Archive for the ‘Internet’ Category

Intellectual Property Monopolies Clarified

March 22, 2014

Tibor Machan always has something interesting to say in his columns at the Daily Bell web site. For example, his article “Intellectual Property, Anyone?”.

One comment pointed out that one reason that many intellectuals, even some libertarians, defend “intellectual property” monopolies, is “the envy that the intellectual suffer for the successful, troglodyte businessman”…

That may be true for many, but not for all.. But there is at least an idea that other parties who use someone’s new idea are somehow “freeloading”. I do believe in “credit where credit is due”, but this is impossible to do “justly” in the long run when you create incentives for “rent-seeking”. That’s what a copyright and patent regime does , especially in a land of corporations, or, the present land of corporations.

It inevitably becomes a battle of wits and trickery. Two people who have the same idea, but one of them lives closer to the patent office. Is that “fair”? I’m a software engineer, but some of my code is generic functions that I’ve written before. Whose code is that?

The US Constitution included the mention of copyright and patent, with a parenthetical clause that says the purpose was utilitarian. It a land of individual artisans, maybe, maybe not.

The most convincing argument, though, against “intellectual property”, in my opinion, is the total, absolute, unequivocal requirement by definition of an agency (government, mob, dictator, etc.) with powers to violate the non-aggression principle, PLUS the total, absolute, unequivocal arbitrary and capricious nature of where the boundaries are on “intellectual property”. That is, how far does it reach? How many years?

One science fiction writer, Robert Sawyer I think, wrote once that he thought copyrights should be limitless, without expiration, and inheritable to all generations!

This is all because we have come to think of copyright in this way. I have read that before the introduction of the printing press, there was no such thing as copyright, and copyright itself was “invented” by kings and authorities for the purposes of censorship. Think the “stamp act”. Think permits for the First Amendment akin to permits for the Second.

Although Thomas Cahill in his book “How the Irish Saved Civilization” pointed out that the reverence for books that the Irish learned from St. Patrick led to a noble’s exile for sneaking into his neighbor’s palace in the dark of night to copy the neighbor’s books in the dark!

The idea of monopoly rights for inventions for utilitarian purposes is also part and parcel with the idea that a monopoly of force over a bounded geographical area –or unbounded, as some world dictatorship advocates would have it– is necessary for scientific, artistic, and technological advancement.

One example demonstrates the lie of the collective utilitarian argument used in the USA Constitution. Tim Berners-Lee, and hypertext (and related ideas), and his colleagues, public-domaining the Web, and we all can see the results.

A more expansive article of evidence is the “open source” movement (as in the Open Source Foundation, which grew out of the idea of “free software”, with “free as in free speech, not free beer”, Richard Stallman’s preaching point. Tens and maybe hundreds of thousands of programmers are contributing to projects that by now ALL of us use.

Linux servers dominate the nodes used to carry the Internet. Firefox and Chrome and other freely shared browsers are pushing Internet Explorer out of the way. More and more of us are using Open Office or Libre Office or the Google applications to do their documents. This has inspired a parallel movement to do the same thing with hardware inventions, but not just computer hardware, but physical inventions. Open Source programs for 3-D printing for example.

And note that the barriers for entry into the class of patent-holders also holds back new inventions. With the new law Obama recently signed, it’s also a matter of who gets to the patent office first, and no matter if you had prior art, no matter if it was already in the public market. Get the patent and start trolling.

Another argument against patents as incentives for invention is the obvious fact of incentives to suppress them. A new energy patent holder (see infinite-energy.com, and use the hyphen!) might be tempted to sell it to an oil company for a billion bucks, and the oil company might consider it a bargain! And don’t forget the rumor of the light bulb that never burns out. Amazing how long those lights last in your car’s dashboard. And remember Tesla’s suppressed inventions. He might have been able to continue some of that today, with crowd-sourcing.

But the clincher, in my opinion, is the fact that no matter how you might enforce copyright or patent monopoly in the real world, there is no “natural” way at all, no “self-evident” way at all, to do it without arbitrary and capricious decree by somebody against any and all others.

//

Left-fascists riot in Honduras Congress, democracy, and individual freedom

February 1, 2014

Herein read my reaction to comments in La Gringa’s “blogicito”, found at the following link:

http://tinyurl.com/m7wyh7m

This episode of changing rules in Honduras just shows the general peril of ANY government. Democracy is NOT any “better” than any other form of government. Power corrupts. Taxation is extortion by definition, no matter how many of the majority vote for it. Follow the law or go to jail. By the way, though, I read various articles on the proceedings, and they are not the end of the democracy as depicted, so much as a lot of noise and riot by a party founded by people who in power did much worse, of course.

The United States’ long history is the best attempt maybe along those lines, and look where it is now. The “strong media” of the 19th century is now a sycophantic mouthpiece for more control over every piece of your life by government. The best example of this is their treatment of the champion of individual freedom in the United States in his presidential campaign, Ron Paul.

