Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Police State updates - unconstitutional surveillance , police abuse and manipulation of the media ....... does the fish rot from the head ?

Why do we see police state laws rammed through without public uproar..... maybe this explains some of the malaise.....

Tyler Durden's picture

23% Of America Is Illiterate

Following on the heels of the dumbing down of the State of the Union speech we noted yesterday, we thought a simple visualization of just how stunningly poor our nation's reading skills really are would be useful. One in five Americans lacks the basic reading skills beyond a 4th grade level - are you one of them?

Camover 2013: Bloc-ing the Surveillance State Berlin Style

Related articles for those in the comments section arguing that surveillance sets us free.

The UK, whose police forces pioneered experiments with the technology in the 1960s, leads the world in surveillance of its people.
Exactly how many CCTV cameras there are in the UK is not known, although one study four years ago estimated 4.8m cameras had been installed.
What is rarely disputed is that the UK has more cameras per citizen than anywhere else.
Analysis of figures from the European Commission showed a 77 per cent increase in murders, robberies, assaults and sexual offences in the UK since Labour came to power.
The total number of violent offences recorded compared to population is higher than any other country in Europe, as well as America, Canada, Australia and South Africa.
The UK had a greater number of murders in 2007 than any other EU country – 927 – and at a relative rate higher than most western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.
It also recorded the fifth highest robbery rate in the EU, and the highest absolute number of burglaries, with double the number of offences recorded in Germany and France.
Note that the 77 percent increase in crime happened DESPITE the internationally famous underground surveillance center introduced in London profiled in the previous article. So if someone presents to you the argument that surveillance will protect you from BAD GUYS, ask them how they explain the fact that you are more likely to be assaulted in the most surveilled city on earth than anywhere else.
Benjamin Franklin was able to easily explain this apparent contradiction (at least it’s a contradiction to the feeble minded): Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.


Guest Post: Meet Stingray Surveillance: The "Unconstitutional, All-You-Can-Eat Data Buffet"

Tyler Durden's picture

Via Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,
It’s getting impossible to keep track of all the new spy tools being rolled out by the police state in the name of “fighting terrorism”, aka spying on innocent American citizens unconstitutionally.  I thought that I had my hands full the other day with ARGUS: The World’s Highest Resolution Video Surveillance Platform, but this “Stingray” system is already being deployed illegally in cities throughout the United States.  As the EFF states: “The Stingray is the digital equivalent of the pre-revolutionary British soldier.”  From theEFF:
The device, which acts as a fake cell phone tower, essentially allows the government to electronically search large areas for a particular cell phone’s signal—sucking down data on potentially thousands of innocent people along the way. At the same time, law enforcement has attempted use them while avoiding many of the traditional limitations set forth in the Constitution, like individualized warrants. This is why we called the tool “an unconstitutional, all-you-can-eat data buffet.”

Recently, LA Weekly reported the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) got a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) grant in 2006 to buy a stingray. The original grant request said it would be used for “regional terrorism investigations.” InsteadLAPD has been using it for just about any investigation imaginable.

Of course, we’ve seen this pattern over and over and over.The government uses “terrorism” as a catalyst to gain some powerful new surveillance tool or ability, and then turns around and uses it on ordinary citizens, severely infringing on their civil liberties in the process.

Stingrays are particularly odious given they give police dangerous “general warrant” powers, which the founding fathers specifically drafted the Fourth Amendment to prevent. In pre-revolutionary America, British soldiers used “general warrants” as authority to go house-to-house in a particular neighborhood, looking for whatever they please, without specifying an individual or place to be searched.
The Stingray is the digital equivalent of the pre-revolutionary British soldier.

On March 28th, the judge overseeing the Rigmaiden case, which we wrote about previously, will hold a hearing on whether evidence obtained using a stringray should be suppressed.  It will be one of the first times a judge will rules on the constitutionality of these devices in federal court.

It will be interesting to see what happens in late March.  I will be watching.

Full article here.

and awards for death dealing gamers.......

