NSA’s Desperation for Secrecy Leads to Stupidity, Alienating the Hacker Community: ‘Freedom Downtime’, a Call to Arms

In 2012 we witnessed NSA’s Director Gen. Keith Alexander put on a black t-shirt and jeans and head out to DEF CON, “one of the world's largest annual hacker conventions”, in search of the youngest and brightest minds in our society to join his ilk:

“‘In this room, this room right here, is the talent our nation needs to secure cyberspace,’ Alexander told the standing-room-only audience at DefCon, a grassroots gathering in Las Vegas expected to draw a record 16,000 attendees this year. ‘We need great talent. We don't pay as high as everybody else, but we're fun to be around.’”

DEF CON 20 By General Keith B Alexander Shared Values Shared Response [sic]

We all know that top government officials lie, this should be obvious to everyone, especially after watching the “National Director of Intelligence James Clapper commit perjury when he testified before the Senate” when he stated that the NSA does “not wittingly” spy on Americans, but the lies that Gen. Keith Alexander dishes out are something else.

I’ll leave the fun factor bit of working for the NSA to the reader, but to claim that the NSA is working to secure cyberspace, now that’s a pack of lies, unless, of course, he is using the military definition of ‘secure’, implying that he wants to “gain possession”, to obtain ownership, of the Internet. In that case, he is one-hundred percent correct.

As Thomas Drake has revealed on numerous occasions, that is exactly what he meant. It’s something that Michael Hayden, the former Director of the NSA and the CIA and the former Principal Deputy of the DNI, has also confirmed, that the United States government wants to own the Internet.

“It’s important. Very few people are still getting it. It is an information war. See, information is power. Information is the coin of the realm, and the government has decided in the Internet age, the way to control it is to own it. Hayden actually said this well over a decade ago, that ‘we have to own the net.’ I don’t think people fully appreciated what that meant.” - quoted text begins at approximately 5:20 in the following video.

NSA Whistleblower was Witness to 9/11 Foreknowledge

So my money is on the latter, that the U.S. government wants to own the Internet, in which case they should be stopped at all costs, but let’s humor Gen. Keith Alexander’s doublespeak that the NSA is trying to create a safer Internet, in which case, he is blatantly lying.

Everyone knows that the NSA has weakened security, which in turn is seriously hurting American technology companies (2). As Bruce Schneier points out:

“I think about this all the time with respect to our IT systems and the NSA. Even though we don't know which companies the NSA has compromised -- or by what means -- knowing that they could have compromised any of them is enough to make us mistrustful of all of them. This is going to make it hard for large companies like Google and Microsoft to get back the trust they lost. Even if they succeed in limiting government surveillance. Even if they succeed in improving their own internal security. The best they'll be able to say is: ‘We have secured ourselves from the NSA, except for the parts that we either don't know about or can't talk about.’”

In a recent interview, Ben Wizner, the director of the ACLU Speech, Privacy & Technology Project, the person in charge of “expanding the right to privacy and increasing the control that individuals have over their personal information; and ensuring that civil liberties are enhanced rather than compromised by new advances in science and technology”, confirm Bruce Schneier’s concerns, that NSA’s program is not about creating a “secure cyberspace” but about compromising security; creating backdoors so to eliminate privacy:

“Wizner says that the documents handed over by Snowden to journalists have sparked two different debates: one about law and policy and what Congress should do, and another among the tech community about the way their security has been compromised by intelligence agencies, with the weakening of encryption standards and finding weaknesses in tech giants’ data centers to suck up information.

“‘The tech community, particularly people worried about security, has been radicalized by these disclosures. They now see that their threat model needs to include the NSA as an adversary if they are going to protect their systems,’ says Wizner.”

Edward Snowden and ACLU at SXSW

The cat is out of the bag, the NSA is undermining the major tools protecting the privacy of everyday communication on the Internet:

“The agency has circumvented or cracked much of the encryption, or digital scrambling, that guards global commerce and banking systems, protects sensitive data like trade secrets and medical records, and automatically secures the e-mails, Web searches, Internet chats and phone calls of Americans and others around the world.”

