Google Search

Showing posts with label still. Show all posts
Showing posts with label still. Show all posts

Friday, October 18, 2013

Cop Drives Into Pole Going 70-75 MPH, Wasn't Wearing Seatbelt, Wasn't Responding To Emergency, Collects Workers Comp & Still Being Paid


Chris | InformationLiberation

Here's an example of one of those speeding cops 20/20 caught on camera. This cop drove his car into a pole while speeding, wasn't wearing a seatbelt, and wasn't responding to an emergency, yet he's collecting workers comp on the taxpayers dime and still being paid while the police "investigate."

Patch.com reports:

An internal affairs investigation will decide whether Deputy Adewale Olukoju is punished after he drove into a Marguerite light pole at 70-75 MPH.

Deputy Adewale Olukoju, 44, who was not wearing a seatbelt when he sped 70-75 MPH into a light pole in June, continues to collect a paycheck during the investigation, OCSD Lt. Jeff Hallock said.

Olukoju has not returned to work though, Hallock said, because he is on leave for worker's compensation.

Olukoju was ejected from his police cruiser after he crashed while traveling south on Marguerite near Vista Del Lago. He was not responding to an emergency, authorities said. The deputy is not suspected of being under the influence of drugs or alcohol at the time of the crash.

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- 6-Foot 300-Pound Probation Officer Fatally Shoots 12-Pound Russell Terrier Because It Wouldn't Follow His "Verbal Commands To Get Back"
- "Pedro Offers You His Protection": The Preston PD Gets a Combat Vehicle
- Riverside Cop Tricks Autistic Teen into Buying Pot
- Skokie Woman Thrown Into A Jail Cell Bench By "Unapologetic" Cop
- Use of Taser on 8-year-old girl justified, Pierre police say
- Idaho Cop Assaults Man for Video Recording Traffic Stop From More Than 50 Feet Away
- Virginia State Police Used License Plate Readers At Political Rallies, Built Huge Database
- This Week's Corrupt Cops Stories

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Saturday, February 2, 2013

Illinois Citizens Still Being Arrested For Filming Cops Despite Court Ruling Which Blocked Unconstitutional Law


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs'); Naperville woman arrested on eavesdropping charges for recording forced installation of ?smart meter?
Paul Joseph Watson

Illinois citizens are still being arrested for recording police officers despite a 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling last year that blocked the enforcement of the law on the grounds that it was unconstitutional.

Following yesterday?s story concerning residents of Naperville who attempted to resist utility workers invading their private property to install so-called ?smart meters? ? which have been linked with health issues ? it emerged that one of the refusniks, Malia "Kim" Bendis, was arrested on attempted eavesdropping charges for recording police officers during the incident.

The irony of citizens being arrested for supposedly ?eavesdropping? on cops in public where there is no expectation of privacy, while simultaneously the government forcibly installs devices on people?s property that really do eavesdrop on them in total violation of the 4th amendment, is staggering. Remember ? this is a state that threatens to send people to prison for life for recording police officers.

Bendis filmed her friend?s confrontation with city workers and police but at no time attempted to interfere in their actions. The video clip shows an officer asking Bendis not to film him, an order with which she immediately complies.

However, the Chicago Tribune reports that Bendis was arrested and ?Charged with two misdemeanors -- attempted eavesdropping and resisting a peace officer.?

The state of Illinois is still directing its police officers to enforce a law that has repeatedly been found unconstitutional.

As the PINAC blog notes, ?Bendis was charged with misdemeanor eavesdropping which indicates they may have kept the law intact but reduced it to a misdemeanor from a felony. Or more likely means the newspaper wasn't very clear in their reporting,? adding that the Illinois legislature introduced a "technical change" to the law a day before the incident, but that no one seems to be aware of what exactly the change is.

In May 2012, the U.S. 7th Circuit Court of Appeals blocked the enforcement of a law that made it a felony to film police officers in the state of Illinois. This followed a case involving Illinois resident Michael Allison ? who at one point was facing life in jail for recording cops.

?The Illinois eavesdropping statute restricts far more speech than necessary to protect legitimate privacy interests; as applied to the facts alleged here, it likely violates the First Amendment's free speech and free-press guarantees,? wrote Judge Diane Sykes.

Furthermore, when Cook County State Attorney Anita Alvarez appealed the ruling, U.S. District Court Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman re-affirmed it. In states all across the country, Americans arrested for filming police officers in public have won their cases. In August 2011, the First Circuit Court of Appeals also ruled that it is not illegal for citizens to videotape police officers when they are on public duty.

Eavesdropping charges against Illinois resident Tiawanda Moore for recording patrol officers were dropped in August 2011, after a "Criminal Court jury quickly repudiated the prosecution's case, taking less than an hour to acquit Moore on both eavesdropping counts."

Despite numerous different courts not only in Illinois but across the United States continually ruling that it is not illegal to record police officers in public, Americans continue to be arrested for doing so.

This sets a dangerous new precedent in America?s decline towards an authoritarian state, where laws that have clearly been blocked as unconstitutional are being enforced illegally on a whim for the convenience of police officers to abuse the rights of citizens without their actions being documented.
_
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a host for Infowars Nightly News.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- AZ Cop Investigated For Having Allegedly Used Stun Gun On Stepson Over 'Unsatisfactory Report Card'
- An Anger Management Class?
- Gary Raney: The Slave-Catching Sheriff of Ada County, Idaho
- Cop Who Shot Puppy Runs Away Like a Little Girl After Owners Win In Court
- Yes, They Intend to Draft Your Daughter
- The Obama Administration Prepares for War -- Against Us
- Police Pack Courtroom of Cop Facing Felony Charges for Shooting & Killing Restrained Dog
- Honesty is Not a Job Requirement for Police Officers

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Thursday, January 17, 2013

Mesa County Police Have Been Using Drones For Years, Still Coming Up With Rules On Use


Follow @infolibnews!function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src='//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,'script','twitter-wjs'); by Timothy Geigner

The march towards drones becoming a common tool for domestic law enforcement agencies seems inevitable and some people aren't happy about it. We've already covered the backlash against one artist who satarized New York City's drone program. San Diego, for their part, valiantly refused to honor an FOIA request on their domestic UAV program because they determined on their own that there wouldn't be a public benefit to the disclosure. MuckRock thought that was a dodge not afforded San Diego under FOIA rules, but San Diego again declined to say anything at all about the program.