But college kids loved him. He was different, and showed character by shutting down lobbyists, like Larry Abrammoff said in a Q&A on CSpan once, he was one that you could not get anything from him with offers of money. Otherwise, he said they’re more or less all for sale.

Centralization of power in the United States began with the Constitution, had a false start with Alexander Hamilton’s central bank baby, which Andrew Jackson killed off, got a second wind with Abraham Lincoln, and then accelerated after the Federal Reserve Bank was created and populated with the bankers they were supposedly going to regulate for the people’s interest, and it was created after a campaign that pretended it was to stop their abuses. The Income Tax was another abuse enacted the same year. It’s an abuse because I don’t have the right to tell you how much you get to keep of the fruits of your labor and how much you have to pay me for “protection”. Even if you vote for me. Theft is theft. Or call it extortion if you must, because it depends also on how “stable” such thieves are in office.

At least by a vote they have to got through pretense.

Allende was voted a plurality in Chile, and when he began ruling as an economic and political tyrant, the Congress had no constitutional remedy, so they passed a resolution DEMANDING that the military stop him. Allende did not yield to diplomatic pressure, either, and a lot of that saw the (again) sycophantic controlled “strong” media cheering Allende for cutting down Anaconda copper.

The media (outside Honduras) did not report the abused Allende perpetrated any more than they did Zelaya’s. But in 2009 we already had the Internet. So the only mainstream reporting during both abusive regimes was condemnatory of the moves against leftist-fascism.

Think not; more centralized control is their game plan. At least that’s what they do. Some as zombies, true, but nonetheless.

That’s why hope for Honduras, in my opinion, has two grounds for optimism.

ONE, the fact that one of the poorest country in Latin America, and that was already saturated by violent gangs and the same demagaguery as Venezuela, Peru, Ecuador, and even Argentina and Brazil, nonetheless pushed back against the tyranny.

TWO, they worked quickly to find a way to bring Honduras out of the vicious poverty swamp. They scoured the world and brought people from Chile to share how they became the first Latin American developed country. They investigated the examples of South Korea (contrast with North Korea) and Hong Kong and China’s special economic zones (that copy the HK model), Singapore, that became prosperous while their neighbors sank in the mire.

The politics is noisy in Honduras right now, and the dirty laundry is now public, but it was always thus. It’s just that after 2009, they have to stay clean, at least until the sons of the Chavez-Zelaya-Castro marriage grab a majority or plurality.

It was always much WORSE in fact. I have certain knowledge that many of the Congress years past were into the kinds of business that would make Al Capone blush. And that includes some of those now demanding “democracy” from the controlling coalition.

Fighting over the spoils of conquest is what this is, and people must push back against any government having any power at all to loot anybody.

Luke 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the  blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised…

Matthew 17:24 And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute?

25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers?

26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free.

//

//

The Internet and the Obamacare and a Controlled Net?

October 27, 2013
The bitcoin logo

The bitcoin logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Daily Bell covers another phenomenon with another way of looking at things:

http://www.thedailybell.com/news-analysis/34692/Facebook-Changing-the-Face-of-Mercantilism/

Events are tending to consolidating into a setup for the infamous Mark of the Beast government. Everybody is using plastic, they’ve nationalized the ID already (done long ago almost everywhere outside the USA), and the Internet is a perfect vehicle for a buy and sell medium. IP6 Internet, I believe, they say anyway that it’s “more secure” than IP4. Don’t know enough about it yet to say, but “more secure” can mean anybody you transact with could identify you positively (as much as is possible).

Bitcoin can get traction in the stealth side of the Internet, somewhat, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be an attempt to use it to control the entire world’s economic activity. They could even let go of the current dollar disaster, no problem, they’ve already got some of these international units in place, euro-units, whatnot.

In fact, they could just criminalize all transactions done outside their scope.

Lots of readers are jumping in on this and thinking there are too many problems for this to make it work. Obamacare is a good warning on that, as central planning is always eventually doomed anyway. No matter with all that stuff they’re feeding the popular mind to scare them (us) with what their secret agents will do to bad guys (“Oh, and he owns an anti-government web site”).

No man shall buy or sell save he that hath “the mark”. But eventually, it all crumbles on the head of the dictator and dictators who get this thing going. During the plagues, a “grievous sore” falls on those who do have “the mark”, and eventually, “he [The Beast] shall come to his end, and none shall help him.”

Why Open Source will dominate the future and is spreading freedom.

October 1, 2013
Tux, the Linux penguin

Tux, the Linux penguin (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

 

Why Open Source will dominate the future and is spreading freedom.

 

1. The USA situation is where it all ends up, in the end, it’s just that the bigness multiplies the moral hazard (an economic term) of rent-seeking, and concentrates more economic influence. Being the declining #1.

2. Enterprises pay for modernization, for sure, of their own software. Work for hire is not relevant. IBM has even paid big for projects that enhance Linux, for example, including the big belly flop dive of a billion dollars –with a “B”– some years back.

3. Which brings me to the point that the very title you gave to this discussion supports my point. IBM is making Linux work well on the mainframes!