New Medal of Honor Coming for Cyber Soldiers

By Sarah Dee
February 13, 2013
The AP reported today that a new medal of honor could be in the works for those in the military who operate weaponized drones and cyber-assaults from behind a computer screen.
The report said that:
“…the medal will be considered a bit higher in ranking than the Bronze Star, but is lower than the Silver Star, defense officials said.”
“The medal is a brass pendant, nearly two inches tall, with a laurel wreath that circles a globe. There is an eagle in the center. The ribbon has blue, red and white stripes .”
This will be the first time a medal of honor will be created for those who have not risked their life in a combat situation. The mechanics of drone warfare is all very “Ender’s Game.” (Spoiler Alert! In Orson Scott Card’s classic science-fiction novel, Ender is a child genius who operates a fleet of attack planes on a cyber-game, only to discover that  the “game” was actually real-time warfare and he was “playing” with soldier’s lives.)

According to the article:
 “Over the last decade of war, remotely-piloted Predators and Reapers have become a critical weapon to both gather intelligence and conduct airstrikes against terrorist or insurgents around the world. They have been used extensively on the battlefields in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as in strikes in Pakistan, Yemen and northern Africa.”

Eerily similar right?  The Pentagon remains tight-lipped about their cyber-warfare activities and those who commented on this story only did so on the condition of anonymity. “Pentagon creates new medal for cyber, drone wars,” rightly sums it up when it says this new medal of honor is:
 “A recognition of the evolving 21st Century warfare…(*)”

As CISPA Debate Rages Again, Obama Already Using Its Powers

February 13, 2013
Source: Activist Post

Just like most draconian legislation that politicians try to pass, the government has already been using the illegal powers and hopes to justify its actions with the passage of a new law. See warrantless wiretapping. Other even worse actions, like torture and assassinations of Americans without due process, are simply kept secret because they know a law for it would never be possible.

It was recently announced that the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA, will once again be coming for a vote in the United States Congress. Lawmakers citedincreased threats from hackers and cyber espionage as the motivation for its reintroduction.

This version of CISPA is reportedly identical to last year's version that easily passed in the House by a count of 248 to 168. Congressman Jared Polis (D-Colo), who voted against the measure, said the law "would waive every single privacy law ever enacted in the name of cybersecurity."

Other critics have pointed out that CISPA gives Obama a "kill switch" over the Internet in a "national cyberemergency".

CISPA has been roundly criticized by privacy advocates as enshrining the powers of the government to surveil and control the Internet in two overarching ways. First, government can lay claim to protecting "critical infrastructure" under which the Web has now been included. This opens the door for requesting that private companies like Google, Facebook and so far 800 others work openly on the initiative as well.

Both attempts to pass it in the Senate in 2012 narrowly failed with the last vote of 51-47occurring in November which was closer than its 52-46 August vote.

After its failure, the White House and CISPA co-sponsor Joe Lieberman warned the public that Obama would enact an executive order if lawmakers won't pass the bill.

Although Obama has yet to issue a formal executive order, The Washington Post reportedthat Presidential Obama signed a secret cybersecurity presidential directive: Presidential Policy Directive 20 essentially giving himself all the power that CISPA seeks to legitimize:

Presidential Policy Directive 20 establishes a broad and strict set of standards to guide the operations of federal agencies in confronting threats in cyberspace, according to several U.S. officials who have seen the classified document and are not authorized to speak on the record. The president signed it in mid-October.

The new directive is the most extensive White House effort to date to wrestle with what constitutes an “offensive” and a “defensive” action in the rapidly evolving world of cyberwar and cyberterrorism, where an attack can be launched in milliseconds by unknown assailants utilizing a circuitous route. For the first time, the directive explicitly makes a distinction between network defense and cyber-operations to guide officials charged with making often-rapid decisions when confronted with threats.
The reality is that much of CISPA's privacy-shattering policies already are taking place under the FISA Amendments Act which Obama reauthorized for an additional 5 years. As the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported back in March:
the FAA is the statute Congress passed giving immunity to telecom companies despite their participation in the NSA’s massive warrantless wiretapping program, which the New York Times first exposed in 2005. EFF and a host of other civil liberties groups have been involved in litigation challenging the constitutionality of warrantless wiretapping for years. (Source)
The extent of warrantless wiretapping and surveillance already being shared between the government and private companies has been exposed by The Washington Post, as well as former NSA whistleblowers William Binney and Thomas Drake, and former AT&T technician Mark Klein.