Everyone knows what the end game is for the NSA, as Glen Greenwald puts it, “to eliminate all privacy globally.”

Glenn Greenwald "The Goal Of The U.S. Government Is To Eliminate ALL Privacy Globally!"

The government’s latest attempt in trying to ensure that they maintain control by preventing additional leaks of sensitive information is to implement a system where they can “scan workers with secret clearances” (emphasis added):

“US intelligence officials are planning a sweeping system of electronic monitoring that would tap into government, financial and other databases to scan the behavior of many of the 5 million federal employees with secret clearances…

“‘What we need is a system of continuous evaluation where when someone is in the system and they're cleared initially, then we have a way of monitoring their behavior, both their electronic behavior on the job as well as off the job,’ Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told Congress last month.”

Government Officials To Spy on Workers With Secret Clearance

And this is how the NSA is shooting themselves in the foot. They are bringing out their top guns, trying to hire the best in the field to help them spy on everyone, including themselves. But they are stupid and arrogant enough to think that the best in class will actually agree to put themselves under a microscope where their every move will be scrutinized.

Anyone remotely familiar with the ‘hacking community’ - I prefer to think of it as anyone that has decided to make the Internet their home - will know that no one from this community will willingly submit to having observers watched their every move, not even close, and definitely not those that are the best at what they do.

If you would like to have a feel for what this hacker community is all about then the following 2001 documentary sharing Kevin Mitnick story, “Freedom Downtime”, will give you a glimpse into this world. You be the judge; do you believe the majority of this community is gullible or corrupt enough to actually decide to work for such people as James Clapper, Michael Hayden, and Gen. Keith Alexander, or are they more likely to create beautiful open-source systems that will undermine what the NSA is trying to achieve; to own the Internet? Where lies the glory; in protecting your home and family, or being a judas? This is a call to arms:

“I think this is a community that will welcome this chance to have a conversation with Ed Snowden,” continues Wizner. “Ed can still do the Oprah interview one day if that’s what he wants to do. But we’re not here to talk about his personal life, or what he does every day, or what any network journalist would have to ask. We’re here to talk about the issues. It’s a call to arms.”

Freedom Downtime

What’s Really Going On: Bahrain vs. Ukraine, Can You Spot the Difference?

1. Introduction

2. Bahrain

3. Ukraine

4. The Point

I. Introduction

What amazes me is that sane intelligent people have become hysterical by consuming western mainstream media propaganda designed to divert our attention away from the root cause of what ails our society.

For example, with the Ukrainian crisis shock doctrine tactics are being used to bombard us into a frenzy, the ultimate purpose for which is to distract us from the great game: Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Grand Chessboard (2, 3), our economy’s addiction to indefinite growth, the transfer of wealth from Main Street to Wall Street (2), the resource wars, The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), the geography of energy pipelines, the misconception of American exceptionalism and how it influences our foreign policy specifically on how it relates to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the significance of war being a racket (2), and the inverted totalitarian nature of our governments waging war on information (2, 3).

To have a better understanding of what all this is about, below you will find a brief summary of what’s been going on in two major conflict zones, Bahrain and Ukraine. Can you spot the difference?

II. Bahrain

The Kingdom of Bahrain is a monarchy which has been ruled by the al-Khalifa dynasty since 1783. The present king is Hamad bin Isa bin Salman Al Khalifa, and he rules the country with an iron fist. He was molded for this position, receiving training from the “British Army at Mons Officer Cadet School at Aldershot in Hampshire” and the “United States Army Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth in Kansas” where he acquired a “degree in leadership” [sic].

In 2011, when faced with a mass popular peaceful uprising from the majority Shia population demanding equality and freedom, Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa decided to brutally suppress the protests; injuring, killing, and kidnapping countless people in the process. Some news reports even cited it as ‘genocide’.