4. Speaking of which, we also note that Linux is treated in technical terms as an “equal partner” with IBM i and IBM p on the Power Servers. Its role has only grown.
And that means it shares the spot with what looks from my perspective like the absolutely best multi-user proprietary operating system ever built, the IBM i, of course.
And yes, I’m sure it still beats Linux, even though both of them share one shortcoming with the mainframe, and that is no native GUI. (Which by the way Frank Soltis said once was something he always regretting deciding against.)

5. But note that even with the IBMi on Power, IBM opted, instead of enhancing the operating system with the new functionality that has been coming at us from open source projects, they decided to just incorporate the open source applications into the operating system (or plugged onto it). Apache, PHP, MySQL, Java, and of course HTTP and HTML, and the rest. And our fellow brethren of the “order of the i” have jumped in and added Ant, and Python, and lots more, God bless them.

And you could make a case for Scott Klement’s open source projects blowing open great new vistas of productivity for the i community.

6. Android is taking lots of market share from what would have been Apple’s domain, and probably expanded the touch-screen market in the process.

Bottom line, not going away soon, especially before libertarian principles start affecting central planning territory, but it is in start-up mode.

 

 

Phil Zimmerman is in the news again… Get encryption

June 24, 2013

Phil Zimmerman has long been a hero to people who respect the right as recognized in the Fourth Amendment of the United States. He’s the one who open-sourced PGP (“Pretty Good Privacy“) that can protect your communications from private spying by others, but also apparently protects it from government.

Privacy services companies stand up against Big Brother — RT News:
http://rt.com/news/privacy-services-companies-boom-142/

Got nothing to hide? It seems like it’s the government that has plenty to hide –from US THE PEOPLE!

Matthew 10:26 Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be

Google Tries To Walk Back PRISM Cooperation

June 19, 2013

Originally posted on YouViewed/Editorial:

Google Asks Intelligence Court To Let It Release Data

 

 

” Google Inc. (GOOG) urged the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for permission to publish the aggregate numbers and scope of national security requests it receives from the U.S. government.

The filing with the secret court, which issues warrants for collecting foreign intelligence inside the U.S., is the latest effort by Google to ease restrictions on disclosing the information the government has asked for under the surveillance program code-named Prism.

“We have long pushed for transparency so users can better understand the extent to which governments request their data — and Google was the first company to release numbers for National Security Letters,” Niki Fenwick, a spokeswoman for Google in Washington, said in an e-mail. To promote greater transparency, the company is seeking “to publish aggregate numbers of national security requests, including FISA disclosures, separately,” she said.”

View original 131 more words

Jailed Qwest CEO had refused NSA requests

June 15, 2013
Qwest logo

Qwest logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

QWEST, NSA, AND INSIDER TRADING?

The Story Of Joseph Nacchio And The NSA – Business Insider:
http://www.businessinsider.com/the-story-of-joseph-nacchio-and-the-nsa-2013-6

Former Qwest CEO Joseph Nacchio is currently serving a six-year sentence after being convicted of insider trading in April 2007 for selling $52 million of stock in the spring of 2001 as the telecommunications carrier appeared to be deteriorating.

During the trial his defense team argued that Nacchio, 63, believed Qwest was about to win secret government contracts that would keep it in the black.

Nacchio alleged that the government stopped offering the company lucrative contracts after Qwest refused to cooperate with a National Security Agency surveillance program in February 2001.

So it’s in the news because of the very public revelations by Edward Snowden in the Guardian. But wait a minute. Is this a “new” story? Guess not. Only “conspiracy theorists” made a big deal of it before, including long before Leslie Cauley’s USA Today story:

Back in 2006 Leslie Cauley of USA Today, citing multiple people with direct knowledge of the arrangement, reported that shortly after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks America’s three largest telecoms signed contracts to provide the NSA with detailed call records from hundreds of millions of people across the country.

Cauley noted that Qwest’s refusal to participate “left the NSA with a hole in its database” since the company served local phone service to 14 million customers in 14 states.

From USA Today (emphasis ours):

The NSA, which needed Qwest’s participation to completely cover the country, pushed back hard. …

the agency suggested that Qwest’s foot-dragging might affect its ability to get future classified work with the government.

Nacchio’s legal concerns about the NSA program at the time mirror those of civil liberty groups today.

Cauley, citing sources familiar with events, reported the NSA asserted that Qwest didn’t need a court order — or approval under Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (which oversees NSA snooping) — to provide the data.

“They told (Qwest) they didn’t want to [run the proposal by the FISA court] because FISA might not agree with them,” one NSA insider told USA Today.

There is a record of the NSA running afoul of FISA: In July the FISA court ruled that the NSA violated the Fourth Amendment’s restriction against unreasonable searches and seizures “on at least one occasion.”

Her sources told Cauley, the author of the USA Today story, that the NSA had said other agencies like FBI, CIA, and the DEA might have access to all that massive database.

Hey, People! What else is true that those crazy tin-foil-hat conspiracy theorists have been telling us?

And looky here, even on CSPAN, we see appearances by NSA spokesmouths doing talks on what this program does and why, and no, there are strict rules on what we look at, we stay inside guidelines.

