Thursday, October 30, 2014

Media Language that “Disappears the Palestinians”


Global Research | Oct 29, 2014 | Jonathan Cook

The Guardian has about the best coverage to be found in the mainstream media of the Israel-Palestine conflict – which tells you quite how bad everyone else is.

Today the paper’s readers’ editor, Chris Elliott, ponders complaints about its coverage. Not surprisingly, many of them are from the Israeli embassy, which says it is concerned about the Guardian’s disproportionate interest in Israel-Palestine, implying that this is evidence of anti-semitism.

Actually it is quite the opposite. It is evidence of the Guardian’s historic and current support for the state of Israel, though not the occupation. Elliott alludes to this obliquely as he points out that the paper’s most famous editor, C P Scott, was instrumental in getting the British government to issue the Balfour Declaration. The Guardian’s pride in having helped to create a Jewish state is still palpable at the paper (as I know from my years there), especially among senior Jewish editors who influence much of the conflict’s coverage – yes, that is a reference to Jonathan Freedland, among others.

The Israeli embassy, of course, is trying to browbeat the Guardian to bring it into line with the dire coverage of the rest of the media.

The lesson the readers’ editor draws is:
When looking at these three complaints I think the important message is that if the Guardian is to continue its strong focus on Israel and Palestine, which it is entirely at liberty to do, we have to put a similar effort into the use and awareness of language that we use to discuss the issues on both sides.
And yet, as usual, the article only considers the problematic use of language regarding the Israeli side of the conflict. The reality is that the Guardian, like most western media, is really only interested in the Israel-Palestine conflict because of the Jews, not the Palestinians. There are many reasons for this:
  • historic European guilt about the Holocaust;
  • the central place of the Jews in Biblical stories most westerners were raised on in the still-Christian west;
  • the sense that the Jews are more like us than the “Arabs” – that they are, as Theodor Herzl, the father of Zionism, put it, “a rampart of Europe against Asia, an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism”;
  • the fact (mostly unmentionable) that Jews are strongly represented on the staff of western media often in senior positions, but rarely are there any Muslims or Arabs, and that many Jewish staff naturally identify with the plight of relatives in Israel;
  • the continuing appointment to Jerusalem bureaux of partisan Jewish reporters who speak Hebrew but not Arabic; live in west Jerusalem, not East Jerusalem; whose younger children go to Jewish schools, not Arab schools; and whose older children serve in the army.
All of this is so normalised among the western media that the New York Times barely seems concerned that at least three of its senior writers on the conflict have had children serving in the Israeli army: Ethan Bronner, David Brooks and now, we discover, Isabel Kershner. We will know that we have an even-handed media only when we can conceive of a paper recruiting not only a Palestinian reporter (in itself almost impossible, it seems) but a Palestinian reporter with a child who openly supports Hamas (let’s not even try to imagine the possibility of their being allowed to have a child who fights in the resistance!).

As the Guardian’s Elliott inadvertently indicates, sensitivity about language is central to the concerns of papers like the Guardian when it comes to the Jewish side, but not so much when it comes to the Palestinians.

Today Moshe Machover, a London University philosophy professor, sent a letter to the readers’ editor that I reproduce below concerning a recent Guardian article. The Guardian’s report contains the usual insensitivities of language towards the Palestinians, so common-place that they are never noted or questioned. But this is about more than insensitivity. It is about the constant misuse of language in ways that work to Israel’s benefit by shaping how western publics understand the conflict. In fact, it is precisely such language that has enabled Israel to incrementally disappear the Palestinians.
 Dear Readers’ Editor,

In yesterday’s Guardian there was a report by your Jerusalem correspondent Peter Beaumont about what is in fact Israel’s continued illegal colonization of east Jerusalem.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/27/israel-construct-settler-homes-east-jerusalem-netanyahu


It began:

“The Israeli government is to advance construction plans for 1,000 housing units to be built in parts of Jerusalem that Palestinians demand for their future state.”