“At least 32 doctors, including surgeons, physicians, paediatricians and obstetricians, have been arrested and detained by Bahrain's police in the last month in a campaign of intimidation that runs directly counter to the Geneva Convention guaranteeing medical care to people wounded in conflict….

“Many of the doctors, aged from 33 to 65, have been ‘disappeared’ – held incommunicado or at undisclosed locations. Their families do not know where they are. Nurses, paramedics and ambulance staff have also been detained.”

When it became evident that if this unrest continued the al-Khalifa dynasty might lose their 220 year old strangle hold on the nation and that king Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa might be deposed, a request for assistance was make to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and UAE, who in turn sent in their militaries to quell the protests.

Poets, activists, artists, children, lawyers, journalists, doctors, nurses, writers, musicians, along with countless others have been and continue to be imprisoned. Some have even been sentenced to jail for listening to music not approved by the regime. The brutality of the totalitarian nature of this kingdom has gone as far as passing a new law that makes ‘offending’ the King of Bahrain “punishable by up to 7 years in prison.”

“Offending King Hamad can now result in up to seven years in prison, Bahrain announced Tuesday. The news comes just days before the third anniversary of the Shiite-led, Arab Spring-inspired protests against the kingdom’s Sunni monarchy….

“Bahrain convicted and jailed two activists for one and four months, respectively, in 2012 for Twitter comments that supposedly insulted King Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa. Social media comments are included in the new edict.”

Most of western mainstream media has chosen self-censorship, refusing to expose the brutality of this regime. Western mainstream media’s coverage of Bahrain has been so benign that “the regime in Bahrain often openly trumpets the hagiographical treatment it receives”, which is evident by CNN’s international arm’s decision not to air its own documentary on Bahrain's Arab Spring repression:

“Despite these accolades, and despite the dangers their own journalists and their sources endured to produce it, CNN International (CNNi) never broadcast the documentary. Even in the face of numerous inquiries and complaints from their own employees inside CNN, it continued to refuse to broadcast the program or even provide any explanation for the decision. To date, this documentary has never aired on CNNi.

“It is CNN International that is, by far, the most-watched English-speaking news outlet in the Middle East. By refusing to broadcast ‘iRevolution’, the network's executives ensured it was never seen on television by Bahrainis or anyone else in the region.”

Bahrain portion of iRevolution on CNN June 19 2011 (Amber Lyon)

By the way, did I mention that at the time that these protests were taking place, “Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates arrived… on an unannounced visit to [Bahrain to] offer American support to the royal family”, and that the “U.S. [was] actively feeding that regime new weapons” (2), and that the United States has a large military base in Bahrain that they have operated since 1971, and that “in 2010, the Navy embarked on a five-year, $580-million project to expand the base, proposing to essentially double the size of the current 62-acre facility”?

During a visit to Bahrain “US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel said that the United States would not abandon the region. ‘Although the Department of Defense is facing serious budget constraints, we will continue to prioritize our commitments in the [Persian] Gulf, while making sure that our military capabilities evolve to meet new threats,’ he said.”

source

click image to enlarge - source

Just to help put things into perspective, the following two maps show the approximate locations of U.S. Military Bases in South-Central Asia and the Middle East, and some of the Existing and Proposed Oil and Gas Pipelines. Additional maps for this set providing a lot more information available at: “Target is Still Iran: Clear Cutting the Middle East and the Coming Blood Bath (Mapping World War III)”.

click map to enlarge - source

click map to enlarge - source

It’s very important to keep in mind that the protests in Bahrain were and continue to be largely peaceful, and that no delegates from any other country have ever appeared in support of the protesters at any of the locations where demonstrations have been taking place.

Now let’s take a look at Ukraine.

III. Ukraine

Ukraine is a “unitary state composed of 24 oblasts (provinces), one autonomous republic (Crimea) and two cities with special status: Kiev, its capital and largest city and Sevastopol, which houses the Russian Black Sea Fleet under a leasing agreement. Ukraine is a republic under a semi-presidential system with separate legislative, executive, and judicial branches.”