But do you know why they’re not even denying one thing that Snowden said, that he could have looked at anybody’s records, even the President’s? Because they know that anybody can see that this is obviously and clearly a violation of the Fourth Amendment.

Here’s the Fourth:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Okay, now read it with the emphasis where it goes. It’s a right to BE secure in you “persons, houses, papers, and effects”. It is NOT a right to FEEL secure, or a right to be secure “if you have nothing to hide”. Remember, this is an amendment that recognizes the natural right of persons to such security. Having thousands of government agents able to spy on anybody at any time is NOT being secure from “searches”.

The amendment does not make an exception for future technology! It is a LIE that it does not. The word “effects” easily extends the spirit of the natural right recognized in this amendment (recognized, not created) to electronic communications between people. The moronic argument that one sends all those private emails into the ether as if they meant it for broadcast to anybody who wants it is stupid.

If any telecommunications company asked for your permission to share all your comings and goings with any third party that wanted it, you/we would say No, of course.

One more point about the Fourth Amendment. The significant word there for the purposes of Orwellian Big Brother Mass Search of data is “persons”. This is a plural of the word “person”, and when a warrant “particular describes” the “persons or things” we would expect those “persons” to be indentified individually.

Like the freedom of speech, of religion, and the freedom of press, and the Fifth, this speaks to the rights of us as individual “persons”, NOT to our rights as groups. It might be “reasonable” to law enforcement to go house to house searching inside for a couple of bombers on the run, but it is not “reasonable” to each and every place they might feel like searching.

For example, take any one house in Watertown, it was not “reasonable” that a particular John Doe had Suspect #2 in hiding in his residence. Nobody was “secure” in their houses or persons that day. Contrary to some government-media spokesmouths’ mutterings, who said it was a “voluntary” lockdown, the evidence is to the contrary.

WOLF BLITZER’S EPISODE OF FOOT-IN-MOUTH DISEASE

Wolf Blitzer stuck his entire foot in his mouth to try to get a whack in at Rand Paul. Never mind the video on youtube that shows Boston’s finest knocking aggressively on doors and literally ordering the occupants outside, so they could go in and search the house.

The Dunkin Donuts operators of those news feeds did not come in, and the policemen wanting their coffee and donuts had to call them and tell them they could come open the store for them.

There is also the story of the policeman that went to fetch milk for a mother’s baby because the mother thought she could not leave the house.

And then Blitzer of course left out of his embarrassing presentation the point Rand Paul raised that it only took FIFTEEN MINUTES after the “lockdown” was raised for a regular citizen to find the bad guy. Could have saved millions of bucks and let people do productive work.

CONGRESS IS CULPABLE FOR THIS BIG-BROTHER-GATE

Let us remember that some of us warned about this when Congress enacted into law a proviso that  exempted all telecommunications companies from any civil or criminal damages resulting from the release of data to government. That was some years ago and it is obscured in the results from search engines.

Here is some relevant data from the Electronic Freedom Foundation:
https://www.eff.org/pages/calea-faq#3

But then with the Patriot Act, the ones ordered to serve up data are ordered to keep it secret. How do we know that the NSA spokesmen are telling us the truth? Are NSA agents, employees and contractors under orders to keep other details secret, like maybe the collection of CONTENT we know they survey as well?

They are now saying this dragnet of all the records of calls and emails only involves the header information. Baloney, because that leads them to where they get all the content they want.

Whistleblowers have already released to the “wild” that they record all the calls in a loop and listen for certain keywords and when those keywords happen, a recording kicks the call content to an analyst. Posted here at Business Insider’s web site is a list of keywords from years back:
http://www.businessinsider.com/nsa-prism-keywords-for-domestic-spying-2013-6

Okay, some people like (Old Guard Establishment Republican) Senator Lindsey Graham, is saying that he has no problem with this universal Big Brother surveillance of everybody because he has “nothing to hide”. Now from the people come calls for Lindsey Graham to give us his passwords so we can check to see whether he has nothing to hide.

WHO HAS SOMETHING TO HIDE?

Well, now we see the biggest coverup of these times of the biggest lawbreakers of our time and for a long time, and that is the NSA itself.

If spying on all of us Americans, and residents and tourists inside the USA, was so harmless, then why did they act like it was something to hide?

Why are they still hiding from any conversation that points out the whistleblower’s exposure to the fact that so many government agents have access to any telephone conversation they wish to listen to? Why are they avoiding the fact, now made public, that they can pull up any email they wish to look at?

Why are they trying to change the subject and shoot the messenger?

Now we know. The NSA gets ALL the header information for whatever they want, and acts like there is no Fourth Amendment when they want to listen to YOUR phone call or look at YOUR email, whoever you are.

Maybe Lindsey Graham says he has nothing to hide precisely because he does have something to hide and somebody at Fort Meade knows about it?

Why are none of these smarter-than-thou clever “reporters” asking questions like that?

There is something rotten not in Denmark but in the USA. Well, probably Denmark too.

