Microsoft Adding Windows 10 Style Spyware in 'upgrades' to Windows 7 and Windows 8.

Microsoft Adding Windows 10 Style Spyware in 'upgrades' to Windows 7 and Windows 8. HT: Ghack.

Microsoft has been criticized by privacy advocates in regards to the data hunger of its Windows 10 operating system. The operating system slurps data like there is no tomorrow, especially when systems are set up using the express settings.

Experienced users may disable telemetry and data collection partially during setup, and then some more afterwards using the Registry or Group Policy.

What makes this problematic however is the fact that it is nearly impossible to stop all of the data collecting that is taking place.

While users may disable some, for instance by using privacy tools (of which there are plenty), others cannot be disabled or stopped that easily, for instance because of hardcoded host and IP address information that bypass the Hosts file of the operating system.


Windows 7 and 8.

Windows 7 and 8 users have been plagued by "upgrade preparation" updates but left alone otherwise up until recently when it comes to this new level of data collecting.
This changed recently with the release of several updates for both operating systems that step up the game.

• KB3068708 Update for customer experience and diagnostic telemetry - This update introduces the Diagnostics and Telemetry tracking service to existing devices. By applying this service, you can add benefits from the latest version of Windows to systems that have not yet upgraded. The update also supports applications that are subscribed to Visual Studio Application Insights. (Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 R2, Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (SP1), and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1)
• KB3022345 (replaced by KB3068708) Update for customer experience and diagnostic telemetry - This update introduces the Diagnostics and Telemetry tracking service to in-market devices. By applying this service, you can add benefits from the latest version of Windows to systems that have not yet been upgraded. The update also supports applications that are subscribed to Visual Studio Application Insights. (Windows 8.1, Windows Server 2012 R2, Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (SP1), and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1)
• KB3075249 Update that adds telemetry points to consent.exe in Windows 8.1 and Windows 7 - This update adds telemetry points to the User Account Control (UAC) feature to collect information on elevations that come from low integrity levels. (Windows 8.1, Windows RT 8.1, Windows Server 2012 R2, Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (SP1), and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1)
• KB3080149 Update for customer experience and diagnostic telemetry - This package updates the Diagnostics and Telemetry tracking service to existing devices. This service provides benefits from the latest version of Windows to systems that have not yet upgraded. The update also supports applications that are subscribed to Visual Studio Application Insights. (Windows 8.1, Windows RT 8.1, Windows Server 2012 R2, Windows 7 Service Pack 1 (SP1), and Windows Server 2008 R2 SP1)

If these updates are installed on the system, data is sent to Microsoft regularly about various activities on it.
Microsoft lists two host names in KB3068708 that data is received from and sent to:

• vortex-win.data.microsoft.com
• settings-win.data.microsoft.com

These, and maybe others, appear to be hardcoded which means that the Hosts file is bypassed automatically.

What you can do about it. Read the full story here, MUST READ more here.

Twitter Sues the U.S. Government

Twitter Sues the U.S. Government. (Wapo).

It seems to be a one-way street for the U.S. government when it comes to privacy, and Twitter’s not cool with it. 

The company filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government on Tuesday stating that the company’s First Amendment rights were violated by the Justice Department’s restrictions on what they could publically reveal about the government’s request for user data. They want more transparency than is currently permitted in their biannual reports.

“It’s our belief that we are entitled under the First Amendment to respond to our users’ concerns … by providing information about the scope of U.S. government surveillance,” said Ben Lee, a Twitter vice president. 

“We should be free to do this in a meaningful way, rather than in broad, inexact ranges.” As it stands, tech firms can only report a broad number of requests, instead of an exact number. Read more at the Washington Post.

Video - Andrew Klavan: 'The Debate is Over'

In which our host, Andrew Klavan, explains why conservative opinion is so unwelcome in Washington DC, Hollywood and the mainstream media: Because the debate is over, the science is settled, and the time for talking is past.

John Brennan, Pres Obama's nominee to be the director of the CIA: "too much freedom is possible."

John Brennan, Pres Obama's nominee to be the director of the CIA: "too much freedom is possible."HT: IsraelMatzav.John Brennan, President Obama's nominee to be the director of the CIA, argued for government censorship in his graduate school thesis, claiming 'too much freedom is possible' in a discussion of Egypt in 1980 under Anwar Sadat.
In his 1980 graduate thesis at the University of Texas at Austin, John Brennan denied the existence of “absolute human rights” and argued in favor of censorship on the part of the Egyptian dictatorship.
“Since the press can play such an influential role in determining the perceptions of the masses, I am in favor of some degree of government censorship,” Brennan wrote. “Inflamatory [sic] articles can provoke mass opposition and possible violence, especially in developing political systems.”

Brennan ultimately concluded that human rights do not exist because they cannot be “classified as universal.”“The United States should be expected to pass a more strict human rights test [than Egypt] because its environment is more conducive to the realization of those rights,” Brennan concluded. “

An economic comparison between Egypt and one of its wealthy Arab neighbors such as Saudi Arabia or Kuwait would be equally unfair due to the wealth of those countries.”
“[T]he stage of economic development and political development have a direct impact on human rights,” he wrote. “The former enables a political system to offer its citizens welfare (e.g. health services) and security (e.g. military defense).” “The fact that absolute human rights do not exist (with the probable exception of freedom from torture) makes the [human rights] analysis subject to innumerable conditional criticisms,” he wrote. “The exact definition of human rights and possible justifications for violations is determined by a particular perspective. A change in perspective causes a drastic change in the analysis.”
“Human rights, therefore, does [sic] not take precedence over all other political goals,” Brennan concluded.
“Since absolute rights do not exist, any attempt by a nation to apply a human rights test to another nation (e. g. Carter administration human rights policy) is extremely difficult. Such a policy would be full of inconsistencies and therefore its implementation would be onerous.”
In other words, Brennan favors double standards. By comparison, here's what the US Declaration of Independence has to say about human rights:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

President Obama has definitely found his ideological soulmates in John FN Kerry (who was confirmed on Tuesday), Chuck Hagel and John Brennan.Hmmm.....A man is known by the company he keeps!Read the full story here.

