Are we not sick of the lies? 9/11 was an inside job, aided by the Israelis and Saudis!
They started off by saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Ten minutes later, they were reading the text of a resolution claiming the existence of “overwhelming evidence” that “pre-planted explosives . . . caused the destruction of the three World Trade Center buildings.”
And so it was, on July 24, 2019 — nearly 18 years after the horrific attacks that traumatized a nation and changed the world forever — the Franklin Square and Munson Fire District, which oversees a volunteer fire department serving a hamlet of 30,000 residents just outside of Queens, New York, became the first legislative body in the country to officially support a new investigation into the events of 9/11.
The resolution, drafted and introduced by Commissioner Christopher Gioia, was unanimously approved by the five commissioners. Members of the audience — including the families of fallen firefighters Thomas J. Hetzel and Robert Evans, both Franklin Square natives — joined in solemn but celebratory applause after the fifth “ay” was spoken.
Conversing with guests after the meeting, Commissioner Dennis Lyons remarked on the enormous and lasting toll that 9/11 has taken on the Franklin Square community. “We have a memorial — a piece of steel from the World Trade Center with 28 holes where the nuts and bolts used to go,” Lyons explained. “Every year on the 11th, we put a rose in each hole for the 24 Nassau County firefighters and four Franklin Square residents who died on 9/11.”
The impact of 9/11 on the community extends well beyond the victims and their grieving families. On September 12, 2001, the Franklin Square Fire Department was called in to assist with the massive rescue and recovery effort that was just getting underway. Countless members of the department, including Gioia and Commissioner Philip Malloy (then rank-and-file firefighters), spent weeks on the pile searching in vain for civilians and fellow responders who might still be alive. Today, Malloy is one of thousands suffering chronic health effects.
The department also lost one of its own in Thomas J. Hetzel, affectionately referred to as “Tommy” by the commissioners. Hetzel was a full-time member of the New York Fire Department in addition to serving as a volunteer firefighter in Franklin Square. A touching memorial to Hetzel was on display during the meeting, and Hetzel’s widow, parents, and sister were all in attendance.
“The Hetzel and Evans families were very appreciative of the proceedings,” Gioia commented the day after the meeting. “They know it’s an uphill struggle. But at least they have hope, which is something they haven’t had in a long time.”
The FBI has released a 15-page document warning of the dangers of “anti-government, identity-based, and fringe conspiracy theories.” The law enforcement agency says that these are “very likely to motivate some domestic extremists to commit criminal, sometimes violent activity.” The document seems to recommend increased social media and web censorship.
The FBI assesses anti-government, identity-based, and fringe political conspiracy theories very likely motivate some domestic extremists, wholly or in part, to commit criminal and sometimes violent activity. The FBI further assesses in some cases these conspiracy theories very likely encourage the targeting of specific people, places, and organizations, thereby increasing the Iikelihood of violence against these targets. These assessments are made with high confidenced, based on information from other law enforcement agencies, open-source information, court documents, human sources with varying degrees of access and corroboration, and FBI investigations.
One key assumption driving these assessments is that certain conspiracy theory narratives tacitly support or legitimize violent action. The FBI also assumes some, but not all individuals or domestic extremists who hold such beliefs will act on them. The FBI assesses these conspiracy theories very likely will emerge, spread, and evolve in the modem information marketplace, occasionally driving both groups and individual extremists to carry out criminal or violent acts. Indicators that may lead to revised judgements or cause a change in the confidence level assoc iated with this assessment include a lack of conspiracy theory-driven criminal or violent activity in the near to long term or significant efforts by major social media companies and websites to remove, regulate, or counter potentially harmful conspiratorial content.
So what do they consider conspiracy theories? A few of the theories and topics mentioned in the document are QAnon, Pizzagate, the New World Order, various child-sex trafficking ring theories, and racial extremists. Interestingly, there is no specific mention in this document of Antifa and their theories, despite the fact that they’re decidedly anti-government and confirmably violent.
The internet brings people together in forums, on social media, in private online chatrooms, and via email. The document released by the FBI seems to consider that this is part of the problem.
Although conspiracy theory-driven crime and violence is not a new phenomenon, today’s information environment has changed the way conspiracy theories develop, spread, and evolve. The advent of the Internet and social media has enabled promoters of conspiracy theories to produce and share greater volumes of material via online platforms that larger audiences of consumers can quickly and easily access.
Based on the increased volume and reach of conspiratorial content due to modern communication methods, it is logical to assume that more extremist-minded individuals will be exposed to potentially harmful conspiracy theories, accept ones that are favorable to their views, and possibly carry out criminal or violent actions as a result. The Internet has also enabled a ‘crowd-sourcing’ effect wherein conspiracy theory followers themselves shape a given theory by presenting information that supplements, expands, or localizes its narrative.
The examples above demonstrate how crowd-sourced conspiracy theories can influence which entities extremists choose to target. These examples also substantiate concerns expressed by some researchers who believe a rise of conspiracism, fostered in part by the Internet, may be accompanied by a search for scapegoats-those believed to be the conspirators’ allies, henchmen, or collaborators.
This is worrisome, as censorship of any alternative view is already at an all-time high, with a coordinated purge of alternative media websites from social media outlets and a major search engine. It seems as though this could potentially lead to even more censorship. Maybe that’s what it’s actually for – to give social media outlets even more justification for cracking down on free yet unpopular speech.
The document notes the FBI’s definition of “conspiracy theories.”
Although many conspiracy theories appear benign or inconsequential, others create serious risks. Throughout history, such conspiracy theories have fueled prejudice, witch-hunts, genocide, and acts of terrorism.’ In the context of domestic terrorism, extremists often view the activities of alleged conspirators as an existential threat that can only be stopped through drastic, or even violent means…
…A conspiracy theory is an attempt to explain events or circumstances as the result of a group of actors working in secret to benefit themselves at the expense of othersr. Conspiracy theories typically allege wrongdoing by powerful others (for example, public officials, business executives, scientists) or societally marginalized groups (for example, Muslims, Jews), and are most prevalent among individuals with extreme political viewsg. Some conspiracy theories point to weak circumstantial evidence, but ignore stronger evidence that would refute their claims.