The wording “the Palestinians demand” suggest that these parts of Jerusalem do not belong to the Palestinians but to someone else. This false impression is reinforced by what follows:

“The move, revealed by the prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, is the first in what is expected to be a series of announcements this week on new settlement construction work in East Jerusalem and on the occupied West Bank.”

Surely, “work in East Jerusalem and on the occupied West Bank” is wrong as it falsely suggests that East Jerusalem is not occupied but belongs to Israel; it should have been “work in occupied East Jerusalem and West Bank.” I am sure you will wish to correct this misleading wording in your next column.

Sincerely,

Moshé Machover

Google Survey: Majority of US Citizens Think US Gives Too Much to Israel


The majority of US citizens, according to a Google Consumer Survey (cited here), think the US gives too much aid to Israel:

Today 6 in 10 Americans believe the U.S. gives too much aid to Israel

Surveying Americans about U.S. aid to Israel requires putting it into proper perspective. Given Israel’s position as the leading single U.S. foreign aid recipient (by a wide margin), as in 1989 asking the foreign aid question requires embedding relevant data to obtain a bona fide response.  When such data is included, the majority of Americans (60.7 percent) believe U.S. aid to Israel is excessive.  The major response, that aid to Israel is “Much too much” is 33.9 percent of Americans.  Some 26.8 percent believe it is “too much” while 25.9 percent believe it is “about right.” Only 13.4 percent of Americans believe U.S. aid to Israel is not enough.


The policy and political implications of this finding are stark.  Elected officials passing ever larger aid packages and supplemental spending for Israel simply cannot claim they are representing the majority interests of their constituents.  American presidents proclaiming the U.S.‐Israel bond is “unbreakable” cannot claim such a bond is willingly underwritten by U.S. taxpayers.  The finding also shines yet more light on Israel lobby organizations as the major factor coming between most constituents and their representatives and quietly working to ensure that Israel’s majority share of the U.S. foreign aid budget continues.

The survey also finds that, in particular, younger US citizens are strongly opposed to the amount of US aid that goes to Israel, and, crucially, finds that “Only the Wealthiest Americans believe U.S. aid is ‘about right’”:

The only category of Americans (47.6 percent) who believed U.S. aid for Israel is “about right” is the segment earning $150,000 or more (although even 42.9 percent in that category thought aid was too high).  The next lower income category, $100,000‐149,000 is the most vehemently opposed to aid, with 79.5 percent believing it is too high (42.9 percent responding “much too much” and 36.6 percent “too much.” )

While the Google report says the findings are “stark”, they are nothing new at all, and are entirely consistent with the findings of the recent study out of Cornell and Northwestern universities, the largest study of its kind to date, that looked at nearly 1,800 individual US policy issues and found that the average US citizen has zero impact on those policies, while the wealthiest citizens essentially get exactly what they want, meaning they dictate US policy (and they largely comprise the US government).

This Google survey simply singles out one of the policy issues, which all illustrate that the USA is in no way a democracy, but simply a society in which people are allowed to choose which of two corporate-backed figureheads they want as the face of an oligarchy that dictates government policy in its own interest.

It is also worth noting here that 1) the top ten recipients of US aid (with Israel as #1) all, like the US itself, have torture regimes, 2) US law “prohibit[s] U.S. foreign aid to nuclear weapons states such as Israel that are not signatories to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty”, and 3) Obama, while repeatedly insisting the US is a “nation of laws”, requested more military aid for Israel than any president ever (among many other blatantly illegal acts).

Robert Barsocchini is a researcher focusing on global force dynamics.  He also writes professionally for the film industry.  Here is his blog.  Also see his free e-book, Whatever it Takes – Hillary Clinton’s Record of Support for War and other Depravities.  Click here to follow Robert and his UK-based colleague, Dean Robinson, on Twitter.

