Tag Archive: civil liberties


MOXNEWSd0tC0M MOXNEWSd0tC0M·

 

Published on Dec 23, 2013

December 23, 2013 C-SPAN News http://MOXNews.com

 

…..

Eyes everywhere: NSA’s second tier spying partners identified

Published time: December 19, 2013 20:08
Edited time: December 20, 2013 00:22
AFP Photo / DPA / Peter Steffen Germany out

AFP Photo / DPA / Peter Steffen Germany out

Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands and several other EU countries were named among “third party partners” in the NSA-led global signal intelligence program, a new leak submitted by journalist Glenn Greenwald to Danish TV reveals.

According to the document, obtained by Swedish TV program ‘Mission: Investigate’, that has been probing Sweden’s participation in global spying operations, nine European countries were added to the list of NSA accomplices.

The “third party partners” to the Five Eyes nations has now grown to include nine states – Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Spain.

The newly-leaked document from Edward Snowden is the first written confirmation of Denmark’s formal agreement with the NSA, the Copenhagen Post writes.

Denmark’s role in US spying scheme was labeled “very worrying” by Enhedslisten’s Pernille Skipper, Danish parliamentarian.

“When Denmark is one of the US intelligence services’ close allies, one must ask themselves what it is we are giving in return,” Skipper told public broadcaster DR.

“When you consider this along with the other revelations that have come out, which insinuate that the US systematically spies on residents throughout Europe in violation of very basic rights, then you can naturally fear that the collaboration between Denmark and the US means that Danes have been spied upon.”

The list of new NSA partners was made public last week as part of the new batch of NSA-documents from the Snowden-Greenwald collection. The ‘14-Eyes’ group, the document also revealed, send their staff for training to the US. The group is also known as the SIGINT Seniors Europe or SSEUR.

 

Read More Here

 

…..

Enhanced by Zemanta

Business Insider

The TSA Is Expanding Its Reach Far Beyond Airport Security

TSA VIPR teams security

TSA

TSA VIPR team members in Memphis, Tenn.

Ron Nixon reports in The New York Times on the expansion of TSA’s Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response squads, or VIPR, which are leaving the airports behind to perform security checks at train stations, subway stops, and other transportation-related hubs.

Created in the wake of the 2004 Madrid train bombing, VIPR teams — comprised of explosives experts, behavioral detection officers, and canine handlers — work with local law enforcement to move through crowds and randomly stop passengers and ask questions.

Perhaps more surprising is their reach into places you wouldn’t really expect: Rodeos, music festivals, and sporting events. Their expansion has civil liberties groups pushing back on what they call warrantless searches with no probable cause.

Read More Here

Enhanced by Zemanta

WashingtonPost WashingtonPost

Published on Jun 6, 2013

Members of Congress and The White House are defending a top secret NSA program that continues to collect data from millions of phone records, but civil liberties supporters remain skeptical. The Post’s Ellen Nakashima explains.

*****************************************************************************

CATO INSTITUTE

NSA Snooping: a Majority of Americans Believe What?

Yesterday, the Washington Post and the Pew Research Center released a joint poll that purportedly showed that “a large majority of Americans” believe the federal government should focus on “investigating possible terrorist threats even if personal privacy is compromised.”

But a careful look at the poll shows citizens are far less sanguine about surrendering their privacy rights, as the facts continue to be revealed.

Pollsters faced a difficult challenge—to accurately capture public opinion during a complex and evolving story. Recall, on Wednesday of last week, the story was about the NSA tracking Verizon phone records. So the pollsters drew up a perfectly reasonable and balanced question:

As you may know, it has been reported that the National Security Agency has been getting secret court orders to track telephone call records of MILLIONS of Americans in an effort to investigate terrorism. Would you consider this access to telephone call records an acceptable or unacceptable way for the federal government to investigate terrorism?

Fifty-six percent found this “acceptable.” Thus, the “majority of Americans” lead in the Washington Post.

However, on Thursday, the Washington Post revealed explosive details about the massive data-collection program PRISM—and the public was alerted that the NSA was not just collecting phone records, but email, Facebook, and other online records. So the pollsters quickly drew up a new question, asked starting Friday, from June 7-9:

Read More Here

*****************************************************************************
The Independent

Are there more spy revelations to come? America rages at NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden and labels him a ‘traitor’

Snowden facing prosecution in hiding as ex-girlfriend writes of being ‘lost’ without him

Washington was in disarray last night as it attempted to determine exactly how damaging revelations of secret intelligence snooping programmes might be to American national security, as anger at the whistleblower behind them, 29-year-old Edward Snowden, continued to harden.

“He’s a traitor,” the Speaker of the House, John Boehner, declared.

The laying bare of two surveillance programmes run by the National Security Agency – and the prospect of more leaks possibly to come – had the US government scurrying in multiple directions; reassuring restive members of Congress, heading off growing complaints about the snooping activities from European allies and prioritising a nascent criminal investigation likely to lead to charges being filed against Mr Snowden.

But while President Obama would love to get Mr Snowden in a courtroom, his administration is now facing its own legal battle. The American Civil Liberties Union yesterday filed a lawsuit arguing that its mass collection of private data is illegal and should be stopped, a move that could eventually end with the programme being tested in the Supreme Court.

Top-level officials from NSA, FBI, the White House and State Department headed to Capitol Hill last night to give a behind-closed-doors briefing to the House of Representatives. They faced a likely barrage of questions about what, to some, looked like sloppy protection of secrets by the NSA.

The puzzlement is all the greater because of the background of Mr Snowden, who may or may not still be in hiding in Hong Kong. He had access to NSA data as a contract worker employed by the consulting firm Booz Allen Hamilton, and the degree to which US intelligence agencies now rely on contract workers is now causing alarm. About a third of all those cleared to access classified materials last year were not government employees, the Washington Post said.

