Shadow Government

In search of truth, the mysterious, and bizarre. Gary rules here.
Forum rules
Civil discussion appreciated. No Spam...
User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 88992
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 136720Unread post Blue Frost
Wed Jun 01, 2016 8:38 pm

I have criminal thoughts all the time, some would disturb the people in the middle east. Could I be guilty of a future crime :think:



User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 137094Unread post Gary Oak
Wed Jun 08, 2016 5:49 pm

I imagine that the PC police and the shariah police will one day be cracking down on a few of the threads of Gary Oaks Corner. Hopefully Obamas legacy will be undone to some degree if he steps down. More freedoms need to be taken away obviously to satisfy the liberals and the muslims of course.

European Union Declares War On Internet Free Speech

The European Union (EU), in partnership with Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Microsoft, has unveiled a "code of conduct" to combat the spread of "illegal hate speech" online in Europe.

Proponents of the initiative argue that in the aftermath of the recent terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels, a crackdown on "hate speech" is necessary to counter jihadist propaganda online.

Opponents counter that the initiative amounts to an assault on free speech in Europe. They say that the EU's definition of "hate speech" and "incitement to violence" is so vague that it could include virtually anything deemed politically incorrect by European authorities, including criticism of mass migration, Islam or even the European Union itself.

Some Members of the European Parliament have characterized the EU's code of online conduct which requires "offensive" material to be removed from the Internet within 24 hours, and replaced with "counter-narratives" as "Orwellian."

The "code of conduct" was announced on May 31 in a statement by the European Commission, the unelected administrative arm of the European Union. A summary of the initiative follows:

"By signing this code of conduct, the IT companies commit to continuing their efforts to tackle illegal hate speech online. This will include the continued development of internal procedures and staff training to guarantee that they review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.

"The IT companies will also endeavor to strengthen their ongoing partnerships with civil society organisations who will help flag content that promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct. The IT companies and the European Commission also aim to continue their work in identifying and promoting independent counter-narratives [emphasis added], new ideas and initiatives, and supporting educational programs that encourage critical thinking."

Excerpts of the "code of conduct" include:

"The IT Companies share the European Commission's and EU Member States' commitment to tackle illegal hate speech online. Illegal hate speech, as defined by the Framework Decision 2008/913/JHA of 28 November 2008 on combating certain forms and expressions of racism and xenophobia by means of criminal law and national laws transposing it, means all conduct publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a group of persons or a member of such a group defined by reference to race, color, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin....

"The IT Companies support the European Commission and EU Member States in the effort to respond to the challenge of ensuring that online platforms do not offer opportunities for illegal online hate speech to spread virally. The spread of illegal hate speech online not only negatively affects the groups or individuals that it targets, it also negatively impacts those who speak out for freedom, tolerance and non-discrimination in our open societies and has a chilling effect on the democratic discourse on online platforms.

"While the effective application of provisions criminalizing hate speech is dependent on a robust system of enforcement of criminal law sanctions against the individual perpetrators of hate speech, this work must be complemented with actions geared at ensuring that illegal hate speech online is expeditiously acted upon by online intermediaries and social media platforms, upon receipt of a valid notification, in an appropriate time-frame. To be considered valid in this respect, a notification should not be insufficiently precise or inadequately substantiated.

"The IT Companies, taking the lead on countering the spread of illegal hate speech online, have agreed with the European Commission on a code of conduct setting the following public commitments:

"The IT Companies to have in place clear and effective processes to review notifications regarding illegal hate speech on their services so they can remove or disable access to such content. The IT companies to have in place Rules or Community Guidelines clarifying that they prohibit the promotion of incitement to violence and hateful conduct.

"The IT Companies to review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary.

"The IT Companies and the European Commission, recognising the value of independent counter speech against hateful rhetoric and prejudice, aim to continue their work in identifying and promoting independent counter-narratives, new ideas and initiatives and supporting educational programs that encourage critical thinking."

The agreement also requires Internet companies to establish a network of "trusted reporters" in all 28 EU member states to flag online content that "promotes incitement to violence and hateful conduct."

The EU Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality, Vra Jourová, has defended the initiative:

"The recent terror attacks have reminded us of the urgent need to address illegal online hate speech. Social media is unfortunately one of the tools that terrorist groups use to radicalize young people and racists use to spread violence and hatred. This agreement is an important step forward to ensure that the internet remains a place of free and democratic expression, where European values and laws are respected. I welcome the commitment of worldwide IT companies to review the majority of valid notifications for removal of illegal hate speech in less than 24 hours and remove or disable access to such content, if necessary."

Others disagree. The National Secular Society (NSS) of the UK warned that the EU's plans "rest on a vague definition of 'hate speech' and risk threatening online discussions which criticize religion." It added:

"The agreement comes amid repeated accusations from ex-Muslims that social media organizations are censoring them online. The Council of Ex-Muslims of Britain has now begun collecting examples from its followers of Facebook censoring 'atheist, secular and ex-Muslim content' after false 'mass reporting' by 'cyber Jihadists.' They have asked their supporters to report details and evidence of any instances of pages and groups being 'banned [or] suspended from Facebook for criticizing Islam and Islamism.'"

