartung said.

To put that in context, in his first five years as president, Obama sold $30 billion more weapons than President Bush did during his entire eight years as commander-in-chief.

Murphy expressed hopes that Obama would press the Saudi king on his conduct in Yemen. “Right now, the Saudi’s focus on Yemen is distracting them from the war against violent extremists,” Murphy said in a statement emailed to The Intercept. “And personally, I hope President Obama takes this opportunity to have a frank discussion with Saudi Arabia about their continued backing for religious and educational institutions around the world that promote sectarianism and intolerance.”

But many activists are losing hope that the U.S. relationship with Saudi Arabia will change.

“The reality is the U.S. foreign policy establishment including the State Department and Pentagon are happy with the Saudi relationship,” said Stephen McInerney, executive director of the Project On Middle East Democracy. “In order to change course, meaningfully, it would take real leadership and investment in doing so, and President Obama — although his instincts might be that the Saudis are problematic in a number of ways — he hasn’t shown any serious desire to bring about a change of policy.”

Forced child prostitution case: Netherlands elite, royalty under microscope

NL Times

A number of important Dutch people were named in the Amsterdam court on Monday, where witnesses are being questioned in a case surrounding an extensive network of child sexual abuse and child prostitution in Amsterdam in the 1980’s. According to the first witness, former mayor Ed van Thijn, former Minister Onno Rudding and Prince Claus were all involved in pedophile-prostitution to some extent.

Koos van Woudenberg is the first of nine witnesses that will testify under oath this week. According to Van Woudenberg, he was abused in an Amsterdam apartment while he was still in primary school, according to AD reporter Koen Voskuil tweeting live from within the courtroom.

In that Amsterdam apartment, which belonged to now deceased professor Ger van Roon, sexual acts were committed with young boys, Van Woudenberg told the court. The witness stated that he saw former mayor Ed van Thijn, top Justice official Joris Demmink and former Minister Onno Rudding in the apartment, performing sexual acts with boys.

Demmink was there almost every time, Van Thijn at least twice. Van Woudenberg had oral sex with Rudding. He also claims that he saw Prince Claus at a bar “in relation with young boys.” Prince Claus was also in Van Roon’s apartment.

The second witness to be questioned was Raphael Beth, a former employee of public health service GGD, back then GG&GD, in Amsterdam. The now 70 year old Beth worked as a field employee for the service from the late 80’s. He had a good overview of the boys involved because they came to him with their problems. He also visited visited the six or seven youth-brothels in the city at least once a week, to talk to the owners and check on the boys.

Read More

Government Officials Admit to ECONOMIC False Flag Operations

Washington's Blog

False flag attacks don’t just involve physical deaths and wars …

They also involve faked economic events and financial casualties.

For example, two officials of the International Monetary Fund said last month that they needed the threat of an imminent financial catastrophe to force other players into accepting its measures such as cutting Greek pensions and working conditions, and – as the Greek government put it (via Bloomberg) – the IMF was “considering a plan to cause a credit event in Greece and destabilize Europe.”

High-level officials also admitted to intentionally destroying their own nations’ economies in order to “justify” structural economic reforms.

For example, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and Japanese central bank officials admitted that they kept Japan’s economy in a deflationary crisis to promote “structural reform” which would allow the Japanese economy to be looted by foreign interests. Japanese central bank officials admitted the same thing.

Japan Times noted in 2003:

Official statements by BOJ executives [reveal]: The BOJ can be helpful by not being helpful. The princes recognized that such structural change was so opposed to the special and general interests of most Japanese — citizens, businessmen, bureaucrats and politicians — that it could be achieved only by crippling the economy and preventing its recovery.

Something similar happened in Thailand and the EU.

Indeed, the former head of the Bank of England said  last month that the depression in the EU was more or less a “deliberate” policy choice.

And an economist at insurance giant AIG – and former head of the European Commission’s unit responsible for the European Monetary System and monetary policies – said in 2008 that what European leaders wanted was to create a crisis to force introduction of “European economic government.”

Indeed, Greece (more), Italy, Ireland (and here) and other European countries have all lost their national sovereignty to the ECB and the other members of the Troika.

ECB head Mario Draghi said in 2012:

The EU should have the power to police and interfere in member states’ national budgets.

***

“I am certain, if we want to restore confidence in the eurozone, countries will have to transfer part of their sovereignty to the European level.”

***

“Several governments have not yet understood that they lost their national sovereignty long ago. Because they ran up huge debts in the past, they are now dependent on the goodwill of the financial markets.”