Read More Here

*****************************************************************************

Ric Bradshaw
Sheriff Ric L. Bradshaw
Palm Beach County
Sheriff’s Office
CJC member since 1997

Palm Beach County sheriff gets $1 million for violence prevention unit amid questions about civil liberties, care for mentally ill

By Dara Kam and Stacey Singer – Palm Beach Post Staff Writers

Florida House and Senate budget leaders have awarded Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw $1 million for a new violence prevention unit aimed at preventing tragedies like those in Newtown, Conn., and Aurora, Colo., from occurring on his turf.

Bradshaw plans to use the extra $1 million to launch “prevention intervention” units featuring specially trained deputies, mental health professionals and caseworkers. The teams will respond to citizen phone calls to a 24-hour hotline with a knock on the door and a referral to services, if needed.

The goal will be avoiding crime — and making sure law enforcement knows about potential powder kegs before tragedies occur, Bradshaw said. But the earmark, which is a one-time-only funding provision, provoked a debate Monday among mental health advocates and providers about the balance between civil liberties, privacy and protecting the public.

Bradshaw said his proposal is a first-of-its-kind in the nation, and he hopes it will become a model for the rest of the state like his gang prevention and pill-mill units.

“Every single incident, whether it’s Newtown, that movie theater, or the guy who spouts off at work and then goes home and kills his wife and two kids — in every single case, there were people who said they knew ahead of time that there was a problem,” Bradshaw said. “If the neighbor of the mom in Newtown had called somebody, this might have saved 25 kids’ lives.”

Bradshaw is readying a hotline and is planning public service announcements to encourage local citizens to report their neighbors, friends or family members if they fear they could harm themselves or others.

The goal won’t be to arrest troubled people but to get them help before there’s violence, Bradshaw said. As a side benefit, law enforcement will have needed information to keep a close eye on things.

“We want people to call us if the guy down the street says he hates the government, hates the mayor and he’s gonna shoot him,” Bradshaw said. “What does it hurt to have somebody knock on a door and ask, ‘Hey, is everything OK?’ ”

That’s enough for Senate budget chief Joe Negron, R-Stuart, who helped push through the funding last weekend.

He said he met with Bradshaw about the program and “got assurances from the sheriff that this is going to be done in a way that respects people’s autonomy and privacy, and that he makes sure to protect against people making false claims.”

Mental health advocates, however, worry about a potential new source of stigma, and the potential for erosion of the civil rights of people with mental illnesses.

“How are they possibly going to watch everybody who makes a comment like that? It’s subjective,” said Liz Downey, executive director of the Palm Beach County branch of the National Alliance on Mental Illness. “We don’t want to take away people’s civil liberties just because people aren’t behaving the way we think they should be.”

Bradshaw acknowledged the risk that anyone in a messy divorce or in a dispute with a neighbor could abuse the hotline. But, he said, he’s confident that his trained professionals will know how to sort out fact from fiction.

“We know how to sift through frivolous complaints,” he said.

The proposal still needs the blessing of Gov. Rick Scott, who has line-item veto authority.

 

Read Full Article Here

Image Source

By Desert Rose

Here we  have  evidence  of the  ruthless  and depraved deeds of a  government  driven  by  greed and  power.  The  psychological process  used  to  turn the  citizens of  a  country against fellow  countrymen/women.  To demonize and criminalize innocents  for their  own  ends.  The  rationalization behind the process is  twofold. 

First it is  an  efficient and effective  way  to  eliminate  a group of  people  that  pose a  threat  to  your  ultimate  plans  of  control .  By  ensuring that  the  citizenry  at  large  are indoctrinated to  believe  that  these  Falun Gong  practitioners posed  a threat  to the nation and it’s people.  Labeling them  as  extremists,  suicidal ,  dangerous  and  deranged.  Thereby  enlisting the   uninformed citizenry to participate  in the persecution and  ultimately  the execution of a people  who meant  harm to  no one, save  those who  could not  afford independent  thought……The Government.

Top Officials Implicated in Organ Harvesting in China

Police chief’s research exemplifies regime’s guilt

Before he kicked off the biggest political storm in recent Chinese communist history last February after attempting to defect at a U.S. Consulate in southwestern China, police chief Wang Lijun supervised the cutting of thousands of organs from the bodies of prisoners of conscience—while they were still alive.

Wang was merely a mid-ranking officer in a dark conspiracy that reached to the top of the Chinese Communist Party.

In Jinzhou City in Liaoning Province in northeastern China, Wang Lijun ran a research laboratory in the same building as the security bureau he headed. His research focused on live, human organ extraction and transplantation.

He was working under the watch of Bo Xilai, the recently disgraced official who was head of Liaoning Province when Wang began his research.

The facts about Wang were revealed in 2006 when, three years after becoming director of the public security bureau, he was given an award—but not one for fighting crime. Wang’s team had done pioneering research on how best to transplant organs taken from prisoners—who were possibly still alive when their organs were removed—and surgeons acting at his direction had honed new techniques over “thousands” of on-site trials.

“As we all know, the so-called ‘on the scene research’ is the result of several thousand intensive on-site transplants,” he said in his acceptance speech for the award.

He talked up his research: “For a veteran policeman, to see someone being executed and to see this person’s organs being transplanted to several other persons’ bodies, it was profoundly stirring.”

Read Full Article Here

Secondly,  this  process being used to  indoctrinate  the  masses to  view those  who are  different  as  evil and  dangerous.  Thereby  providing  not only  a successful cover  for the governments evil purposes but  acceptance even encouragement to  punish these people.  For the  greater  good  of  course.

A Regime Makes War Against the Peaceful Falun Gong Practice

The Chinese Communist Party began its campaign to crush Falun Gong with an avalanche of propaganda depicting people who often meditate in parks as suicidal revolutionaries bent on destroying China.

Few Chinese believed the narrative, despite it being repeated hundreds of times. Up to 400 articles were published by each of the major newspapers within the first 30 days of the campaign.

Falun Gong was well-established, with over 28,000 practice sites across China. It was comfortably familiar to many, and public sympathy was with the group.