Whistleblowers tell – Wiretapping one Watergate office, now wiretapping everybody!

June 13, 2013
NSA Spy Center

NSA Spy Center (Photo credit: JamesArtre)

 

What if the Republicans or Democrats had called for prosecution against Deep Throat? What if the CIA had brought charges? Nixon had an enemies’ list, what if that were a kill list?

 

What if he had wiretapped not only the Democrats but the Republicans too, and not only political operators but their families, their friends, their acquaintances, and spies, and criminals, and cops, and governors, and Supreme Court justices like Robert Brown, and not only all of those, but every single person living in the United States?

 

What if this had some connection to Justice Roberts’ sudden change of attitude on the Obamacare decision? Before you answer, remember, PRISM was still called a “conspiracy theory” just ten years ago, and even after the New York Times ran a short article on it.

 

EDITORIAL: The Whistleblower – Washington Times:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/11/the-whistleblower/

 

There are a couple of paragraphs that bring out clearly the difference between Watergate and the more recent revelations:

 

(A couple of editors’ notes -mine- are in [brackets])

 

The latest revelations will have no pernicious effect [ed: on
terrorists and enemies] because our enemies assume Uncle Sam has been listening. Al Qaeda operatives use codes, dead drops and encryption to carry out attacks, such as the Boston bombings, under the nose of the mass surveillance. That’s what spies and terrorists do.

 

[The official record of events is that it took ten years to get at
Osama bin Laden, because he did not communicate using the media that
PRISM grabs.]

 

Google, Facebook and the other companies play along, denying that the government is directly tapping into their servers. This is an empty assurance, considering that these companies could never legally admit to allowing a tap. The court order authorizing blanket interception of “all call-detail records” from Verizon instructs that “no person shall disclose to any other person that the FBI or NSA has sought or obtained tangible things under this order.”

 

The next paragraph is a point that has not yet been made:

 

Such extreme secrecy isn’t about making sure that China or the Taliban never learn about U.S. surveillance capabilities, but about keeping ordinary Americans in the dark about what’s going on. The Nixon administration was brought low by the bungled bugging of the Democratic National Committee headquarters 41 years ago. Now every telephone in the country is tapped. A lot of people are unhappy about it, and we can be sure that the unelected bureaucrats in charge of these powerful surveillance tools will say whatever it takes to keep them.

A few analysts operating in secret have access to every embarrassing photograph, incriminating text message and off-color remark ever made on a telephone or over the Internet. The lesson here, so far, is that if the government won’t tell the public what’s going on, someone will. It’s not the way to run a government, but this government brought it upon itself. The Founding Fathers would never have entrusted power over such information to a handful of men. Neither should we.

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/11/the-whistleblower/#ixzz2W6XP2ldQ
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

 

The cat is out of the bag, now we all know, the American government has now admitted it, the truth is on the loose and in the wild, wild, untamed wilderness of the Internet. No wonder the president doesn’t like the New Media, Bush didn’t either of course.

 

CONSPIRACY THEORIES — WHAT ELSE ARE THEY HIDING

 

In 2012 Old Media was still denying what some of us were protesting against what we knew 20 years ago. As long ago as a six months, the ignored warnings were called “conspiracy theories”.

 

Nixon was impeached and pushed out of office for covering up the operation to wiretap the phones of the political opposition to listen in to their conversations.

 

Now, we have a case of two administrations connected with two different political parties, engaging in wiretapping everybody in the nation, not just around the world, and intercepting the communications of ALL of us.

 

EUROPE (AND RUSSIA AND CHINA) ARE NOT BLAMELESS

 

Europe is of course acting all indignant, like they would never do such a thing, but the same watchmen who warned about what the NSA is doing have also fingered the Europeans.

 

Europeans, Echelon is yours too. Western nations trade intelligence, but they also spy on each other. We know this. But this puts some meat to those bones.

 

NO WONDER THEY HATE THE INTERNET AND NEW MEDIA

 

No wonder exposed political operatives and politicians don’t like the New Media. The cyber-security flap is all about getting control, however they can. Copyright, patents, security, they’ll use anything to be able to have the Chinese-style “flip switch” that Joe Lieberman pined for, to be able to shut down the Internet with a button controlled from the White House.

 

The Chinese had a Cultural Revolution too, were upwards of 20 million were killed for thinking different, with a bunch of personal grudges thrown in, no doubt. What makes the Lieberman think he can get an Internet switch without a cultural revolution government?

 

+==================================+

 

Proverbs 15:3
The eyes of the Lord are in every place, beholding the evil and the good.

 

Luke 8:17
For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.

 

Galatians 6:7
Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

 

Isaiah 1:18
Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

 

Revelation 3:20
Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.

 

 

The Daily Bell – Edward Snowden: Limited Hangout or a Globalist Step-Back?

June 10, 2013

 

http://www.thedailybell.com/29215/Edward-Snowden-Limited-Hangout-or-a-Globalist-Step-Back

 

These guys at The Daily Bell always offer penetrating insight into the big stories that the Old Media plays up big. More often than not, there is more to the fact that it is a story in the corporate-government-media complex than meets the eye at first glance.