By the way, here's a video of Brennan talking about Hezbullah in 2006.(Hat Tip: Daily Caller).

Bill introduced in Ohio would effectively ban concealed carry without repealing it.

Bill introduced in Ohio would effectively ban concealed carry without repealing it.(Buckeyefirearms).This is how they want to circumvent CCW without repealing CCW. This tactic will be coming to your state soon, be aware! You would not even be allowed to have a gun in your own apartment or rented home without permission. 

Article; Two Ohio Democrat State Representatives, Bill Patmon and Ted Celeste, are co-sponsoring a bill “to generally prohibit a person from having a firearm on privately owned land or premises unless the person owns, controls, or resides on or in the land or premises, has permission of the owner or person who controls the land or premises and, if the land or premises is rental property, of the tenant when required, or is the tenant with respect to those premises.” 

The bill specifies that it ”applies to any person, including a concealed handgun licensee.” HB595 would essentially reverse current law, which allows concealed carry on private property unless a sign is posted requesting that law-abiding CHL-holders stay out, and replace it with a requirement that CHLs would need to obtain permission to carry almost anywhere they go. That permission could come in the form of a sign specifically granting permission to CHL-holders, or by the CHL-holder obtaining permission either orally or in writing. The bill would even require non-tenants on rented or leased property to obtain permission to bring a firearm on the property. Short of obtaining that permission, the gun owner orconcealed handgun licensee would not be allowed to go on the property, visit a place of business, or even to keep a gun in their friend’s apartment or place of business (if they lease). Read the full story here. Full bill linked here: http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=129_HB_595

UN Small Arms Treaty Passes in silence While Media covers 'Obamarama'.

UN Small Arms Treaty Passes in silence While Media covers 'Obamarama'.(ReadAbility).
The United Nations Small Arms Treaty passed in its second session. The Media was silent over its passage.
According to the UN’s press release,

Concluding its two-week session today, the second United Nations conference to review the 2001 Programme of Action on trafficking in small arms and light weapons adopted a consensus outcome document that highlighted the international community’s renewed commitment to preventing, combating and eradicating the illicit trade.
The document’s adoption represented a major achievement for delegations, who had failed to agree on a final outcome at the first review conference, held in 2006. “We accomplished something great today,” said U. Joy Ogwu ( Nigeria), President of the Conference, formally known as the United Nations Conference to Review Progress Made in the Implementation of the Programme of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in All Its Aspects.
According to the text, Member States renewed their pledge to rid the world of the scourge brought upon it by the illicit manufacture, transfer and circulation of small arms and light weapons, and their excessive accumulation and uncontrolled spread in many parts of the world. They also committed to mobilizing the necessary political will and resources to implement the Programme of Action and the International Tracing Instrument, with the aim of achieving clear and tangible results over the next six years, through 2018.
Further by the text, States emphasized that the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons continued to sustain conflicts, exacerbate armed violence, undermine respect for international humanitarian law and international human rights law, aid terrorism and illegal armed groups, and facilitate increasing levels of transnational organized crime, as well as trafficking in humans, drugs and certain natural resources.

Ahhh yes, the cries of terrorism and drugs and boogey men for the passage of the treaty. This comes from member nations who knowingly promote these kinds of things. Even the United States is now in the midst of a scandal involving gunwalking, known as Fast and Furious, and at least one man arrested has come forward and said that Fast and Furious was all about arming drug cartels in Mexico, never about tracking them.
All countries signed the declaration and further documentation can be found here.
According to the program of action:

“8. Reaffirming our respect for and commitment to international law and the purposes and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, including the sovereign equality of States, territorial integrity, the peaceful resolution of international disputes, non-intervention and non-interference in the internal affairs of States, “. Non-intervention and non-interference? How about Syria? NATO is part of the United Nations.
“9. Reaffirming the inherent right to individual or collective self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations,”. Collective means the state, in-contrary to our Bill of Rights guaranteed by our government, but ultimately granted by our Creator.
“10. Reaffirming also the right of each State to manufacture, import and retain small arms and light weapons for its self-defence and security needs, as well as for its capacity to participate in peacekeeping operations in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, “. This is just another statement dealing with a ‘collective right’, not an individual right. The ATF, FBI, Homeland Security, along with all the ‘alphabet’ agencies of the federal and state governments are immune and the tyranny they will accomplish when this treaty is fully implemented staggers the mind.
“11. Reaffirming the right of self-determination of all peoples, taking into account the particular situation of peoples under colonial or other forms of alien domination or foreign occupation, and recognizing the right of peoples to take legitimate action in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations to realize their inalienable right of self-determination. This shall not be construed as authorizing or encouraging any action that would dismember or impair, totally or in part, the territorial integrity or political unity of sovereign and independent States conducting themselves in compliance with the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples,” This section was examined previously. It is important to point out that the West Bank and Gaza are not recognized as an ‘sovereign and independent States’, therefore they are up for grabs.

Of course this will be enforced by the UN’s blue helmets, or International Assistance.
Keys To Liberty reported,

It is interesting to note, the “delegations agreed to strengthen the action programme’s implementation at the national, regional and global levels over the period 2012-2018. On follow-up measures, they decided to hold a one-week biennial meeting of States in 2014 and 2016, and a one-week open-ended meeting of governmental experts in 2015 to consider the Programme of Action’s full and effective implementation”. (Underline Emphasis is the author’s) Over the next few years ‘something’ is needed to fully implement this treaty by 2018. Each two years they will meet to see how the treaty has been complied with. This means new statutes in place at the federal level, further restricting the right to keep and bear arms. An assault weapons ban, large capacity magazine ban and stripper clips ban are just around the corner. In the future this will probably begin with more ‘false flag’ operations, stemming, and leading to our own government behind them. More Aurora, Colorado’s, more Sikh Temple type massacres around the country and maybe even a Oklahoma City bombing type event.