Consequently, they are usually at odds with official or prevailing explanations of events) While a conspiracy theory refers to an allegation that may or may not be true, a conspiracy is a true causal chain of events. Real conspiracies involving illegal, antidemocratic, or harmful activities by high level government officials and political elites have been exposed in the past and it has been argued that such plots have encouraged conspiracism in society.
Relying on the premises that nothing happens by accident, nothing is as it seems, and everything is connected, conspiracy theorists tend to view every bad outcome as the result of an intentional decision by an evil actor, dismiss disconfirming evidence as “fabricated” by the conspirators, and connect a wide range of seemingly unrelated occurences to suggest a larger plot. Despite sharing key characteristics and at times featuring similar themes and intersecting plots, conspiracy theories vary greatly in their scope. Some are narrowly focused on a particular event or set of events whereas others suggest broad, expansive narratives that link multiple conspiracies in complex ways to portray a group of evil actors working to manipulate society on a global scale.
So, does this definition mean that anyone who disagrees with the official story about anything is a dangerous conspiracy theorist?
The FBI document mentions numerous arrests, some of which were not widely publicized. The document also provided a list of conspiracy theories that they find particularly worrisome in Appendix B.
The conspiracy theories referenced in this intelligence bulletin have been categorized as anti government, identity-based, or fringe political because they assert secretive, malevolent acts either by an allegedly hostile and tyrannical federal government, by racial, religious, or social minority groups, or by political opponents.
(U) NWO: A group of international elites controls governments, industry, and media organizations, instigates major wars, carries out secret staged events, and manipulates economies with the goal of establishing global rule.
(U) UN: The UN is being used by an evil global cabal to erode American sovereignty, strip away individual liberties, and bring foreign troops to American soil in order to replace democracy with global tyranny.”
(U) False Flags: The official story surrounding a given terrorist attack or mass shooting is a lie; the event was staged or conducted by the government to justify encroachments on civil liberties.
(U) Zionist Occupied Government: Jewish agents secretly control the governments of Western states and are conspiring to achieve world domination.
(U) Islamberg: The small Muslim community near Hancock, New York known as Islamberg is a terrorist training camp; its residents, who pose as peaceful Muslims, are in fact Islamic radicals operating as a terrorist sleeper cell.
(U) Pizzagate: High ranking democratic officials are or were involved in a child sex trafficking ring centered at the Comet Ping Pong pizza restaurant in Washington, DC.’
(U) QAnon: An anonymous government official known as “Q” posts classified information online to reveal a covert effort, led by President Trump, to dismantle a conspiracy involving “deep state” actors and global elites allegedly engaged in an international child sex trafficking ring.’
The thing one might find particularly ironic is that the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein has brought out a massive amount of information about…well…child sex trafficking and global elite pedophiles. (See this article, this article, this one, and this one.)
Beginning on page 2 of the document, the FBI cites numerous cases of violence based on conspiracy theories.
The FBI assesses anti-government, identity-based, and fringe political conspiracy theories very likely motivate some domestic extremists, wholly or in part, to engage in criminal or violent activity. This assessment is based on events in which individuals committed crimes, plotted attacks, or successfully carried out deadly violence and who – either before or after their arrests -attributed their actions to their conspiratorial beliefs. These events include instances in which the perpetrators intended to kill groups identified by such theories as hostile and malevolent, or to simply carry out dangerous, unlawful acts in an effort to draw attention to or expose a perceived conspiracy.
Most people who question the status quo would not be surprised if this document is just the beginning of a crackdown on anyone who refuses to accept the mainstream explanations because they might “engage in criminal or violent activity.”
While some of the theories mentioned are pretty far-fetched, the First Amendment protects free speech – and that includes conspiracy theories. Most people who believe that there are pedophiles in our government or who question the official reports of heinous events will never become violent. But now, it appears they may become targets of suspicion based on their thought crimes.
And when this FBI report is combined with the recently introduced Threat Assessment, Prevention, and Safety Act of 2019, which focuses on developing “a national strategy to prevent targeted violence through behavioral threat assessment and management, and for other purposes,” it certainly could make critical thinkers a little bit nervous.
Daisy Luther is a coffee-swigging, gun-toting blogger who writes about current events, preparedness, frugality, voluntaryism, and the pursuit of liberty on her website, The Organic Prepper. She is widely republished across alternative media and she curates all the most important news links on her aggregate site, PreppersDailyNews.com.Daisy is the best-selling author of 4 books and lives in the mountains of Virginia with her two daughters and an ever-growing menagerie. You can find her on Facebook, Pinterest, and Twitter.
By JOHN KAMINSKI
Aug 3, 2019
Absence of social conscience
dooms humanity to slavery
Deceived populace fails to see
World War 3 already under way
as Jew psychos demolish nations
I remember back in the early days following 9/11 when skeptics tried to convince the general public that the government and media were lying to them about what had really happened, we were constantly trying to estimate what percentage of the population it would take to (1) overthrow the criminals who planned the whole thing, and (2) restore what people generally hoped was an honest government (but wasn’t).
9/11 sure as hell wasn’t done by Al-Qaeda, which we now know was a creation of the American and Israeli intelligences services. And it’s ominous to realize that the Saudis who are really secret Jews and the Jews themselves from their American-funded fortress in Israel planned, executed and covered up the destruction of American landmarks to create a condition of permanent war against people everywhere.
Realize this, American fools! Our current president’s major foreign allies (some say foreign bosses) are precisely Israel and Saudi Arabia, the very entities who conspired with our own CIA and military to create the false flag terror disaster of September 11, 2001.
Back then, say 2002-06, informal estimates ranged from 10-20 percent of the population were needed to effectively challenge the lies from Washington about the demolition of the Twin Towers. Of course, that never happened as the government controlled media fabricated a report that was forced down the throats of Americans, allowing the Jewish henchmen who engineered the deadly deception to escape unscathed with billions of dollars in their pockets.