NSS communications officer Benjamin Jones said:

"Far from tackling online 'cyber jihad,' the agreement risks having the exact opposite effect and entrapping any critical discussion of religion under vague 'hate speech' rules. Poorly-trained Facebook or Twitter staff, perhaps with their own ideological bias, could easily see heated criticism of Islam and think it is 'hate speech,' particularly if pages or users are targeted and mass reported by Islamists."

In an interview with Breitbart London, the CEO of Index on Censorship, Jodie Ginsburg, said:

"Hate speech laws are already too broad and ambiguous in much of Europe. This agreement fails to properly define what 'illegal hate speech' is and does not provide sufficient safeguards for freedom of expression.

"It devolves power once again to unelected corporations to determine what amounts to hate speech and police it a move that is guaranteed to stifle free speech in the mistaken belief this will make us all safer. It won't. It will simply drive unpalatable ideas and opinions underground where they are harder to police or to challenge.

"There have been precedents of content removal for unpopular or offensive viewpoints and this agreement risks amplifying the phenomenon of deleting controversial yet legal content via misuse or abuse of the notification processes."

A coalition of free speech organizations, European Digital Rights and Access Now, announced their decision not to take part in future discussions with the European Commission, saying that "we do not have confidence in the ill-considered 'code of conduct' that was agreed." A statement warned:

"In short, the 'code of conduct' downgrades the law to a second-class status, behind the 'leading role' of private companies that are being asked to arbitrarily implement their terms of service. This process, established outside an accountable democratic framework, exploits unclear liability rules for online companies. It also creates serious risks for freedom of expression, as legal but controversial content may well be deleted as a result of this voluntary and unaccountable take-down mechanism.

"This means that this 'agreement' between only a handful of companies and the European Commission is likely in breach of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (under which restrictions on fundamental rights should be provided for by law), and will, in practical terms, overturn case law of the European Court of Human Rights on the defense of legal speech."

Janice Atkinson, an independent MEP for the South East England region, summed it up this way: "It's Orwellian. Anyone who has read 1984 sees its very re-enactment live."

Even before signing on to the EU's code of conduct, social media sites have been cracking down on free speech, often at the behest of foreign governments.

In September 2015, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was overheard on a live microphone confronting Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on what he was doing to prevent criticism of her open-door immigration policies.

In January 2016, Facebook launched an "Online Civil Courage Initiative" aimed at Facebook users in Germany and geared toward "fighting hate speech and extremism on the Internet."

Writing for Gatestone Institute, British commentator Douglas Murray noted that Facebook's assault on "racist" speech "appears to include anything critical of the EU's current catastrophic immigration policy." He wrote:

"By deciding that 'xenophobic' comment in reaction to the crisis is also 'racist,' Facebook has made the view of the majority of the European people (who, it must be stressed, are opposed to Chancellor Merkel's policies) into 'racist' views, and so is condemning the majority of Europeans as 'racist.' This is a policy that will do its part in pushing Europe into a disastrous future.

Facebook has also set its sights on Gatestone Institute affiliated writers. In January 2013, Facebook suspended the account of Khaled Abu Toameh after he wrote about corruption in the Palestinian Authority. The account was reopened 24 hours later, but with the two posts deleted and no explanation. Abu Toameh wrote:

"It's still a matter of censorship. They decide what's acceptable. Now we have to be careful about what we post and what we share. Does this mean we can't criticize Arab governments anymore?"

In June 2016, Facebook suspended the account of Ingrid Carlqvist, Gatestone's Swedish expert, after she posted a Gatestone video to her Facebook feed called "Sweden's Migrant Rape Epidemic." In an editorial, Gatestone wrote:

"After enormous grassroots pressure from Gatestone's readers, the Swedish media started reporting on Facebook's heavy-handed censorship. It backfired, and Facebook went into damage-control mode. They put Ingrid's account back up without any explanation or apology. Ironically, their censorship only gave Ingrid's video more attention.

"Facebook and the EU have backed down for now. But they're deadly serious about stopping ideas they don't like. They'll be back."

Originally published at Gatestone Institute - reposted with permission

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/articl ... Sqij1e6.99

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 137804Unread post Gary Oak
Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:31 pm

In the Tom Cruise movie Minority Report I do believe that they were showing us way back then technology that they already had and intended to use in the near future. I wonder if other technology they showed in that movie they also have ?

Pre-Crime Facial Recognition System Developed

One day next year, you try to board a plane but are stopped by security. The automated facial recognition system has informed the officials that you look like a terrorist and might pose a security risk.


A few days later, you walk into a bank to apply for a mortgage, but are turned away before you can explain because once again the automated facial analysis software the bank uses has determined you have features associated with gamblers.

You have no criminal record and your credit rating is fine, but that doesn't matter to the software behind the computer system known as Faception.

Based on an image, it matches facial features across its database to predict behavior before it occurs and label you with such tags as pedophile, terrorist, gambler or thief based solely on the geometry of your face.