Read more
 

Saudi Arabia’s Alleged Involvement in the 9/11 Attacks. “Red-Herring”, Propaganda Ploy

Comment: Let's remind ourselves that this had been the plan from the start in order to set Saudi Arabia up, gain control of its resources and deflect attention away from the Anglo-American Establishment and Israel's involvement in the 9/11 attacks. 

---------------------

Prof. Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research 

The 9/11 narrative in the mainstream media has taken on a new slant. The FBI is now accused of whitewashing Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks. 

The alleged Saudi involvement in supporting Osama bin Laden, not to mention the classified 28 pages of the 9/11 joint Congressional inquiry pertaining to the insidious role of Saudi Arabia in supporting the hijackers is  part of a propaganda ploy. 

When the report of Joint Congressional Inquiry into 9/11 was released in December 2002, it was met with considerable skepticism. That skepticism grew for a period of time but then was reduced to speculation about what was contained in the 28 pages that had been redacted by the Bush White House.
Various U.S. government leaders have since suggested that the missing 28 pages point to Saudi Arabia’s complicity in the 9/11 crimes. However such musings fail to discuss other important issues, like the links between the Saudi regime and the Western deep state, or the fact that, from the start, even the Saudis were calling for the 28 pages to be released. Discussion of the missing 28 pages also omits mention of the highly suspicious nature of the Inquiry’s investigation and its leaders. (Kevin Ryan, The 9/11 Joint Congressional Inquiry and the 28 Missing Pages, Global Research, March 14, 2014

The report of the FBI 9/11 Review Commission (25 March 2015) has revealed circumstances which allegedly were withheld by the FBI from both the 9/11 Commission headed by former Jersey Governor Thomas Kean as well from the joint Senate House inquiry committee chaired by former Senator Bob Graham. Graham.

Read more

Barrie Trower on Wi-Fi in schools

Ron Paul: US Elections Are Rigged, Voting Simply Used to Pacify the Public

MINTPRESS

 

Clute, TX — Dr. Ron Paul says the American electoral system is rigged to keep “independent thinkers”from succeeding.

“I see elections as so much of a charade,” the former Texas congressman said during an April 11 appearance on RT America’s “The Fishtank.” “So much deceit goes on.”

Paul is no stranger to the twisted rules of the American presidential horse race. He ran for the highest office as a Libertarian in 1988, and in 2008 and 2012 as a Republican.

He arguably came closest to the nomination in 2012, when the GOP amended its party regulations to prevent the former Texas representative from stealing Mitt Romney’s thunder.

Rule 40(b) of “The Rules of the Republican Party” was changed so the Republican National Committee could “limit the visibility and power of libertarian-minded Texas Rep. Ron Paul at the convention and thus present a unified front behind Mitt Romney, the presumptive nominee,” according to David Byler, an elections analyst at RealClearPolitics. The rule requires that, in order to win the nomination, a candidate must have the support of a majority of delegates from eight states.

Although recent wins have tipped Sen. Ted Cruz past the cut off, the rule as written came close to helping Trump take the nomination. Paul warned that the GOP’s machinations to block Donald Trump are a sign of a corrupt, undemocratic system.

“I’ve worked on the assumption … for many, many decades, that whether there’s a Republican or a Democrat president, the people who want to keep the status quo seems to have their finger in the pot and can control things,” he said in the interview.

“They just get so nervous, though, if they have an independent thinker out there — whether it’s Sanders, or Trump or Ron Paul, they’re going to be very desperate to try to change things.”

Paul had nothing but scorn for Trump’s policies: “He’s offering us nothing new, and he’s going backward in many ways.”

He suggested that the 2016 election is “a lot more entertainment than anything else” because none of the candidates “have answers” to modern political problems.

Even so, Paul interprets the success of these outsider candidates as a sign that “more people are discovering that the system is all rigged and voting is just pacification for the voters and it really doesn’t count.”

“I don’t think there’s an easy way out for the establishment or the parties,” he noted, explaining that Democrats and Republicans would both rather risk “further alienation of the people” than allow a candidate to succeed who could shake up the system.

Paul recalled his own 2012 encounter with Rule 40(b) as an important political lesson for both himself and the American people.

“I was upset about it but didn’t want to waste too much energy being angry because this is the way the system works,” he said. “It’s a rotten system.”

Watch the entire interview below:

Robert De Niro speak candidly about "VAXXED" vaccine documentary, his son, autism - NBC 13-04-2016

See also: Robert De Niro wakes up and opens up on vaccines By Jon Rappaport

Swiss Bank Whistleblower Claims Panama Papers Was A CIA Operation

Liberty Blitzkrieg
Mike Krieger

Bradley Birkenfeld is the most significant financial whistleblower of all time, so you might think he’d be cheering on the disclosures in the new Panama Papers leaks. But today, Birkenfeld is raising questions about the source of the information that is shaking political regimes around the world.