This preposterously false report — which never mentioned Building 7 — really couldn’t have fooled middle schoolers, yet thanks to the Jewish hammerlock on mainstream media, it fooled a majority of Americans, who years before had already been zombified by the Jews’ abject control of money and media.
Of course, the people who engineered the greatest self-inflicted injury in American history are still in power, and the vast majority of the American people have never even contemplated challenging the colossal lies they hide behind.
And President Trump’s appointment of the most depraved minions (Bolton, Pompeo and Giuliani) from the criminal second Bush administration responsible for the crimes of 9/11 illustrate there will be no authentic candor on this matter from the U.S. government in the near future.
The enforced indifference to this crime against not only all Americans but all humanity has persisted to this day, and is still in force as Trump prepares to start World War 3 to please his casino-owning, drug-peddling, arms-smuggling, child-molesting Jewish masters.
But the key question as to why unintelligent Americans failed to challenge the lies they were being told didn’t so much focus on this specific event but instead was the same question that has remained unanswered throughout the 20th century and in fact most of American history.
The real question is why don’t people have a social conscience? Has it been bred out of them by lying politicians, TV, drugs and fake news!? Or are they simply too busy staying alive to worry about their freedom?
Why don’t Americans care about remedying the situation with their obviously criminal leadership which conspired with their Israeli masters to obliterate an American landmark and cover up the fact that this faux terrorist attack was used obscure the judgment of expert observers that the buildings needed to be demolished because of a process that was physically deteriorating the Twin Towers themselves.
It has become apparent that there are zero genuine Americans remaining in the elective positions of the U.S. government. There are only those getting paid by the Jews who with their endless amounts of money determine who will govern everyone, and at every level: national, state and local.
The most telling example occurred in the 2016 presidential election, in which many Americans voted for Donald Trump (including me) because they believed if Hillary Clinton were elected, she would have started World War 3 on behalf of the Jews who control American finances and the Israelis who foment revolution and oppression around the world.
Now we all see clearly that it made no actual difference whether we voted for Trump or Hillary, since they were both owned by the Jews. This reality has existed since President Jimmy Carter insisted that Palestinians should be treated as actual human beings.
Patriotism is now a crime against the evil Deep State. As Florida’s new governor recently showed, Israel and the Jews now take precedence over the U.S. Constitution.
The USA is being destroyed by Jews. If we let money rule the world, we’re doomed.
Jews control the media IN ALL COUNTRIES today. If you don’t believe the lies they tell you, you’re a hater. This is how Jews silence legitimate opposition to their criminal behavior.
The way we treat indigenous people shows our true worthlessness as a people.
Jews are a social cancer that is deliberately killing the human species.
What they are creating is an abomination they are destined to rule in hell.
Responsible officials in every country need to realize Jews are the enemy of every country on Earth, but it might be too late to realize this, because the Jews already own almost every world leader on the planet. And they are constantly trying to kill the ones they don’t own.
One of the greatest deceptions ever perpetrated against the American people continues to be Donald Trump’s apparent obsession with building a wall on the Mexican border with the U.S., which at most recent look shows that no part of said wall has been constructed in the past three months. The bad part is that illegal immigration is even higher than it was during the criminal Obama administration.
“I will build a great wall, and nobody builds better walls than me . . . and I will make Mexico pay for that wall. Mark my words.” — Donald Trump
(See full quote)
The percentage of people with an actual social conscience is ridiculously low, around 2 percent, which is far too low for our species to survive. The other 98 percent are, willingly or not, engulfed by their own addictions, compulsions and distractions.
The invasions of North America and Europe by Third World refugees has been made possible by rich Jews (the same people who choose our presidential candidates), as evidenced by the Star of David seen on buses transporting illegal immigrants from Honduras across Mexico to the U.S. border. Also evidence are hundreds of African men seen wandering around San Antonio recently brandishing roles of hundred dollar bills, presumably given to them by rich Jews seeking to destabilize the USA and also infect Americans with deadly diseases many of these Africans are carrying.
The invasion of Africans currently overrunning many European countries has been facilitated by Jewish NGOs eager to swamp educated white countries with illiterate black refugees, all with the treasonous support of the leaders of white Western countries.
Social conscience is also not present in media, which relies on titillating propaganda for success in publishing and broadcasting. Of course, most of the blame for this falls on Jews who own most of the media and have no conception of social conscience except as regards the continuing psychotic preeminence of their own twisted clan.
All big media are owned by Jews, and they have elevated blacks into the hero roles, telling the evil white people how to behave. This is a great formula for turning everyone into brainless slaves.
As I have said many times before, you can’t be a Jew and a human at the same time. You must renounce one or the other. This should tell you all you need to know about the deafening darkness now descending upon your immediate future.
World War 3 is a match that pits the Jews against the rest of humanity. If the world finds out what the Jews have done to them, as the elder President George Bush once told journalist Sarah McClendon, he and his criminal cronies would all be hung from the nearest lamp post by an outraged public. This needs to happen now.
(This essay is dedicated to all my blood relatives.)
We previously wrote about planned obsolescence, but now things have gone even further. Products aren’t just being designed to be obsoleted, but they are being intentionally engineered by manufacturers to self-destruct and take other parts with them.
America has been at a juncture in its evolution of Capitalism for some time. We’ve agreed to take a greedy detour that deviates from our roots of greatness and pride. Where this path will take us, we’re not sure, but we’re about to explore it.
Understandably, it’s a dynamic and challenging environment in which businesses now exist. Being a business owner today there are endless amounts of regulatory bodies with which to comply, filings to make and taxes to pay. That’s not even including creating a competitive product or service, bringing your products and services to market in a meaningful way and trying to create – and keep – an exceptional customer experience. Let’s face it, business ain’t easy.
Every business has a polarity to its financials: expenses and revenue. Every business also has a polarity to its revenue: new customers and existing customers.
If you want to grow a business’s profits, there are a limited number of ways to do it. Many are reputable and add customer value, but some are disreputable and have the potential of causing customers negative experiences and possibly injury or even death.