Then-Party chief Jiang Zemin began efforts to suppress Falun Gong in 1996, but the regime’s efforts met with sit-ins and peaceful acts of civil disobedience that Chinese people hadn’t seen since the Tiananmen Square massacre.

Jiang, who rose to power through supporting the crackdown on the student democracy movement, was both jealous and threatened by the fact that Falun Gong had attracted more adherents than the CCP had members. There were roughly 60 million Party members and up to 100 million Falun Gong practitioners.

He also wanted to wipe out the resurgence of Chinese traditional belief that Falun Gong represented, and in the persecution—which would demand that everyone in China take sides—he saw an opportunity to solidify his power.

As he said in a letter that made the case for persecution, he could not tolerate that Falun Gong adherents believed in something beyond the materialism and atheism of Chinese communism.

For three years, the security forces had harassed Falun Gong practitioners. Following the publication in the city of Tianjin, just down the road from Beijing, of an article attacking the practice, adherents gathered asking the article be withdrawn. Police arrested 45 of them, and in response to pleas for their release, told the practitioners to ask Beijing.

Ten thousand Falun Gong adherents gathered at the appeals office in Beijing on April 25, 1999. It was a crowd so large police arranged them on the sidewalks around Zhongnanhai, the communist leadership compound.

That night Jiang wrote to members of the Politburo Standing Committee that “behind the scenes” Falun Gong masterminds were making a move against the regime. He called it “the most serious incident since the political turbulence in 1989.”

Practitioners had merely gone to appeal against mistreatment, asking the central government to uphold its own laws.

Jiang wrote that Falun Gong was competing with the Party for the masses. “We must understand this issue as a political one, as one that involves the very existence of the Party and the nation. We must thoroughly investigate it and show zero tolerance!”

Read Full Article Here

One  would  ponder the use of  this process in  another  country,  say  one that  is  not   communist or  at  least  not  yet.  Comparing the process of the  criminalization of  Falun Gong practitioners to  oh  let’s  say Americans  who  question the  status  quo.  People  who  question  government  and  their  motives.  People  who have questioned  the  loss  of  liberties, the  more and  more  prevalent terror  attacks on  American  soil.  Those  who so  distrust  the  motives  of the  government   that they question everything including the  incessant  need   to  nullify the  Constitution and the Bill of   Rights.  Unlawful wars,  lies  to the  American People,  subterfuge at every turn.  All to  undermine and  demoralize the people.  Labeled  as  conspiracy  nuts,  non  conformists, anti-government radicals, Christians, Conservatives, Struggling  Middle Class, Constitutionalists, Libertarians, veterans and  gun  owners have  all been lumped  together  to  be labeled in this manner.  Listed  as possible terrorists we  are  placed on   watch  lists  and  no  fly  lists by the   Department  of Homeland Security. 

Terrorist watch listDHS’s new terrorist database rankles privacy groups

Published 15 August 2011

A new DHS plan to create its own version of the FBI’s terrorist watch list that is exempt from the Privacy Act has privacy groups concerned; under the proposed plan, DHS would create the Watchlist Service which would bring the FBI’s suspected terrorist list in-house and expand on it

DHS plans a Privacy Act-exempt watch list // Source: dariknews.bg

A new DHS plan to create its own version of the FBI’s terrorist watch list that is exempt from the Privacy Act has privacy groups concerned.

Under the proposed plan, DHS would create the Watchlist Service which would bring the FBI’s suspected terrorist list in-house and expand on it. The list would contain names, dates of birth, biometric data, photos, passport information, driver’s licenses, and other critical information. The goal, according to DHS’s 6 July proposal, is to increase employee access to the FBI and Justice Department’s list “in order to automate and simplify the current method for transmitting” the data to DHS component agencies including the Transportation Security Administration (TSA).”

TSA currently uses the watch list for its Secure Flight program, which is aimed at preventing suspected terrorists from boarding planes by allowing the agency to instantly check ticketed airline passengers’ names against the database.

Testifying before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee in July, David Heyman, the assistant Homeland Security secretary for policy, explained that DHS had identified screening gaps in its review of the suspected terrorist database.

To address these security gaps, DHS “has transitioned the Secure Flight program to use all terrorist watch list records containing a full name and a full date of birth and designates matches to those records as selectees subject to enhanced physical screening prior to boarding a flight,” he said.

What concerns privacy advocates though, is a particular provision in DHS’s proposal that states the department will “exempt portions of the system of records from one or more provisions of the Privacy Act because of criminal, civil and administrative enforcement requirements.”

The proposed provision has led privacy advocates like the Electronic Privacy Information Center, the American Library Association’s Washington office, the Bill of Rights Defense Committee, and the Center for Financial Privacy and Human Rights to issue a joint letter to DHS demanding that the department reconsider its proposal.

The groups’ main concern is that these exemptions would remove critical safe guards put in place to protect the rights of citizens. Their letter stated, “secretive government lists without any meaningful safeguards present a very real risk of ‘mission creep,’ in which a system is pressed into unintended or unauthorized uses. Under this proposal, the agency would have the right to maintain and rely upon information it does not know to be accurate, relevant, timely, or complete without recourse — the right to subject citizens to arbitrary decisions.”

Read Full Article Here

Anyone  who criticizes, anyone  who complains  of the  abuse of  power  that  is  taking place  is  labeled.  The indoctrinated   and  conditioned  masses follow  suit  and   play their   roles  to the   T- baggers, Conspiracy  nuts, wingnuts, racists,zombies, lymbic  brained, tin foil  brigade……so many more   epitaphs   used to  describe  those  who  question and  do  not  follow   quietly  the  disturbing path that  is  being  set  before  this  nation.  You  say    Pffffft  that  can’t  happen  here this is  not   China, this is  not Russia, this is  not the  Middle  East.  We  have  freedom ,  we  have  rights,  we  are American!! 

Janeane Garofalo calls teabaggers “racist rednecks”

Tea Party Racism??