It is widely accepted that Ukraine has been ruled by oligarchs for a very long time, the democratically elected president, Viktor Yanukovych, who was removed from power by the Ukrainian parliament in February 2014, being one of the most prominent.

We can pick up the Ukraine story in 2004 from the Orange Revolution, or from the 2008–09 Ukrainian financial crisis brought about by Wall Street shenanigans followed by an IMF bail-out (2), or in 2010 when Ukraine passed a law “against joining military alliances such as NATO”, or from 2013 when China decided to buy 3 million hectares of Ukrainian farmland, or we could even go back as far as 1954 when the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic transferred Crimea to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic:

“On 19 February 1954, the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union issued a decree transferring the Crimean Oblast from the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. The transfer of the Crimean Oblast to Ukraine has been described as a ‘symbolic gesture,’ marking the 300th anniversary of Ukraine becoming a part of the Russian Empire. The General Secretary of the Communist Party in Soviet Union was at the time the Ukranian Nikita Khrushchev.”

How about we pick up the story from 21 November 2013, with this latest round of unrest; Dubbed Euromaidan, the protests began in response to a sector of the public “demanding closer European integration” through a trade agreement with the EU which the Ukrainian government had decided to reject.

The agreement was a modified version of the same deal that the EU had offered Armenia, which Armenia also rejected, since the government and the majority of Armenians realized that it was a bad deal. To find out how bad this offer was all we have to do is look at why Armenia also ended up rejecting the offer.

In September 2013, Armenia called off an Armenia-EU Association Agreement after they found out that the trade deal was not really about easing trade restrictions with the EU but about screwing over Russia, and themselves by extension (emphasis added):

“The apparently smooth progress towards a final deal came to a shuddering halt in early September, when President Serzh Sargsyan met his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin and announced plans to join another economic bloc, the Moscow-led Customs Union. Membership of the grouping, which currently includes Russia, Belarus and Kazakstan, would require Armenia to adopt a different set of trade tariffs and agreements which EU officials say are not compatible with the Association Agreement.

“Despite this, President Sargsyan says Customs Union membership would not conflict with the EU accord, which he argues could be uncoupled from the DCFTA.

“‘Armenia is ready even now to sign an Association Agreement with the EU,’ Sargsyan said in a question-and-answer session after addressing the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe on October 2. ‘Sadly, our partners in the European Commission have said there is a clear contradiction between the Customs Union and the agreement on a free trade zone.… We have suggested that we could sign just the Association Agreement, which mainly covers political reforms.’….

“‘There has recently been a lot of talk about the civilisational choice facing members of the Eastern Partnership initiative. We have always stated that we don’t believe it’s right to view the issue in those terms.’”

What the EU wanted Armenia and Ukraine to do is equivalent to telling someone that they can come over and play at your house as long as they are willing to permanently tell the rest of their family to fuck off! Insanity!

This rejection by Yanukovych’s administration did not sit well with Eurocentrics, western oligarchs, Euromaidan’s core protesters, the EU, or the United States government. So, the protests turned violent as did the oppression by government forces, which in turn kicked off what is now being referred to as the 2014 Ukrainian revolution which has brought about the ascension of Oleksandr Turchynov and Arseniy Yatsenyuk to power, as President and Prime minister respectively; Yatsenyuk being the person that the U.S.’s top diplomat in Europe, Victoria Nuland, and the U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine had agreed would be the best person to rule Ukraine:

"The two officials also discuss frankly the merits of the three main Ukrainian opposition leaders - Vitaly Klitschko, Arseniy Yatseniuk and Oleh Tyahnybok. The female speaker [Victoria Nuland] says that Mr Klitschko, the former heavyweight boxing world champion, should not be in any new government. 'I don't think it's a good idea.' She adds: 'I think Yats (Arseniy Yatseniuk) is the guy who's got the economic experience.'"