"Sorry, citizen, but Detective Iron Death-Spy is very, very shy."

Image source: CC BY 2.0

But one thing that has generally been accepted is that law enforcement agencies were required to operate these drones under very strict guidelines and within very strict geographic boundaries. It would appear, for Mesa County, Colorado at least, that may not be universally true. The EFF's Drone Census project has uncovered that Mesa County has two UAVs and can operate them without many of the restrictions in place elsewhere.

The MCSO must abide by standard FAA restrictions on domestic UAV flights, which cap flights to below 400 feet and preclude night flights or operating over "populated areas, heavily trafficked roads, or an open-air assembly of people." But MCSO's drone authorization includes no geographic restrictions: effectively, the agency can fly its UAVs anywhere in Mesa County. This freedom has allowed the agency to log dozens of operational missions since fall 2010. MCSO flight logs indicate that its UAV team has logged more than 160 flight hours on its drones since January 2011.
So, whereas other UAV programs are restricted to flying over areas where they could chiefly assist in locating missing people in difficult to surveil areas, Mesa County can fly them anywhere within their jurisdiction without any limitations beyond the somewhat vague-sounding "populated areas, heavily trafficked roads" or the open air above a large assembly of people. That can leave a great deal of sky to buzz around with less of the oversight I think is desperately needed in programs like this.

Now, just to be clear, these drones do not carry arms. They are used for imaging. Then again, as the creep continues, the rules keep shifting towards greater use and application, so it wouldn't be fair to slam anyone concerned that someday we may indeed see armed UAVs over our skies. Equally worrying is this:

MCSO has been using drones operationally for two years, but the department has no written drone policy outlining the uses for which its officers may deploy UAVs. Ms. Barnes writes that MCSO is "currently in the process of drafting a written policy for the use of our unmanned aircraft."
Well, that's just peaches. Military-style technology deployed domestically without any official policy for its use. I feel so warm and fuzzy inside.

(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Big Brother/Orwellian
- Graphic Novel Declared A Terrorist Operation By US Government, Advance Money Seized
- The TSA's True Focus Isn't 'Safety' - It's Self-Preservation
- Colombia Adopts Mandatory Backdoor and Data Retention Mandates
- ITU Boss In Denial: Claims Success, Misrepresents Final Treaty, As US, UK, Canada And Many More Refuse To Sign
- DMCA Copyright Takedowns To Google Increased 10x In Just The Past Six Months
- TSA's Grip on Internal Travel is Tightening
- AVTM Interviews Fliers on the TSA
- The Everyday Absurdities of the TSA

and the government can,t understand why such a large potion of the population is pissed at them.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Monday, June 25, 2012

Obama and Eric Holder Are Still Lying About the Medical Marijuana Raids



by Scott Morgan

On Thursday, Eric Holder lied to Congress about DOJ's escalating attacks against medical marijuana:
Mr. Holder said federal officials are not going after those who are staying within the confines of their states' medical marijuana laws, but said some have "come up with ways in which they are taking advantage of these state laws."

"We limit our enforcement efforts to those individuals, organizations that are acting out of conformity with state law," Mr. Holder told a House Judiciary Committee oversight hearing. [Washington Times]

That statement is simply false, and flagrantly so. It's been widely reported in the press that federal prosecutors have threatened to arrest state officials merely for administering their own medical marijuana laws. One cannot claim that regulators performing their official duties are "acting out of conformity with state law". They are the state. You can't threaten them with arrest and then subsequently claim that enforcement is only directed at those who violate local laws.

Moreover, the feds have raided hundreds of dispensaries without making any effort at all to determine whether state laws are being violated. Most of the time, they're just confiscating money and medicine without even charging anyone. They keep saying the people they raid were breaking local laws, but they aren't proving that to be the case. When have they ever demonstrated that any of these businesses were violating state laws?

This whole just-enforcing-state-laws excuse is the same nonsense we were hearing from the President a month ago, and the Obama Administration's ability to comfortably repeat this crap owes much to the media's total failure to follow up on it.


Latest Politics/Corruption
- Minor Cuts to Defense Budget Could Lead to War: Top US Military Official
- Rand Paul Answers: Why He Endorsed Romney
- Tom Woods Has Info Ron Will Not Be Endorsing Romney
- Carol Paul Speaks about Rands Endorsement of Romney and Ron Paul 6-13-12
- Why Rand Paul was Wrong to Endorse Mitt Romney & Jack Hunter is a Statist
- Rand Paul Responds to Endorsement Controversy on Peter Schiff Show
- Joe Scarborough: Why I voted for Ron Paul
- Mitt Romney Once Harangued a Neighbor for Smoking Pot, Then Called the Cops

Even if the feds really were enforcing State Law, do they even have jurisdiction to do that? If the State law was violated, wouldn't the State's police be the ones to enforce that law?
10th Amendment?
The County Sheriff is the highest law enforcement authority. I believe the Sheriff could tell the DEA (ATF, TSA, all of them) to stay out of his/her county. Not that the Federal agencies would listen.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

The TSA Is Still Groping Children In Airports

Agents coldly refer to kids as ?suspects? and scream at parents who attempt to diffuse situations
Steve Watson


Two notable incidents this week indicate that despite a ?change in policy? last year, the TSA is still conducting enhanced patdowns on children as young as four years old.