Netanyahu ‘a chickenshit’, say enraged US officials

Binyamin Netanyahu: accused by a US source as only
interested “in protecting himself from political defeat”.
Photograph: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg
Irish Times | Oct 29, 2014 | Peter Beaumont

US relations with Israel have plunged to new depths of bitterness and hostility as senior officials in the Obama administration decried Binyamin Netanyahu as a “chickenshit prime minister”, “coward” and more interested in his political survival than peace.

The furious assessment delivered in anonymous but no-holds barred comments in an interview with American journalist Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic underline a state of anger with Mr Netanyahu characterised as “red hot”.

The remarks are particularly telling in having been made to Goldberg, a Washington insider who has interviewed Mr Obama and Mr Netanyahu, and who warned US-Israeli relations were in a “full-blown crisis” that could only get worse after the mid-term elections. 

The comments underline the dismal state of relations between the Obama and Netanyahu administrations after a series of damaging announcements by Israel – including again this week – regarding its determination to push ahead with settlement building in occupied East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

The temperature of relations plunged again last week when Israeli defence minister Moshe Yaalon was snubbed by senior administration officials during a visit last week to Washington, which itself followed a public warning from the White House that Israel risked alienating its “closest allies”.

Despite the deepening frustration in Washington, Mr Netanyahu continued to hit back over the latest settlement announcement, saying US criticism was “detached from reality”, even on the eve of the publication of the latest remarks.

“The thing about Bibi is, he’s a chickenshit,” said one official quoted in the Atlantic. “The good thing about Netanyahu is that he’s scared to launch wars. The bad thing about him is that he won’t do anything to reach an accommodation with the Palestinians or with the Sunni Arab states.

“The only thing he’s interested in is protecting himself from political defeat. He’s not (Yitzhak) Rabin, he’s not (Ariel) Sharon, he’s certainly no (Menachem) Begin. He’s got no guts.”

In a more diplomatic and public statement on recent settlement announcements, US national security council spokesman Alistair Baskey insisted the US would continue to criticise Israel.

“There are times when we disagree with actions of the Israeli government and we must raise our concerns, such as our concerns about Israel’s settlement policy,” he said. “We raise these concerns as a partner who is deeply concerned about Israel’s future and wants to see Israel living side by side in peace and security with its neighbours.”

In comments designed to further sting Mr Netanyahu, who has expended huge diplomatic effort on attempting to derail any deal with Iran over its nuclear programme, another official suggested the White House no longer believed Mr Netanyahu would launch a pre-emptive strike on Iran to prevent it obtaining nuclear weapons.

“It’s too late for him to do anything,” said the official. “Two, three years ago, this was a possibility. But ultimately he couldn’t bring himself to pull the trigger . . . Now it’s too late.”

The comments are the latest in a series of high-profile spats between Washington and Netanyahu’s government. Relations began their sharp decline when Mr Yaalon accused US secretary of state John Kerry of being “obsessive and messianic” in his pursuit of a peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians. Later, in off-the-record remarks, Kerry warned that Israeli risked becoming “an apartheid state”.

Responding to the remarks in the Atlantic late last night, Israel’s far-right economics minister, Naftali Bennett, used his Facebook page to call for Washington to renounce the comments. Guardian

Wednesday, October 29, 2014

Jesse Ventura on Abolishing Political Parties, Voter Fraud Myth & The War Economy

Breaking the Set | Oct 29, 2014

Abby Martin features an exclusive interview with former Minnesota Governor, Jesse Ventura, covering everything from the myth of voter fraud to endless war in the Middle East.

ISIS: America's mercenary task force


SOTT | Oct 28, 2014 | Tony Cartalucci

Generally historical revision takes place long after events unfold and the victors attempt to bury humiliating or inconvenient truths. Today, in the age of information, these would-be victors are finding it increasingly necessary to revise history in real-time through a strategy of increasingly repetitive, but decreasingly effective propaganda.