Марионетки Майдана (Marionettes of Maidan)

Further information on what was being discussed in the above leaked telephone conversation through the following video in which the spokesperson for the United States Department of State, Jen Psaki, is grilled with questions on why the United States is, in essence, conducting a coup d'état, planning a regime change in Ukraine:

“What I’d do is not have USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy working with U.S. taxpayers’ money to knock off an elected government in Ukraine, which is what they did. I wouldn’t try to force the people of Ukraine into a deal with NATO against their interest or into a deal with the European Union, which is against their economic interest.” - Dennis Kucinich.

State Dept. Psaki grilled over leaked ' F**k the EU ' tape - Russia leaked it

This, of course, did not end with simple words. Western oligarchs, one of whom was John McCain, were involved in supporting the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine (2):

“We watched today what is going on from the Eastern Europe. Europe parliamentarians are coming to Kiev demonstrating and even camping. Polish parliamentarians are camping in Kiev in Maidan, main square of Kiev city.

“And so yesterday Russian TV showed John McCain arrival to Kiev and he brought with him some luggage, diplomatic luggage, eight big bags: one of them only was set for ... [his] diplomatic car and the seven other big bags were placed in Ukrainian cars and they said that it is money. Huge amount of money brought to spread, to support opposition.

“I asked where is international law? How is it possible to intervene in such ugly way in the internal disturbed situation in Ukraine?

“Money, money and all this was spread [among opposition] and made based on huge amounts...

“So I think that not Russian intervention but European, American intervention, direct appearance in demonstrations, appearance among oppositions, take and flow, making some speeches, encouraging for revolution.

“That I can say, I as a former diplomatic, my job, I cannot even imagine such kind of behaviors are suitable for current international law...”

Victoria Nuland Admits: US Has Invested $5 Billion In The Development of Ukrainian, "Democratic Institutions"
- Please note the Exxon Mobil and Chevron logos flanking Victoria Nuland on the podium -

As for what’s currently unfolding in Ukraine? The situation is dynamic: there is an “anti-Russian revolutionary government in power in Kiev”, “Russia has taken control of Crimea”, Canada’s Stephen Harper is comparing “Russia’s Crimea moves to Third Reich aggression” [sic], Crimea's parliament has voted to join Russia (2), the United States is threatening Russia with sanctions (2) and accusing Russia of a “breach of international law”, Russia is close to calling in a $2 billion Ukraine gas debt (2), some are calling this a new Cold War (2, 3, 4), and video and testimonials have surfaced that indicate the snipers that were assassinating people during the protests were hired by Maidan leaders (2, 3, 4, 5, 6):

“The first day when there was killing, out of the 28 people dead, nine were police. I mean, it’s not normal in these demonstrations, when one side opens fire, and it’s usually the police, but nine of their own people die. So one was always suspicious, at the beginning.

“But from this phone call that you just played, it seems that almost all the snipers were from the opposition side, which is a terrible indictment of their behavior, and also of the—most of the foreign media, which have completely suppressed this phone call, and of Western governments, who have made no reference to it. I mean, to their credit, the new authorities in Kiev claim that they’re going to have an investigation of the sniper issue, but I’ve not heard John Kerry or David Cameron coming out publicly and saying, ‘That’s a very good idea, and these are very disturbing suggestions.’”

Estonian Foreign Minister Urmas Paet and Catherine Ashton discuss Ukraine over the phone: Kiev snipers hired by Maidan leaders - leaked EU's Ashton phone tape
(conversation begins at approximately 2 minutes into the video)

As for what all this is about, as Pepe Escobar, “the roving correspondent for Asia Times/Hong Kong, an analyst for RT and TomDispatch, and a frequent contributor to websites and radio shows ranging from the US to East Asia”, states:

“In a nutshell; Washington’s bipartisan Ukraine policy has always been anti-Moscow. That implies regime change whenever necessary. As the European Union (EU), geopolitically, is nothing but an annex to NATO, what matters is NATO extending its borders to the Ukraine. Or at least Western Ukraine – which would be a valuable consolation prize.