The Israeli startup Faception claims to already be in talks with the Department of Homeland Security in the United States about employing its system for which it has, according to marketing material, "built 15 different classifiers, including extrovert, genius, academic researcher, professional poker players, bingo player, brand promoter, white collar offender, pedophile and terrorist."

Faception claims to have identified 9 of the 11 terrorists involved in the Paris attacks when its criminal detection algorithms were applied to photos after the attacks and the overall accuracy is estimated at 80% by the company.

The system, it must be remembered, does not perform facial recognition in the traditional sense, not bothering to attach a name to a face.

Using facial features to predict traits, it instead lies much closer to 19th century theories of phrenology, a now debunked pseudoscience that used the shape of the skull to predict a host of factors about a person's mind and behavior.

While few would argue the power of body language and facial expression to indicate our mood and attention, alerting a security guard to a nervous commuter for example, the notion that inherent criminality can be found in the shape of one's eyes or the position of a nose is both deeply troubling and doubted by most experts.

But just like no-fly lists that prevent toddlers who share names with terrorists, let's not rest assured that truth, racism or effectives will be an impediment to implementing Faception.

Yet true facial recognition carries its own dangers as well. In the past century, the average person enjoyed a measure of privacy through obscurity. Walk down the street of a major city and there was little chance of being recognized among thousands of anonymous faces.

That is all changing now. As facial recognition systems continue to be refined and produced for smartphones, instant recognition of any face is in the hands of the public at large not to mention tens of thousands of CCTV cameras.

One such application is called FindFace, an app developed by two Russian programmers that allows anyone to use facial recognition software and their smartphone camera to identify faces on the street and link each to a real name with 70% accuracy.

The system cross references facial geometry with photos found on social networks to produce name matches for anyone passing on the street, sitting on a bus or entering a store.

It is not hard to imagine uses for such a system for those who would like to identify protestors, find the name of their next stalking victim or perhaps ID a witness or an adult film actress.

If the potential for abuse with FindFace and its link to social networks, then consider the power of the UK site Facewatch, an online site that acts as a public watch list for known face profiles and which has now been integrated with facial recognition software, NEC's NeoFace, and private surveillance cameras.

As reported first by Ars Technica in 2015, the intention is for a shop owners to place a thief or unruly customer's face on the public watch list which will allow every security camera across the world to flag that individual and deny him entry into other restaurants and stores.

What could possibly go wrong with a crowd sourced black list for automated social exclusion? Certainly a waiter who gets stiffed on a tip wouldn't add your face to the list.

With any of the proposed systems, there exists the danger of not only tearing away the last layers of public privacy that remain but also of placing an inordinate level of trust in the accuracy of those systems through a phenomenon known as automation bias by which we tend to trust automatic systems more than humans now.

Aside from the dubious claims of predicting behavior simply on one's facial features, a premise that appears on the surface to be little more than automating a centuries old process of racial profiling, the rapid advances of facial recognition could spell an end to any semblance of privacy in public.

Soon, these systems promise, our faces will be automatically entered into government, commercial and crowd sourced databases open to advanced recognition algorithms.

Are we all ready to live in a world where police and even strangers don't need to ask for ID since it is written on our very faces?

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/articl ... 6AgzJgP.99

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 88992
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 137806Unread post Blue Frost
Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:37 pm

There was a news report yesterday on recognition software that has almost everyone in it in America, and Europe, it can be used for a lot of that stuff already.
It started as marketing, but behind the curtain it was the government.

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 137809Unread post Gary Oak
Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:43 pm

I wonder if they have alreaxy been using it on the sly ? and if so then for how long ?

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 88992
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 137815Unread post Blue Frost
Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:56 pm

I remember it starting in the 80s so it's likely been out 20 years before that.

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 138075Unread post Gary Oak
Wed Jun 22, 2016 10:41 am

I have wondered what methods they are using that we don't know about yet.

Govt. Surveillance Using Unconventional Methods To Listen To Your Conversation

Governments monitoring citizens is nothing new. Since the formation of organized civilizations, leaders have sought out information regarding those who live under their rule, leadership, dictatorship, or other form of government.

This goes beyond informants and spies, often relying on technology of the day to monitor specific conversations to identify potential threats against the country.

With technology growing at a rapid rate, governments around the world (not just the United States) are turning to more unconventional methods to listen to individual conversations, including, potentially, yours.

While this is nothing new, it is important to understand the ramifications.

A Brief History on Government Surveillance

During and immediately after World War II, mail correspondence coming in and out of the country often had government officials reading letters. East Germany and the Soviet Union would monitor individuals who they believed might defect to the West.

Earlier on, in the United States, Herbert O. Yardley sat in charge of a group of Army code breakers using code name "Black Chamber" to spy on communications within the United States.

Towards the end of the Second World War, Operation Shamrock evolved from Black Chamber in 1945. The United States had three communication companies handling the majority of all correspondence made within the U.S. (Western Union, ITT and RCA Global).