At a Kansas airport, a four year old girl was called a ?suspect? and ordered to undergo a full patdown by TSA officers after hugging her grandmother during the screening process.

In a Facebook post, which has since been removed pending a formal complaint, the girl?s family noted that agents accused the child of potentially having a handgun in her possession when she ran to hug her grandmother during the screening process.

The TSA agents then threatened to shut down the entire airport unless the ?suspect? was subjected to a full patdown. According to the family?s account, the agents were shouting at the girl, ordering her to co-operate, causing her to start screaming and kicking at them. The TSA workers even attempted to take the girl away from her family and frisk her in a separate room.

"?they didn't explain anything and she did not know what was going on," the girl?s grandmother said. "She saw people grabbing at her and raising their voices. To her, someone was trying to kidnap her or harm her in some way."

In a separate incident, at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport, the TSA forced a seven year old mentally handicapped girl to undergo an enhanced patdown because her use of crutches dictated that she could not walk through metal detectors.

The girl?s parents attempted to alleviate her anxiety by asking the TSA agents to calmly introduce themselves and explain what they were doing. However, the agents would have none of it and instead ?were exceptionally aggressive,? according to the girl?s father.

After he began recording footage of the screening with his iPhone, one of the agents ?started screaming at me and cursing me and threatening me,? he told The Daily.

?They?re harassing people,? said the father, Dr. Joshua Frank. ?This is totally misguided policy.? Added Mrs. Frank: ?They still attack her like she?s Osama bin Laden. It?s not fair.?

The family ended up missing their flight altogether because of the incident.

The TSA has defended agents in both incidents, issuing almost identical statements saying that they followed the correct procedures.

As we have previously reported, the TSA has revised its policy on patdowns of children on two separate occasions,?yet the procedures have continued regardless.

The two new incidents this week highlight the fact that until it is written into law to make the grope-downs illegal, there is no safety net against TSA tyranny.

We cannot simply take the word of an agency that has?repeatedly lied to the public about its actions over and over again.

FLASHBACK:?Busted: TSA lied about promise not to grope children

FLASHBACK: No 'enhanced' pat-downs for kids, TSA says

?????????????????????-

Steve Watson is the London based writer and editor for Alex Jones? Infowars.net, and Prisonplanet.com. He has a Masters Degree in International Relations from the School of Politics at The University of Nottingham in England.


View the original article here

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Under Obama, the Freedom of Information Act is Still in Shackles

By TREVOR TIMM, Electronic Frontier Foundation

Three years ago this past weekend, on his first full day in office, President Barack Obama issued his now infamous memo on transparency and open government, which was supposed to fulfill his campaign promise to lead the "most transparent administration in history." Instead,? his administration has been just as secretive--if not more so--than his predecessors, and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) has become the prime example of his administration's lack of progress.

In 2009, Obama made FOIA reform the centerpiece of his open government agenda. "My Administration is committed to creating an unprecedented level of openness in Government," he said, while laying out principles he wished to see his agencies adopt in the proceeding months. In March of 2009, Attorney General Eric Holder issued what the Justice Department called "comprehensive new Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) guidelines." Holder ordered that all executive branch departments and agencies were to apply "a presumption of openness" in response to FOIA requests.

In 2010, EFF's senior counsel David Sobel testified to Congress, calling on the Obama to lead by example if they wish to change the FOIA process.

Unfortunately, secrecy won out in the Obama administration almost immediately. In the early months of his presidency, a court ruled that the administration would have to turn over photos related to the Abu Ghraib torture scandal in response to a FOIA request. Knowing they'd likely lose the appeal, Obama supported a new law that could keep information secret even when FOIA would otherwise require disclosure. The bill's only intention was to create a way to shield photographs of detainee abuse from public disclosure.

President Obama also refused at first to release White House visitor records, a practice for which his predecessor, George W. Bush, was pilloried. The Obama Administration appealed a court's ruling that the visitor logs were subject to FOIA.? In September 2009, Obama reversed course and agreed to release voluntarily White House visitor records going forward. But in 2011, the Administration was still fighting in court to keep the logs before Obama's reversal a secret.

The Associated Press looked at the administration's commitment to transparency in 2010 and concluded Obama was using FOIA exemptions to withhold information from requesters more than Bush did in his final year, despite receiving fewer overall requests. And one of the most frequently used exemptions was one Obama explicitly told the agencies not to use: the "deliberative process" exemption, which allows the government to withhold documents dealing with its decision making process. In Obama's first year in office, the use of the exemption skyrocketed from 47,395 times in 2008 to 70,779 times in 2009.

Worse, more than a year after Obama and Holder's memos, a National Security Archive study found "less than one-third of the 90 federal agencies that process such FOIA requests have made significant changes in their procedures." Even FOIA requests on transparency were held up:

The AP is still waiting--after nearly three months--for records it requested about the White House's "Open Government Directive," rules it issued in December directing every agency to take immediate, specific steps to open their operations up to the public.
Yet around the same time, when President Obama was asked a question at a townhall about why his administration wasn't more transparent, he responded by saying it was the most transparent in the modern era. What was his first reason? The administration's release of White House visitor records--the same records they went to court to fight to keep secret. The President also bragged: "We've revamped the classification system so it's not used to hide things that might be embarrassing to us." Which, of course, is not true either. As EFF has pointed out, government secrecy and overclassification has reach absurd levels under Obama.

More damage was done to FOIA in the Dodd-Frank bill. A little-noticed provision of the recently passed financial-reform legislation stated that the SEC "no longer has to comply with virtually all requests for information releases from the public, including those filed under the Freedom of Information Act." Other media organizations have lodged public complaints about FOIA procedure at the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and even agencies dealing with health and scientific issues like the EPA and NASA.