Ann Coulter: Occupy Wall Street Protesters Are Getting in Touch With Demonic Side

MSNBC on NYPD Police Brutality during Occupy Wall Street Lawrence O’donnell with “The Last Word”

Severe police action as thousands of Occupy protesters fill Times Square

Look around  folks  and  take a  real hard  look  at  what  is  happening  around  you.  How  many  of  you are  questioning the  rationalization  behind   the  events  that are  taking  place and  how  they are  being  utilized to  fulfill an  agenda?
  What  agenda you  may  ask?  Well let’s  take a  look  shall  we?  The constant and  common  denominator  between  all these  events  and  the  agenda  that  they will ultimately   fulfill can  all be pinpointed  to one event   in the  history  of  this Nation.  On  September  11th  2001  there  became  evident to  anyone  who  wanted to see  a deadly  agenda that  marked  the  decent of this  once  great  nation.  The  mentality  that  has  gone  on to become the  battle  cry  of  not only  the  administration but of   State  and local   governments as  well.  “Never let a  good  crisis go to waste”, a statement  made  infamous   by  Rahm Emmanuel  and parroted  many  times over  by   different  figures  within the  government  apparatus. 

  Dianne Feinstein Not letting a good crisis go to waste.

Obama Gun Control Press Conference afte Sandy Hook Shooting

Incredible Speech on Gun Violence

Never Let A Good Crisis Go To Waste : Nanny Bloomberg Brings Us Protection Not Only From Our Bad Choices and Lack Of Control in Food Choices, But In Our Ownership Of Guns and Now In Our Freedoms and Constitution….For Our Own Good Of Course !

The   WTC  attack was  used  not only  to  usher in  an  illegal war ( which  we  now  have proof of having  been  planned years before  they were  able to  implement it) , it  was  the  beginning  of the  end of the   Constitution and  the  American  way  of  life.  How was it the  end?  Very  simply  it  helped to  usher in the  implementation of  the  Patriot  Act. 

Sept. 20, 2001 – Bush Declares War on Terror

Bill Cooper predicts 9/11 attack on the twin towers

  Judge Andrew Napolitano Natural Rights and The Patriot Act part 1 of 3

So many, so  very many called  for the  government to  do  something  and  protect  us from the   big  bad  terrorists and they  complied.  The Patriot  act  was  enacted  and  those   cowards who could only think of  being  protected  not  caring  how,  convinced themselves  that  more  government  was  better  and that the  government  knew  best.  Did they  once  stop to think  what they  were  asking  for ?  Did  they  stop  to think  what  the  end  result  would  be? Did they  once  stop and   remember   all this  government and  others  like it  had  done  when afforded unchecked  power?   The  answer  to all these  questions , unfortunately   is  NO…….All they  could  think  about  was  their  fear  and  their  need  to be protected  at  all costs.  Their  response to those  who  did  think and  remember was quite amusing and devastatingly  sad…….”If you have  nothing to hide, then you have  nothing to  fear”.  This  has  become  the  cry of the  conformists and  apologists.  They have  opted for the head in the  sand  approach.  If  the government  says it is  for  my  own  good then  it  must  be true.  Anyone denying  me and mine the  safety being  offered  by the  government is wrong and therefore  dangerous.  The  demoralization and alienation  campaign  had  begun.  George  Bush  gave a  speech and  in it  I can  remember the  use of  the   word  terrorist over  and over  again ,  culminating in this one  statement  that  said  it  all and  frankly labeled everyone in one  way  or  another……”If you are  not  with us  , the you are  with the  terrorists!”  That is  how  we  as  Americans  have  lived our  lives  everyday  since whether  we  are aware of it  or  not.  We are blackmailed and threatened  on a  daily  basis.  Oh not  in a  confrontational in  your  face  kind of  way  ,  no of  course  not .  It is  more subtle than  that .  A  quite   sophisticated  mind  game that   is  molding  the  majority  of  Americans  into the  hive mind citizens they  strive  for .  The useful  idiots  that Yuri  Bezmenov  the   Ex- KGB  Officer  that  explains the steps  necessary  to  undermine a nation. 

Ideological Subversion of Western Society

  Soviet Subversion of the Free World Press, 1984 – Complete

For those of  you  who  are   beginning to have  doubts  and  are   opening  your  eyes  to the  possibility  of  something   not  being   quite  right I say this……The  devil is  in the details and in  order  for you to see the  truth   you  must look at the  whole  picture not  just the  frame that  is before  you at  any one  given  moment  in time.  You  must pull back and  look at  it  as  a  whole.  See History  as  it  has  unfolded  before  your  eyes not in  the  way  they  have  chosen to  present it  to you.  Understand that  the orchestration of this  play has  been a  very  long time in the making  ,but  who is  behind it is  not  as  important  as  where we  will be  as a  nation   if they  accomplish what  they  have  set  out to do. 

US-Canada Claim Iran-Al Qaeda Ties Despite US Funding Al Qaeda in Iran for Years

April 23, 2013 (LD) – As the FBI reels from what now appears to be revelations it was directly involved in the Boston Marathon bombings, a deluge of FBI “success” stories have been “serendipitously” splashed across Western headlines. Among them was an allegedly “foiled” terror attack in Canada, reported to be the work of terrorists supported by “Al-Qaeda operatives in Iran.” The Globe and Mail, in its report, “Canada joins U.S. in alleging al-Qaeda has operatives based in Iran,” states:

“To many, it came as a surprise that the RCMP is alleging that two terror suspects arrested in Canada on Monday were supported by al-Qaeda operatives in Iran.

The Sunni-based al-Qaeda and Shia Iran belong to different branches of Islam that have been at odds historically. But in recent years U.S. officials have formally alleged that Iran has allowed al-Qaeda members to operate out of its territory.”