“The CIA I’m sure is behind this, in my opinion,” Birkenfeld said.

– From the CNBC article: Swiss Banker Whistleblower: CIA Behind Panama Papers

Last Friday, I published a post titled, Was the Panama Papers “Leak” a Russian Intelligence Operation? Here’s some of what I wrote:

Initially, this seemed to be a theory worth exploring, but in the following days I’ve come to a far different conclusion. The primary divergence between what I currently believe and what Mr. Murray proposed is that I do not think the leaker was a genuine whistleblower motived by the public interest. I think the leaker was working on behalf of a sophisticated intelligence agency.

The fact that we seem to know nothing about “John Doe” concerns me. Say what you will about Edward Snowden, but he came out publicly shortly after his whistleblowing and offered himself up for the world to judge. His life, career and personality have been put on full display, and each and every one of us has had the opportunity to decide for ourselves whether his motivations were noble and pure or not.

With the Panama Papers’ “John Doe” we are given no such opportunity, and in fact, the whole thing reads very much like a script concocted by some big budget intelligence agency. Once I started coming around to this conclusion, the obvious choice was U.S. intelligence; given the lack of implications to powerful Americans, the clownishly desperate attempts to smear Putin, and the appearance of Soros, USAID, Ford Foundation, etc, linked organizations to the reporting.

So for someone who already thinks the whole Panama Papers story stinks to high heaven, a CIA link to the release seems obvious; but is it too obvious? Perhaps.

At this point, I want to make something perfectly clear. I do not profess to know the “real story” behind the Panama Papers. The truth is, nobody knows, except for John Doe and the people he was working for (or with). The only thing I feel fairly confident about is that the story we are being fed is not the real story. The more I read and reflect upon the very minor consequences of the leak thus far, the more I become convinced this was a geopolitical play by a powerful intelligence agency. At first, I assumed it was U.S. intelligence, but Mr. Gaddy puts forth a compelling theory. If this was the work of the CIA, it was an extremely sloppy and obvious hit job. On the other hand, if this was the work of Putin for the purposes of blackmail, it’s one of the most ingenious chess moves I’ve ever seen played on the global stage.

The main point I was trying to hammer home with that post was the fact that I did not believe the Panama Papers was an altruistic act of heroic whistleblowing, but that it was an intelligence operation. I went on to say that I thought the notion it was a Russian job was plausible merely because if it was indeed a CIA operation (as I initially suspected), we would have to accept that the agency is mind-bogglingly sloppy and clownish. Nevertheless, according to notorious swiss bank whistleblower, Bradley Birkenfeld, this is the work of the CIA.

CNBC reports:

Bradley Birkenfeld is the most significant financial whistleblower of all time, so you might think he’d be cheering on the disclosures in the new Panama Papers leaks. But today, Birkenfeld is raising questions about the source of the information that is shaking political regimes around the world.

Birkenfeld, an American citizen, was a banker working at UBS in Switzerland when he approached the U.S. government with information on massive amounts of tax evasion by Americans with secret accounts in Switzerland. By the end of his whistleblowing career, Birkenfeld had served more than two years in a U.S. federal prison, been awarded $104 million by the IRS for his information and shattered the foundations of more than a century of Swiss banking secrecy.

In an exclusive interview Tuesday from Munich, Birkenfeld said he doesn’t think the source of the 11 million documents stolen from a Panamanian law firm should automatically be considered a whistleblower like himself. Instead, he said, the hacking of the Panama City-based firm, called Mossack Fonseca, could have been done by a U.S. intelligence agency.  

“The CIA I’m sure is behind this, in my opinion,” Birkenfeld said. 

Birkenfeld pointed to the fact that the political uproar created by the disclosures have mainly impacted countries with tense relationships with the United States. “The very fact that we see all these names surface that are the direct quote-unquote enemies of the United States, Russia, China, Pakistan, Argentina and we don’t see one U.S. name. Why is that?” Birkenfeld said. “Quite frankly, my feeling is that this is certainly an intelligence agency operation.”

Asked why the U.S. would leak information that has also been damaging to U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, a major American ally, Birkenfeld said the British leader was likely collateral damage in a larger intelligence operation.

“If you’ve got NSA and CIA spying on foreign governments they can certainly get into a law firm like this,” Birkenfeld said. “But they selectively bring the information to the public domain that doesn’t hurt the U.S. in any shape or form. That’s wrong. And there’s something seriously sinister here behind this.”