The Post's investigation revealed such a massive overlap of government and corporate interests that it is already operating free of transparency and oversight. Their findings were appropriately titled, "A hidden world, growing beyond control."
Some 1,271 government organizations and 1,931 private companies work on programs related to counterterrorism, homeland security and intelligence in about 10,000 locations across the United States. (Source)
Perhaps it is because of the exposure these whistleblowers have given that CISPA aims to go a step further and give corporations the power to prevent hard evidence leaks. As Stephen C. Webster of Rawstory states:
Imagine if Bank of America knew that WikiLeaks had obtained a cache of its internal documents the very instant that transmission was made, and a financial blockade were launched before WikiLeaks could even begin examining the files. Because CISPA words the definition of 'cyber threat intelligence' to include 'theft or misappropriation of private or government information' and 'intellectual property,' that’s precisely what’s at stake here.
After all, who wouldn’t want a government minder as a personal bodyguard during travels abroad? By placing the NSA on guard for corporate network security, big tech firms like AT&T, Verizon, IBM, Facebook and Google won’t be as hard-pressed by market forces — like rival companies and, yes, even hackers — to innovate their security technologies, leaving the heaviest lifting, and spending, up to Big Brother instead. (Source)

There is no doubt that the apparatus of CISPA is already in effect and it's merely going to be justified through legislation. The Supreme Court refuses to address privacy issues and has effectively shut down all lawsuits aimed at holding accountable those engaging in domestic warrantless wiretapping. And there are many private companies ready to offer their assistance to help track everyone's digital movements and communications.

Increasing coverage of social media was brought to the U.S. government in 2010 by war criminal Raytheon's RIOT search technology which has been called a "Google for spies." Covert eavesdropping of VoIP services like Skype has been introduced by the private sector (including Microsoft) through patents filed as far back as 2007. And massive, largely unknown data mining companies like Axciom which began in 1969 now collects and analyzes 50 trillion data transactions per year.

So CISPA passing or Obama's executive order in the name of cybersecurity is of little practical consequence other than legalizing past privacy violations and offensive state-sponsored cyber attacks by the U.S. government. It won't even make the government's cybersecurity actions transparent, but it certainly will make it transparent that a whole new level of the Internet Security Industrial Complex is taking shape.


Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Psycho Houston Cop Highlights Wider Justice Problem

image source
John Galt
Activist Post

The word "psycho" is not used here to be inflammatory. It is generally accepted that the pyschopathic personality is a disorder characterized by amorality, brutality, lack of impulse control, and profoundly lacking empathy. With this make-up, as author of The Psychopath: The Mask of Sanity Hervey Cleckley, states:
Provided you are not forcibly stopped, you can do anything at all.
Stories of police brutality across the nation are legion, but every once in a while something stands out as particularly heinous. In this category would certainly be the case of Michael Pena of the NYPD who during his time off at 6:15 a.m. drunkenly raped Lydia Cuomo in a Bronx courtyard; an act that the court concluded was not rape, but "sexual assault." Pena will likely be in prison for life, but the wording of the court is horribly offensive for victims of such savagery.

When the court system and the police departments themselves downplay, or completely overlook and obstruct the punishment of officers, it leads to public confidence falling into an irreparable state. Such is the case of a young Houston man who had the misfortune of running into Sgt. Curtis Hampton.