EFF has experienced many of these problems first hand. When we sued the FBI after it was revealed they were systematically abusing their National Security Letter authority, the bureau redacted the vast majority of the thousands of pages requested. In another case, it was clear the FBI was redacting arbitrarily information when it wasn't appropriate. The DHS singled out EFF, along with other activist groups and media representatives such as the ACLU, EPIC, Human Rights Watch, and AP, for an extra layer of review on its FOIA requests. EFF sued just to find out the names of the members of Obama's Intelligence Oversight Board.

But by March 2011, only 49 of the 90 federal agencies had followed any "specific tasks mandated by the White House to improve their FOIA performance." The National Security Archive found in July that federal backlogs of FOIA requests are growing. A Study released in December of this year by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) and OpenTheGovernment.org found the administration was withholding information using nine of the most common exemptions 33% more than George Bush's last full year in office.

But perhaps the worst violation of Obama's open government principles was the deplorable attempt by the Justice Department to change the DOJ's own FOIA regulations. Under the proposed rule, instead of refusing to confirm or deny a document is in the Department's possession, the agency could "respond to the request as if the excluded records did not exist." The Los Angeles Times called it an "outrageous proposal" that "provides a license for the government to lie to its own people and makes a mockery of FOIA." After near universal outcry, including pressure from Congress, the Justice Department scaled back its rules. But as the Sunlight Foundation said, the Justice Department's revised FOIA rules were still "worse than reported" and allow reviewers to dismiss requests for a host of trivial reasons. Obama's Justice Department seemed intent on killing the very law it championed at the start of his administration.

The Freedom of Information Act has been hailed by open government advocates as "one of the most significant laws ever passed by the U.S. Congress," yet its passage and survival has been fought by Presidents for more than forty years. The bill, as a significant check on executive power and secrecy, was originally opposed by Lyndon Johnson, yet was signed into law in 1966. When Congress strengthened the act after the Watergate scandal, President Ford vetoed it on the advice of his then-chief of staff Dick Cheney. Thankfully, Congress overrode his veto. Reagan's Attorney General Edwin Meese was so opposed to FOIA, despite its being law for more than 20 years, he wrote a memo telling the Justice Department to disregard essentially requests it disliked.

President Obama promised to change all that. Unfortunately, it's clear many of his pledges have been broken or ignored, turning his declaration that he would lead the "most transparent administration ever" into a punch line rather than a re-election slogan.


Latest Politics/Corruption
- Rick Santorum Hates Ron Paul's Libertarian Ideas
- L.A. teacher suspected of lewd conduct keeps benefits
- Gingrich Staffers Attack Ron Paul Supporter in Florida
- MD Gov. wants to tax apps, e-books, other downloads
- Obama Accused of Contempt of Court in 'Birther' Hearing
- Limbaugh: Ron Paul "Sounds Like An Islamic Terrorist"
- Idiot Politicians Propose Regulating Oil Companies With 'Reasonable Profits Board'
- Bill Maher Says He Supports SOPA

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Tuesday, February 7, 2012

HAARP – Everything You Wanted to Know – Nick Begich: Angels Still Don’t Play This HAARP – VERY Informative

Dr Eastlund hasn’t been sitting around either. He’s got other projects that he’s been working on that are quite interesting. And one of those recently in fact of October 2005, he presented a paper at Penn State on weather modification utilizing gravitational waves. Now what’s important about this paper, extremely important about this paper is that it talks about being able to modify weather using 1600 times less energy than was anticipated for weather modifications applications using HAARP. In other words, 1600 times less energy than was once thought to be needed, it’s now understood by him, as a physicist, in a major university presentation, to be possible. Now when you think about weather modification, one of the other things that happened with Dr Eastlund is he was invited by the European Space Agency to do a paper on weather modification using the HAARP systems, that was completed in 1999 and presented for peer review at a major space expo in Europe. Coming off of that paper, FEMA and NASA contracted with Dr Eastlund to prepare a paper utilizing space based technologies, satellite based technologies for weather modification applications. And one of the things that he saw and that he mentions in both of these papers, is for instance being able to affect tornadoes. And the idea of tornadoes, you know you have a warm front coming into contact with a cold front, and when they come together you get a sheering force that causes that twisting action where you get the tornado formation. So the idea of Eastlund was, if you could heat the cold front sufficiently, that when these two fronts connected you didn’t get that energy differential to create that tornado formation, you could essentially knock out tornadoes. The problem is of course if you missed and you heat the already heated area so that there’s even a greater differential when it encounters the cold front, you have more energy available to create even a more destructive tornado. The fact of the matter is other governments around the world have taken this very seriously, including our own, and has invested a significant amount of money, to look at how to affect these things.

There’s a couple of other applications of HAARP that I want to talk a little bit about. The first one, and these are the two probably most controversial areas of HAARP, the first one deals with the idea of manipulating weather systems. And this is a very important issue. Because, again, you’re dealing with concepts that have been attempted over the years. In fact these days you’ve actually got the United States Congress, two bills pending, one in the Senate one in the House, to create a commission for review of weather modification technology, because commercial interests are now advancing them along with other militaries from around the world. So you’ve got economic interest interested as much as the military in controlling weather outcomes, and climate outcomes for obvious advantage and reasons. But it creates problems, and here’s what happens with HAARP. HAARP is actually capable of, in fact the early versions were called ionospheric heaters because they literally would heat the ionosphere. And when you think of this area being heated, it’s about 30 miles in diameter above the facility itself. And when you heat the area by affecting this region, you literally push it up. So it goes up and out into space perhaps as far as 200 kilometers. Instead of being 30 miles above the Earth’s surface, now you’re almost a couple hundred miles potentially out into space with this column. And the lower atmosphere below rushes in to fill that space. Now what happens then? Firstly, any satellite that was a low orbiting satellite, zipping through space, hits this area, hits this energized area that’s supposed to be there then all the sudden it encounters friction and the satellite burns up and it crashes, so as an anti-satellite technology. The Russians, the Strategic Studies Institute in London reported, that they had actually looked at Russian papers that had a concept for incoming comets and asteroids. You know most of these things when they come into our atmosphere, they burn up. Because you’ve got this 30 miles where these objects are coming in at such high velocities, they encounter friction and they begin to burn up and break up and nothing ever hits the Earth. But big objects make it to ground and big problems can occur accordingly. But think about, instead of 30 miles, maybe having 210 miles of range and distance of atmosphere to break up those incoming objects. Much larger objects could be destroyed in that way. That was some of the research the Russians had done utilizing the technology and their heaters back in the 70s.

