Posts tagged suspicious

Facebook Propaganda. “If you aren’t on Facebook, you are a psychopath, mass murderer, untrustworthy…….”

2

Source: http://sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com

20120808-083043.jpg

I don’t think I have ever seen such overt/bullshit propaganda like this before.

The Daily mail out of the U.K. published a propaganda article saying this.

Is not joining Facebook a sign you’re a psychopath? Some employers and psychologists say staying away from social media is ‘suspicious’

Facebook has become such a pervasive force in modern society that increasing numbers of employers, and even some psychologists, believe people who aren’t on social networking sites are ‘suspicious.’

The German magazine Der Taggspiegel went so far as to point out that accused theater shooter James Holmes and Norwegian mass murder Anders Behring Breivik have common ground in their lack of Facebook profiles.

(more…)

Target on Your Cyber Back: DHS Has a List of Words Deemed ‘Suspicious’

0

Source: http://rt.com

Target on your cyber back: DHS has a list of words deemed ‘suspicious’

US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) employees work on the Industrial Control Systems Cyber Emergency Response Team (ICS-CERT) operational watch floor where they monitor, track, and investigate cyber incidents (Reuters / Chris Morgan / Idaho National Laboratory)

The Department of Homeland Security has flagged hundreds of words as “suspect” – and while many make sense, like “Al Qaeda,” some are just plain odd. For example, the DHS may dig through your cyber life if you write something about snow. Or pork.

So, you’ve just come back from a beach holiday in Mexico and posted about it on your blog. Or maybe you’ve tweeted about skiing lessons? Updated your status, saying you’re stuck home with food poisoning?

All those things will tweak the DHS antennae, according to a manual published by the agency. The Analyst’s Desktop Binder, used by agency employees at their National Operations Center to identify “media reports that reflect adversely on DHS and response activities,” includes hundreds of words that set off Big Brother’s silent alarms.

Department chiefs were forced to release the manual following a House hearing over documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit. It revealed how analysts monitor social networks and media organizations for comments that “reflect adversely” on the government.

Somehow, it remains unclear exactly how your food poisoning may reflect adversely on the government – unless you’re a civil servant that had lunch at the work cafeteria and are now blaming the tuna salad for your misfortune. It’s even less clear how natural phenomena like snow or ice reflect badly on the powers that be in Washington DC – unless, of course, they have somehow convinced themselves they can control the elements.

I’ve also wondered whether the monitoring is cumulative. Will one mention of an airplane be less worrying to the Department of Homeland Security than, say, 20 to 30 words from the no-no list? What if I’m writing the weather report? What if I blew a tire somewhere on an interstate and am sending a message for help? Both the words ‘help’ and ‘interstate’ are on the list. Does that mean I can expect men in black to come before the AAA?

It’s also hard to believe that the supposed terrorists that the DHS is on the lookout for are that stupid. Can you honestly imagine one person posting “hey, let’s go make a pipe bomb and blow up a police car this weekend” on a friend’s wall? I’d imagine people who plot terrorist acts are focusing on two things: not getting caught and getting their job done. Why on earth would they broadcast their malicious intentions online?

And so, like many of the DHS’s brilliant, thought-out programs, this one seems to be directed at the unsuspecting, innocent general public. Only now, as well as possibly being branded a terrorist for not wanting to use a credit card or buying a flashlight, you might get locked up for blogging about clouds. (Very dangerous word, cloud. Who knows what it could mean.)

I am by no means diminishing the need for domestic security. But the DHS seem to be taking the notion of prevention a little too far, and they seem to be accounting for their actions less and less. To quote a (possibly) paranoid Roman: “who will guard the guardians?”

(more…)

Paul camp cries fraud over Nevada Caucus results

0

Source: http://m.examiner.com

By Mark Wachtler

Adelson precinct, site of the last open Caucus in Nevada. Ron Paul won the precinct with 58 percent of the vote.

 

February 5, 2012. Las Vegas. For the second time in just five primary states, the Republican Party, with the assistance of the national corporate news media, is raising questions about the legitimacy of this season’s primary election system. First, the Iowa Republican Party and the entire American media knowingly reported the wrong Iowa Caucus results with the wrong person being declared the winner. Last night, it appears the same thing may be happening in Nevada. And again like Iowa, critics are accusing the GOP of suspicious activity.

Perhaps it’s indicative that the beneficiary of these recurring vote counting “mistakes” always seems to be former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney. He’s just happens to be the same man that both the Republican Party establishment and the four corporations that own all of America’s news media outlets are actively supporting.

Iowa Caucus

In Iowa a few weeks ago, local Republican precinct captains – the individuals responsible for providing the official vote count to the state Republican Party – were up in arms and all over the national media claiming their vote counts had somehow been changed once they arrived at the state GOP headquarters. Two weeks later, the party announced that Mitt Romney didn’t win, but instead, Rick Santorum had actually won. This author was one of the only national journalists that predicted the results would be reversed. Two weeks later, they were. Read the article, ‘Santorum won Iowa and didn’t say Black’ for specific details, published two weeks before the Iowa GOP reversed their vote count.

Nevada Caucus

As early as 2:00am this morning, supporters of Ron Paul had taken to social media with cries of “fraud” over the Nevada Caucus election results, or lack there of.

Here are just some of the comments taken from the Ron Paul 2012 Facebook page:

Dorian RM posted, “I am seriously smelling voter fraud again. This is seriously depressing.” Toni P wrote, “I am not a big pusher of conspiracy theories, but this election is swaying me to how corrupt this all is.” Patrick M added, “It’s not a conspiracy. It’s been proven.” Matt K confirmed the same feeling, posting, “I’m smelling voter fraud.” Ryan added, “Is this true about the fraud in Nevada or is everyone just panicking?”

That’s the big question as self-imposed deadline after self-imposed deadline passes without any word from the missing precincts of Clark County. According to the Nevada Republican Party last night, they were going to recount every single vote from Clark County, right there in the smoky, back room of the GOP headquarters. The only good part of the announcement is that a representative from each candidate would be allowed to oversee the recount.

Expected to be over by “midnight”, that deadline turned into “dawn”. When dawn came and went with no vote results in sight, questions over vote fraud really picked up steam. See the below chain of events from last night and decide for yourself if something fishy is going on.

Events of the Las Vegas Caucus, February 4, 2012. All times and percentages are rough estimates from memory. All are from first-hand witness accounts.

Counting the votes

8:00pm EST – Some polls close, roughly 3 percent of the total vote is in. Mitt Romney leads with over 50 percent of the votes counted. Ron Paul and Newt Gingrich are tied with approximately 20 percent of the vote each.

(more…)

Go to Top