Right about now you are probably thinking, so what? As long as the Senate doesn’t ratify all if well. Ask yourself if you are familiar with the United Nation’s Agenda 21. The Senate didn’t ratify that. Instead Bill Clinton basically passed it by executive order. Mike Opelka, at the Blaze writes:

Agenda 21 is a two-decade old, grand plan for global ’Sustainable Development,’ brought to you from the United Nations. George H.W. Bush (and 177 other world leaders) agreed to it back in 1992, and in 1995, Bill Clinton signed Executive Order #12858, creating a Presidential Council on ‘Sustainable Development.’ This effectively pushed the UN plan into America’s large, churning government machine without the need for any review or discussion by Congress or the American people.

So it is perfectly feasible that this will be implemented over a period of years, but very short years.
From The Trenches reports on legislation that is currently before Congress to put the squeeze on those of us wishing to maintain our Second Amendment rights.Hmmmm........"Dictatorship naturally arises out of democracy, and the most aggravated form of tyranny and slavery out of the most extreme liberty". ~ Plato.Read the full story here.

President Obama's White House circulating draft of executive order on cybersecurity.

"Emperor' President Obama's White House circulating draft of executive order on cybersecurity. (TheHill).The White House is circulating a draft of an executive order aimed at protecting the country from cyberattacks, The Hill has learned. The draft proposal, which has been sent to relevant federal agencies for feedback, is a clear sign that the administration is resolved to take action on cybersecurity even as Congress remains gridlocked on legislation that would address the threat. The draft executive order would establish a voluntary program where companies operating critical infrastructure would elect to meet cybersecurity best practices and standards crafted, in part, by the government, according to two people familiar with the document. The concept builds off of a section in the cybersecurity bill from Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) that was blocked last month by Senate Republicans, who called it a backdoor to new regulations. The draft has undergone multiple revisions and is brief, spanning no more than five pages. It is still being worked on and is subject to change, the people familiar with the draft stressed.
It's also unclear whether the final product will get the president's approval to move forward. A new draft of the executive order is expected to be shared with agencies next week. A spokeswoman for the White House declined to comment on whether a draft for a executive order was being circulated, but said it is one of the options the administration is weighing. "An executive order is one of a number of measures we’re considering as we look to implement the president’s direction to do absolutely everything we can to better protect our nation against today’s cyberthreats," said White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden. "We are not going to comment on ongoing internal deliberations.” "The White House needs to step back and say, 'Does this make a meaningful contribution in the near term?' " Lewis said. Additionally, he cautioned that industry would balk at electing to join a program led by DHS, which is plagued with a spotty track record when it comes to leading national security efforts. "Find me a company that says 'I'm going to voluntarily agree to be regulated by DHS.' Nobody is going to volunteer to have DHS regulate them," Lewis said.Read the full story here.

The History Of DHS Ammunition Purchases.

   The grand total? A mere 1.88 BILLION rounds ordered in less than eight years time.58% of all the ammunition that has been ordered, was ordered under the Obama Administration.


The History Of DHS Ammunition Purchases.(theintelhub).By James Smith.

“This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future.” ~ Adolf Hitler.

The question of whether a leader is good or a tyrant is an age old question. Being the one who wears the crown opens you up to criticism from all levels, and to be quite frank, you can’t make everyone love you. This article is to outline purchases by the Department of Human resources since August 2002, a ten year span. The Department of Homeland Security was created by then President Bush as a preventative measure from further terror attacks on American soil. And since its inception, has been fodder for skeptics and fuel for those demanding a smaller, unintrusive government. Below you will find the lists of solicitations, hyper linked to their pages located at http://www.fbo.gov.
The following filters were used:
■US Coast Guard and Secret Service were not accounted for. The USCG rarely requested ammunition, and the Secret Service were mainly “Award Only” notices. No amounts of ammunition could be obtained.
■Any “Award Notice” only entries were omitted due to the lack of needed information. In the first chart, you find the hyper linked solicitation, the total number of rounds requested, and the agency requesting the ammunition. Of all of the sub-departments, only Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) ordered ammunition outside the filters discussed above.Read and see the full story here.

Twitter + Location = "We Know Your House".

Twitter + Location = "We Know Your House".(NSS).By Anna Brading. Yesterday, we wrote about how Michael Dell's daughter had been too open with details of her family's activities and location, and gave some advice on how to post wisely on social networks. One of our readers, James, then left a comment on the story alerting us to WeKnowYourHouse.com.
Calling itself "another social networking privacy experiment", WeKnowYourHouse scours Twitter for people using the word "home" in their tweets and picks up their associated geolocation, then publishes said tweet to its site along with information about where the tweeter is. The site tells you where the person is, plots them on a map, shows you the Google Street View picture of that location, tells you nearby places they've found on Foursquare, crime statistics for the area, local photos posted to Instagram near that location, and even shows an advert where you can "Meet local sl**s". Nice. The site promises that it only keeps the last hour of data, and then fully deletes it, but it's scary to see how much information can be compiled against someone so quickly, using information that is freely available.Read the full story here.

Obama Transforms State Department “Background Notes” Into Campaign Material.