The Army received direct, legal access to all three of these companies, making it possible to read all individual conversations.

To monitor potential Soviet sympathizers and other possible communists, the NSA was founded in 1952, taking over for Operation Shamrock. However, the federal government did not openly and publicly acknowledge the existence of the NSA until 1975.

During the 1960s, the NSA created Project Minaret, used to monitor and record telephone communication. Giant warehouses full of tape recorders were used to automatically record phone conversations when lines connected.

Up until a congressional investigation and open hearing known as the Church Committee hearings in 1975, the NSA operated behind the scenes, illegally, obtaining information. The committee found this to be in violation of the Fourth Amendment, so it passed The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

This act required the NSA to go to a secret court to receive permission in order to monitor specific individuals, both within the U.S. and abroad.

Current Techniques and Methods to Monitor Your Conversation

In the book 1984 by George Orwell, the government could more or less listen in on everything a person did. That, currently, is becoming more and more the case. While there likely isn't someone sitting in a dark room filled with cigarette smoke, listening to your conversation, what is going in is known as data mining.

Data mining is something almost all major tech companies do. It uses information from a variety of sources and cross references everything to identify possible traits. It helps come up with your search engine results and Facebook advertisements.

It also helps determine whether you are involved in a possible terrorist plot. When you send an email, instant message, buy something online or visit a Web site, all this information is sent through a fiber-optic splitter, with some of this information obtained by an NSA data intercept station and cataloged via keywords.

This is saved based on your IP address and other specific information to cross reference what you say, do, buy and visit online with possible threats. In other words, everything you do online, while not necessarily directly monitored, is mined for information.

Today, video and audio surveillance in public locations is sent to police stations and government facilities. It makes it possible to track down criminals more easily, but it also makes it possible to listen in directly and record a conversation you have on your phone, or just with the person you're sitting next to.

If you have a problem with the President, or the bus driver, the audio recorder will pick it up.

When you ride on buses or trains in many parts of the United States, what you say could be recorded. Get on a New Jersey Transit light rail train in Hoboken or Jersey City, for example, and you might notice an inconspicuous sign that says "video and audio systems in use."

For a lot of people, audio recording seems like crossing a line.

"It is creepy that they want to record our conversations," says Jeanne LoCicero, a lawyer with the ACLU of New Jersey. "We all have a reasonable expectation that we can have private conversations in public and this really is undermining that principle."

Sometimes the methods used to gather information are right out of spy movies. Jeff Harp, a KPIX 5 security analyst and former FBI special agent revealed how listening devices were planted around the San Francisco Bay Area in an effort to catch real estate agents rigging foreclosure auctions, "they put microphones under rocks, they put microphones in trees, they plant microphones in equipment. I mean, theres microphones that are planted in places that people dont think about, because thats the intent!"

Surveillance devices can often be hidden in plain sight. LED fixtures are the "backbone" of a new surveillance system scrutinizing and recording us. The New York Times reported that 171 LED fixtures inside Terminal B at Newark Liberty International Airport are "watching" us.

Using an array of sensors and eight video cameras around the terminal, the light fixtures are part of a new wireless network that collects and feeds data into software that can spot long lines, recognize license plates and even identify suspicious activity, sending alerts to the appropriate staff.

It's not the "green" side of saving energy by automatically turning the lights off and on that has the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey excited and "already talking about expanding it to other terminals and buildings." Instead, the excitement comes from the mountains of data captured by sensors and analyzed by software about "the habits of ordinary citizens."

Furthermore, home tech is becoming Internet connected. Home lights, refrigerators, ovens, coffee pots and everything else come with built-in Wi-Fi. Now, with the data mining, the government is able to determine what you like to eat, when you drink your morning coffee and even watch you through cameras built into motion detectors (in your lights) and through the webcam in your computer.

The Government is Listening

While government surveillance is nothing new, modern technology is, and governments around the world are taking advantage, making it possible for government facilities and organizations everywhere to know just about everything about you and your family.

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/articl ... RlPHu6I.99

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 139043Unread post Gary Oak
Tue Jul 05, 2016 8:11 pm

20 Ways Technology Is Tracking You On A Constant Basis


The Internet is essentially a giant copying machine. Every time you send an email, you're sending a copy of your message to the recipient.

The process is more or less the same for every communication that's made whether we think of what we're doing as communication or not.

But everything we do online starts with a command which adds up to a message which is stored, duplicated and shared.

Our mobile technology does the same thing, and this process enables our devices to generate a constant stream of information about our behavior both in the real world and online.

Here are 20 ways technology is tracking you on a constant basis.

Online Banks- If you use PayPal or Square to hold and spend money online, every transaction is recorded.

Automobile Computerization- Most cars built since 2006 use integrated computer components which record and transmit navigation data.

Roadway Sensors- Cameras on light poles, cable sensors, and intersection pressure plates record how many cars pass over, and in some cases can be used to track a single vehicle.

Social Media- If you spend any time on social media you already know and have chosen not to think about how much personal information you're giving away.