Both at face value and upon deeper examination, this assertion is utterly absurd, divorced from reality, and indicative of the absolute contempt within which the Western establishment holds the global public. In reality, the West, the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel in particular, have propped up and perpetuated Al Qaeda for the very purpose of either undermining or overthrowing the governments of Iran, Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Algeria, Libya,  Russia, Malaysia, Indonesia, and beyond. Regarding Iran in particular, Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 New Yorker piece titled, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” would state:

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 coöperated 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.

In a follow up, Hersh in his 2008 New Yorker piece titled, “Preparing the Battlefield: The Bush Administration steps up its secret moves against Iran,” spelled out a damning indictment of US involvement in bolstering, arming, and funding terror organizations, not linked to, but described as actually being Al Qaeda.Read Full Article Here

To conform and  go with the  flow  at this point  in time is  tantamount to  suicide as  a nation.  You  must  open  your  eyes  and  view the  events  as  a puzzle  that  must  be  deciphered.  It’s  true intent exposed so that  you may  see how  it   has  developed  and  what it’s ultimate  intent entails.  To do  so  requires discipline,  time  and  courage.  There  are  many  who  would  sooner  shoot  you  down and label  you  crazy  than allow  you  to  go  down this  road.  Which you  choose is  entirely up to you ,  however,  if you are  reading this  and  you  choose to  do  nothing, to  say  nothing then you are  as  responsible  as  the  criminals  perpetrating these crimes  against  our  people.  Your  silence and  lack of  resolve  making you  complicit  in the  crimes  that  will be  heaped  upon  the  American   people when the  time to   unveil the final  agenda arrives.  Truly  look at  what  is  presented  and  try to  understand  where it is  going and  what   the  ultimate  result   could be.  That is  all anyone  can  ask  of  you  That is  all  any of  us  would require.  We  need  you to  wake  up  and understand  what  is  being  done…….

Former diplomat wistleblower talks about US government secrets and corruption

  FBI Fake Terror Plot History: Judge Napolitano

Patriot  Act  NDAA, Indefinite  Detention  Of  American Citizens,  Presidential Kill List, Fusion Centers, CISPA, SOPA, PIPA, Gun Control, Executive Orders, Unamanned  Drones, TSA, Lockdowns,  Door to Door Illegal Searches, Warantless  Surveillance, Personal Data Sharing, Militarization of  local  police, Legitimization of  Police  Brutality, Veterans – Christians-Constitutionalists-Libertarians-Gun Owners- Activists being  labeled  as  potential  terrorists and the list   goes on and  on

FBI knew of PLOT TO KILL Occupy Wall Street activists; stayed silent, potential SNIPER ASSASINATIONS

FBI & DHS Under Obama Declared Occupy Wall Street Protesters TERRORIST To Protect Big Business

Occupy Wall Street

  FOX News Attacks Occupy Wall Street Protests

On Fox News, Tea Party Good, Occupy Wall Street Bad

 

************************************************************************************************

Occupy tries to help Columbine survivor keep his home

“THIS Is Where Occupy Is Going” – MOC #188


************************************************************************************************

Ron Paul: What if the People Wake Up?


***********************************************************************************************

RT.com
Wed, 06 Feb 2013 11:54 CST

© Reuters / Nacho Doce

Officials may gain access to intimate knowledge of the whereabouts of cell users in Maryland. Phone records could be handed over without a search warrant if a new bill passes. A civil liberties group has labeled the proposal ‘invasive’.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland has criticized government plans to allow law enforcement officials automatic access to these records, testifying against the intrusive tracking bill, House Bill 377 , on Tuesday. The bill is currently being considered by the Maryland House Judiciary Committee.

Law enforcement officials must obtain a search warrant prior to accessing such information, insisted ACLUM.

“Of all of the recent technological developments that have expanded the surveillance capabilities of law enforcement agencies at the expense of individual privacy, perhaps the most powerful is cell phone location tracking,” said the national American Civil Liberties Union last September, in response to knowledge they obtained that numerous police departments were tracking the devices without a search warrant anyway.

Read Full Article Here

The FBI is using informants to stir up fake terror plots, destroying lives in the process.

The following article first appeared in The Nation. For more great content from the Nation, sign up for its e-mail newsletters here.

It wasn’t long after he met the man called Shareef that Khalifa Al-Akili began to sense he was being set up. Within days of their seemingly chance meeting, Shareef was offering to drive Akili, a 34-year-old Muslim living in East Liberty, Pennsylvania, to the local mosque for prayers. Shareef told Akili he was “all about fighting” and “had a lot of resources at his disposal.” But when Shareef began to probe Akili about his views on jihad and asked him if he could obtain a gun, Akili grew nervous. “I begin to try to avoid him, but would still see him due to the fact that he lived two minutes’ walking distance from my apartment,” Akili said later. In January of this year, Shareef showed up with a “brother” who called himself Mohammed and was keen to meet Akili. Mohammed told Akili that he was a businessman from Pakistan involved in jihad. “He kept attempting to talk about the fighting going on in Afghanistan, which I clearly felt was an attempt to get me to talk about my views,” Akili recalled. “I had a feeling that I had just played out a part in some Hollywood movie where I had just been introduced to the leader of a terrorist sleeper cell.”

Out of curiosity, Akili did an Internet search on the cellphone number he’d received from Mohammed. Much to his surprise, he discovered that the man was, in fact, an FBI informant named Shahed Hussain, who had played a pivotal role in at least two major terrorism-related sting operations in recent years. In a lengthy posting on his Facebook page recounting these events, Akili wrote, “I would like to pursue a legal action against the FBI due to their continuous harassment.” He also set up a press conference in Washington with Muslim civil liberties groups to publicize his fear that he was being entrapped. But it was too late. In mid-March, Akili was arrested and charged with being in possession of a .22-caliber rifle at a shooting range several years earlier, an act deemed illegal because of a decade-old drug conviction. Though his arrest was on nonterrorism-related charges, at his bond hearing FBI agents and US Attorneys told the judge they’d seen unspecified “jihadist literature” at his apartment and also alleged that he’d told one of the informants of his desire to go to Pakistan and join the Taliban. The judge ordered Akili held without bail.