 

They don’t offer these ideas as just-so, or as if they were facts. Indeed they simply say this is what it looks like to us.

 

In my opinion, their ideas generally ring true…

 

Free-Market Analysis: You read it here first over the weekend: Like Julian Assange and Occupy Wall Street, Edward Snowden is likely part of a larger dominant social theme, a manipulation created and supported by globalists who have created the world’s mega-surveillance state and now want to publicly enshrine it.

See our two articles:

Reuters: People Demand Government Action to Subdue Internet Surveillance

Was Guardian ‘SpyGate’ Article Planted to Support Pending British ‘Snooper’ Law?

The Guardian, which broke the initial story utilizing Snowden as a source, is part of the mainstream media. The mainstream media is controlled and globalist in its outlook. If those controlling the Guardian and other mainstream outlets didn’t want Snowden on the front page, he wouldn’t be there.

 

read the rest of the article here…

 

Reminds me of something from the Isaac Asimov science fiction Foundation trilogy… The Second Foundation arranges to get itself discovered and sacrifices a few of its own to make the First Foundation think that the Second Foundation is extinguished…

 

False flag operations, the military calls them. Seems as though about half of the “terrorist” hits since 2001 that the FBI stopped were FBI false flag operations in the first place.

But stop the presses. The Daily Bell itself promotes throughout its web pages the theme that the Internet Reformation is a big challenge to the powers that be that they expend considerable intellectual effort exposing. There is Ron Paul praising Edward Snowden and saying we need many more of them. Whether or not Snowden and Julian Assange are meant as the first phase of a Hegelian exercise, it still remains that it does expose the spying.

Like Ezekiel wrote in his prophetic book, if the warning is sounded and you do nothing, it’s their fault, not yours. If you don’t sound the alarm, then it’s your fault, not theirs.

These rogue actors have sounded the alarm, Ron Paul of course more effectively than most of us in the context of the current state of the world.

But there is indeed something missing. We all need more Ron Paul’s all over the world. The rest of the world is none of America‘s business, meaning meddling is neither welcome or effective as a diplomatic tool. But what is more effective is communication among private individuals, which is exactly what the Internet enables. American fans of Ron Paul and the principles of liberty and respect, and individual rights, need to become more aware of international initiatives along these lines.

And for comic relief, we have a comment from Donald Trump on Fox News Channel.

Headline: Donald Trump calls Snowden a “grandstander”.

Really? Donald Trump calling Snowden a grandstander? Hello? Get it? Really? Are you kidding me?

 

 

 

Found at lewrockwell.com and elsewhere, news and commentary roundup

May 19, 2013

It should be no secret to the people that read this blog regularly, but http://lewrockwell.com is an almost daily stop for me, with new insights and revelations from behind the scenes about current events, from an independent liberty-minded thinker’s perspective:

I may or may not own a gun, but for those who do, or who are considering:

Mini/Pocket 9mm Pistols for Concealed Carry:
http://lewrockwell.com/rep4/mini-9mm-concealed-carry.html

Real Men Wear Red: Sportsmen Who Choose To Wear the Colour Are More Likely To Be Winners Because They Are ‘Dressing To Kill’:
http://lewrockwell.com/spl5/real-men-wear-red.html

Evidence for Confiscation: 5 Examples That Show the Threat Is Real by S.H. Blannelberry:
http://lewrockwell.com/orig14/blannelberry11.1.html

There was a news conference by the targets of the IRS witch-hunt. Make no mistake that’s what it was. It’s not just the keyword searches for putting the applications behind the rest of them. There were some that were not from any “tea party” or “patriot” names, but “American Grizzlies”? And how about that keyword “constitution”? Are neutral officials –ahem, “neutral”– somehow allergic to the United States Constitution? How about the groups with the name “Christian” in them?

The story of Gary Johnston, a retired police officer from Kingston, Tenn., seemed to typify the abuse suffered by many rank-and-file tea party members at the hands of the IRS.

Johnston told WND he put together a small tea party group in 2009 and had no plans to file for tax-exempt status as a 501(c)(4) organization. But the IRS told him he had to do it. So, he first filled out a 19 page questionnaire in March of 2010. In August, the IRS sent him another form with 22 more questions, and embedded within those were another 60 questions.

“A lot of the questions struck me as strange,” Johnston said.

“Intrusive, terrible questions. They wanted to know any and every email that’s ever come to us or sent by us, personal or private, that might be construed to be political. They wanted to know everybody that was coming to our meetings, if we charged money, who donated, what the donations were. They wanted to know everything about our personal lives and our families’ personal lives — anyone in our family that might be politically connected.”

What sort of personal information did the IRS want to know?

“They wanted to know who we were affiliated with, what we did, what we aspired to do, what positions we might run for politically. They were asking questions that you could not answer, but could trap you.”

Did they ask you anything about reading material?