Ride Sharing Taxis- Modern taxi services, like Uber, make an electronic record of your travel which can be accessed and shared.

Air Travel- Your flight schedules, and locations are all logged in a database.

Drone Spying- Along our borders, and around military bases, surveillance drones can capture and record your activities.

Snail Mail- Every piece of mail that comes to and from your home is scanned and goes into a permanent online database.

Utility Usage- Your electricity and water usage are monitored and recorded.

Face Recognition Software- Every time your image finds its way onto the Internet, especially on Facebook, face recognition software is ticking away to identify you.

Cell Phone Call and Location Data- Everything your smartphone does is recorded including location indicators and other data usage.

Security Cameras- Most security camera feeds are stored in online sharing services which can easily be viewed by intelligence agencies or hackers.

Browser Data- Google has been tracking browser user's online behavior for years. They do it for advertising research and to develop tech that can anticipate your next online purchase.

Smart Homes- Intelligent appliances don't just work on preset timers and obey our commands, they also transmit all usage data to the Internet via a wifi link that is often not advertised.

Home Security- As with smart homes and appliances, our home security systems often transmit data over the Internet where it can be collected.

Credit cards- Every purchase you make is tracked, recorded, and shared with other merchants and agencies.

Smart Devices- This covers a lot of ground. It basically means anything that's interactive and can communicate with the Internet.

Online Merchants- Buying things online creates at least three records of your activity, your browser movements, the record of sales, and the delivery info.

Public Libraries- One of the oldest ways to monitor people's private thoughts. Governments can track a person's public library record to make determinations about possible criminality or dissident political thoughts- and they don't even need computers to do it.

IRS- This federal agency tracks of all your financial information from the moment you begin working until death.

Of course, there are even more frightening ways people can be tracked and are likely to be tracked in the future- such as data firms secretly using your webcam and microphone to spy on you.

People are increasingly warming up to the idea of having RFID chips installed in their bodies in order to carry medical, financial or other information.

But these chips can be surreptitiously scanned to track a person's location, their health status, and their behavior.

What's more, these are just the tip of the iceberg, and they are only the tracking devices that officials and tech firms admit can be used to track you.

When you imagine the experimental, and secret military methods of tracking people that are likely to exist - you realize there is truly no place to hide.

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/articl ... 7LqCVYX.99

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 139238Unread post Gary Oak
Thu Jul 07, 2016 11:00 pm

This would be another way to get rid of that pesky American constitution that stands in the way of taking America's freedoms away. Many people believe that Obamanation got a degree in Constitutional law so that he would be best equipt to destroy it.


New Push For Global Police State

On June 26, 2016 the American Mirror published a series of photos of MRAP armored vehicles with United Nations markings being carried on trucks down Interstate 81 in Virginia two days earlier

The photos came with open speculation on why the UN would have vehicles, sealed against gas, on US soil. World Net Daily followed up with a more nuanced piece that indicated that the MRAPs were not intended for an imminent UN military deployment in the US.

Instead, they had been purchased from American companies, before being manufactured in York, PA and were headed overseas to be used by the UN in conflict areas. Crisis averted, right? Not quite.

Don't bother looking for blue helmeted soldiers at Walmart or white UN vehicles on the freeway this month, despite where Obama would prefer to deploy them.

There is no question that the UN is expanding its police powers or that Americans are footing the bill for it, just look at the increase from 2,000 to 13,000 UN "police officers" from 1999 to today with further increases requested, as reported in The New American.

Nor is there any doubt that the UN's deputy chief is asking for and receiving "the latest technology and access to intelligence" in addition to armored vehicles and thousands of new troops.

So far, these roughly 13,000 troops have been deployed to eighteen conflict zones designated as "peace missions", often to help fill a political power vacuum.

No such power vacuum exists in the United States where just the opposite is the primary threat to liberty.

In May, 2015 the trend of providing military equipment to domestic law enforcement had become so strong that President Obama issued an executive order to seize back some of the tanks provided free of charge to local law enforcement, but it is far too little and too late to dismantle the police state.

Massive amounts of military equipment taken together with a push for "internationalizing" American police procedure have begun to transform what used to be a local, community-based organization into the method of control for globalists.

The Strong Cities Network is one such example of promoting international policing in a surveillance state.

The Strong Cities Network is an agreement governed by a law-enforcement group whose laws and procedures will be applied in cities around the world, including, at first, some American cities such as New York, Atlanta, Denver and Minneapolis.

Law-enforcement tactics and measures will be adopted from international bodies, such as the police arm of the United Nations, not the local control that is the bedrock of the US system.

Those promoting this network never fail to remind us that it is intended to fight terrorism and violent extremism. Attorney General Lynch referred to establishing "a global community" in her statement unveiling the new program.

The lure of safety from terrorism is a powerful one, but it is important to understand that the "extremism" often referred to in the globalist speeches is that of resistance to their agenda.

In 2012, in a speech to the UN's General Assembly, President Obama declared that "the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."