“This is a purely military-centric game – the logic of the whole mechanism ultimately decided in Washington, not in Brussels. It’s about NATO expansion, not ‘democracy’. When neo-con State Department functionary Victoria Nuland had her 15 seconds of fame recently, what she actually meant was ‘We’re NATO, F**k the EU.’ No wonder there will be an urgent NATO Defense Ministers meeting in Brussels on Wednesday, centered on Ukraine.

“No one will ever read that in US corporate media – or in academia for that matter. Harvard Professor Francis Boyle talking to Voice of Russia, or Princeton’s Stephen Cohen in a recent article for the Nation, are glaring exceptions.

“Every informed analyst knows the mastermind of this ‘policy’, since the 1970s, is Zbigniew ‘The Grand Chessboard’ Brzezinski. Dr. Zbig was US President Barack Obama’s mentor at Columbia and is the Talleyrand of the Obama administration’s foreign policy machine.”

The Expansion of NATO

As for what will happen when the dust settles, Pepe Escobar does have some predictions:

“Ukraine is slouching towards federalization. The Kiev regime-changers will have no say on autonomous Crimea - which most certainly will remain part of Ukraine (and Russia by the way will save $90 million in annual rent for the Sevastopol base, which until now was payable to Kiev.)

“The endgame is all but written; Moscow controls an autonomous Crimea for free, and the US/EU ‘control’, or try to plunder, disaster capitalism-style, a back of beyond western Ukraine wasteland ‘managed’ by a bunch of Western puppets and oligarchs, with a smatter of neo-nazis.

“So what is the Obama/Kerry strategic master duo to do? Start a nuclear war?”

Below you will find four maps that should help in providing further information on what some of this chaos may be all about: First is an Ethnolinguistical map of Ukraine (excluding minorities), and the next three are maps of pipelines connecting Russia to the EU.

click image to enlarge - source

click image to enlarge - source

click image to enlarge - source

click image to enlarge - source

IV. The Point

What would the discourse in the United States be if western mainstream media used their resources to investigate the feasibility of U.S. foreign policy; spending billions of dollars overtly and countless billions covertly to overthrow democratically elected governments across the globe? Would the citizens of the United States continue to point their fingers at other nations, and demand the overthrow of those corrupt governments, or would they look inward, and question the overwhelmingly opulent life of their own leaders? What would the world look like if those responsible for so much chaos, death and destruction were brought to justice? Will we ever see that day?

Bill Hicks - It's Just A Ride

Regarding Liz Wahl and Abby Martin, Just a Reminder That Phil Donahue Was Crucified Twice in America for Opposing War with Iraq

With all the coverage of Liz Wahl's resignation from RT and Abby Martin's comments (2 ) on why she condemned Russia's actions in Crimea, thought I would just remind everyone that Phil Donahue, "an American media personality, writer, and film producer best known as the creator and host of The Phil Donahue Show", a show that had a "29-year run on national television in America", a person who was "ranked #42 on TV Guide's 50 Greatest TV Stars of All Time", a person that Oprah Winfrey credits for giving birth to her show, stating that "if it weren't for Phil Donahue, there never would have been an Oprah Show!", was fired from MSNBC for opposing the 2003 U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, "even though his show was a highly rated one on the network."

I believe Chris Hedges put it best in an article entitled, "The Day That TV News Died":

"I am not sure exactly when the death of television news took place. The descent was gradual — a slide into the tawdry, the trivial and the inane, into the charade on cable news channels such as Fox and MSNBC in which hosts hold up corporate political puppets to laud or ridicule, and treat celebrity foibles as legitimate news. But if I had to pick a date when commercial television decided amassing corporate money and providing entertainment were its central mission, when it consciously chose to become a carnival act, it would probably be Feb. 25, 2003, when MSNBC took Phil Donahue off the air because of his opposition to the calls for war in Iraq.