“Oh, yes, they asked any and all literature that you’ve ever had disseminated or had sent to you; anything that’s ever been written about you; anything you’ve ever written on a blog or to a newspaper. They asked me for outlines of what I’ve been reading, you could call that a book report. They asked what we were really trying to accomplish. It went on and on and on.”

After 70 days of filling out all sorts of intrusive documents, Johnston finally consulted a CPA and tax attorney. He said the attorney took one look at the material and said, “What did you do to upset the IRS? You’ve made somebody angry. I’ve never seen anything like this in my life. 80 percent of this is illegal. They can’t ask you this stuff.”

She advised Johnston not to respond to many of the questions and not provide the IRS with much of the material it had requested. The IRS then sent him a form with another 40 questions, including some of the same questions he had refused to answer earlier.

Then Johnston’s group started getting “a lot of calls from the IRS.”

“These IRS agents who were calling us were apologetic. They were saying ‘I’m sorry, I’m sorry. … I’m with you guys, I have to do this. This is part of my job.’”

Johnston said their bosses, at the Cincinnati office, “were telling them they have to do this.”

The witch hunt was executed by the IRS against the targeted groups. Why did they think they could get away with this?

And that’s not all. Look at the way the IRS treated Dr. James Dobson‘s application for Family Talk:

“Ms. Medley did not call back until March 19. Family Talk Action’s attorney asked her when the IRS would issue its determination letter. Ms. Medley responded saying, I don’t think your Form 1024 (application for exemption) will be granted because Family Talk Action is ‘not educational’ because it does not present all views. She continued, saying that Family Talk Action sounded like a ‘partisan right-wing group’ because, according to Ms. Medley, it only presents conservative viewpoints. She then added, ‘you’re political’ because you ‘criticized President Obama, who was a candidate.’” [Ed: So WHAT
if it presented issues from their point of view? They all
do, and the IRS has routinely approved the left-wing
groups over the years with much worse bias!]

The organization said it had submitted sample radio programs after the IRS had demanded them, although none was aired during an election year.

“It was the opinion of Family Talk Action’s legal counsel that these samples were not only 501(c)(4) qualified but 501(c)(3) qualified,” the statement said.

“Family Talk Action’s legal counsel had never heard an IRS agent express biased statements like those he heard during the March 19 call. He also felt that the this agent did not understand the difference between 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) entities,” the report said.

Not educational because it “doesn’t present all views”? Oh yeah? How about all the multitude of 501c4 AND 501(c)(3) entities it routinely approves that only present leftist and anti-Christian views, like Media Matters and others?

Oh, and what did the Big “O” say he’s going to do about it? He’s going to put a stop to this because it’s important that Americans “understand and believe that the IRS” is fair. Oh yeah, except this episode shows it’s NOT fair. How about it’s important to follow the Supreme Law of the Land, the Constitution?

So who is he going to put in jail over this for abuse of power? Anybody?

Look, does the Socialist Workers Party get the third degree grilling, send us all of your emails you ever got or sent? What an uproar that would be right? How about from the unions?

It’s not a “small cadre” of a couple of “rogue agents”. It looks like it was ALL the conservative groups that had any of those “suspicious” keywords in their names!

http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/lawmakers-demand-jailtime-for-irs-scandal/

According to Fox News, an internal timeline by the inspector general’s office revealed the IRS began looking at tea party and “patriot” groups as early as 2010, shortly after Obamacare was passed.

However, in 2011 the organizations scrutinized were expanded to include groups focused on government debt and spending, taxes and education on “ways to make America a better place to live” as well as those who criticized “how the country is being run.”

In early 2012, the IRS expanded the list even further to include groups that were educating people on the Constitution and Bill of Rights and involved in limiting/expanding government.

Gardner told WND that among the multiple conservative groups targeted by the IRS was at least one group from Colorado.

The group, which is asking that its name be kept private for now, applied for 501(c)(4) status and had its application illegally released to the public during the application process, which is a clear violation of federal law.

“The information on their application was confidential and the IRS was required by law to treat it as such, yet that information was leaked to ProPublica,” Gardner said. “Who’s to say the IRS didn’t give out confidential donor information either? This confirms people’s worst beliefs about government overbearance.”

They’re demanding health records from medical organizations, too:

Yeah, just apologize and that’s it? We put a muzzle on the voices of tens of thousands of Americans, and tilted the election to an administration that expands the Patriot Act, confiscates two months of emails and reports from a press organization (a leftist one even!) to catch a whistleblower supposedly, tells the man in charge in Tripoli second to the late Ambassador he’d better muzzle himself instead of testify to events, covers up the truth about events that left four people to die in an attack that could have been avoided. And refuses to give up the prerogative (it’s not a “right”) to kill any American the President fingers as a threat. And under whom even the Pentagon is now claiming the power to kill Americans and control them under certain conditions.

And nobody goes to jail? Watergate was a LOT less than all this, and people went to prison. Hello?