“The government is basically saying [the charges have] nothing to do with the informant,” Akili’s attorney, Markéta Sims, told me. “But I’ve been doing this a long time, and I’ve never heard of someone being charged with felony possession for handling a gun at a shooting range.”

The FBI has employed informants ever since its inception as the Bureau of Investigation in 1908. In 1961 director J. Edgar Hoover established the Top Echelon Criminal Informant Program, in which FBI field offices were instructed to develop live sources in the “organized hoodlum element.” By 1975 the Church Committee found that the bureau was employing more than 1,500 domestic informants. But while the FBI has long used undercover informants to infiltrate criminal networks and build cases against potential suspects, in the domestic front of the “war on terror,” informants have come to play a far more proactive role in surveilling communities deemed suspect by the bureau.

According to the Center on National Security at Fordham Law School, there have been 138 terrorism or national security prosecutions involving informants since 2001, and more than a third of those have occurred in the past three years. Nearly every major post-9/11 terrorism-related prosecution has involved a sting operation, at the center of which is a government informant. In these cases, the informants—who work for money or are seeking leniency on criminal charges of their own—have crossed the line from merely observing potential criminal behavior to encouraging and assisting people to participate in plots that are largely scripted by the FBI itself. Under the FBI’s guiding hand, the informants provide the weapons, suggest the targets and even initiate the inflammatory political rhetoric that later elevates the charges to the level of terrorism.

Before he approached Akili, Hussain was pivotal in securing convictions in 2006 against two Muslim men in Albany, New York—an imam and a local pizza shop owner. He had lured the two into a loan transaction that prosecutors later alleged was a deal to launder the proceeds of an illegal missile sale, though neither man had any prior criminal record or history of violence. In a separate case in 2008, Hussain was dispatched to Newburgh, New York, where he spent nearly a year enticing a group of indigent African-American and Haitian men, some of whom converted to Islam in prison, with offers of as much as $250,000 to participate in a plot to bomb a Bronx synagogue and Jewish community center. After the men were convicted at trial, the judge in the case, Colleen McMahon, said it was “beyond question that the government created the crime here” and criticized the FBI for sending informants “trolling among the citizens of a troubled community, offering very poor people money if they will play some role—any role—in criminal activity.” The men were sentenced to twenty-five years in prison.

The FBI’s expanded deployment of informants over the past decade is the result of a mandate to catch terrorists before they can strike next, an effort that has fundamentally refocused the bureau from its traditional law enforcement mission to gathering intelligence on potential threats. Within a year of the 9/11 attacks, the FBI had reassigned nearly half its field office positions formerly devoted to the “war on drugs” to the new “war on terror” and launched nearly 3,000 new counterterrorism investigations. Since then, the bureau has been increasingly devoted to counterterrorism efforts: its current $8.1 billion budget allocates $4.9 billion to intelligence and counterterrorism, approximately $1.7 billion more than all other federal crimes combined.

Informants are crucial to producing the raw field intelligence that the bureau uses to justify these vast new expenditures. Under the FBI’s Domain Management program, modeled after the NYPD’s CompStat initiative, FBI Director Robert Mueller holds periodic “accountability” meetings with field offices, in which his agents report on a series of intelligence-gathering metrics in the geographic areas they oversee—among them the production of raw intelligence gathered by informants or electronic surveillance compiled in “information reports” and disseminated to law enforcement agencies. These informants operate in a post-9/11 environment of relaxed guidelines that allow the FBI to engage in lengthy and extensive surveillance of individuals and communities with little or no evidence of any wrongdoing afoot. Where once agents needed to have a “predicate” to launch such an investigation, these days none are required.

The FBI has kept the details of the full scope of its informant network a closely guarded secret. It has not revealed the number of official and unofficial informants (the latter known as “hip pockets” in bureau parlance) on its payroll; or how much it budgets for these informants; or what kinds of targets they track, particularly in Muslim communities. In its 2008 budget request the FBI disclosed that it had been working since November 2004 under a classified presidential directive that mandated an unspecified increase in “human source development and management.” In 2009, after civil liberties groups sued for some of these details under the Freedom of Information Act, the bureau made public its internal investigative guidelines but redacted nearly the entire section on “undisclosed participation” of confidential informants.

* * *

Though relatively few informant-driven investigations have led to the discovery of actual “homegrown” plots, the Muslim community for years has reported instances of people being approached by informants trying to enlist them in violent jihad. At times the informants have been so aggressive they have quickly raised suspicions. At a California mosque in 2010 one FBI informant, Craig Monteilh, advocated violent jihad so vehemently that the mosque’s members sought and received a restraining order against him. Monteilh, a former fitness instructor paid $177,000 over the course of his service with the FBI, participated in what the bureau dubbed Operation Flex, in which he was assigned to monitor gyms and mosques across Orange County, California, home to the country’s second-largest Muslim population. “We started hearing that he was saying weird things,” college student Omar Kurdi later told a reporter. “He would walk up to one of my friends and say, ‘It’s good that you guys are getting ready for the jihad.’”

Once the restraining order was issued, Monteilh was effectively done as an informant. His work became public a few months later when he was convicted on grand larceny charges in an unrelated incident. He subsequently sued the FBI, alleging the agency had revealed his informant status, leading to an attack by a fellow prisoner during his incarceration. He also gave a statement in support of a suit filed against the bureau by the ACLU that named the then head of the Los Angeles office, J. Stephen Tidwell, who had made a point of visiting a mosque in Irvine in June 2006 and telling the congregants that the FBI would not spy on them. “If we’re going to mosques to come to services, we will tell you,” he said. “We don’t want you to think you’re being monitored. We would come only to learn.” The next month, agents under Tidwell deployed Monteilh to the very same mosque.