"Donahue and Bill Moyers, the last honest men on national television, were the only two major TV news personalities who presented the viewpoints of those of us who challenged the rush to war in Iraq. General Electric and Microsoft — MSNBC’s founders and defense contractors that went on to make tremendous profits from the war — were not about to tolerate a dissenting voice. Donahue was fired, and at PBS Moyers was subjected to tremendous pressure. An internal MSNBC memo leaked to the press stated that Donahue was hurting the image of the network. He would be a 'difficult public face for NBC in a time of war,' the memo read. Donahue never returned to the airwaves. "

Phil Donahue fired for opposing the invasion of Iraq

It's also very important to note, and shows the sheer will and integrity of Donahue, that this was not the first time that he was crucified for his opposition to war. Donahue also opposed the first gulf war, and he paid the price dearly:

"The show also lost support after Donahue expressed his feelings regarding the first Gulf War. In the fall of 1995, ABC-owned KGO-TV in San Francisco dropped Donahue after carrying it for several years and, weeks later, New York's WNBC-TV also canceled it. Donahue was also evicted from its Rockefeller Plaza home, and relocated to new studios in Manhattan. Many other stations, such as KTRK-TV in Houston, and KYW-TV in Philadelphia moved it to late-night and early-morning time slots, causing a further loss of viewers. Donahue never aired on another station in New York or San Francisco, two of the largest U.S. television markets.

"After 29 years (26 of which in syndication) and nearly 7,000 shows, the final episode aired on September 13, 1996, culminating in what remains to be the longest continuous run of any syndicated talk show in U.S. television history."

As I have stated previously, in my opinion and those of many others, our corporate western mainstream media (2) is garbage, as Immortal Technique puts it, just “The 4th Branch” of the government, so view it at your own peril.

Immortal Technique-the 4th branch

As for Liz Wahl and Abby Martin, I like what RT and James Corbett had to say about it (Corbett's comments follows RT's press release):

"Ms. Wahl's resignation comes on the heels of her colleague Abby Martin's recent comments in which she voiced her disagreement with certain policies of the Russian government and asserted her editorial independence. The difference is, Ms. Martin spoke in the context of her own talk show, to the viewers who have been tuning in for years to hear her opinions on current events – the opinions that most media did not care about until two days ago. For years, Ms. Martin has been speaking out against US military intervention, only to be ignored by the mainstream news outlets – but with that one comment, branded as an act of defiance, she became an overnight sensation. It is a tempting example to follow.

"When a journalist disagrees with the editorial position of his or her organization, the usual course of action is to address those grievances with the editor, and, if they cannot be resolved, to quit like a professional. But when someone makes a big public show of a personal decision, it is nothing more than a self-promotional stunt.

"We wish Liz the best of luck on her chosen path."

The Resignation Seen 'Round the World - #NewWorldNextWeek

Information War Kicks into High Gear on Reddit: A List of Open Subreddits and How to Deal with Censorship

1. Information War on Reddit

2. List of Open subReddits

3. How You’re Censored and What You Can Do about It

4. An Example of How to Deal with Censorship

I. Information War on Reddit

The censorship from the front pages of Reddit (2 ) of Glenn Greenwald’s story on the infiltration of the Internet by shills is becoming mainstream news, and the irony of this is just delicious. As Greenwald pointed out on his Twitter account:

“The key to solving media woes is to have random, anonymous, bitter, partisan Reddit moderators decide what is and isn't ‘news’”

How the Government Manipulates Your Thoughts Online

Censorship on Reddit is, of course, not new. It kicked into high gear about four years ago when our corporate mainstream media started lumping the site together with the likes of Facebook – a serious disservice to the portal. Unfortunately, gatekeepers in control of some of the subReddit took this to heart - some would argue that they were plants from the beginning but we’ll leave that alone for now - and they started to change the rules of the game (Reddit, owned by Condé Nast, a division of Advance Publications, an American media company “ranked as the 52nd largest private company in the United States”, was guilty of this as well, but we’ll also leave that alone for now).

Censorship on Reddit first began with altering “the rules” for submissions - each subReddit has their own - and once the gatekeepers - some of the moderators (mods) - realized that news which they did not agree with was making it to the front page, they began to delete the submissions. Some of the most censored subReddits even began to ban certain users from submitting content.