This just further confirms my belief that this whole “leak” isn’t what we are being told. This is the work of an intelligence agency working on behalf of a particular government, not on behalf of the public. Don’t be duped.

The Sugar Conspiracy

Ian Leslie
The Guardian

In 1972, a British scientist sounded the alarm that sugar – and not fat – was the greatest danger to our health. But his findings were ridiculed and his reputation ruined. How did the world’s top nutrition scientists get it so wrong for so long? 

Robert Lustig is a paediatric endocrinologist at the University of California who specialises in the treatment of childhood obesity. A 90-minute talk he gave in 2009, titled Sugar: The Bitter Truth, has now been viewed more than six million times on YouTube. In it, Lustig argues forcefully that fructose, a form of sugar ubiquitous in modern diets, is a “poison” culpable for America’s obesity epidemic.

A year or so before the video was posted, Lustig gave a similar talk to a conference of biochemists in Adelaide, Australia. Afterwards, a scientist in the audience approached him. Surely, the man said, you’ve read Yudkin. Lustig shook his head. John Yudkin, said the scientist, was a British professor of nutrition who had sounded the alarm on sugar back in 1972, in a book called Pure, White, and Deadly.

“If only a small fraction of what we know about the effects of sugar were to be revealed in relation to any other material used as a food additive,” wrote Yudkin, “that material would promptly be banned.” The book did well, but Yudkin paid a high price for it. Prominent nutritionists combined with the food industry to destroy his reputation, and his career never recovered. He died, in 1995, a disappointed, largely forgotten man.

Perhaps the Australian scientist intended a friendly warning. Lustig was certainly putting his academic reputation at risk when he embarked on a high-profile campaign against sugar. But, unlike Yudkin, Lustig is backed by a prevailing wind. We read almost every week of new research into the deleterious effects of sugar on our bodies. In the US, the latest edition of the government’s official dietary guidelines includes a cap on sugar consumption. In the UK, the chancellor George Osborne has announced a new tax on sugary drinks. Sugar has become dietary enemy number one.

This represents a dramatic shift in priority. For at least the last three decades, the dietary arch-villain has been saturated fat. When Yudkin was conducting his research into the effects of sugar, in the 1960s, a new nutritional orthodoxy was in the process of asserting itself. Its central tenet was that a healthy diet is a low-fat diet. Yudkin led a diminishing band of dissenters who believed that sugar, not fat, was the more likely cause of maladies such as obesity, heart disease and diabetes. But by the time he wrote his book, the commanding heights of the field had been seized by proponents of the fat hypothesis. Yudkin found himself fighting a rearguard action, and he was defeated.

Not just defeated, in fact, but buried. When Lustig returned to California, he searched for Pure, White and Deadly in bookstores and online, to no avail. Eventually, he tracked down a copy after submitting a request to his university library. On reading Yudkin’s introduction, he felt a shock of recognition.

“Holy crap,” Lustig thought. “This guy got there 35 years before me.”

Read more

Green is the Color of Money

See also: 

• Dark Green I
• Dark Green II:    Roots of Eco-Fascism
• Dark Green III:  Eco-Nazi-Aristocracy
• Dark Green IV:  1001 Club, WWF & Green-Washing
• Dark Green V:    Elephants & Tigers
• Dark Green VI:  The Club of Rome and “World Problematique”  (1)
• Dark Green VII: The Club of Rome and “World Problematique”  (2)
• Dark Green VIII: Waldheim’s UN, Lebensräum and Sustainable Development
• Dark Green IX:    UN Agenda 21 and US Land Grab
• Dark Green X:       UN Agenda 21 and SMART Growth
• Dark Green XI:     Climate Change: Divide and Conquer All Over Again… (1)
• Dark Green XII:    Climate Change: Divide and Conquer All Over Again… (2)
• Dark Green XIII:   Geo-Engineering and Global Warming
• Dark Green XIV:    Global Cooling, Bilderberg and the Oceanic Wild Card
• Dark Green XV:     Goldman Sachs and Carbon Tax
• Dark Green XVI:    I’ve been Gored!
• Dark Green XVII:  The IPCC’s All Seeing Eye  (1)
• Dark Green XVIII:  The IPCC’s All Seeing Eye  (2)

Stunning Video Reveals Why You Shouldn't Trust Anything You See On Television

Zero Hedge

In recent years, many have voiced increasing concerns with their ability to place trust in official data, and have faith in conventional narratives.