According to Monteilh, his handlers in Operation Flex instructed him to identify potential militants or, failing that, to “pay attention to people’s problems”—such as marital or business difficulties—and assess whether individuals might be susceptible to rumors about their sexual orientation “so that they could be persuaded to become informants.” His handlers also told him that “everybody knows somebody,” meaning that people from Afghanistan, for example, would inevitably have family members or acquaintances with ties to the Taliban—information the FBI could use to “threaten…and pressure them to provide information, or could justify additional surveillance.” Monteilh said the agents also gave him the green light to have sex with Muslim women for investigative purposes. “They said if it would enhance the intelligence, go ahead and have sex,” he told a reporter. “So I did.” When Monteilh asked his handler, agent Kevin Armstrong, about the FBI’s broad latitude in conducting the investigation, he said Armstrong told him that on national security matters, “Kevin is God.”

In 2005 the FBI’s Office of the Inspector General found “serious shortcomings” in the bureau’s Criminal Informant Program. The report, which examined some 120 cases, including those related to terrorism, found that 87 percent of the investigations involving informants contained violations of the FBI’s own guidelines. Among the chief violations were the failure of agents to caution informants about the “limits of their activities,” the “failure to report unauthorized illegal activity” by their informants, and the issuance of “retroactive approvals” for illegal acts the informants had already committed. The report noted that since 2001 the rules had been loosened at the FBI’s request to reflect the new emphasis on intelligence gathering, and by extension the bureau’s dire need for informants. In testimony before Congress in May 2002, FBI Director Mueller argued that requiring agents to read “verbatim instructions” to their informants, “written in often intimidating legalese, [was] proving to have a chilling effect, causing confidential informants to leave the program.”

When inspectors asked the FBI to identify a terrorism investigation in which an informant had played a “pivotal role,” the bureau cited the work of Mohamed Alanssi, who in 2005 had secured the conviction of a well-known Yemeni cleric and his assistant. The two men were charged with funding Al Qaeda and Hamas. What the report didn’t mention was that Alanssi, in a fit of pique at his handlers (who he claimed owed him money for his services as an informant in as many as twenty terrorism prosecutions), had set himself on fire in front of the White House and ended up being deemed so unstable that at the trial of the two Yemenis, he was asked to testify for the defense.

* * *

For Muslims approached by the FBI to become informants, the consequences of declining such requests can be dire. Ahmadullah Niazi, one of the mosque members who reported the FBI’s own informant, Craig Monteilh, after hearing him talk about planning a terrorist attack, was later contacted by agents and asked to become an informant himself. When he refused, he found himself arrested on charges of lying to immigration officials after he allegedly denied having family ties to a member of Al Qaeda. Prosecutors ultimately withdrew the charges, but Niazi said by the time the case was dismissed, both he and his wife had lost their jobs.

In 2010 Tarek Saleh, a Brooklyn cleric, alleged that the FBI derailed his green card application after he declined its request to travel to Afghanistan and make contact with a relative who was allegedly part of Al Qaeda. “To use me as a bait to trap people, I cannot do this job,” Saleh said.

Tarek Mehanna, a 29-year-old US citizen convicted this year of advocating violent jihad through his writings and translations of various texts, claims that the criminal case against him was initiated after he rebuffed the overtures of FBI agents to become an informant. “They said that I had a choice to make: I could do things the easy way or I could do them the hard way,” Mehanna said at his sentencing. “The ‘easy’ way, as they explained, was that I would become an informant for the government, and if I did so I would never see the inside of a courtroom or a prison cell. As for the hard way, this is it.”

With the FBI’s expanding operations overseas, such cases are not limited to the United States. In one instance in 2010, FBI agents and other American officials contacted Yonas Fikre, a Muslim American from Portland, Oregon, while he was visiting family in Sudan. Fikre declined to be questioned without a lawyer present and rejected a request to become an informant. He subsequently received an e-mail from a State Department address: “Thanks for meeting with us last week in Sudan. While we hope to get your side of the issues we keep hearing about, the choice is yours to make. The time to help yourself is now.” A year later, while traveling in the United Arab Emirates, Fikre was arrested by local security forces, who detained and tortured him for three months, he alleges, asking many of the same questions the FBI had posed to him. One of his interrogators told him he was being held at the behest of the United States.

Attorneys at the CLEAR (Creating Law Enforcement Accountability & Responsibility) project, based out of the City University of New York School of Law, have represented dozens of people since 2009 who have been approached by the FBI for voluntary interviews; they say the threat of retribution for those who refuse to become informants is real. “The FBI approaches the vast majority of our clients as potential informants to partake in mass surveillance of Muslim communities, unconnected to any real criminal investigation,” said Amna Akbar, a supervising attorney at CLEAR. “The bureau is aggressively attempting to cultivate informants in Muslim communities by using coercion, pressure tactics and intimidation.”

As an example, Akbar cites the case of Mohammed Tanvir, a 28-year-old from Pakistan who in October 2010 found himself on the Department of Homeland Security’s “no fly” list following more than a year of fending off requests from FBI agents to become an informant. In 2009, after returning from a visit to his wife in Pakistan, Tanvir says agents appeared at a 99 Cent Store in the Bronx where he worked to question him. “They said they had been following me,” Tanvir recalled. “They had photos of me riding the train to work.” The agents told Tanvir they’d heard from his co-workers at a previous construction job that he had been to Taliban training camps in Afghanistan, a claim Tanvir denies; he says that Indian immigrants at the worksite called him “Taliban” to taunt him about his Pakistani nationality. The agents nevertheless pressed him to become an informant, asking him to focus on the South Asian community in New York City, and offered him money and other enticements, such as bringing his wife to the United States and paying for his parents to make religious pilgrimages from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia. “We need people like you to just watch around your community,” Tanvir says the agents told him. He also says they wanted him to go to Afghanistan to infiltrate militant training camps and “report on what is going on there.” Tanvir, who insists he has no knowledge of the training camps, declined the FBI’s request despite threats that he would be deported back to Pakistan—a prospect that frightened him because his family depended on the money he was sending from the United States.