Opposition to Sharia Law and uncontrolled immigration are symptoms of a much larger problem that begins with shifting control from local police to State, then Federal, then a far-removed international council formed to decide that patriotism and liberty are extremist values.

Spiking food prices, disease, natural disaster, economic collapse or any of a number of other catalysts could push the country into 'extremism', providing justification enough.

Let us not forget the last time that Interpol came under the control of the Nazi, Reinhard Heydrich, and shifted its attention to such dangerous "extremists" that would try to help Jews escape the Holocaust.

Couple this with an omnipresent digital surveillance state that crosses borders and there is little need for foreign soldiers at all.

Don't be afraid of UN soldiers marching into town but instead of the slowly boiling pot that labels patriotism as dangerous extremism and seeks to replace local values and local control with a global police state based on foreign values.

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/articl ... frISWBM.99

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 88992
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 139239Unread post Blue Frost
Thu Jul 07, 2016 11:05 pm

I read about those weeks ago, people where not sure if they where built for the UN, or something else .
A few years ago there where many shipped to Georgia, and Florida, most got shipped out i believe.
Any UN troops I see they better not be trying to enforce anything, me, and a few friends already dislike the UN.
There is a bill I read that they want America out of the UN, but it will never pass.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 88992
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 139240Unread post Blue Frost
Thu Jul 07, 2016 11:07 pm


User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 139871Unread post Gary Oak
Fri Jul 22, 2016 2:34 pm

Surveillance Technology Advances
News Image By PNW Staff July 20, 2016
Share this article:
The first time I saw a camera use facial recognition for autofocus assist I immediately remembered the original Terminator film when the terrifying cyborg creature walked down a darkened alley, its targeting and AI systems scanning the faces of passers-by.



This technology has been around for a few years now, but in the early stages it seemed about as reliable as voice recognition, that is to say, laughably bad. So I wrote it off,

But, in the intervening time, it's made strides in an Orwellian direction. Today, it's on social media, scanning faces and logging them along with massive amounts of metadata. The health industry, as well, has been quick to jump on board. Thousands of doctors and health facilities insist on scanning the faces of new patients or updating their files for existing patients.

Thinking about the privacy implications, the picture becomes very frightening, very quickly. Microsoft recently announced the release of a service that can guess your emotional state from a photo. Before that, they produced an age guessing app, which had a sneaky ad-serving element to it.

The first generation of facial recognition software worked similarly to the system by which fingerprints are matched, by correlating similarities, their arrangement, and proportions.

Today, these systems are not only much more powerful in terms pf processing power, but they are also far more sophisticated. Possessing AI components, modern face detection technology (FDT) is very close to displaying human level abilities in certain respects.

Beyond recognizing faces, today's systems can log and utilize an array of other types of biometric information to verify an individual such as hair style, body proportions, stride length and more. These kinds of markers are usable by the system even in very low-resolution images, as low res as 36x36.

Fortune magazine reported last year that a system known as Churchix is creating a database of people who are members of churches. As early as 2014, it became possible to do reverse Google searches using anonymous photographs of people.

There is a deluge of biometric data that's being sucked up by voice command software, fingerprints, and facial recognition systems in addition to massive amounts of metadata such as phone calls, GPS info, and electronic receipts.

You can be identified and located at almost any time or place. As the late radio commentator, Paul Harvey, used to say, "You can run, but you cant hide."

The issue has been a serious one for a long time now. But the culture of security has ratcheted things up to a terrifying degree.

Two events have made the reality of personal surveillance a very near and present one: the passing and subsequent bolstering of The Patriot Act, and the revelations given to us by NSA whistleblower, Edward Snowden.



In the shadow of September 11th, 2001, we allowed the government far-reaching powers to curtail our privacy and freedom.

Until Snowden made his startling revelations and fled the country, many of us didn't really believe that anyone, not even the government would want to record massive amounts of personal data. As time has progressed, the fact of massive overreach into our private lives is undeniable.

Today, we don't sit in our homes and offices wondering how we would feel 'if' we were being surveilled, we think instead of whether we've said something too near to our smartphone or written an email that might be construed as a national security threat.

The FBI has openly admitted to having 52 million faces on file, of which 1.5 million are in US prisons today. The size of the total "criminal population" cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, come anywhere near 52 million. That gives you about a 1 in 8 chance of being in that database, and they undoubtedly have more.

The size of the total "criminal population" cannot by any stretch of the imagination come anywhere near to 52 million. That gives you about a 1 in 8 chance of being in that database- and they undoubtedly have more.

Technology, such as facial recognition, is here to stay; its not going anywhere. The convenience factor that consumers enjoy and the data sucking potential of big business is far too compelling.

But, on a personal level, what would it take to get the average American to take a critical look at the use of their favorite toys?

http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/articl ... ews_id=506

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 88992
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 141344Unread post Blue Frost
Sun Aug 21, 2016 7:26 pm

Who really runs the CIA, nothing it does seems American to me, or in Americas Interest.
To me it seems to be a very covert criminal organization. Drugs, murders, Coups, money laundering.