What happened in all of this development was this excitement from ARCO because here it was they were going to make money on gas they could never make money on before. But what happened is, the company went through some controversies, some changes, the company eventually sold. Actually ARCo’s no longer here. But the company itself, a subsidiary was later sold to another organization called E-Systems. And E-Systems was the subject of Washington Post reports back in the early 90s. They predominantly were, at that time, a $2.1 billion dollar company, with the vast majority of their income derived from what are called black projects. Projects so secret even the U.S. Congress doesn’t know what they’re funding. And the citations regarding that are also in the book Angels Don’t Play This HAARP. The point is, this company ends up with the patents and the subsidiary, and what did they do? They sold out. They sold to none other than Raytheon Corporation, the losing bigger on the first project in the beginning. So Raytheon ends up with the intellectual property, they end up with that project and later sold to British Aerospace, which is an interesting change of events and that was in 2003. The project also shifted in 2003 from the Navy and the Air Force over to DAARPA which is the defense department’s research agency that deals with, again, very very classified research and projects.

But let’s get back to some of the other applications of HAARP and some of the other things that it can do. One of the other applications that came up early on is the idea of what’s called earth penetrating tomography. Let me make that really simple. By analogy, it would be like X-raying the Earth, or looking into the Earth several kilometers or several miles deep to look at underground structures, or mineral deposits, nuclear facilities, tunnels, mining facilities, all those kinds of things can be detected by Earth penetrating tomography. Now, the way that this would work with HAARP is really unique, and this again going back to Dr. Eastlund’s patents. By sending this energy up, this focused energy up into the ionosphere, what they can do is they can pulse the energy so it acts like a punch. So it’s punching the ionosphere with this force that causes the ionosphere to vibrate in resonance in harmony with this signal on the ground.

Brooks Agnew is an interesting guy. He’s a specialist in earth penetrating tomography and actually there’s an article by him posted on my website at www.earthpulse.com. At that site you can read the article in detail. But basically what he found is back during the 80s and 90s he was doing work in Earth penetrating tomography for the oil industry. And what he was able to do, is with 30 watts of power, which is nothing compared to 1 billion watts of effective radiated power with HAARP. But, with 30 watts of power he was able to get profiles of ground strata several kilometers deep. And he actually used this with a company that’s now fairly well known, Haliburton. He went around to 9 states and 26 known drill sites where they actually knew exactly what the ground strata was and the oil and gas grades that were there. And Brooks Agnew with his technology, Earth penetrating tomography, was able to determine with 99% accuracy, not only the ground strata differentials, but whether there was oil and gas in the ground and the quality of those oil and gas deposits. That is an incredible technology considering that the method of use was not disturbing in terms of natural systems at those very low power levels. Yet, you know when you think about oil and gas, those are public resources, having certainty about where to drill and what to do would certainly change the dynamics of how the industry competitively fought for those resources, and would have huge implications in the economies of the world. But the point of the matter is, that technology is not being used for mineral exploration today, it’s being used primarily for military applications as is the case with HAARP.

But when you get in to Earth penetrating tomography, the problem that Brooks Agnew has and others have voiced is the idea of the energy concentrations. Because what he knew is that if you used too much energy, in his worst case scenario, you could trigger geologic events, earthquakes, those kinds of events could be triggered using high energy densities in the ELF range. In fact there was a DoD news briefing. It goes back to April 27, 1997, and it was at the University of Georgia and it was Secretary of Defense William Cohen and he was commenting on weapons of mass destruction. Remember that’s way before 9/11. And one of the weapons of mass destruction he cited were environmental weapons systems utilizing electromagnetic energy for triggering earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and climate alterations.

If you take it a little bit further and you start to look at this whole concept of using a system on the ground to aggravate the ionosphere. Now what else happens when that lower atmosphere rushes in, you also change pressure systems in the immediate region in terms of lows and highs and the way those pressure systems work and the way in which jet streams flow, by altering the flow of jet streams, by altering the way the atmosphere’s located within an area, that’s where you can get these huge problems.

Back in 1977 the United States ratifies a treaty where we agreed to not use environmental manipulation as a weapon of war, whether it be to create earthquakes or tidal waves, or volcanic eruptions or disturb the weather, all of these things were restricted under that treaty when they involve national boundaries or crossing national boundaries. Like most U.S. treaties, the exemption is for domestic use. The treaties we sign with all these other countries have a clause within them that allows use of the technologies that might be forbidden against another country, to be used within the boundaries of your own country.

And as we took this issue on, there was an underlying problem as well. Some of the things that were developed by the inventor, ideas that should be explored were being ignored, because military had no interest. A good example was Dr. Eastlund had this idea that using radio frequency energy you could actually trigger chemical reactions in the upper atmosphere, which in fact you can, I mean it’s well known. But what you can do by triggering these reactions is you could actually create ozone. In other words if ozone depletion is truly a problem, here you have a system that can replenish ozone utilizing known laws of science. Likewise, knocking out particular pollutants, again by understanding their interactions with radio frequency energy to be able to neutralize pollutants in the environment. None of these things are being looked at and yet they offer huge potentials. I’ve had lots of conversations with Dr Eastlund over the years, and you know he’s got a much different view. I mean he’s a senior scientist, an outstanding physicist on the world scene. His concepts today for advancing energy systems and ways to really free people and utilize the science, not for our destruction but for its enhancement. And I think that’s where lots of science gets misused when those using it are only seeing certain applications.