Tanvir says the FBI first approached him in 2007, after he wired money to help a childhood friend from Pakistan who had been detained in Mexico for overstaying his visa. At the time the agents merely questioned him, but once they’d set their sights on him as a potential informant, he says they called him repeatedly, showed up at his workplace, and threatened to arrest him if he refused to take a polygraph and undergo further questioning. Eventually, Tanvir says, he stopped taking their calls.

Akbar says the FBI placed Tanvir on the “no fly” list as retaliation for his refusal to work as a paid informant. In May CLEAR sent a letter to the FBI threatening to sue if Tanvir isn’t removed from the list. Regardless of the outcome, Tanvir—a green card holder who once hoped to settle in the United States—says that as a result of his ordeal, he is now seeking to return to Pakistan permanently.

Four years ago, undercover video recorded workers on forklifts forcing “downer” cows into slaughter at the Hallmark and Westland meat plant in Chino, CA, which at the time was a top supplier to the USDA
The sting, by the Humane Society of the United States, put Hallmark and Westland out of business. When USDA saw the undercover video, it demanded the largest beef recall in U.S. history and it immediately cut off Hallmark and Westland from the lucrative school lunch business.
The damaged meat going to the National School Lunch program was also the subject of a $150 million lawsuit against Hallmark and Westland.
Other animal rights organizations have pulled off their own stings since the big one at Chino.   These undercover investigations usually involve sending someone in to get a job with the company being targeted.
Until now, whenever one of these undercover videos was released, it usually meant whoever owned the animal facility where abuses were filmed was in big trouble.
But not any more in Iowa. Within a few hours on Wednesday, the Iowa Senate took up an “ag-gag” bill, made some amendments, and passed it on a 40-10 vote. The House then immediately took up the Senate changes and approved them without debate on a 69-28 vote.
The bill, House File 589, now on Iowa House File 589‘s desk, is all but certain to be signed into law, and it will be the first “ag-gag” law in America, says Nathan Runkle, executive director of Chicago-based Mercy for Animals (MFA), an animal rights group that has been active in Iowa.
The new law, if it passes constitutional muster, could turn the tables on animal rights groups doing these undercover investigations. It gives Iowa’s county sheriffs a long list of possible violations to charge once it is disclosed that any filming or recording was done without the permission of the animal facility owner.
If the Iowa law had been in effect in California in 2008, Hallmark and Westland would have been able to go to court claiming status as victims of “animal facility tampering” for an “amount equaling three times all the actual and consequential damages” against “the person causing the damages.”
“This flawed and misdirected legislation could set a dangerous precedent nationwide by throwing shut the doors to industrial factory farms and allowing animal abuse, environmental violations, and food contamination issues to flourish undetected, unchallenged and unaddressed,” says Runkle.  “This bill is bad for consumers, who want more, not less, transparency in production of their food.”
Some of the more likely unconstitutional language was removed from the bill, but Runkle told Food Safety News the intent of the legislation remains exactly the same – “to shield animal abusers from public scrutiny and prosecute investigators who dare to expose animal cruelty, environmental violations, dangerous working conditions or food safety concerns.”
Animal rights organizations like HSUS and MFA – working with investigators to expose violations – could themselves be prosecuted under the new Iowa law.  And, the law does not just apply to animal facilities but also any “crop operation.”
Recent investigations by MFA in Iowa are certainly among those getting the attention of lawmakers. In 2011, the Chicago animal rights group turned its cameras on a large Iowa egg farm owned by Sparboe, and an Iowa Select Farms pig operation.
It found over-crowding in battery cages, some containing dead hens, on the egg farm, and at the pig operation sows being penned in confinement cages and testicles being removed from piglets without painkillers.
 And in 2009, MFA exposed the Iowa-based Hy-Line Hatchery’s practice of throwing more than 150,000 live male chicks into grinding machines every day.
Runkle says passage of the  “ag-gag” law proves Iowa agriculture “has a lot to hide.”
“This law is un-American and a broad government overreach. It seeks to shield animal abusers from public scrutiny and prosecute the brave whistleblowers who dare to speak out against animal cruelty, environmental pollution and corporate corruption.”
The new law shields animal abusers from public scrutiny, makes criminals out of those who dare to expose cruelty to farm animals and threatens the consumers’ right to know, according to the MFA.
Wayne Pacelle, president and chief executive of HSUS, has written Gov. Branstad, urging the Republican governor to veto HF 589.
 “The intent of this bill is simple: shield animal agribusiness from public scrutiny by punishing whistleblowers and protecting animal abusers,” wrote Pacelle. “By signing this bill into law, animal agribusiness will have unbridled and unchecked power over worker safety, public health and animal welfare.”
Pacelle said the Iowa Senate and House rushed the bill through at a speed rarely found in the legislative process. Normally, he said, deliberations of such consequence take weeks, or at least several days.
Iowa’s sudden passage of an “ag-gag” law has brought together opposition to these state measures by a broad spectrum of national organizations, including animal rights, civil liberties, public health, food safety, public health, environmental and other groups.
Many see HF589 as an unconstitutional infringement on First Amendment rights.
Ag-gag bills were introduced in four states last year, including Iowa. None of those passed.  This year, ag-gag bills have been introduced in Utah, Nebraska, Minnesota, Missouri, Illinois, Iowa, Indiana, Florida and New York.
The Florida bill was defeated.  Except for Iowa, the others are pending.
The Wednesday night passage of the Iowa ag-gag bill came with support from some of the state’s most powerful agricultural lobbyists including: The Institute for Cooperatives, The Agribusiness Association of Iowa, Iowa Select Farms, Iowa Cattlemen’s Association, Iowa Dairy Association, Iowa Farm Bureau, Iowa Corn Growers Association and Monsanto Co.
Under the new law, anyone making “a false statement or representation” as part of an application of employment at an animal facility could, after a first conviction, be charged with a class D felony.
To produce a record of image or sound without the owner’s permission is defined as the new crime of “animal facility interference.”

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/03/iowa-approves-nations-first-ag-gag-law/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=120301