Obama Transforms State Department “Background Notes” Into Campaign Material.(Heritage).Production by U.S. embassies of the State Department’s long-running series of annual “Background Notes” covering every country in the world had long been considered a useful service for the American public. Now, however, they appear to have morphed into yet another taxpayer-subsidized campaign commercial for the Obama Administration.
The old Background Notes were sui generis—useful reference materials that were more comprehensive than the practical but choppy CIA “Factbook” and other U.S. government publications. Now, though, State has dropped everything from the Background Notes but the section on relations with the U.S. No more historical context, no recounting of complex and long-standing issues in the country. Just cut to the chase—that is, the time when the current Administration came to power.
Compare the nearly 1,200-word “Fact Sheet” published this week by the U.S. embassy in Brazil with the last Background Note on Brazil written during the George W. Bush Administration.
The 4,100-word Bush document, chock full of facts and figures helpful in analyzing the country and its importance to the U.S., never once mentions the name of any U.S. President. The 300-word section on U.S.–Brazil relations takes up about 7 percent of the document.
Conversely, fully 70 percent (830 words) of the Brazil Fact Sheet, which is focused exclusively on U.S. relations with Brazil, discusses President Obama either directly by name (twice!) or in the context of the plethora of programs his Administration has launched with Brazil, including a shared “commitment to combat discrimination based on race, gender, ethnicity, or lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) status; to advance gender equality; a bilateral instrument that targets racism; support for HIV/AIDS prevention, promotion of clean energy technologies in Brazil, and mitigation of climate change.”
There is no mention, however, of how much these many programs are costing the American taxpayer.So, apparently, the need for historical context is selectively applied. And although President Obama visited Chile on the same March 2011 trip he made to Brazil, there is no mention of it in the document.
Since President Obama took office, the budget of the State Department has increased from $38.7 billion to $50.2 billion, and thousands have been added to the payroll. Seems pretty easy to tell what many of them are doing.Hmmmm............" DEFINITION OF TOTALITARIANISM " - Personality cultism.Regulation and restriction of speech.Control over the economy. Mass surveillance, political repression. Regulate every aspect of public and private life. politics.Read the full story here.

Stratfor emails reveal secret, widespread TrapWire surveillance system already in place throughout the U.S.?

Stratfor emails reveal secret, widespread TrapWire surveillance system already in place throughout the U.S.?(RT).Former senior intelligence officials have created a detailed surveillance system more accurate than modern facial recognition technology — and have installed it across the US under the radar of most Americans, according to emails hacked by Anonymous.

Every few seconds, data picked up at surveillance points in major cities and landmarks across the United States are recorded digitally on the spot, then encrypted and instantaneously delivered to a fortified central database center at an undisclosed location to be aggregated with other intelligence. It’s part of a program called TrapWire and it’s the brainchild of the Abraxas, a Northern Virginia company staffed with elite from America’s intelligence community. The employee roster at Arbaxas reads like a who’s who of agents once with the Pentagon, CIA and other government entities according to their public LinkedIn profiles, and the corporation’s ties are assumed to go deeper than even documented.
The details on Abraxas and, to an even greater extent TrapWire, are scarce, however, and not without reason. For a program touted as a tool to thwart terrorism and monitor activity meant to be under wraps, its understandable that Abraxas would want the program’s public presence to be relatively limited. But thanks to last year’s hack of the Strategic Forecasting intelligence agency, or Stratfor, all of that is quickly changing.
Hacktivists aligned with the loose-knit Anonymous collective took credit for hacking Stratfor on Christmas Eve, 2011, in turn collecting what they claimed to be more than five million emails from within the company. WikiLeaks began releasing those emails as the Global Intelligence Files (GIF) earlier this year and, of those, several discussing the implementing of TrapWire in public spaces across the country were circulated on the Web this week after security researcher Justin Ferguson brought attention to the matter. At the same time, however, WikiLeaks was relentlessly assaulted by a barrage of distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) attacks, crippling the whistleblower site and its mirrors, significantly cutting short the number of people who would otherwise have unfettered access to the emails.
On Wednesday, an administrator for the WikiLeaks Twitter account wrote that the site suspected that the motivation for the attacks could be that particularly sensitive Stratfor emails were about to be exposed. A hacker group called AntiLeaks soon after took credit for the assaults on WikiLeaks and mirrors of their content, equating the offensive as a protest against editor Julian Assange, “the head of a new breed of terrorist.” As those Stratfor files on TrapWire make their rounds online, though, talk of terrorism is only just beginning.
Mr. Ferguson and others have mirrored what are believed to be most recently-released Global Intelligence Files on external sites, but the original documents uploaded to WikiLeaks have been at times unavailable this week due to the continuing DDoS attacks. Late Thursday and early Friday this week, the GIF mirrors continues to go offline due to what is presumably more DDoS assaults. Australian activist Asher Wolf wrote on Twitter that the DDoS attacks flooding the servers of WikiLeaks supporter sites were reported to be dropping upwards of 40 gigabytes of traffic per second. On Friday, WikiLeaks tweeted that their own site was sustaining attacks of 10 GB/second, adding,“Whoever is running it controls thousands of machines or is able to simulate them.”
According to a press release (pdf) dated June 6, 2012, TrapWire is “designed to provide a simple yet powerful means of collecting and recording suspicious activity reports.” A system of interconnected nodes spot anything considered suspect and then input it into the system to be “analyzed and compared with data entered from other areas within a network for the purpose of identifying patterns of behavior that are indicative of pre-attack planning.”
In a 2009 email included in the Anonymous leak, Stratfor Vice President for Intelligence Fred Burton is alleged to write, “TrapWire is a technology solution predicated upon behavior patterns in red zones to identify surveillance. It helps you connect the dots over time and distance.” Burton formerly served with the US Diplomatic Security Service, and Abraxas’ staff includes other security experts with experience in and out of the Armed Forces.
What is believed to be a partnering agreement included in the Stratfor files from August 13, 2009 indicates that they signed a contract with Abraxas to provide them with analysis and reports of their TrapWire system (pdf).
“Suspicious activity reports from all facilities on the TrapWire network are aggregated in a central database and run through a rules engine that searches for patterns indicative of terrorist surveillance operations and other attack preparations,” Crime and Justice International magazine explains in a 2006 article on the program, one of the few publically circulated on the Abraxas product (pdf). “Any patterns detected – links among individuals, vehicles or activities – will be reported back to each affected facility. This information can also be shared with law enforcement organizations, enabling them to begin investigations into the suspected surveillance cell.”
In a 2005 interview with The Entrepreneur Center, Abraxas founder Richard “Hollis” Helms said his signature product “can collect information about people and vehicles that is more accurate than facial recognition, draw patterns, and do threat assessments of areas that may be under observation from terrorists.” He calls it “a proprietary technology designed to protect critical national infrastructure from a terrorist attack by detecting the pre-attack activities of the terrorist and enabling law enforcement to investigate and engage the terrorist long before an attack is executed,”and that, “The beauty of it is that we can protect an infinite number of facilities just as efficiently as we can one and we push information out to local law authorities automatically.”
An internal email from early 2011 included in the Global Intelligence Files has Stratfor’s Burton allegedly saying the program can be used to “[walk] back and track the suspects from the get go w/facial recognition software.”
Since its inception, TrapWire has been implemented in most major American cities at selected high value targets (HVTs) and has appeared abroad as well. The iWatch monitoring system adopted by the Los Angeles Police Department (pdf) works in conjunction with TrapWire, as does the District of Columbia and the “See Something, Say Something” program conducted by law enforcement in New York City, which had 500 surveillance cameras linked to the system in 2010. Private properties including Las Vegas, Nevada casinos have subscribed to the system. The State of Texas reportedlyspent half a million dollars with an additional annual licensing fee of $150,000 to employ TrapWire, and the Pentagon and other military facilities have allegedly signed on as well.
In one email from 2010 leaked by Anonymous, Stratfor’s Fred Burton allegedly writes, “God Bless America. Now they have EVERY major HVT in CONUS, the UK, Canada, Vegas, Los Angeles, NYC as clients.” Files on USASpending.gov reveal that the US Department of Homeland Security and Department of Defense together awarded Abraxas and TrapWire more than one million dollars in only the past eleven months.
News of the widespread and largely secretive installation of TrapWire comes amidst a federal witch-hunt to crack down on leaks escaping Washington and at attempt to prosecute whistleblowers. Thomas Drake, a former agent with the NSA, has recently spoken openly about the government’s Trailblazer Project that was used to monitor private communication, and was charged under the Espionage Act for coming forth. Separately, former NSA tech director William Binney and others once with the agency have made claims in recent weeks that the feds have dossiers on every American, an allegation NSA Chief Keith Alexander dismissed during a speech at Def-Con last month in Vegas.Read the full story here.