But let’s get down to the most controversial issue dealing with HAARP which is the physical effects on human health. And I want to get into the ELF effects because this is extremely important. And there’s another video in this series on mind control which gets into this idea of being able to be overridden by radio frequency energy from the outside. This is what we know from the research. If you go back to mid 1980s there was a document called Low Intensity Conflict in Modern Technologies produced at Maxwell Airforce Base and has a section in it on electromagnetic weapons systems where it gets into a whole discussion of what was possible. if you even go back further you’ve got to go back to a book called Unless Peace Comes published in 1969. Within that is a chapter called How to Wreck Your Environment. The guy that wrote it was Gordan MacDonald. He was a full professor at UCLA and a science advisor to President Johnson when he was in the presidency. And he had written back then that if we could ever figure out how to electronically stroke the ionosphere in just the right way, we could return a signal to the Earth that would literally manipulate the behavior of people over huge geographic areas. That was JF Gordon MacDonald’s ideas. But we didn’t have a way to electronically stroke the ionosphere and create that kind of returning signal. Later in a book by Zbigniew Brzezinski, it was a book called Between Two Ages, and in this book is a reiteration of JF Gordan’s ideas of, again, being able to electronically stroke the ionosphere and return a signal to the Earth. And this particular book by Brzezinski – and Brzezinski for those who don’t remember he later became National Security Adviser to President Carter. At the time he wrote the book he was a professor and researcher at Columbia university. But, here’s this idea, now how do you electronically stroke the ionosphere? That’s exactly what HAARP does.

And this is what the military research has shown, is that you can affect everything down to the molecular level if you understand enough about the physics of the body and the math of radio frequency energy’s relationship to it, you can manipulate radio frequency energy to affect the body. And this is what they did actually in a study sponsored by the Airforce. The study was at the University of Utah. It was completed in 1985 and it was under the auspices of the science advisory board to the Airforce and it produced what is called the radio frequency dosimetry handbook. Simple language, it’s the dosage of radio frequency energy necessary to override every vital organ in the body including the brain, whether it be the liver, the kidney, the hearth, the lungs, to interfere with their natural performance as a weapon application. Now again you’re talking about energy that is different, we’re talking about a whole different view of warfare. We’re using energy as the base. These technologies are now being developed for things like the active denial system which is using knowledge of microwave millimeter waves to affect the body to create pain or heat sensation, affecting only the nerve endings on the surface of the body. But these basic principles apply to the entire living organism.


View the original article here

Monday, February 6, 2012

USA in financial meltdown -- but Israel still wants more money

US government cannot pay its debts, but Israel is asking for more cash as usual

Stocks lower as anxiety grows over looming threat of U.S. debt default

SOURCE

Stocks lower as anxiety grows over looming threat of U.S. debt default (2011)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-2019235/FTSE-PREVIEW-U-S-debt-ceiling-standoff-hits-stocks.html

FURTHER READING

Israel wants 20 Billion more (2011)
http://www.businessinsider.com/ehud-barak-20-billion-defense-2011-3

US regime promises Israel THIRTY BILLION DOLLARS from American tax-payers -- a 25% increase! (2007)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=2571

Israel asks America for $12 billion dollars more (2003)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=247

Israel wants $450 million extra from US for new Nazi-style checkpoints (2005)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=0787

US taxes pay $700 million more aid to Israel than to all Africa (2002)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=22

Israel secretly sells American nuclear weapons to China (2004)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=776

Israel caught spying on America again (2004)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=566

*** HACKING NOTICE ***

This article was restored from backup after being hacked -- within a week of us naming and shaming Google as a company which actively provides free hosting for a major hacking network:

http://twitter.com/theinsider_org/status/106344598795845632

It was a lame automated brute force attack, but very inconvenient for people working hard to produce this website -- and what makes this especially stupid is that this website clearly agrees with most of what the hackers in question are saying.

It's lame to attack a website for making a stand. It's beyond lame to do so when the hackers are blindly deleting articles that actually agree with most of what the hackers themselves are saying in their own activism literature.

Err, take a closer look my friends, you attacked a website that supports your cause. Doh! That doesn't mean we can't be critical, too. We say it how it is. That's no grounds for a cyber attack.

"The Insider" mailing list article, 29 July 2011.


View the original article here

Thursday, September 15, 2011

HAARP – Everything You Wanted to Know – Nick Begich: Angels Still Don’t Play This HAARP – VERY Informative

Dr Eastlund hasn’t been sitting around either. He’s got other projects that he’s been working on that are quite interesting. And one of those recently in fact of October 2005, he presented a paper at Penn State on weather modification utilizing gravitational waves. Now what’s important about this paper, extremely important about this paper is that it talks about being able to modify weather using 1600 times less energy than was anticipated for weather modifications applications using HAARP. In other words, 1600 times less energy than was once thought to be needed, it’s now understood by him, as a physicist, in a major university presentation, to be possible. Now when you think about weather modification, one of the other things that happened with Dr Eastlund is he was invited by the European Space Agency to do a paper on weather modification using the HAARP systems, that was completed in 1999 and presented for peer review at a major space expo in Europe. Coming off of that paper, FEMA and NASA contracted with Dr Eastlund to prepare a paper utilizing space based technologies, satellite based technologies for weather modification applications. And one of the things that he saw and that he mentions in both of these papers, is for instance being able to affect tornadoes. And the idea of tornadoes, you know you have a warm front coming into contact with a cold front, and when they come together you get a sheering force that causes that twisting action where you get the tornado formation. So the idea of Eastlund was, if you could heat the cold front sufficiently, that when these two fronts connected you didn’t get that energy differential to create that tornado formation, you could essentially knock out tornadoes. The problem is of course if you missed and you heat the already heated area so that there’s even a greater differential when it encounters the cold front, you have more energy available to create even a more destructive tornado. The fact of the matter is other governments around the world have taken this very seriously, including our own, and has invested a significant amount of money, to look at how to affect these things.