24-year-old Blake Pate, after being hurt in a car accident on Christmas Day, exited his vehicle dazed and likely seeking help. Instead of receiving help, he was shot four times . . . killed by a police officer who was nearby the scene of the accident. An autopsy revealed that there were no drugs or alcohol in his system, and he had no criminal history.
According to a complaint filed by the victim's mother:
'Officer Hampton witnessed the accident and went to investigate,' the complaint states. 'The noise of the crash brought numerous residents of the apartment complex outside, allowing them to witness the subsequent events. 
'Blake extricated himself from the wreckage of his vehicle and began to walk toward the nearest street light. Blake was stunned from the accident and bleeding from superficial wounds to his face. Blake had his hands extended in front of him. 
Officer Hampton drew his service pistol and fired four shots at Blake at an extreme close range. Blake was struck in the thigh, the chest, and the neck. 
'At no point did Blake attack or otherwise threaten Officer Hampton. Blake was not found to be carrying any type of weapon. He was completely unarmed. At the time of the shooting, Officer Hampton was not in fear of his life or bodily injury or that of another. Officer Hampton saw no weapon on Blake nor did he suspect Blake had a weapon.' (Source)
Blake's mother, Patsy, received no remedy from a grand jury, which decided not to indict Hampton for the killing -- they heard no witness testimony.

Patsy's complaint has now been issued at the federal level. The complaint goes on to chronicle Sgt. Hampton's long history of brutality, which included other questionable shooting incidents. One incident that was documented was Hampton shooting a man multiple times who was threatening suicide. The department ruled that this was not excessive force.

A second incident saw Hampton shoot a dog that was enclosed behind a fence. No disciplinary action was taken.
Adding to his repertoire of psychopathic behavior, Hampton also has multiple complaints against him for sexual harassment, categorized by one woman (also an HPD officer) as attempted rape. Hampton was suspended for 15 days, no charges. And that was a heavy penalty compared to the one that followed after he tied his girlfriend to a bed and tried to rape her - 5 days suspension, no charges. This incident was concluded to be sexual role play that "went overboard."

According to the Houston Press, another incident emerged that led to the following statement encapsulating the classic behavior of a psychopath:

In 2008, another HPD officer filed a complaint against Hampton for sexual misconduct. 

'It is extremely disturbing that someone in a position of authority cannot see the error of what he did,' reads an HPD Internal Affairs document. 'The fact that [Sgt. Hampton] seeks to blame the victim makes his actions even more egregious.' (Source)
To date the HPD has stayed true to form and has taken no action against Hampton for Blake Pate's death. Blake's mother has taken the correct step in filing a suit against the city, and against Hampton, personally. If police departments are not going to take action to screen, monitor, and properly evaluate predatory behavior within their ranks, then it is up to victims and activists to hold them accountable by filing lawsuits and spreading the word about being on high alert of certain individuals.

and regarding the Dorner situation.....

LAPD Trying to Execute Dorner While Endangering LA Citizens with Frenzied ‘Shoot to Kill’ Gunfire

By Mike Adams
Natural News
February 12, 2013
I’ve never seen a police force look as pathetic and weak as the LAPD does right now. The entire police force has been thrust into a state of complete terror by the actions of one police officer named Christopher Dorner who allegedly has gone on a cop-killing rampage.
According to The Telegraph, “Around 50 LAPD officers and their families remain under protection at their homes amid fears Dorner would come out of hiding to target them…”
Question: do these other cops not know how to fire a gun themselves? Do they not have a shotgun at home for self defense?
Can you imagine how pathetic and weak these people are to have fifty police families huddled in their homes, barricading their doors and windows, fearing for their lives because of one mortal man running around?
This is total proof that the LAPD has become a culture of pathetic weaklings who apparently have to cry for their mommas instead of manning up and packing heat.

It’s not like there’s an entire terror cell of people armed with AK-47s coming after them. This is one friggin’ lone guy with a gun. This problem is not that difficult to deal with if you actually know how to handle a firearm.