Phase I: Justifying Chaos

It was only in 2007 that US foreign policy openly sought to pursue war against Iran, Syria, and Lebanon's Hezbollah, while undercutting pro-Iranian factions in Iraq which at the time the US was still occupying. Failing to accomplish this directly, the US planned a not-so-covert proxy war that would include funding, politically backing, and even arming groups ranging from the Muslim Brotherhood to militants aligned with Al Qaeda itself.

This is perhaps best summarized by the prophetic 2007 report "The Redirection: Is the Administration's new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?" written by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh and published in the New Yorker.


It stated (emphasis added):
To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has cooperated with Saudi Arabia's government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.
Hersh would also go on to chronicle American political and financial support that was being provided to the Muslim Brotherhood, even then under then US President George Bush. In all, the supposedly "spontaneous" uprisings referred to by the Western media as the "Arab Spring" in 2011 were being engineered years ahead of time - not in an attempt to promote peaceful pro-democratic aspirations, but to serve as cover for ultra-violent foreign-backed insurrections that would leave a trail of destruction stretching along Africa's northern coast, all the way to the borders of Iran, Russia, and even China.

Phase II: The War

After denying any role in the "Arab Spring" unrest, the US would soon not only openly support the protesters in the streets, but also support armed militants that followed in the wake of protests. This support included that of a military dimension - with militants in Libya being provided aircover and special forces initially, to eventually the air-dropping of weapons, equipment, and other supplies.

US Senator John McCain (R-Arizona) would even travel to the terrorist capital of Libya - Benghazi - and offer US support in person. He would stand literally upon the footsteps of Benghazi's courthouse where Al Qaeda rallies would be held shortly after, promising weapons to men who would later slaughter a US ambassador in that very city.

After the destruction of Libya's government amid NATO's intervention, Benghazi would serve as a terrorist epicenter where weapons, cash, and fighters were being staged before being sent to NATO-member Turkey and then to fight in northern Syria. Among these terrorists were seasoned militants of the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), an official Al Qaeda franchise in North Africa. One of their leaders, Abdelhakim Belhadj would eventually find himself in power in Tripoli after the collapse of the Libyan government, and even have his photograph taken with Senator McCain.

Predictably, as NATO shifted resources and attention from the overthrow of Libya to the overthrow of Syria, the conflict aimed at Damascus escalated. It did not however succeed. Instead, the West found itself in a protracted proxy war in which its role in arming, aiding, and abetting hardcore sectarian extremists became increasingly obvious.

Phase III: The "Rise" of ISIS

Clearly, the rise of the so-called "Islamic State" or ISIS, did not happen overnight, nor by accident. It was not only the logical result of the United States continuing its strategy of proxy warfare it had carried out against Libya, now unfolding in Syria, it was also the premeditated, documented result of what veteran journalist Seymour Hersh had warned about in 2007.

It is a threat that not only Syria understands all too well, but a threat its allies including Iraq, Iran, and Russia fully understand and are mobilizing against.

The US has found itself revising history, attempting to explain the existence of ISIS lurking in the footprints of its massive support of so-called "moderates" in Syria's ongoing conflict. The US has attempted to claim ISIS has built itself on "donations," selling oil to the black market, and by taking hostages for ransom. If only building a multinational terrorist mercenary force was that easy, we could imagine Syria, Iraq, and Iran would likewise have vast mercenary armies to outmatch ISIS in an afternoon.

The reality is, to explain how the US and its regional partners have provided "moderates" with billions in aid only to have ISIS rise up and displace these "moderates," we must realize that there were never any "moderates" to begin with, and that the US intentionally armed and funded terrorists, just as Hersh warned in 2007, to create a terrorist mercenary army that "espouses a militant vision of Islam" and is "sympathetic to Al Qaeda."

ISIS didn't displace the "moderates," the truth of what America has done in the Middle East has displaced the lies the West has been telling the public starting in 2011 at the height of the so-called "Arab Spring."