NDAA on trial: Obama Admin refusing to tell a federal judge if they’ve abided by an injunction that prohibits them from such.

NDAA on trial: Obama Admin refusing to tell a federal judge if they’ve abided by an injunction that prohibits them from such.(RT).Not only is the White House fighting in court for the power to jail Americans indefinitely without trial, but the Obama administration is refusing to tell a federal judge if they’ve abided by an injunction that prohibits them from such.
Attorneys for the White House have been in-and-out of court in Manhattan this week to argue that the indefinite detention provisions of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, or NDAA, are necessary for the safety and security of the nation. When President Barack Obama signed the bill on December 31, he granted the government the power to put any American away in jail over even suspected terrorist ties, but federal court Judge Katherine Forrest ruled in May that this particular part of the NDAA, Section 1021, failed to “pass constitutional muster” and ordered a temporary injunction.
On Monday, White House attorneys asked for an appeal for that injunction so that they’d be once more legally permitted to indefinitely detain anyone over mere accusations. When specifically asked to answer whether or not they’ve adhered by Judge Forrest’s injunction so far, though, administration attorneys refused to cooperate with the questioning.
Activist and reporter Tangerine Bolen is a plaintiff in the case against the NDAA, and in an op-ed published Thursday in the Daily Cloudt, she writes that the federal attorneys asking for an appeal have declined to reveal whether or not they’ve cooperated with the judge’s May 2012 injunction.

 If the government has arrested anyone over alleged “belligerent ties” since Judge Forrest ordered a temporary stay, the government could be in contempt of court.

“Obama’s attorneys refused to assure the court, when questioned, that the NDAA’s section 1021 – the provision that permits reporters and others who have not committed crimes to be detained without trial – has not been applied by the US government anywhere in the world after Judge Forrest’s injunction,” Tangerine tells Daily Cloudt. “In other words, they were telling a US federal judge that they could not, or would not, state whether Obama’s government had complied with the legal injunction that she had laid down before them.”
In its original form, the NDAA allows the military hold anyone accused of having “substantially supported” al-Qaeda, the Taliban or “associated forces” until “the end of hostilities” and indefinitely imprison anyone who commits a “belligerent act” against the United States, yet fails to explicitly define what is constituted as such. In her injunction, Judge Forrest said, “In the face of what could be indeterminate military detention, due process requires more.”
“An individual could run the risk of substantially supporting or directly supporting an associated force without even being aware that he or she was doing so,” the judge ruled.
Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges is also a plaintiff in the case and along with Tangerine warns that his own investigative work could be construed by the government to put him away in prison for life.
“I have had dinner more times than I can count with people whom this country brands as terrorists,” Hedges wrote earlier this year, “but that does not make me one.”
Carl Mayer, an attorney representing the plaintiffs in the case, told RT that he expected the White House to appeal the judge’s injunction, but that he considered it a lost cause.
“[W]e are suggesting that it may not be in their best interest because there are so many people from all sides of the political spectrum opposed to this law that they ought to just say, ‘We’re not going to appeal,’” Mayer said.
Mayer stated that, because of the injunction, “The NDAA cannot be used to pick up Americans in a proverbial black van or in any other way that the administration might decide to try to get people into the military justice system. It means that the government is foreclosed now from engaging in this type of action against the civil liberties of Americans.” Now, however, the White House wants the power to be once more restored.
Outside of federal court on Thursday, Hedges appeared pleased, Courthouse News reports.
“It didn’t appear to me by the end that [the government] had any argument to stand on,” Hedges said. “The judge eviscerated them.”
Even with the injunction still standing, though, the government has yet to admit if it’s adhering to Judge Forrest’s ruling. Hmmmmm.....Obama: "“I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation.”Read the full story here.