But I suppose it’s some sort of new California political correctness now that even LAPD officers have no idea how to use a firearm to defend themselves.
Wow, have the police officers in LA become sissified to the point of being paralyzed with fear? (And if so, why on earth are these people being paid to protect us, ironically, from bad guys with guns?)
LAPD randomly firing at anybody in a blind frenzy of wild incompetence
By the way, as part of the sissified, trigger-happy frenzy we’re all witnessing here, LAPD officers are just shooting up innocent people for no apparent reason.You don’t even have to resemble the suspect to be shot at, amazingly.
As is reporting:
LAPD officers mistakenly opened fire on Emma Hernandez, 71, and her daughter, Margie Carranza, 47, as they were sitting inside their blue Toyota Tacoma. The truck was riddled with bullets, Hernandez was shot twice in the back, and Carranza was injured by broken glass.
The LA Times reports:
Law enforcement sources told The Times that at least seven officers opened fire. On Friday, the street was pockmarked with bullet holes in cars, trees, garage doors and roofs. Residents said they wanted to know what happened. “How do you mistake two Hispanic women, one who is 71, for a large black male?” said Richard Goo, 62, who counted five bullet holes in the entryway to his house.
As the LAPD explains, the truck these women were driving “resembled” the truck of Christopher Dorner and therefore LAPD cops just flat-out OPENED FIRE on the vehicle without even identifying who was driving it! How did it “resemble” Dorner’s truck? Well, it was a truck! That sucker had four wheels and a bed for hauling stuff! Sheee-at!
As the attorney of one of the women driving the truck retorted, “The vehicle is a different color. The license plate doesn’t match. There’s nothing there for you to start shooting people. And even if they had the person in question… Mr. Dorner… you still have to give them an opportunity to get out. You can’t just start administering street justice.”

Oh, but you can if you’re LAPD! Every truck is a legitimate target, regardless of the color or the license plate number. After all, you can’t expect LA cops to pay attention to all those little details like vehicle color or the license plate number or the sex of the driver.

I mean, who has time for all that? Heck, just aim and fire! It’s POLICE WORK for God’s sake! Whatever bad happens, they can just explain it all later and settle the lawsuits with taxpayer money, right?
The woman driving the truck, by the way, was shot in the back and nearly killed. She was given “an apology” by the LAPD. Something like this:
“We’re really sorry, ma’am, that our officers are total morons who are just as likely to shoot and kill innocent citizens as they are to hit anyone actually resembling a suspect.

But then again, you were driving a vehicle, and we were told the suspect was driving a vehicle, so you can see why we had to immediately open fire and SHOOT TO KILL YOU even before identifying who was behind the wheel.
So you can’t really blame us. After all, we’re the police, and our bullets leave our guns with good intentions, regardless of what they actually hit.”

LAPD literally trying to KILL Dorner, not arrest him
See the photo of the actual pickup truck on the right. Notice how the bullets were aimed in the “shoot to kill” zone rather than the “shoot to stop the vehicle” zones?
They weren’t shooting out the tires here, folks: they were aiming for skulls.
Forget about an arrest: This is an execution effort under way. I can’t help but think there’s got to be a lot of truth to the rumor that Dorner knows too much and could really embarrass LAPD if he is allowed to talk to the press.
This manhunt has the urgency of a political execution squad, not an arrest of a murderer. I’m not defending the guy’s actions here, but let’s be honest about this: since when did the LAPD care so much about a murderer on the loose?
Unfortunately for us all, LAPD officers have proven themselves to be trigger-happy morons, and innocent LA citizens are already being caught in the crossfire. It’s getting so bad that black men in LA are wearing “Don’t Shoot Me” T-shirts in the hopes that LAPD cops will hold their fire.
This clever ploy will fail, of course, since half the LAPD officers can’t read to begin with. Or they might see the T-shirt at an angle where the word “Don’t” is obscured and only see the words “Shoot Me” in which case they will eagerly comply.

This is getting so bad I’m actually starting to become an advocate of gun control… for the POLICE!Thank goodness these cops don’t carry full-auto weapons like the 7,000 assault rifles DHS has recently ordered, or those women in the pickup truck would be little more than blood stains on the pavement by now.