There’s a couple of other applications of HAARP that I want to talk a little bit about. The first one, and these are the two probably most controversial areas of HAARP, the first one deals with the idea of manipulating weather systems. And this is a very important issue. Because, again, you’re dealing with concepts that have been attempted over the years. In fact these days you’ve actually got the United States Congress, two bills pending, one in the Senate one in the House, to create a commission for review of weather modification technology, because commercial interests are now advancing them along with other militaries from around the world. So you’ve got economic interest interested as much as the military in controlling weather outcomes, and climate outcomes for obvious advantage and reasons. But it creates problems, and here’s what happens with HAARP. HAARP is actually capable of, in fact the early versions were called ionospheric heaters because they literally would heat the ionosphere. And when you think of this area being heated, it’s about 30 miles in diameter above the facility itself. And when you heat the area by affecting this region, you literally push it up. So it goes up and out into space perhaps as far as 200 kilometers. Instead of being 30 miles above the Earth’s surface, now you’re almost a couple hundred miles potentially out into space with this column. And the lower atmosphere below rushes in to fill that space. Now what happens then? Firstly, any satellite that was a low orbiting satellite, zipping through space, hits this area, hits this energized area that’s supposed to be there then all the sudden it encounters friction and the satellite burns up and it crashes, so as an anti-satellite technology. The Russians, the Strategic Studies Institute in London reported, that they had actually looked at Russian papers that had a concept for incoming comets and asteroids. You know most of these things when they come into our atmosphere, they burn up. Because you’ve got this 30 miles where these objects are coming in at such high velocities, they encounter friction and they begin to burn up and break up and nothing ever hits the Earth. But big objects make it to ground and big problems can occur accordingly. But think about, instead of 30 miles, maybe having 210 miles of range and distance of atmosphere to break up those incoming objects. Much larger objects could be destroyed in that way. That was some of the research the Russians had done utilizing the technology and their heaters back in the 70s.

What happened in all of this development was this excitement from ARCO because here it was they were going to make money on gas they could never make money on before. But what happened is, the company went through some controversies, some changes, the company eventually sold. Actually ARCo’s no longer here. But the company itself, a subsidiary was later sold to another organization called E-Systems. And E-Systems was the subject of Washington Post reports back in the early 90s. They predominantly were, at that time, a $2.1 billion dollar company, with the vast majority of their income derived from what are called black projects. Projects so secret even the U.S. Congress doesn’t know what they’re funding. And the citations regarding that are also in the book Angels Don’t Play This HAARP. The point is, this company ends up with the patents and the subsidiary, and what did they do? They sold out. They sold to none other than Raytheon Corporation, the losing bigger on the first project in the beginning. So Raytheon ends up with the intellectual property, they end up with that project and later sold to British Aerospace, which is an interesting change of events and that was in 2003. The project also shifted in 2003 from the Navy and the Air Force over to DAARPA which is the defense department’s research agency that deals with, again, very very classified research and projects.

But let’s get back to some of the other applications of HAARP and some of the other things that it can do. One of the other applications that came up early on is the idea of what’s called earth penetrating tomography. Let me make that really simple. By analogy, it would be like X-raying the Earth, or looking into the Earth several kilometers or several miles deep to look at underground structures, or mineral deposits, nuclear facilities, tunnels, mining facilities, all those kinds of things can be detected by Earth penetrating tomography. Now, the way that this would work with HAARP is really unique, and this again going back to Dr. Eastlund’s patents. By sending this energy up, this focused energy up into the ionosphere, what they can do is they can pulse the energy so it acts like a punch. So it’s punching the ionosphere with this force that causes the ionosphere to vibrate in resonance in harmony with this signal on the ground.

Brooks Agnew is an interesting guy. He’s a specialist in earth penetrating tomography and actually there’s an article by him posted on my website at www.earthpulse.com. At that site you can read the article in detail. But basically what he found is back during the 80s and 90s he was doing work in Earth penetrating tomography for the oil industry. And what he was able to do, is with 30 watts of power, which is nothing compared to 1 billion watts of effective radiated power with HAARP. But, with 30 watts of power he was able to get profiles of ground strata several kilometers deep. And he actually used this with a company that’s now fairly well known, Haliburton. He went around to 9 states and 26 known drill sites where they actually knew exactly what the ground strata was and the oil and gas grades that were there. And Brooks Agnew with his technology, Earth penetrating tomography, was able to determine with 99% accuracy, not only the ground strata differentials, but whether there was oil and gas in the ground and the quality of those oil and gas deposits. That is an incredible technology considering that the method of use was not disturbing in terms of natural systems at those very low power levels. Yet, you know when you think about oil and gas, those are public resources, having certainty about where to drill and what to do would certainly change the dynamics of how the industry competitively fought for those resources, and would have huge implications in the economies of the world. But the point of the matter is, that technology is not being used for mineral exploration today, it’s being used primarily for military applications as is the case with HAARP.

But when you get in to Earth penetrating tomography, the problem that Brooks Agnew has and others have voiced is the idea of the energy concentrations. Because what he knew is that if you used too much energy, in his worst case scenario, you could trigger geologic events, earthquakes, those kinds of events could be triggered using high energy densities in the ELF range. In fact there was a DoD news briefing. It goes back to April 27, 1997, and it was at the University of Georgia and it was Secretary of Defense William Cohen and he was commenting on weapons of mass destruction. Remember that’s way before 9/11. And one of the weapons of mass destruction he cited were environmental weapons systems utilizing electromagnetic energy for triggering earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and climate alterations.

If you take it a little bit further and you start to look at this whole concept of using a system on the ground to aggravate the ionosphere. Now what else happens when that lower atmosphere rushes in, you also change pressure systems in the immediate region in terms of lows and highs and the way those pressure systems work and the way in which jet streams flow, by altering the flow of jet streams, by altering the way the atmosphere’s located within an area, that’s where you can get these huge problems.