Obama fights ban on indefinite detention of Americans

Obama fights ban on indefinite detention of Americans.(RT).The White House has filed an appeal in hopes of reversing a federal judge’s ruling that bans the indefinite military detention of Americans because attorneys for the president say they are justified to imprison alleged terrorists without charge. Manhattan federal court Judge Katherine Forrest ruled in May that the indefinite detention provisions signed into law late last year by US President Barack Obama failed to “pass constitutional muster” and ordered a temporary injunction to keep the military from locking up any person, American or other, over allegations of terrorist ties. On Monday, however, federal prosecutors representing President Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta filed a claim with the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals in hopes of eliminating that ban.The plaintiffs “cannot point to a single example of the military’s detaining anyone for engaging in conduct even remotely similar to the type of expressive activities they allege could lead to detention,” Obama’s attorneys insist. With that, the White House is arguing that as long as the indefinite detention law hasn’t be enforced yet, there is no reason for a judge to invalidate it. Reuters reports this week that the government believes they are justified to have the authorization to lock alleged belligerents up indefinitely because cases involving militants directly aligned against the good of the US government warrants such punishment. Separate from Judge Forrest’s injunction, nine states have attempted to, at least in part, remove themselves from the indefinite detention provisions of included in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, or NDAA.
In section 1021 of the NDAA, the president’s authority to hold a terrorism suspect “without trial, until the end of the hostilities” is reaffirmed by Congress. Despite an accompanying signing statement voicing his opposition to that provision, President Obama quietly inked his name to the NDAA on December 31, 2011. In May, however, a group of plaintiffs including notable journalists and civil liberty proponents challenged section 1021 in court, leading to Just Forrest to find it unconstitutional one month later. "There is a strong public interest in protecting rights guaranteed by the First Amendment," Forrest wrote in her 68-page ruling. "There is also a strong public interest in ensuring that due process rights guaranteed by the Fifth Amendment are protected by ensuring that ordinary citizens are able to understand the scope of conduct that could subject them to indefinite military detention."
At the time Just Forrest made her injunction, attorney Carl Mayer told RT on behalf of the plaintiffs that, although he expected the White House to appeal, “It may not be in their best interest.” “[T]here are so many people from all sides of the political spectrum opposed to this law that they ought to just say, 'We're not going to appeal,’” Mayer said. "The NDAA cannot be used to pick up Americans in a proverbial black van or in any other way that the administration might decide to try to get people into the military justice system. It means that the government is foreclosed now from engaging in this type of action against the civil liberties of Americans." The original plaintiffs, who include Pulitzer Prize-winner Chris Hedges, have asked Just Forrest to make her injunction permanent. Oral arguments in the case are expected to begin this week.Read the full story here.

Making Oregon a “Dry State” - Obama admin now seizing water supplies.

Making Oregon a “Dry State” - Obama admin now seizing water supplies.(TrevorLoudon).By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton.

Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness… Treasured guarantees from the Declaration of Independence. Except that life depends on water and in a stealth power grab of staggering scope, governments and agencies have laid claim to the very rain itself.
This ties into the socialist precept that the government shall own the means of production, including the means of food production. If you are looking for the logical implication of Obama’s recent rant that “You didn’t build that!,” that the necessary components of anything you build or grow come from government, this is where you arrive.
It has always been the American ideal that you own land and all that is on it. It’s yours, not the government’s. That should include the water that is on that land or that falls on that land. But it would seem that Oregon is more in tune with state collectivism as Gary Harrington of Jackson County, Oregon found out the hard way recently. He owns 170 acres with 3 ponds on his land. Most of us would consider it a no-brainer that the water on his land was his to do with as he sees fit. Oregon has other ideas and is instituting water prohibition:

Oregon law that says all of the water in the state of Oregon is public water and if you want to use that water, either to divert it or to store it, you have to acquire a water right from the state of Oregon before doing that activity.

And:

If you build a dam, an earthen dam, and interrupt the flow of water off of [YOUR OWN] property, and store that water that is an activity that would require a water right permit from us.

And:

Under Oregon law, all water is publicly owned. With some exceptions, cities, farmers, factory owners, and other water users must obtain a permit or water right from the Water Resources Department to use water from ANY source…

Note: “publicly owned” means “not yours.”
For the heinous crime of water collection, Harrington has been sentenced to 30 days in jail and a $1500 fine. Why, how very, very Communist:

Communism, the political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society.