Most businesses want -really, need – to create exceptional growth. That’s why they’re in business and for publicly traded businesses, that’s the expectation of their shareholders.
Expense reduction is a limited short term limited gain, so businesses rightfully focus on revenue generation. If you’re a small business you have one sole mission – gain new customers. But, for large businesses with existing product lines and established market share, what are their options?
They either need to get very good at marketing and create innovative ways of differentiating themselves from their competitors with their existing product line or they need to bring entirely new products or product lines to market in an effort to gain more new customers. This often takes a long time (R&D) and comes at a great expense.
The most obvious and accessible option is to create more revenue with their existing, established, customer base.
Designing your products to have planned obsolescence can be challenging given the fact that businesses have to remain competitive in their customer’s eyes to maintain market share. So, businesses have innovated new ways of obsoleting.
I’ll use my recent experience with brakes on a Hyundai Elantra as a prime example of business’ new and improved obsolescence strategy. Replacing the brakes on your car is one of the easiest, most economical and cost-saving updates you can do on your vehicle. So, I have a great deal of experience with brakes.
First, a little brake anatomy and physiology.
Image credit: How to Replace Disc Brake Pads
As you can see in the diagram, the pressurized brake fluid in the blue line coming into the piston expands the piston and causes the brake pads to apply friction to the brake rotor.
Image credit: How to Replace Disc Brake Pads
Most people know that if they drive on their brakes very long after they start hearing a squealing sound that they’ll be ruining their brake rotors. So you can’t drive very long after you hear that early warning or you’ll be looking at a much larger, more expensive project of not just replacing your pads, but the rotors as well.
But, what if Hyundai could design the brakes such that they could ensure that your rotors had to be replaced, not just your pads? If this were true, rather than offering their customers more value, they’re “offering” customers negative value, having them pay for replacing something unnecessarily.
What if Hyundai could make a very simple design change that would ensure that customers not only had to replace their pads but their rotors as well? If the vehicle is newer, then they’re almost ensured that the customer will bring it to the dealership to have the brakes done. Brakes aren’t something covered in a warranty and if the customer was deemed at fault, then neither would the rotors. This could be a windfall for Hyundai!
So, what is the early warning system people use to ensure that they don’t have to replace the majority of their brake system?
Here’s a recent picture from a 2013 Hyundai Elantra.
|Factory Brake Pads||After-Market Brake Pads|
That little shim of metal that extends beyond the hard metal backing of the brake pad is what makes the audible sound as the pad wears down to the last remaining protection from putting metal on metal.
The brake pad falling off of the backing plate wouldn’t have crossed my mind as odd, but when I was told that the front brake rotors had to be replaced under 60k miles, that’s what made me think twice.
I realized that the warning shim that makes noise had been reduced by ½ in size. It was made so small that the brake pad had failed on one side before the shim was even making any noise.
Rather than the normal squeal from the shim that you get, from a shim that’s the correct length such as the right photo, you just go immediately to metal on metal grinding sound and instantly start to destroy your rotors.
Right about now, if you’re a Hyundai Executive, you should be seeing dollars signs in your eyes!
We’ve just created an innovative new way to Capitalize on all of our existing customer base in a whole new way. Existing, unsuspecting, trusting, customers who have been served well by Hyundai products in the past will buy a brand new car and be forced to replace their rotors on their very first brake pad replacement.
Not only does this offer the business revenue for the labor and materials for replacing pads, but a job that is 2-3 larger.
Here’s a breakdown from autoservicecosts.com for brake jobs:
|Brake Pads||$50 – $150||$100||$150 – $250|
|Rotors||$200 – $400||$150||$350 – $550|
|Calipers||$50 – $100||$100||$150 – $200|
Hyundai has successfully increased its brake pad replacement revenue from $250 to $800…an increase in revenue of 220%.
This is a clear financial win for Hyundai in the short term, but won’t this have side effects? Similar to the first law of thermodynamics, to the extent their shenanigans are known by their customers, their business is likely to receive equal and opposite backlash from their customers.
The phrase “The customer is always right” is the hallmark of American business and became representative of Capitalism ideals around the world. This simple phrase had the ability to make or break businesses of a bygone era.
Done right, a business would thrive off of their customer relationships. Done wrong, it could devastate a business overnight. Arguably, this phrase Made America Great.
Businesses took a strong stance that they were there to serve customers. The more the business provided value for the customer, the more businesses yielded the benefit of customer loyalty and goodwill for the business.
Like me, can you list a half dozen times in the last 12 months were you’ve been told you’re “wrong” as a customer?
Waited on the phone for 45 minutes on the phone only to be transferred 3 times? Tried to buy a countertop from Ikea only to wait for 1.5 hours to retrieve it from warehouse pickup? Have you been to the hospital and misguided about the real price of the service only to find out it costs 2-3x more than originally stated or labeled?
If you’ve experienced a scenario similar to this, then you’ve experienced Oppositional Capitalism. Businesses are now taking a clear stance that the customer is wrong. Businesses seem to only be willing to value the customer to the extent necessary. The bigger a business gets and the more cost-competitive a business is, in the case of Ikea, the less they seem to care about an individual experience.
Tell us your Oppositional Capitalism story in the comments.
In order to find our path out of the issues we’ve created, we must able to discern one type of Capitalism from another. For us to make those distinctions, we need adequate words we can use that will allow us to begin to articulate and reason about the problem. And so enters Abundance Capitalism.
Stephen Covey’s 7 Habits of Highly Effective People talks about win-win mentality vs. win-lose mentality:
When one side benefits more than the other, that’s a win-lose situation. To the winner, it might look like success for a while, but in the long run, it breeds resentment and distrust.
Stephen believes that when one side disproportionately benefits more than the other, that this results in win-lose. In the end, once customers become aware of a pattern of this win-lose behavior, they often are willing to purchase from another, more trustworthy and mutually beneficial company to purchase from. In this way, win-lose quickly becomes lose-lose because the customer loses just prior to the company losing the customer.
Businesses that want to build and maintain a customer base need to create win-win product and service offerings. These are the concepts buried in the roots of what Capitalism and historically thereby, America, great. In fact, it makes businesses, Capitalism, and even individuals great.