Back in 1977 the United States ratifies a treaty where we agreed to not use environmental manipulation as a weapon of war, whether it be to create earthquakes or tidal waves, or volcanic eruptions or disturb the weather, all of these things were restricted under that treaty when they involve national boundaries or crossing national boundaries. Like most U.S. treaties, the exemption is for domestic use. The treaties we sign with all these other countries have a clause within them that allows use of the technologies that might be forbidden against another country, to be used within the boundaries of your own country.

And as we took this issue on, there was an underlying problem as well. Some of the things that were developed by the inventor, ideas that should be explored were being ignored, because military had no interest. A good example was Dr. Eastlund had this idea that using radio frequency energy you could actually trigger chemical reactions in the upper atmosphere, which in fact you can, I mean it’s well known. But what you can do by triggering these reactions is you could actually create ozone. In other words if ozone depletion is truly a problem, here you have a system that can replenish ozone utilizing known laws of science. Likewise, knocking out particular pollutants, again by understanding their interactions with radio frequency energy to be able to neutralize pollutants in the environment. None of these things are being looked at and yet they offer huge potentials. I’ve had lots of conversations with Dr Eastlund over the years, and you know he’s got a much different view. I mean he’s a senior scientist, an outstanding physicist on the world scene. His concepts today for advancing energy systems and ways to really free people and utilize the science, not for our destruction but for its enhancement. And I think that’s where lots of science gets misused when those using it are only seeing certain applications.

But let’s get down to the most controversial issue dealing with HAARP which is the physical effects on human health. And I want to get into the ELF effects because this is extremely important. And there’s another video in this series on mind control which gets into this idea of being able to be overridden by radio frequency energy from the outside. This is what we know from the research. If you go back to mid 1980s there was a document called Low Intensity Conflict in Modern Technologies produced at Maxwell Airforce Base and has a section in it on electromagnetic weapons systems where it gets into a whole discussion of what was possible. if you even go back further you’ve got to go back to a book called Unless Peace Comes published in 1969. Within that is a chapter called How to Wreck Your Environment. The guy that wrote it was Gordan MacDonald. He was a full professor at UCLA and a science advisor to President Johnson when he was in the presidency. And he had written back then that if we could ever figure out how to electronically stroke the ionosphere in just the right way, we could return a signal to the Earth that would literally manipulate the behavior of people over huge geographic areas. That was JF Gordon MacDonald’s ideas. But we didn’t have a way to electronically stroke the ionosphere and create that kind of returning signal. Later in a book by Zbigniew Brzezinski, it was a book called Between Two Ages, and in this book is a reiteration of JF Gordan’s ideas of, again, being able to electronically stroke the ionosphere and return a signal to the Earth. And this particular book by Brzezinski – and Brzezinski for those who don’t remember he later became National Security Adviser to President Carter. At the time he wrote the book he was a professor and researcher at Columbia university. But, here’s this idea, now how do you electronically stroke the ionosphere? That’s exactly what HAARP does.

And this is what the military research has shown, is that you can affect everything down to the molecular level if you understand enough about the physics of the body and the math of radio frequency energy’s relationship to it, you can manipulate radio frequency energy to affect the body. And this is what they did actually in a study sponsored by the Airforce. The study was at the University of Utah. It was completed in 1985 and it was under the auspices of the science advisory board to the Airforce and it produced what is called the radio frequency dosimetry handbook. Simple language, it’s the dosage of radio frequency energy necessary to override every vital organ in the body including the brain, whether it be the liver, the kidney, the hearth, the lungs, to interfere with their natural performance as a weapon application. Now again you’re talking about energy that is different, we’re talking about a whole different view of warfare. We’re using energy as the base. These technologies are now being developed for things like the active denial system which is using knowledge of microwave millimeter waves to affect the body to create pain or heat sensation, affecting only the nerve endings on the surface of the body. But these basic principles apply to the entire living organism.


View the original article here

Saturday, August 27, 2011

USA in financial meltdown -- but Israel still wants more money

US government cannot pay its debts, but Israel is asking for more cash as usual

Stocks lower as anxiety grows over looming threat of U.S. debt default

SOURCE

Stocks lower as anxiety grows over looming threat of U.S. debt default (2011)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/markets/article-2019235/FTSE-PREVIEW-U-S-debt-ceiling-standoff-hits-stocks.html

FURTHER READING

Israel wants 20 Billion more (2011)
http://www.businessinsider.com/ehud-barak-20-billion-defense-2011-3

US regime promises Israel THIRTY BILLION DOLLARS from American tax-payers -- a 25% increase! (2007)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=2571

Israel asks America for $12 billion dollars more (2003)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=247

Israel wants $450 million extra from US for new Nazi-style checkpoints (2005)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=0787

US taxes pay $700 million more aid to Israel than to all Africa (2002)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=22

Israel secretly sells American nuclear weapons to China (2004)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=776

Israel caught spying on America again (2004)
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=566

*** HACKING NOTICE ***

This article was restored from backup after being hacked -- within a week of us naming and shaming Google as a company which actively provides free hosting for a major hacking network:

http://twitter.com/theinsider_org/status/106344598795845632

It was a lame automated brute force attack, but very inconvenient for people working hard to produce this website -- and what makes this especially stupid is that this website clearly agrees with most of what the hackers in question are saying.

It's lame to attack a website for making a stand. It's beyond lame to do so when the hackers are blindly deleting articles that actually agree with most of what the hackers themselves are saying in their own activism literature.

Err, take a closer look my friends, you attacked a website that supports your cause. Doh! That doesn't mean we can't be critical, too. We say it how it is. That's no grounds for a cyber attack.

"The Insider" mailing list article, 29 July 2011.


View the original article here