And Holder, after treating the Congress with such contempt and stonewalling on Fast and Furious, and to this day refusing to release relevant documents, and even bald-faced punishing the whistleblowers of Fast and Furious, he rebukes Congress for incivility and lack of respect?!
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/hot-tempered-holder-lashes-out-in-defiance/

And yet another one:
http://www.wnd.com/2013/05/irs-rejected-group-on-behalf-of-planned-parenthood/?cat_orig=politics

(BREITBART) The IRS scandal of targeting tea party or conservative organizations grew deeper Wednesday with the revelation that the agency denied tax-exempt status to a pro-life organization because of its hypothetical opposition of Planned Parenthood.

The Thomas Moore Society, a public interest law firm announced that one of their clients was told that their approval as a non-profit was conditioned on a commitment not to protest outside Planned Parenthood abortion clinics.

>>>>

Whattaya know, now they tell us there was a “suicide note” inside that boat in Boston? How convenient. All of a sudden they “found” an admissible “confession”? And how convenient that the “suspect”, umm, “shot himself” in the throat? Now he can’t yell something like “I’m a patsy!” like Lee Harvey Oswald did…

>>>>>

In another story, McClatchy newspapers are quoting ” two anonymous government officials”:

CAIRO — In the month before attackers stormed U.S. facilities in Benghazi and killed four Americans, U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens twice turned down offers of security assistance made by the senior U.S. military official in the region in response to concerns that Stevens had raised in a still secret memorandum, two government officials told McClatchy.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#storylink=cpy

What American official in such a land would report in a “still secret memorandum” that he had security concerns, and then turn down military offers of more security? And then go to the city where other states had pulled completely out? Why would any official do that? This thing does NOT pass the “fishy smell” test:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#.UZi_gIJnEZc

There is something else going on there. Presuming, just for the sake of argument, that it’s true, the big question is indeed WHY? The Embassy had just reported that they could NOT defend the compound in Benghazi, and they needed “additional security upgrades”.

Note, this is some anonymous somebody’s recollection of somebody else’s phone call. Stevens can no longer tell his side of that phone call, ey?

The next three paragraphs from the McClatchy report are interesting because they seem to be an example of “Does. Not. Compute.” Or maybe post-facto C. Y. A.:

Why Stevens, who died of smoke inhalation in the first of two attacks that took place late Sept. 11 and early Sept. 12, 2012, would turn down the offers remains unclear. The deteriorating security situation in Benghazi had been the subject of a meeting that embassy officials held Aug. 15, where they concluded they could not defend the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi. The next day, the embassy drafted a cable outlining the dire circumstances and saying it would spell out what it needed in a separate cable.

“In light of the uncertain security environment, US Mission Benghazi will submit specific requests to US Embassy Tripoli for additional physical security upgrades and staffing needs by separate cover,” said the cable, which was first reported by Fox News.

Army Gen. Carter Ham, then the head of the U.S. Africa Command, did not wait for the separate cable, however. Instead, after reading the Aug. 16 cable, Ham phoned Stevens and asked if the embassy needed a special security team from the U.S. military. Stevens told Ham it did not, the officials said.

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#storylink=cpy

But further on, this “report” seems to come back down to Earth:

“That is odd to me because Stevens requested from the State Department additional security four times, and there was an 18-person special forces security team headed by Lt. Col. Wood that Gen. Ham signed off on that the State Department said no to,” said Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., who has been among the most vocal critics of the Obama administration on Benghazi. “The records are very clear that people on the ground in Libya made numerous requests for additional security that were either denied or only partially granted.”

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2013/05/14/191235/amb-stevens-twice-said-no-to-military.html#storylink=cpy

Senator Lindsay Graham is not my favorite politician, being an advocate as he is for shredding the US Constitution. But note that the Embassy had made repeated security requests and were denied, not by the military brass, but by the State Department in Washington, D.C.

Maybe this is the military brass doing its own CYA “not my fault” public relations effort, true or not. I can believe it, of course. But there are more questions raised in this McClatchy report than answers.

(1) WHO GAVE THE ORDER to the military security team in Tripoli to stand down instead of moving to help defend the Americans under attack?

(2) WHO in the D.C. State Department hierarchy turned down the request for better security in Libya? How high did that decision go? How high does it usually go?

(3) AT THIS POINT, what difference does it make? (This has been answered but it’s good to keep it in mind).

(4) If the important thing is to make sure it doesn’t happen again, then why is the Administration trying to make sure the people they work for don’t even know what happened?

(5) It the important thing is to track down those responsible for this and administer appropriate measures on them, then why are those responsible –already even publicly identified– publicly walking around as free men, and the State Department knowing where they ar

English: Anti-United States Internal Revenue S...

English: Anti-United States Internal Revenue Service symbol. Commonly used by tax protesters and tax reform advocates in the United States. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

?

(6) The acting head of the diplomatic mission in Libya described the situation to the Secretary of State, we now know, finally from his own mouth to Congress. So WHY did Clinton, and Susan Rice (who reports to her), and don’t forget OBAMA himself, repeat so often that this was a spontaneous demonstration and blame a VIDEO?

(7) WHY IS SOMEBODY WHO MADE A VIDEO STILL IN PRISON? DID SOMEBODY SUSPEND THE CONSTITUTION?


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 147 other followers