Do you think businesses care about their customers as much as they used to? Do you find yourself spending more on repairing and replacing items now than you did years ago? Please share your thoughts in the comments.
Jeff Fischer is a Software Engineer and Architect and Innovator who has a passion for philosophy, economics, healthy eating for the prevention and reversal of disease, and lifting weights. If you’d like to read more of Jeff’s writing, it can be found at his blog:Software Business Boot Camp
(CD) — Millions of Americans across the Midwest this summer are being subjected to surveillance from above as the Pentagon experiments with the use of surveillance radars attached to high-altitude balloons.
As The Guardian reported Friday, the defense and aerospace contractor Sierra Nevada Corporation was authorized by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to send up to 25 balloons across six states to track vehicles.
U.S. Southern Command commissioned the project for the stated purpose of creating a “persistence surveillance system” to deter drug traffickers and perceived “homeland security threats.”
Civil liberties advocates were distressed at the newly-reported project on Friday, which the Sierra Nevada Corporation obtained a license to begin on July 12 and end on September 1.
“The deployment of this kind of surveillance capability in the United States is incredibly alarming,” Mana Azarmi, policy counsel for the Center for Democracy and Technology, told Common Dreams. “Persistent government surveillance, such as that facilitated by this technology, raises many civil liberties concerns and should not be permitted in the absence of a warrant.”
“Mass surveillance doesn’t make us safer,” the digital rights group Fight for the Future tweeted.
Mass surveillance doesn’t make us safer
Mass surveillance doesn’t make us safer
Mass surveillance doesn’t make us safer
Mass surveillance doesn’t make us safer
Mass surveillance doesn’t make us safer
Mass surveillance doesn’t make us saferhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/aug/02/pentagon-balloons-surveillance-midwest …
Exclusive: the Pentagon is testing mass surveillance balloons across the midwest
The high altitude balloons promise a cheap surveillance platform that could follow multiple cars and boats for extended periods
Programs like the Pentagon’s balloon experiment “pose a grave threat to basic human rights, freedom of expression, and civil liberties,” Fight for the Future Deputy Director Evan Greer told Common Dreams. “These programs are not about stopping violence, they’re about social control.”
The data the balloons’ sensors will record is similar to information the military has previously gathered using planes and is sometimes referred to as “combat Tivo,” according to Arthur Holland Michel of the Center for the Study of the Drone at Bard College.
“When an event happens somewhere in the surveilled area, you can potentially rewind the tape to see exactly what occurred and rewind even further to see who was involved and where they came from,” Michel told The Guardian.
“Even in tests, they’re still collecting a lot of data on Americans: who’s driving to the union house, the church, the mosque, the Alzheimer’s clinic,” Jay Stanley, senior policy analyst for the organization, told The Guardian. “We should not go down the road of allowing this to be used in the United States and it’s disturbing to hear that these tests are being carried out, by the military no less.”
The military’s project is just the latest example of a massive surveillance infrastructure that the government is creating, sometimes with the help of powerful private companies, Greer told Common Dreams.
“From police partnerships with Amazon’s Ring doorbells to these privately contracted spying balloons,” she said, “a dystopian surveillance state is being built in plain sight, by government agencies with authoritarian dreams and corporations willing to trample our rights to turn a profit.”
The imperialist powers have a long history of colonialism in China, of reducing its people to beggars in their own land. The British, the French, the Germans, the Americans, the Japanese, all are guilty of crimes against China that cannot be expiated or expunged from the record. Defeated finally in 1949, the colonial powers have never abandoned their ambitions to reduce China to a colony once again and are, once again, actively engaged in trying to undermine China as a sovereign nation, to slander it, to sabotage its economy, to threaten it with armed force, to break it into manageable pieces, as they want to do with Russia.
The range of attack is wide. The Canadians, on US orders, have essentially kidnapped and still hold hostage Meng Wanzhou, Chief Financial Officer of the technology company, Huawei. At the same time, the US used the arrest as a warning to others trading with Iran. They have increased their military provocations off the Chinese coast with the US and its vassal states sending naval ships, time and again, through the Taiwan Strait, claiming to be enforcing “freedom of navigation” but in reality declaring that Taiwan, a province of China, is their protectorate.
They have allowed the premier of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, to meet high level officials in the US, in violation of the avowed US One-China policy, providing recognition to her as the head of an independent nation instead of governor of a Chinese province, and have sold billions of dollars worth of military equipment to the regime in Taiwan against Chinese protests. The US even claimed that Taiwan gave their guided-missile cruiser, Antietam, permission to sail through the Strait, authority Taiwan does not have, further exacerbating the situation.
Very large-scale military exercises, that appear to involve all branches of the Peoples Liberation Army, that is land, air, naval, rocket and strategic forces began on Sunday, July 28. They will last most of the week and begin one day after China’s J20 advanced stealth fighter-bombers were moved to the east coast. They are meant to convey the message to the US and to Taiwan that China will not tolerate any more interference and is prepared to take military action to solve the issue once and for all and achieve the final reunification of the country and the defeat the remnants of the reactionary regime that fled the mainland in 1949. The Chinese government has closed vast swathes of the coastal seas to marine and air traffic to carry out the exercises. The Global Times quoted an “insider” source as stating,
“The more Taiwan secessionists stir up trouble and the more foreign support Taiwan secessionists receive, the sooner the day arrives when China becomes reunified.”
The Chinese defence ministry issued a warning on July 25, the same day that the Antietam transited the Strait, a week after a Canadian destroyer and support ship did the same, and just after the completion of joint Chinese-Russian air force exercises, that any move toward Taiwan’s secession could lead to war. The on-going exercises are clearly meant to send the message that China is prepared for the worst-case scenario in defence of its sovereignty and territorial integrity.
On Wednesday, July 24, China warned that it could use force against anyone who intervenes in its efforts to reunify Taiwan. Wu Qian, a spokesman for the defence ministry stated, during a briefing on the new national defence white paper, that
“If anyone dares to separate Taiwan from China, the Chinese army will certainly fight, resolutely defending the country’s sovereign unity and territorial integrity.”