And lest you think this is just a whacky Oregon thing, think again. The EPA has gone insane with Communistic glee and is wreaking havoc across America with the help of Obama, the Progressives and their regulator minions. Indiana is our next stop:

There is a story in Net Right Daily about landowner, Dexter Lutter of Noble County, who thought he was cleaning up the water supply and creating a healthier environment for years to come. Instead, he is facing hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines from the EPA, whose main goal is complete control over all land, air and water.
His crime? Check it out on Net Right Daily, excerpted below:

…A small manmade open ditch ran through Lutter’s property in Noble County, Ind. It was in need of repair, and Lutter got permission from his county to place tile drains for the collection of the agricultural discharge and cover over the eroding open ditch. This not only saved county taxpayer dollars, but also cleaned up the water supply and prevented further soil erosion.
But that doesn’t matter. According to Noble County and Lutter, they were told they violated the Clean Water Act. This is despite the fact that Lutter said the ditch was manmade and used only for agricultural discharge and did not impede the flow of any main waterways — usual exemptions under the Clean Water Act.
It seems both the EPA and Army Corps are no longer content just monitoring activity in “navigable” waterways—as stated in the Clean Water Act, which has commonly lent itself to waterways where a vessel could in fact, navigate. These agencies seem to think they need to adopt a different interpretation of the law, which gets them another step closer to controlling all water in the U.S…

Mr. Lutter now faces the loss of his business thanks to the overreach of the EPA.In fact, Obama is seizing western water supplies now. Didn’t hear about that? Not surprised, the lamestream media is not covering it (well, maybe covering for the administration or covering up criminal overreach, but not covering the story). But just because you can’t see a terrorist, it doesn’t mean he hasn’t been busy. Now the EPA and the feds are brandishing lawsuits which, if won, will award them future water rights of states – starting with New Mexico. Control the water, control the food, control the people. Ask Mao, Lenin or any other dictator. If people won’t comply, starve them out. Think it can’t happen here? It’s already started.

The lawyers told the committee the U.S. government is apparently trying to take over legal management of the state’s water supply. The federal government has asserted claims for damages to groundwater in a natural resource damage case in New Mexico involving Chevron/Molycorp. The claim seeks for those damages to be awarded in the form of future water rights management.
The federal government’s lawsuit has caught the attention of the Western Governors’ Association.
“Claims by federal trustees of this nature are unprecedented and are of great concern to the Western states,” said Pam O. Inmann, executive director of the Western Governors’ Association, in a letter to Tom Vilsack, secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Ken Salazar, secretary of the U.S. Department of the Interior. “…The ramifications of such legal position extend to the very heart of the Western states exclusive ownership and/or management and control of the groundwater resources within their respective boundaries.”

Perhaps a refresher of where this came from (other than Karl Marx) is in order. 

Hmmm.......“Dictatorship, by whatever name, is founded on the doctrine that the individual amounts to nothing; that the State is the only one that counts; and that men and women and children were put on earth solely for the purpose of serving the state.” ~ Harry S. Truman.Read the full story here.

"You didn't Build that Island" - Obama Fundraisers to Deny Thousands a Day at the Beach.

"You didn't Build that Island" - Obama Fundraisers to Deny Thousands a Day at the Beach.(TCP).HT: WhiteHouseDossier.The popular Sherwood Island State Park in Westport will be closed Monday because President Barack Obama plans to use it as a helicopter base for his nearby campaign-fundraising stops. At the height of the summer vacation and beach season, the 238-acre beach on Long Island Sound will be shut down all day so the president can use the park to arrive for and depart from private, high-roller fundraising events, culminating with a $35,800-a-head gathering for the glitterati at movie mogul Harvey Weinstein's waterfront Westport manse.
Thousands of discouraged bathers may be turned away and the state will lose parking fees of $9 for state residents and $15 for out-of-state cars. House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero Jr., R-Norwalk, charged Friday "it's outrageous" that the regional destination will be shut down for the entire day for private political reasons."Could you imagine if a Republican ever did such a thing? They'd be screaming from every corner," Cafero said.
"This is supposed to be the party and the president of the people? To close this state park in August for purely partisan political reasons is outrageous. People are going to be on their one-week vacation and they can't get into Sherwood Island?"Requests for comment from the White House were deferred to the Chicago-based Obama campaign, which did not reply. The Secret Service did not return a request for comment.State Sen. Toni Boucher, R-Wilton, whose district also includes Sherwood Island, said it would make more sense for the presidential chopper to land at Sikorsky Memorial Airport in Stratford or Tweed-New Haven. "I'm flabbergasted," she said Friday night. "It's unfathomable that someone would make that kind of decision. The perception will be that they're taking advantage of a public park for a private purpose. And they call Mitt Romney an elitist."Hmmmm....."When Mr. Obama says, "Everyone plays by the same set of rules," it means they conform to his rules. .Read the full story here.

Will President Obama Override the Congress on Cybersecurity?Cyber bill has Democratic gun control amendment.

Will President Obama Override the Congress on Cybersecurity?Cyber bill has Democratic gun control amendment. (Heritage).The attempt to pass a comprehensive cybersecurity bill before the summer recess failed today in the Senate, 52–46.
The Cybersecurity Act of 2012 was still not ready for prime time, despite several tries at moderating its more objectionable aspects. With this vote, cybersecurity legislation is not likely to move any further in this Congress.
One of the main rallying points for the opposition to the bill was its use of a regulatory structure at the heart of its provisions. The authors tried to soften it by making the regulatory regime “voluntary,” but they still allowed and encouraged regulatory agencies to make the standards mandatory. Such standards would likely cripple innovation, impose large costs on the private sector, and encourage compliance rather than true security.
Additionally, the bill’s cyber threat information-sharing provisions were heavily flawed due to weak and often conflicting liability protections, as well as the rejection of any assistance from the strongest centers of cyber capabilities: the National Security Agency and the Department of Defense. Forty-six Senators agreed that this was a bad idea.

Though cyber legislation is dead, the concern is now whether the President will override the will of the people and their representatives and simply enact an onerous regulatory structure through executive orders. 

President Obama has shown quite an appetite and willingness to do just this sort of end run around Congress. Regardless of his passion for this issue or his opinion on how this problem should be addressed, the Senate has not been able to find a workable bill, and its vote should be respected. In the meantime, the President still has plenty of work to do to improve federal computer systems.
A regulatory regime enacted by fiat would probably be even worse than the one in the bill.Read the full story here.

Daily Caller Now considered by Google a Malware Threat....I wonder what they posted?