I think we should all lobby Sen. Feinstein to redirect her gun control bill at the LAPD and make them “turn ‘em all in” until they can prove they will only shoot at the bad guys instead of random innocent civilians.
Imagine one million armed citizens taking a stand in California
By the way, the bigger story here is that the LAPD has apparently become such a pathetic group of trigger-happy cowards that if an actual shooting war ever broke out between the LAPD and trained, responsible citizens defending justice and liberty, the entire war would be over in five minutes.
The citizens could just stand back and watch the LAPD shoot each other to pieces in a mad, chaotic frenzy of flying lead aimed in no particular direction.
I’m almost expecting the LAPD to run around randomly firing their pistols in the air at this point, hoping that one of the bullets might magically strike Dorner in the head on the way back down.
It’s no more insane than the department’s currently policy of shooting pickup trucks to pieces in the hopes that maybe, possibly, by some miracle Christopher Dorner might be discovered at the wheel.
I’ve got it! That’s the solution! Simply order the LAPD to shoot at all pickup trucks and kill their drivers until Dorner is found dead. If that doesn’t work, they can expand the mandate to shoot at all sedans, and then motorcycles, and then pedestrians, too… why not? It’s all about “keeping the streets safe at any cost,” right? There’s a cop killer on the loose! To Hell with public safety!
Ever better idea: Why not have the LAPD just drop a nuclear bomb on the city from one of their helicopters just to be sure.
After the mushroom cloud clears, they can explain to the remaining news crews that “even if ONE life can be saved by nuking Los Angeles, we have an obligation to try!” (This, by the way, is the same logic Obama offered for nationwide gun confiscation in the aftermath of Sandy Hook.)

After all, there’s a cop killer on the loose, so all logic be damned! Forget about public safety; toss that baby overboard and reload, dammit! Fire! Fire! Fire! And then see if you might have possibly hit Dorner. If not, reload and repeat as often as necessary until the desired corpse appears.

(For the record, this article is obviously satire. Many LAPD officers are wonderful men and women who operate with a high degree of professionalism.
If you are one of those people reading this, please maim the other idiots on the force and get them off the streets before they end up killing innocent citizens and making you all look like a very real danger to public safety.)

Did Police Order Media Blackout to Cover Up Plan to Kill Dorner?

Authorities demanded Twitter, online scanner censorship before setting fire to cabin
By Paul Joseph Watson 
February 13, 2013
Audio which indicates police involved in the siege against Christopher Dorner deliberately planned to set fire to the fugitive’s cabin was preceded by an attempt by authorities to impose a media blackout in an apparent effort to cover up the chain of events that led to Dorner’s death.

As the standoff reached its height, Big Bear-area police scanners were disabled online in order to “ensure officer safety.”

However, the feeds were not cut until after police were clearly heard discussing plans to “go ahead with the plan with the burners,” while on another audio feed from a local news broadcast, cops were heard shouting, “burn this motherfucker.”

At around the same time, CNN’s Wolf Blitzer announced that police had asked news networks not to film live footage of the scene.
Earlier in the day, the the LAPD issued a request to media outlets to “please stop tweeting” about unfolding events.
This was followed by a tweet, subsequently deleted, from the San Bernardino District Attorney which stated, “The sheriff has asked all members of the press to stop tweeting immediately. It is hindering officer safety.”
Luckily, journalist Max Blumenthal, who was listening live to police scanner feeds, defied the order and continued to tweet about how cops were talking about their plan to burn down the cabin, which led to Dorner’s death.

The ferocious response from twitter users to the attempted media blackout led some mainstream news outlets to report that “conspiracy theorists” saw the censorship as a deliberate attempt to cover up the fact that “police left Dorner to burn alive inside the cabin.”

However, this is no longer up for debate, since police scanner audio clearly captures officers talking about letting the fire “burn through the basement,” having previously planned to “burn that fucking house down.”

The deliberate attempt to blackout media coverage of the event in the hours leading up to the cabin being intentionally set on fire by police clearly suggests that authorities were keen to cover up the fact that they were carrying out the pre-planned execution of Christopher Dorner.
Reports that Dorner was ” pushed back inside” the cabin when he attempted to leave also point to this conclusion. Why not just shoot him if he failed to surrender? Why push him back inside the building and prolong the standoff?
No one is attempting to condone Dorner’s actions, but the fact that police officers carried out what clearly appears to be a pre-planned summary execution, on top of their frenzied random shooting sprees of innocent people over the last few days, is a frightening glimpse into a fast-approaching police state where authorities dish out instant Judge Dredd-style justice by killing Americans accused of crimes and denying them a fair trial.


Retired Supreme Court Judge Sanders: No Proof Obama’s Birth Certificate & Social Security Number Are Legitimate

Curtains for Obama.