But it is worthwhile to quote the paper itself:
“To solve the Taiwan question and achieve complete reunification of the country is in the fundamental interests of the Chinese nation and essential to realizing national rejuvenation. China adheres to the principles of “peaceful reunification”, and “one country, two systems”, promotes peaceful development of cross-Strait relations, and advances peaceful reunification of the country. Meanwhile, China resolutely opposes any attempts or actions to split the country and any foreign interference to this end. China must be and will be reunited. China has the firm resolve and the ability to safeguard national sovereignty and territorial integrity, and will never allow the secession of any part of its territory by anyone, any organization or any political party by any means at any time. We make no promise to renounce the use of force, and reserve the option of taking all necessary measures. This is by no means targeted at our compatriots in Taiwan, but at the interference of external forces and the very small number of “Taiwan independence” separatists and their activities. The PLA will resolutely defeat anyone attempting to separate Taiwan from China and safeguard national unity at all costs. “
“Though a country may become strong, bellicosity will lead to its ruin. The Chinese nation has always loved peace. Since the beginning of modern times, the Chinese people have suffered from aggressions and wars, and have learned the value of peace and the pressing need for development. Therefore, China will never inflict such sufferings on any other country. Since its founding 70 years ago, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never started any war or conflict. Since the introduction of reform and opening-up, China has been committed to promoting world peace, and has voluntarily downsized the PLA by over 4 million troops. China has grown from a poor and weak country to be the world’s second largest economy neither by receiving handouts from others nor by engaging in military expansion or colonial plunder. Instead, it has developed through its people’s hard work and its efforts to maintain peace. China has made every effort to create favorable conditions for its development through maintaining world peace, and has equally endeavored to promote world peace through its own development. China sincerely hopes that all countries will choose the path of peaceful development and jointly prevent conflicts and wars.”
“The socialist system of China, the strategic decision to follow the path of peaceful development, the independent foreign policy of peace, and the best of cultural traditions, considering peace and harmony as fundamentals, determine that China will pursue a national defense policy that is defensive in nature.”
Then comes the central tenet of the new Chinese defense strategy,
“The military strategic guideline for a new era adheres to the principles of defense, self-defense and post-strike response, and adopts active defense. It keeps to the stance that “we will not attack unless we are attacked, but we will surely counterattack if attacked.”
“China is always committed to a nuclear policy of no first use of nuclear weapons at any time and under any circumstances, and not using or threatening to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon states or nuclear-weapon-free zones unconditionally. China advocates the ultimate complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons. China does not engage in any nuclear arms race with any other country and keeps its nuclear capabilities at the minimum level required for national security. China pursues a nuclear strategy of self-defense, the goal of which is to maintain national strategic security by deterring other countries from using or threatening to use nuclear weapons against China.”
“Peace is an aspiration for all peoples, and development is an eternal theme of humanity. Faced with global security challenges that are becoming ever more intricate and choices that have to be made at a crossroads of human development, China firmly believes that hegemony and expansion are doomed to failure, and security and prosperity shall be shared. China will remain committed to peaceful development and work with people of all countries to safeguard world peace and promote common development.”
Yet, the western imperialist powers continue to do the opposite. The pressure on China continues in Hong Kong with US and British backed 5th column elements taking to the streets, attacking government buildings, police, Chinese government symbols, anything they can do to create chaos, undermine order, embarrass China, and act as provocateurs to try to spread the chaos further into China. On July 30 the western stooges in Hong Kong succeeded in paralyzing the subway system, by blocking doors and harassing passengers, all applauded and supported by western leaders and media who at the same time support Macron’s repressive police tactics against protestors who do not engage in the violence and the vandalism we see in Hong Kong.
I wrote earlier on the political and financial connections between a number of the leaders of the rioters and US and UK governments, agencies and high level officials including meetings of some of them with Mike Pompeo and Paul Wolfowitz. But their orientation is apparent when they carry British flags or the old British colonial Hong Kong flag. They are the usual opportunists and traitors available in any country for the right price. But they are a serious threat and the central Chinese government and Hong Kong government have made a series of statements warning the 5th columnists that their patience is wearing very thin; that they will act in accordance with the threat they pose.
The western powers, by their aggressive actions and support of 5th column elements, their active agents, are in violation of the letter and spirit of the United Nations Charter, and the long established principle of international law of non-interference in the affairs of another state. Supporting political parties that seek to overthrow a government and insurrection by them is a major breach of international law, yet the American arrogance has reached heights where it assumes the right to do so wherever it wishes, while its vassal states, from NATO to Australia to Japan, follow the American path of collective ruin in hope of catching some crumbs falling from Uncle Sam’s beard.
Reasonable people ask what can be done about the aggressive policies of the United States leadership. Russia and China talk about containment of the threat, renew calls for peaceful diplomacy, support dialogue with Iran to reduce the imminent danger of war in the Persian Gulf, with Venezuela, with respect to all the nations attacked occupied or threatened by the United States. But the Trumps and Obamas, the Bushes and Clintons of the American world, respond with all the more arrogance and fall all over themselves as to who among them is the most bellicose, the most ready to go to war to “make America great again, the most able to “support the spread of democracy,” that is, their rule over the world.
History teaches us lessons and one is that leaderships that become inflated with their own vanity, egoism, and omnipotence while regarding their own people as useful pawns, bring ruin on themselves and their nation. Napoleon thought he had the world, until Russian arms, a Russian winter, and a Czar with intelligence defeated him, a defeat that led to British troops humiliating the French by restoring the Bourbon monarchy in 1815, to Napoleon begging favours from Wellington. Hitler thought he too could conquer the world, but again, like Napoleon, his ambition was defeated by the reality of Soviet Russia, his nation destroyed, his body reduced to a pile of ashes.
When the conclusion of American power will take place no one can predict. But we can predict it will be bloody for the Americans only remember their victories and excuse their defeats. They have a morbid faith in war as a means of policy, a naïve belief in their superiority, and a contempt for other nations that is the corollary of that superiority. So the logic of the situation leads us to foresee a catastrophe, barring some miracle of diplomacy or a miraculous and fundamental change in the nature of American society, but then, I don’t believe in miracles.
Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel “Beneath the Clouds. He writes essays on international law, politics and world events, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”
AUGUST 2, 2019
At the beginning of the 1980s, during a meeting in New York with then ex-President Jimmy Carter, I accompanied Argentine Nobel Prize laureate Adolfo Pérez Esquivel as his translator. At that time, wars were ravaging the Central American countries. I remember vividly how at one point Carter asked Pérez Esquivel, “And what do you think, Adolfo, that the U.S. should be doing in Central America?” Such a direct and honest question by a former U.S. president would be unthinkable today.
Pérez Esquivel responded that the U.S. should be more aware of the tremendous needs in the Central American countries; and that the U.S., rather than opposing popular movements should be supporting them, making sure that human rights were respected by all sides in the long-standing conflicts between the rich and the poor in the region.
This observation is very much related to today’s events. It has been estimated that almost 70 percent of the children who crossed the U.S.-Mexican border in 2014 came from what is called the Central American northern triangle, formed by Guatemala, Salvador and Honduras. Those three countries have suffered from U.S. intervention in their social and political affairs.
Perhaps Guatemala best exemplifies the consequences of this intervention. For many years the U.S. controlled coffee and banana trades in addition to demands of oil concessions from the Guatemalan government. As far back as 1918, the Woodrow Wilson administration warned the Guatemalan government, “It is most important that only American oil interests receive concessions.”
In 1954, the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) carried out a covert operation that deposed the democratically elected Guatemalan President Jacobo Arbenz. The coup that installed Carlos Castillo Armas was the first in a series of U.S.-backed authoritarian regimes in Guatemala and was preceded by U.S. efforts to isolate Guatemala internationally. Arbenz had instituted near-universal suffrage, introduced a minimum wage, and turned Guatemala into a democracy.
Castillo Armas quickly assumed dictatorial powers, banned opposition parties, imprisoned and tortured political opponents, and reversed the social reforms of the Arbenz government. The coup was universally condemned and gave rise to strong anti-U.S. sentiment throughout the Americas.
Nearly four decades of civil war followed, with leftist guerrillas fighting a series of U.S.-backed authoritarian regimes. The consequence was the genocide of the country’s Mayan population, when more than 200,000 indigenous people were murdered by Guatemalan military regimes supported by the U.S.
During the mid-eighties I met in New York Guatemalan Nobel Peace Prize laureate Rigoberta Menchú in front of an automatic cash machine next to a United Nations building. She was with four other women, trying unsuccessfully to withdraw money from the machine. Trying to make light of the situation I told her, “Rigoberta, this machine seems to have been made by witches.” “No, César,” she responded, “This machine was made by the white man….”
As in Guatemala, the U.S. also supported the government in the war in El Salvador against the leftist guerrillas (FMLN), providing military aid in the amount of between one and two million dollars per day. U.S. officers took over key positions at the top levels of the Salvadoran military and made critical decisions in conducting the civil war, a war that lasted over 12 years (1979-1992) and resulted in more than 75,000 people murdered or “disappeared.”
According to the United Nations, while 5 percent of the murders of civilians were committed by the FMLN, 85 percent were carried out by the Salvadoran armed forces and the paramilitary death squads. The squads mutilated the bodies of their victims as a way of terrifying the population. The so-called Atlacatl Battalion, which savagely murdered and mutilated six Jesuit priests, was reportedly under the tutelage of U.S. Special Forces just 48 hours before the killings.
Honduras has had historically strong military ties with the U.S. In 2009, Manuel Zelaya, a liberal reformist, was ousted in a military coup. The U.S. refused to call it a coup while working to ensure that Zelaya did not return to power, in flagrant contradiction to the wishes of the Organization of American States. Today, the country is in disarray: violent gangs are everywhere, while government spending on health and education has declined.
In the last century, the U.S. military intervention leading to the overthrow of democratically elected governments –or support for tyrannical regimes– have played an important role in the instability, poverty, and violence that drive tens of thousands of people from the Central American countries toward Mexico and the United States. To these factors, one should add the destabilizing effect of natural disasters and a general climate of insecurity and violence in these countries.
Actions have consequences and interfering in other countries’ affairs can have long-lasting effects. This is especially true when one considers what happened in Central America. It would be naïve to blame the U.S. for all the ills in much of the region. But it would be equally naïve to ignore how the U.S. intervention has helped create the situation that plagues it today.
Zhang Jun, the new China’s permanent representative to the United Nations, speaks to the press at the UN headquarters in New York, July 30, 2019.
The war of words between the world’s top superpowers is getting more heated by the hour.
China’s new ambassador to the United Nations, Zhang Jun, said on Friday that if the United States wanted to fight China on trade, “then we will fight” and warned that Beijing was prepared to take countermeasures over new U.S. tariffs, Reuters reports.
“China’s position is very clear that if U.S. wishes to talk, then we will talk, if they want to fight, then we will fight,” he told reporters. Calling Trump latest tariff announcement an “irrational, irresponsible act”, Jun said that China “definitely will take whatever necessary countermeasures to protect our fundamental right, and we also urge the United States to come back to the right track in finding the right solution through the right way.”
The ambassador also took a stab at the disintegration of good relations between the US and North Korea (with Beijing’s blessing no doubt), saying that “you cannot simply ask DPRK to do as much as possible while you maintain the sanctions against DPRK, that definitely is not helpful” Yun said siding the the Kim regime. It was more than obvious who the “you” he referred to was.
Pouring more salt on the sound, the Chinese diplomat said North Korea should be encourage, and “we think at an appropriate time there should be action taken to ease the sanctions”, explicitly taking Pyongyang’s side in the ongoing diplomatic saga between Kim and Trump.
When asked if China’s trade relations with the United States could harm cooperation between the countries on dealing with North Korea, Zhang said it would be difficult to predict. He added: “It will be hard to imagine that on the one hand you are seeking the cooperation from your partner, and on the other hand you are hurting the interests of your partner.”