It is essential that people around the world continue to spread this this truth faster than the West can spread its chaos.

Source: New Eastern Outlook
 

Police State USA: 15 Signs that We Live During a Time of Rampant Government Paranoia


Global Research | Oct 28, 2014 | Michael Snyder

How does it feel to live under a government that is getting even more paranoid with each passing day?  Yes, we live in a world that is becoming increasingly unstable, but that is no excuse for how ultra-paranoid the federal government has become.  Today, every single one of us is viewed as a “potential threat” by the government.  As a result, the government feels the need to intercept our emails, record our phone calls and track our expenditures.  But they aren’t just spying on individuals.  The government keeps tabs on thousands of organizations all over the planet, it spies on our enemies and our allies, and it even spies on itself.  The American people are told that the emerging Big Brother police state is for our safety, but the truth is that it isn’t there to protect us.  It is there to protect them.  Our government has become kind of like a crazy rich uncle that is constantly spying on everyone else in the family because he believes that they are “out to get him”.  The following are 15 signs that we live during a time of rampant government paranoia…

#1 Former CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson says that the federal government was so concerned about her reporting on Benghazi, Fast and Furious and other Obama scandals that they hacked her computer, monitored every keystroke and even planted classified material in an apparent attempt to potentially frame her.

#2 The United States has become the nation of the “permanent emergency”.  In fact, there has been at least one “state of emergency” in effect in this country since 1979.

#3 In America today, almost everyone is considered to be a criminal.  At this point, nearly one out of every three Americans has a file in the FBI’s master criminal database.

#4 Most people don’t realize this, but the FBI also systematically records talk radio programs.  The FBI says that it is looking for “potential evidence”.

#5 In Wisconsin, 24 armed police officers are an armored military vehicle were recently sent to collect a civil judgment from a 75-year-old retiree.  It is being reported that officials feared that he might be “argumentative“.

#6 According to guidelines that were recently made public, purchasing Amtrak train tickets with cash is considered to be “suspicious activity” and needs to be reported to the authorities.

#7 The IRS can now seize your bank accounts on suspicion alone.  If you are successful fighting the IRS in court, you might get your money back years later.

#8 Thousands of Americans have their mail spied on by the U.S. Postal Service.  If you are on “the list”, all of your mail and packages are shown to a supervisor before they are delivered to you.

#9 Most people don’t realize that the U.S. border is now considered to be a “Constitution-free zone” where officials can freely grab your computer and copy your hard drive.

#10 The feds have apparently become extremely concerned about what all of us are saying on the Internet.  In fact, they have even been caught manipulating discussions on Reddit and editing Wikipedia.

#11 The U.S. government has become so paranoid that it even spies on our European allies.  Needless to say, our allies over in Europe are quite upset about this but we continue to do it.

#12 To the government, each citizen is a “potential threat”, and this justifies the militarization of our entire society.  The following is an excerpt from an excellent commentary by John Whitehead
Just take a stroll through your city’s downtown. Spend an afternoon in your local mall. Get in your car and drive to your parents’ house. Catch the next flight to that business conference. While you’re doing so, pay careful attention to how you and your fellow citizens are treated by government officials—the ones whose salaries you are paying.

You might walk past a police officer outfitted in tactical gear, holding an assault rifle, or drive past a police cruiser scanning license plates. There might be a surveillance camera on the street corner tracking your movements. At the airport, you may be put through your paces by government agents who will want to either pat you down or run scans of your body. And each time you make a call or send a text message, your communications will most likely be logged and filed. When you return home, you might find that government agents have been questioning your neighbors about you, as part of a “census” questionnaire. After you retire to sleep, you might find yourself awakened by a SWAT team crashing through your door (you’ll later discover they were at the wrong address), and if you make the mistake of reaching for your eyeglasses, you might find yourself shot by a cop who felt threatened.

Is this the behavior of a government that respects you? One that looks upon you as having inviolate rights? One that regards you as its employer, its master, its purpose for being?