And for good reason: just yesterday a University of Chicago finance professor, while being interviewed at the Ambrosetti Forum, said that it is all about preserving confidence and trust in a "rigged game": "if people are told enough by smart people on television that the economy has been fixed, and the market is a reflection of the fundamentals, then they’ll blindly support anything the Fed does."

But while the saying "don't believe everything [or anything] you read" and "trust but verify" may be more appropriate now than ever, the following video is an absolute stunner in its revelation of just how deep "real-time" media deception can truly go.

In a recently published paper by the Stanford lab of Matthias Niessner titled "Face2Face: Real-time Face Capture and Reenactment of RGB Videos", the authors show how disturbingly easy it is to take a surrogate actor and, in real time using everyday available tools, reenact their face and create the illusion that someone else, notably someone famous or important, is speaking. Even more disturbing: one doesn't need sophisticated equipment to create a "talking" clone - a commodity webcam and some software is all one needs to create the greatest of sensory manipulations.

From the paper abstract:

We present a novel approach for real-time facial reenactment of a monocular target video sequence (e.g., Youtube video). The source sequence is also a monocular video stream, captured live with a commodity webcam. Our goal is to animate the facial expressions of the target video by a source actor and re-render the manipulated output video in a photo-realistic fashion. To this end, we first address the under-constrained problem of facial identity recovery from monocular video by non-rigid model-based bundling. At run time, we track facial expressions of both source and target video using a dense photometric consistency measure. Reenactment is then achieved by fast and efficient deformation transfer between source and target. The mouth interior that best matches the re-targeted expression is retrieved from the target sequence and warped to produce an accurate fit. Finally, we convincingly re-render the synthesized target face on top of the corresponding video stream such that it seamlessly blends with the real-world illumination. We demonstrate our method in a live setup, where Youtube videos are reenacted in real time.

In simple English: famous "talking heads" speaking, chatting, interacting on TV can be practically anyone masquerading as said celebrity, and due to the real time conversion, they can talk, react, answer questions and generally emote so that the deception is flawless and totally convincing.

So striking is the real time effect of the conversion, the creators of this algorithm felt the need to clarify their intentions:

This demo video is purely research-focused and we would like to clarify the goals and intent of our work. Our aim is to demonstrate the capabilities of modern computer vision and graphics technology, and convey it in an approachable and fun way. We want to emphasize that computer-generated videos have been part in feature-film movies for over 30 years. Virtually every high-end movie production contains a significant percentage of synthetically-generated content (from Lord of the Rings to Benjamin Button). These results are hard to distinguish from reality and it often goes unnoticed that the content is not real. The novelty and contribution of our work is that we can edit pre-recorded videos in real-time on a commodity PC. Please also note that our efforts include the detection of edits in video footage in order to verify a clip’s authenticity. For additional information, we refer to our project website (see above). Hopefully, you enjoyed watching our video, and we hope to provide a positive takeaway :)

Sadly, while the creators of this stunning technology are forthcoming about their intentions, we doubt many others, those who seek to manipulate and deceive the mass population by ways of the one medium everyone can relate to, namely TV, will be.



And to appreciate just how profoundly deceptive this technology can (and will) be for mass media manipulative purposes, watch the shocking 6 minute clip below.

Armenia vs Azerbaijan, East vs West: Nagorno-Karabakh crisis and the NATO-Israeli connection

Corey Schink & Mike Tutundjian
Sott.net

Victoria 'F**K the EU' Nuland's visit to Azerbaijan last year had analysts wondering whether something was afoot. While Nuland surely wouldn't visit a country in order to oversee destabilization along Russia's border (she's never done than that before, right?), a heated conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan would do just that. The sudden and violent eruption of this 'frozen conflict' at a time of vastly improving Iranian-Azeri-Russian economic and military cooperation provides both the means and motive for NATO/Israeli forces - an opportunity to destabilize Russia and Iran in one blow. 

Historical background

Armenia and Azerbaijan have been at war two times over the Nagorno-Karabakh region - once in 1918 and the second time in 1988, in the last years of the Soviet Union. Azeris began massacring Armenians in Azerbaijan, causing a large number of people to flee. Then they attacked the ethnically Armenian Nagorno-Karabakh in Azerbaijan with a modernized military, attacking people trying to defend themselves with hunting rifles or whatever they could get hold of. The Azeris blockaded Nagorno-Karabakh and all transport and shipments into Armenia proper. Turkey joined the blockade, while Georgia was having its own civil war with Abkhazia, making border crossing there very difficult. So the only border Armenia had that wasn't blockaded (or impaired) was its Iranian one. That blockade is still in place today, although the Georgian border has generally calmed down.  

Read more