As North Korea’s ally and neighbor, China’s role in agreeing to and enforcing international sanctions on the country over its nuclear and ballistic missile programs has been crucial.
However, it is what he said last that was most notable, as it touched on what will likely be the next big geopolitical swan, namely Hong Kong. To wit, Jun said that while Beijing is willing to cooperate with UN member states, it will never allow interference in “internal affairs” such as the controversial regions of Xinjiang and Tibet, and – last but not least – Hong Kong.
And in the latest warning to the defiant financial capital of the Pacific Rim, Jun virtually warned that a Chinese incursion is now just a matter of time, he said that Hong Kong protests are “really turning out to be chaotic and violent and we should no longer allow them to continue this reprehensible behavior.”
And so the die has been cast: Hong Kong’s protesting youth has been given its official warning, and with PLA forces now piling on the border, all that will take for Chinese troops to enter is a provocation.
And to show just how serious China is about all this spontaneous “rioting” nonsense, Reuters reported that Refinitiv (which Reuters owned), has removed from its Eikon terminals in China a Reuters story detailing how an official with Beijing’s Liaison Office in Hong Kong had urged residents of a rural area to drive away anti-government protesters days before a violent clash nearby.
The story, which was published late last week, was not visible on the Eikon terminal’s scrolling news feed in China on Friday. Eikon users outside China said they could still see the story. Reuters was unable to determine precisely when the story had been removed from Eikon’s scrolling news feed for clients in China or whether other stories had been blocked.
Refinitiv has a license to provide financial information in China, and a person familiar with the matter said Refinitiv’s regulator there, the Cyberspace Administration of China, or CAC, had said it would shut down the service unless it removed or blocked certain political stories.
“As a global business, we comply with all our local regulatory obligations, including the requirements of our license to operate in China,” Refinitiv said in a written statement to Reuters.
And that is all anyone needs to know about just how nervous China is over the ever growing protest movement in Hong Kong, and how terrified it is that it can eventually spread to the mainland.
With over 20 Democratic party candidates vying for the US presidential election in 2020, there appears to be an abundance of choice from a glance at the mere number of contenders. But the superficial optics are far from “2020 vision”.
Unfortunately, lamentably, on crucial foreign policy concerning militarism, war and peace, and on relations towards Russia and China, there seems little difference between the crowded field. The single notable exception, so far at least, is the Hawaiian congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard.
Gabbard, a veteran soldier who served in Iraq, has trenchantly criticized America’s overseas militarism and covert wars for regime change. She has also clearly called for an end to Cold War-style hostility towards Russia, and for better bilateral relations.
In some ways, Gabbard is an echo of Donald Trump when he was running for the 2016 presidency as the Republican candidate. Trump back then condemned US foreign wars and proffered developing normal relations with Russia. Since then, however, Trump has failed miserably to end Washington’s militarism. Indeed he has emerged as an even bigger militarist than previous presidents, boosting the Pentagon’s already gargantuan budget, and embarking on a policy of reckless aggression towards Iran.
In regard to Russia, Trump has expressed wanting friendly relations with Moscow. Nevertheless, he has not scaled back on NATO’s provocative build-up along Russia’s borders; his administration continues to sanction Moscow over spurious claims, including on the matter of gas energy trade with Europe; and, to cap it all, this week the US has officially ended its adherence to the Intermediate-Range Nuclear (INF) Treaty. The US termination of the INF raises the specter of a new arms race with Russia and gravely undermines global peace and security. It was President Trump who personally pushed ending the INF by citing baseless claims of Russia violating the treaty.
In short, Trump is no friend of Russia and his past electoral promises of challenging the US status quo on malign foreign policy have turned out to be pathetic empty rhetoric.
It remains to be seen whether Tulsi Gabbard advances to the nomination as Democrat candidate for the presidency. And whether she retains her commitment to fundamentally change US foreign policy on matters of militarism, war and peace and in particular on creating a real reset in relations with Russia.
As both of our columnists cited above have appraised, the US mainstream corporate-controlled media and Washington political establishment have embarked on a systematic and scurrilous campaign to smear Gabbard as “soft on Russia” and a “Kremlin stooge”. The same smear campaign, of course, has been a non-stop effort to politically eviscerate Trump since he entered the White House more than two years ago. He appears to have conformed to the pressure by self-censoring and suppressing his erstwhile promise to restore relations with Russia.
That brings us back to the other 20 or so Democrat candidates. Virtually all of them conform to the giant media hoax (“psyops”) known as “Russiagate” which bombarded the US public with specious allegations of Russian “interference in American democracy”.
Democrat front-runners Joe Biden and Kamala Harris are proponents of this nonsense. So too are supposed “radical left” candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren. A handy compilation of all the candidates’ stated views on Russia as “an enemy” and their denigration of President Vladimir Putin as a “dictator” illustrate the execrable poverty of independent, intelligent thinking among America’s political class. These “opponents” are supposed to be offering American voters a change from Trump. Admittedly, Trump has scoffed at the whole Russiagate claims as “fake news” – and he is right to do that. But what has Trump actually done to pursue normal relations with Moscow? Very little.
All the Democrat candidates – with the honorable exception of Gabbard – are on record for harboring, to varying degrees, Cold War-style ideology of depicting Russia as an enemy or adversary. They have used this baleful and offensive view of Russia as a way to attack Trump. Instead of challenging Trump on his dubious economic policies favoring the wealthy and big corporations, the Democrats have used a futile and destructive tactic of trying to paint Trump has a “Kremlin agent”. Such thinking has only consolidated ever-more hostile US relations with Russia, which has culminated this week in the deplorable collapse of the INF Treaty.
As well as supporting the status quo of obscene US military spending and militarism generally, the so-called political opposition to Trump demonstrate with crystal clarity that there is only one party in the US – the War Party.
Republicans and Democrats are in reality two sides of the same coin that promotes oligarchy and imperialistic wars. That conformity of thinking even among so-called “radical left” candidates is a repugnant reflection on the degraded state of US politics and democracy.