[video][/video]

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 141567Unread post Gary Oak
Fri Aug 26, 2016 4:03 pm

by the looks of things I must be on their watchlist.


People concerned about FEMA camps, communism or Agenda 21 named 'potential terrorists' by U.S. government

(NaturalNews) The United States was founded upon certain important principles -- one of which guarantees its citizens the right to free speech.

In the past couple of decades or so -- particularly since 9/11 -- Americans have witnessed this right being increasingly eroded. Authorities have begun identifying ordinary citizens as "potential terrorists" merely for having strong views and opinions regarding a number of topics.

For instance, if you are concerned about illegal immigration or oppose abortion, you may be labeled as a threat. The federal government has expanded its definitions of "extremism" and "potential terrorism" to include a wide range of people and their views -- chances are that anyone reading this falls into at least one of these categories.

Michael Snyder of TheTruthWins.com has compiled a list of 72 types of people [1] classified in U.S. government documents as extremists or potential terrorists.

The documents include military training manuals [2] and memos [3]; terrorism training manuals for law enforcement [4]; guidelines from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START) [5] and other sources.

Some of the types of people listed as potential threats include:

Members of the Patriot Movement
Those opposed to Agenda 21
Those concerned about FEMA camps
Those who support gun rights
Those who oppose abortion
Those concerned about communism
Those opposed to the "New World Order"
Those who visit "extremist" websites or blogs

This is just a partial list -- in short, almost anyone who has deep-seated beliefs regarding almost any type of social, religious or political issue could be labeled as a potential terrorist by the government.

As Snyder observes:

At one time, the term "terrorist" was used very narrowly. The government applied that label to people like Osama bin Laden and other Islamic jihadists. But now the Obama administration is removing all references to Islam from terror training materials, and instead the term "terrorist" is being applied to large groups of American citizens. ...

The first step to persecuting any group of people is to demonize them. And right now large groups of peaceful, law-abiding citizens are being ruthlessly demonized.

It's obvious that the federal government takes these "threats" seriously -- even when disguising their concerns in a seemingly lighthearted manner. In a recent article published by TheBlaze [6], John Whitehead examines the use of the "zombie" metaphor by various government agencies in their training drills:

For years now, the government has been carrying out military training drills with zombies as the enemy. ...

The zombie exercises appear to be kitschy and fun--government agents running around trying to put down a zombie rebellion--but what if the zombies in the exercises are us, the citizenry, viewed by those in power as mindless, voracious, zombie hordes?

Whitehead notes that, by 2008, the government had compiled a list of more than 8 million names of Americans who are considered a threat to national security. The list is to be used "by the military in the event of a national catastrophe, a suspension of the Constitution or the imposition of martial law." [7]

As Whitehead points out, the government is pursuing a strategy for countering what it perceives as threats by first "detecting" and subsequently neutralizing them:

If there is any lesson to be learned, it is simply this: whether the threat to national security comes in the form of actual terrorists, imaginary zombies or disgruntled American citizens infected with dangerous ideas about freedom, the government's response to such threats remains the same: detect, deter and annihilate.

We are living in dangerous times -- at least for those of us who are determined to exercise our right to free speech.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/047613_poten ... z4ITEfe6ia

User avatar
Twilight turtle
VIP Member.
VIP Member.
Posts: 907
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 3:29 am
Location: Essex, UK

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 142124Unread post Twilight turtle
Fri Sep 09, 2016 8:19 am

Gary Oak wrote: Every law takes away a little bit of freedom. I suspect that they are using chipping livestock in effort to try and make getting chipped seem mundane. You simply would not be able to get off of the grid even if you wanted to.
Getting off the grid - yep, it's just to keep us tethered to "them" and totally dependant by taking away choice. They need us, but make out it's the other way around. Imagine us all completely free, self reliant, living off free energy and maybe growing or making our own produce like in the old days and trading our surplus with each other. But now, we all march to the same water hole for everything - our food, car fuel, electric, money lenders. They got a good thing going there, hostage customer base. If we went back to how things used to be, these corps and gov't would get scattered to the wind and not needed anymore.

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 142137Unread post Gary Oak
Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:16 pm

The surveillance trap is being set. It appears that they want total control before they take away our freedoms.

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 142138Unread post Gary Oak
Fri Sep 09, 2016 12:20 pm

Could it be that they don't want the leadership of a country as powerful as the USA to be in the hands of the populace of the USA ?

Do We Trust The Elections? Homeland Security To Take Charge

image: http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/images ... 012016.jpg
News Image By Michael Snyder - End of The America Dream Blog September 01, 2016
Share this article:


Why does the Department of Homeland Security all of a sudden want to oversee security for the election in November? Just a little while ago I checked the Drudge Report, and I was greeted by the following headline all in red: "HOMELAND SECURITY TO TAKE CHARGE OF ELECTIONS".

I was immediately alarmed, because I had already heard about how local election databases had been hacked, and Donald Trump has expressed concern that the presidential election in November could be rigged somehow. So I immediately clicked on the link and it took me to an article from the Washington Examiner...