I don’t think so. While this hyper-militarization of the government is being sold to the public as a means of preventing terrorism and maintaining national security, it is little more than a wolf in sheep’s clothing. In fact, as I document in my book A Government of Wolves: The Emerging American Police State, what we are dealing with is a police state disguised as a benevolent democracy, a run-away government hyped up on its own power and afraid of its citizenry, whose policies are dictated more by paranoia than need.
#13 As our police departments have become militarized, SWAT team deployments have gone through the roof.  As I wrote about recently, there were only about 3,000 SWAT raids in the United States back in 1980.  But today, there are more than 80,000 SWAT raids per year in this country.

#14 The federal government is so paranoid that it is actually spying on itself.  The “Insider Threat Program” encourages federal employees to closely watch one another and to report any hint of suspicious activity
The federal effort, called the Insider Threat Program, waslaunched in October 2011, and it certainly hasn’t diminished since Edward Snowden disclosed details of the National Security Agency’s domestic spying. As McClatchy reporters Marisa Taylor and Jonathan S. Landay have described,federal employees and contractors are encouraged to keep an eye on allegedly suspicious indicators in their co-workers’ lives, from financial troubles to divorce.

brochure produced by the Defense Security Service, titled “INSIDER THREATS: Combating the ENEMY within your organization,” sums up the spirit of the program: “It is better to have reported overzealously than never to have reported at all.”
#15 Last, but certainly not least, there is the matter of the NSA constantly spying on all of us.  The NSA is monitoring and recording billions of our phone calls and emails, and most Americans don’t seem to care.  But they should care.  I like how an article in the New York Post described what is happening to our society…
Through a combination of fear, cowardice, political opportunism and bureaucratic metastasis, the erstwhile land of the free has been transformed into a nation of closely watched subjects — a country of 300 million potential criminals, whose daily activities need constant monitoring.
Once the most secret of organizations, the NSA has become even more famous than the CIA, the public face of Big Brother himself. At its headquarters on Savage Road in Fort Meade, Md., its omnivorous Black Widow supercomputer hoovers up data both foreign and domestic, while its new $2 billion data center near Bluffdale, Utah — the highly classified Intelligence Community Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative Data Center — houses, well, just about everything. As James Bamford wrote in Wired magazine two years ago, as the center was being completed:

“Flowing through its servers and routers and stored in near-bottomless databases will be all forms of communication, including the complete contents of private e-mails, cellphone calls, and Google searches, as well as all sorts of personal data trails — parking receipts, travel itineraries, bookstore purchases, and other digital ‘pocket litter.’ ”
Source: End of the American Dream

Psychopathic Philly cop threatens to ‘beat the s**t’ out of teen for looking at him (VIDEO)

Screenshot from facebook video
by Damaris Abercrombie
RT | Oct 28, 2014

A Philadelphia police officer who was caught on camera cursing and threatening a teenager with physical violence will be disciplined, police sources told NBC10.

In footage posted Oct. 17 on Facebook, an unidentified officer is seen following a group of teenagers before confronting one particular young man.

“Big man, do we have a problem?” the officer asked during the 12-second video. “Because I notice that you keep trying to make eye contact with me. Is there a problem?”


The teen appeared to reply to the officer, but what he said was not clear.

“Okay, well keep f***ing walking,” the officer then said.

“The next time you look me in my f***ing eye, I’m gonna beat the s**t out you! Now get the f**k out….” he added before the video ended abruptly.

The Facebook user who posted the clip did not describe the situation or offer any details as to when or where the confrontation took place. NBC10 reported that its request for comment from the poster was not answered.

Meanwhile, as of mid-Tuesday, the video had been viewed nearly 122,000 times and shared on Facebook nearly 3,000 times.

Philadelphia police told NBC10 that the officer seen in the video belongs to the city’s 19th District and will be disciplined for the incident. They did not offer any details as to where, when, or why the incident took place.