Daily Caller Now considered by Google a Malware Threat....I wonder what they posted?HT: AstuteBlogger).

If you google the Daily Caller you get the following result :

If you click the link you get the following result:

Update: Via Twitter, the Daily Caller is telling its readers to ignore the warnings and come on in: “.@DailyCaller came under malware attack. We've turned back the enemy and reclaimed our land. Site is safe to visit. Thanks 4 your patience.”Read the full story here.

Video - Gun Control Amendment Restricting Magazine Size To 10 Rounds Slipped Into Cyber Security Bill.

More here.

Federal Protective Service orders 150 sets of riot gear to be delivered in 15 days, in time for the the Republican National Convention?

Federal Protective Service orders 150 sets of riot gear to be delivered in 15 days, in time for the the Republican National Convention?(AP).By Madison Ruppert.The Federal Protective Service a child agency of the behemoth Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is tasked with protecting property owned, occupied or secured by the federal government, seems to be getting ready for a riot or riots in the very near future.
This is the same Federal Protective Service which reportedly “drafted plans to send armed agents into downtown Chicago to patrol the city and prepare for protests” during the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit earlier this year.
This quite sizeable procurement of 150 sets of riot gear is especially noteworthy since it is being filled on a highly accelerated timetable.
The solicitation was posted on July 25, 2012 with a response date of July 26, 2012 and delivery a mere 15 days later.

The items required are: 147 “Upper Body and Shoulder Protection” which are brand name or equal to “Centurion Soft Shell Riot Control System (CPX2500),” along with 152 “Thigh-Groin Protector” brand name or equivalent to “Centurion TPX200,” 156 “Forearm Protectors” brand name or equivalent to “Centurion (FP100),” and 147 units of “Hard Shell Shin Guards” brand name or equivalent to “Centurion (TS70),” 147 carry bags brand name or equivalent to Exotech (E4), 147 tactical gloves brand name or equivalent to “Damascus (DMZ333),” and 147 riot helmets brand name or equivalent to “MaxPro (TR1000).”

This considerable procurement is for “the 2012 Democratic and Republican National Conventions, the 2012 Presidential Inauguration and other future similar activities,” according to the solicitation.

While that is general to the point of absurdity, the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Florida slated for August 27-30 seems like the likely reason.

Seeing as the other events are in the even more distant future, I see no reason to justify the abnormally narrow window of time for this solicitation to be filled.

According to projections, there will be a significant amount of protesters attending the Republican National Convention and local police have reportedly planned to close certain roads in the area in order to stifle the demonstrations.

The chief procurement officer with the DHS, on behalf of the Federal Protective Service, gave some details about the equipment they are looking for which makes it quite clear they are preparing for the worst.The upper body and shoulder protection must “effectively protect the torso and shoulders from blunt force trauma” and “safely absorb blows delivered from blunt objects,” while the riot helmets must have an “adjustable tactical face shield with liquid seal” and be compatible with the “3M Full Face Respirator FR-M40B masks.”
The hard shell shin guards must give officers “substantial protection from flying debris, non-ballistic weapons, and blows to the leg” and have an “optimized protective design for severe riot control or tactical situations.”

Even the gloves that they are looking for are quite heavy duty, with “Kevlar on back of hands [that] is flame/flash retardant as well as cut protective” and a “rolled finger tip design for excellent trigger sensitivity and fit.”

Clearly, they have a quite violent encounter in mind here. The question is: what exactly are they planning for and why?Hmmmm........"Domestic Terrorism False Flag"?Read the full story here.

Cyber bill has Democratic gun control amendment, limits the purchase of high capacity gun magazines for some consumers.

Cyber bill has Democratic gun control amendment, limits the purchase of high capacity gun magazines for some consumers.(TheHill).Democratic senators have offered an amendment to the cybersecurity bill that would limit the purchase of high capacity gun magazines for some consumers. Shortly after the Cybersecurity Act gained Senate approval to proceed to filing proposed amendments and a vote next week, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), a sponsor of the gun control amendment, came to the floor to defend the idea of implementing some “reasonable” gun control measures.The amendment was sponsored by Democratic Sens. Frank Lautenberg (N.J.), Barbara Boxer (Calif.), Jack Reed (R.I.), Bob Menendez (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Schumer and Dianne Feinstein (Calif.).

S.A. 2575 would make it illegal to transfer or possess large capacity feeding devices such as gun magazines, belts, feed stripes and drums of more than 10 rounds of ammunition with the exception of .22 caliber rim fire ammunition. 

The amendment is identical to a separate bill sponsored by Lautenberg. Feinstein was the sponsor of the assault weapons ban, which expired in 2004. The proposed amendment would only affect sales and transfers after the law took effect. Schumer defended the Brady law and assault weapons ban on the floor Thursday evening, perhaps in preparation for the coming fight with Republicans and gun rights activists. Schumer suggested that both the left and right find common ground. “Maybe we could come together on guns if each side gave some,” Schumer said. He suggested that Democrats make it clear that their goal is not to repeal the Second Amendment. “The basic complaint is that the Chuck Schumers of the world want to take away your guns,” Schumer said of the argument made by gun lobbies. “I think it would be smart for those of us who want rational gun control to make it know that that’s not true at all.” Schumer also pointed out that it would be reasonable for the right to recognize that background checks on those buying guns is necessary — as called for in the Brady law. He also said average Americans don’t need an assault weapon to go hunting or protect themselves. “We can debate where to draw the line of reasonableness, but we might be able to come to an agreement in the middle,” Schumer said. “Maybe, maybe, maybe we can pass some laws that might, might, might stop some of the unnecessary casualties … maybe there’s a way we can some together and try to break through the log jam and make sure the country is a better place.” Next week the Senate is expected to debate and vote on proposed amendments to the cybersecurity bill.Read the full story here.