Even before the FBI identified new cyber attacks on two separate state election boards, the Department of Homeland Security began considering declaring the election a "critical infrastructure," giving it the same control over security it has over Wall Street and and the electric power grid.

The latest admissions of attacks could speed up that effort possibly including the upcoming presidential election, according to officials.

"We should carefully consider whether our election system, our election process, is critical infrastructure like the financial sector, like the power grid," Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said.

I would definitely agree with Johnson that our election system is critical infrastructure.

But can a Department of Homeland Security that has been packed with Obama appointees actually be trusted to handle the security for our elections in a fair manner?

Unfortunately, I believe that is a legitimate question.

However, I will concede that something needs to be done. Just the other day, FBI Director James Comey admitted that his agency is taking the threat of election cyberattacks "very, very seriously" after a couple of local election databases were successfully attacked. The following comes from ABC News...

Three days ago, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., sent a letter to Comey, expressing concern that "the threat of the Russian government tampering in our presidential election is more extensive than widely known and may include the intent to falsify official election results."

In late June an "unknown actor scanned a state's Board of Election website for vulnerabilities" and, after identifying a security gap, exploited the vulnerability to conduct a "data exfiltration," or unauthorized data transfer, the FBI said in a recent bulletin.

Earlier this month, hackers used the same vulnerability in an "attempted intrusion activities into another state's Board of Election system," the FBI said.

The integrity of our elections is absolutely paramount. Without free and fair elections we might as well not even have a country.

So the fact that hackers have proven that they can hack into some of our systems is quite alarming indeed.

According to the Daily Beast, voter databases in Arizona and Illinois were the ones that were victimized...

The FBI's analysis of the hacks, contained in a security alert first reported by Yahoo News, shows that Arizona's elections website was penetrated in June using a common vulnerability that's well known to security experts. Then, in July, Illinois' voter files were accessed apparently using stolen login credentials, which could have been obtained by spear phishing a state employee.

So was much damage done by these hackers?

Well, it has been documented that many voters in Arizona did have their party affiliations changed without their knowledge or consent, and this rendered them unable to vote during the primaries...

During the primary election in Arizona, for instance, a number of voters found that their party affiliation had been changed without their knowledge. When they showed up to vote in the state's closed primary elections, some were told they were ineligible to vote with the party of their choice.

State officials have blamed the problem at least in part on an error at the state's driver registration bureau. But similar problems have reportedly cropped up in California, Connecticut, Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania.

Needless to say, we can't have hackers messing with our elections, and something needs to be done.

I just don't know if the Department of Homeland Security can be trusted or if they are the ones that should be fixing this problem.

Before I close this article today, there is one more item that I would like to bring up. In the past, there has been much speculation on the Internet that some sort of "event" could suspend or delay the coming election, and that is why the following headline from U.S. News & World Report caught my eye: "A Candidate's Death Could Delay or Eliminate the Presidential Election". This is how that article begins...

The presidential election could be delayed or scrapped altogether if conspiracy theories become predictive and a candidate dies or drops out before Nov. 8. The perhaps equally startling alternative, if there's enough time: Small groups of people hand-picking a replacement pursuant to obscure party rules.

The scenarios have been seriously considered by few outside of the legal community and likely are too morbid for polite discussion in politically mixed company. But prominent law professors have pondered the effects and possible ways to address a late-date vacancy.

"There's nothing in the Constitution which requires a popular election for the electors serving in the Electoral College," says John Nagle, a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, meaning the body that officially elects presidents could convene without the general public voting.

In this article and this article I documented how Hillary Clinton's health appears to be rapidly failing. It is entirely possibly that if her health continues to go downhill that she might not even make it to election day.

Alternatively, many among the elite would be extremely happy if something caused Donald Trump not to make it to election day. So let us definitely pray for his health and safety and the health and safety of his family.

This election season has already been the strangest one that we have seen in decades, and I have a feeling that it is going to get a lot stranger over the next couple of months.

In the end, let us hope and pray for a fair, honest and safe election, because the American people should get to choose who will be leading them for the next four years.

Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/articl ... lpERBZg.99

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 88992
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 142141Unread post Blue Frost
Fri Sep 09, 2016 2:30 pm

They have had that in the news the last month, or so, I see it as a way to corrupt the election more since they are by Obama, and friends.

User avatar
Blue Frost
SUPER VIP
SUPER VIP
Posts: 88992
Joined: Mon May 14, 2012 1:01 am
Location: Yodenheim

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 142142Unread post Blue Frost
Fri Sep 09, 2016 2:33 pm

And why do we need guns ????

[video][/video]

User avatar
Gary Oak
VIP Member
VIP Member
Posts: 6754
Joined: Mon Jun 25, 2012 5:32 pm

Re: Shadow Government

Post: # 142146Unread post Gary Oak
Fri Sep 09, 2016 6:46 pm

WOW ! Obama is working overtime to take away the freedoms that the the writers of the American constitution tried to ensure Americans had. I wonder what GMO illness they will use to justify locking the masses up ?

Quick Reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
   
Post Reply