A Philadelphia police official commented on the video to NBC10 on grounds that he remain unidentified.

"The video does not reflect well on the officer," the official said. "I have no doubt he had good reason to be exasperated but you have to maintain your professional demeanor."

Less than 1% of Patriot Act’s “Sneak and Peek” Delayed Notice Warrants are Used against Terrorism

ALLGOV | Oct 28, 2014 | Noel Brinkerhoff

Federal law enforcement has increasingly used a key provision of the Patriot Act (pdf) to pry into people’s lives without having to tell them. This practice has been justified under the guise of counterterrorism, but government statistics show that less than 1% of all “sneak and peek” actions involve suspected terrorists.
(photo: Getty Images)

Under section 213 of the Patriot Act, law enforcement agencies can carry out sneak-and-peek warrants, which allow agents to “secretly enter, either physically or virtually; conduct a search, observe, take measurements, conduct examinations, smell, take pictures, copy documents, download or transmit computer files, and the like; and depart without taking any tangible evidence or leaving notice of their presence.” Suspects can be informed of the search later.

The provision was added to the Patriot Act because, the FBI claimed, it was important not to tip off terrorism suspects during cases.

But the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) found after reviewing reports released by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts that only 51 sneak-and-peek requests during 2013 were for terrorism out of 11,129 total requests that year. The biggest reason for the warrants was to investigate drug crimes (9,401 requests), EFF reported.

 “The numbers vindicate privacy advocates who urged Congress to shelve Section 213 during the Patriot Act debates,” Mark Jaycox at EFF wrote. “Proponents of Section 213 claimed sneak and peek warrants were needed to protect against terrorism. But just like we’ve seen elsewhere, these claims are false.”

Tuesday, October 28, 2014

Vaccination Contamination Exposed: 99% Vaccinated Involved in Navy Flu Outbreak

Experimental Vaccines | Oct 28, 2014


http://experimentalvaccines.org/2014/...

Opinion poll shows US, UK Afghan involvement was futile, made us less safe

Press TV | Oct 28, 2014

Recent opinion polls have unveiled that most Britons and Americans believe that the military intervention of their governments in Afghanistan was futile.

The polls were commissioned by the BBC. In a telephone survey, 68 percent of the Brits said their country’s involvement in Afghanistan didn't bear any fruit. The majority of participants said they thought the UK war in Afghanistan wasn't worthwhile. Also a further 42 percent of those surveyed believed that Britain is less safe as a result of the war. In a similar poll asking Americans about their opinion on Washington’s war in the Asian country, almost two-thirds said they were skeptical that the US involvement enabled the Afghan government to defend its own people without assistance. Britain's combat operations were terminated in Afghanistan on Sunday, but the US is still operating in the country.

‘Summoning the devil’: Elon Musk warns against artificial intelligence

Elon Musk (AFP Photo/Robyn Beck)
RT | Oct 27, 2014

Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla, has warned of the danger of artificial intelligence, saying that it is the biggest existential threat facing humanity.

Musk who was speaking at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Aeronautics and Astronautics department’s Centennial Symposium said that in developing artificial intelligence (AI) “we are summoning the demon.”

Fiction, for example in films like The Terminator and the Matrix, has for many years demonized the perils of AI where technology starts to dominate and manipulate the human minds that created it.

“In all those stories where there’s a guy with the pentagram and the holy water, it’s like yeah he’s sure he can control the demon. Didn’t work out,” he said.



Musk was asked if AI was anywhere close to being a reality and he replied that he thought we were already at the stage where there should be some regulatory oversight.

“I’m increasingly inclined to think there should be some regulatory oversight maybe at the national and international level, just to make sure that we don’t do something very foolish,” he said.

The technology magnate, inventor and investor who is CEO of Tesla, Solar City and SpaceX warned in August that AI could be more dangerous than nuclear weapons.

Musk is no stranger to the power of technology. In 2002 when he launched SpaceX, some doubted his ability to make it a success, ten years on it became the first private company to launch a vehicle into space and bring it back to earth and now has a major contract with NASA.

But Musk does not appear to believe that space exploration will change the future of humanity.

“It’s cool to send one mission to Mars, but that’s not what will change the future for humanity. What matters is being able to establish a self-sustaining civilization on Mars, and I don’t see anything being done by SpaceX. I don’t see anyone else even trying,” he said.

But Musk himself has invested in companies developing AI, he says “to keep an eye on them.”

“I wanted to see how artificial intelligence was developing. Are companies taking the right safety precautions?” he told CNN.

Musk is not the only one worried about AI. A group of scholars from Oxford University wrote in a blog post last year that “when a machine is 'wrong,', it can be wrong in a far more dramatic way, with more unpredictable outcomes, than a human could. Simple algorithms should be extremely predictable, but can make bizarre decisions in 'unusual' circumstances."

Dr. Stuart Armstrong, from the Future of Humanity Institute at Oxford University, also warned that AI may have other damaging implications such as uncontrolled mass surveillance and mass unemployment as machines and computers replace humans.

To a certain extent the AI train has already left the station and is already in financial trading, as depicted in Robert Harris’s novel the Fear Index, and in video gaming. Darktrace is an AI program, which uses advanced mathematics to manage the risk of cyber-attacks by detecting abnormal behavior in organizations.

"Russian Sub" in Sweden Hysteria - Deliberately Spread by Western Media - 'Cold War' Redux

Run for your lives! It's Putin!...in a sub!
SOTT | Oct 27, 2014 | Joe Quinn

As Russia continues to assert itself and lay claim to its rightful place as a leading global power, Western governments and their media whores, in a desperate attempt to preserve their faltering hegemony, are resorting to increasingly outrageous anti-Russian stunts and manipulations that surpass even the worst propaganda of the Cold War era.

The most recent episode in the ongoing absurd anti-Russian theater occurred 10 days ago when the Swedish Svenska Dagbladet paper declared that the Swedish military had "intercepted a distress call in Russian on a radio frequency reportedly used by Russia for emergency calls" off the Swedish coast.

Citing unnamed "sources" the newspaper claimed that the call was "encrypted radio traffic between a location outside of Stockholm and Russia's Baltic enclave, Kaliningrad" and that it "indicated a damaged Russian submarine."

Western media outlets needed no encouragement. Every 'newspaper of record' carried inflammatory headlines like What's Putin's war game? A Russian sub in Swedish waters, as if Putin had already been arrested at the helm of the phantom sub. But the 'Best in Yellow Journalism Class' prize must go to Neocon weekly Foreign Policy Magazine for its Cold War redux headline, with a direct reference to the movie The Hunt for Red October, a sterling piece of pro-Western and anti-Russian Hollywood propaganda:  

Read more..

Puppet October Frightfest: The Creeping Horror of Jeb vs. Hillary 2016!

TruthStream Media | Oct 27, 2014

Look what's coming to a 2016 presidential wannabe nightmare near you! It's a bread and circuses pretense of democracy starring evil American dynasty number one and evil American dynasty number two. Same stank, different election!

Not only did we call this can of nightmare juice a long time ago, but how the media can even act shocked right now at announcing this is just laughable. And to anyone who says giving sellout Rand Paul or Bush family Igor Ted Cruz the VP slot on the ticket will change things, take a look at Joe Biden. Does anyone even know what he's done the last eight years? Clue: whoever they tack on, it'll just be to suck in voters for yet another Bush. Please stop lying to yourself. It makes us sad.

Can anyone even tell the difference between these two globalists? This next vote won't even be between the lesser of two evils...it'll just be for straight evil, sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations.

Here, why don't you go leave your comment on Jeb possibly becoming President of the United States of America #45 here on The New York Times article about it: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/27/us/...

Oh wait, you can't. They've disabled comments.