What’s happened to many subReddits is that they have transformed from open forums where users could disseminate information that they deemed important, to censored threads where shills control the news, much like what most of western mainstream media has become. Very unfortunate since it was Reddit’s open uncensored policy that made it one of the most important sites online, putting it on many peoples radar.

As Thomas Drake has pointed out, we are in the midst of a war on information and having access to a space where uncensored thought can be shared is vital to a free society:

“It’s important. Very few people are still getting it. It is an information war. See, information is power. Information is the coin of the realm, and the government has decided in the Internet age, the way to control it is to own it. Hayden actually said this well over a decade ago, that ‘we have to own the net.’ I don’t think people fully appreciated what that meant.” - quoted text begins at approximately 5:20 in the following video.

NSA Whistleblower was Witness to 9/11 Foreknowledge

Don’t get me wrong, Reddit is still very important and will remain so for some time, but many of the subReddits have been infiltrated by what Greenwald refers to as “covert agents” - some being intentional plants, some unwitting cohorts of the system - and these subReddits should not be your main source of information, not by a long shot, and some should be abandoned altogether.

With over 340,000 subReddits I won’t bother listing the ones that I know are being moderated by zealots censoring news up the yin-yang, suffice it to say, many of the main subs are on the list. What I will do though is list a few subReddits that I am aware of that are well worth joining. Your post may not make it to the front page, or get any upvotes, but the odds are that it will not be censored, and if it is, you should raise hell (2, 3) - see Part III and IV on how to do this.

II. List of Open subReddits

Below you will find the top subReddits that I use for my news feed in regards to economics and politics. Solo or in combination as multiReddits, they should provide an accurate picture of what’s going on in the world, and remember, it’s always a good idea and highly recommended to check out the comments of stories that you find interesting, as well as the ‘new’ and ‘rising’ sections. And always be diligent, many new subReddits are created on a regular basis, mainly in response to the censorship, so check the “other discussions” section regularly to find these new subs.

Anarchism, Bad_Cop_No_Donut, Libertarian, restorethefourth, ronpaul, Orwellian, and socialism

Bitcoin and Bitcoinserious

collapse, PostCollapse, and Survival

conspiracy, ConspiracyX, DescentIntoTyranny, EndlessWar , evolutionReddit, POLITIC , undelete, Africa, altnewz, censorship, worldpolitics

cordcutters, TechNewsToday, and technology (/r/technology with a grain of salt, a serious grain of salt, a very serious grain of salt, bye bye /r/technology)

DepthHub, and TrueReddit

cannabis, Drugs, eldertrees, Marijuana, MMJ, and timetolegalize

Economics and economy

energy, environment, Green, Health, nature, oceans, and water

farming, gardening, homestead, and Permaculture

Futurology and gadgets

IWantOut, jobs, and lostgeneration

lectures

education, math, matheducation, and mathpics

opensource, Piracy, torrents, and trackers

MapPorn, politics (I included /r/politics because, even though it is heavily censored and should not be your only source of news, not by a long shot, it is still worth the visit), PoliticalHumor, PoliticalModeration, and Politics_Uncensored

privacy, snowden, WikiLeaks

singularity, Transhuman, and Transhumanism

III. How You’re Censored and What You Can Do about It

There are four main ways that shills try and control the flow of information on Reddit:

• First, you may get banned. If you are, your only discourse is to appeal your banishment to the mods, which probably won’t get you far, or if you really want to participate in the sub, you can just create a new identity and hop right back in. For me, if I get banned, it means that the subReddit is controlled by “bitter, partisan” mods and is garbage, so I just leave and never look back.


• Second, you may face mass downvoting by shills. This comes in waves in certain subs at certain times, or is constant in others. If it’s constant downvoting in a specific sub, then you may want to read the “rules” of the sub and decide if you really belong there. If it comes in waves, there is not much you can do about it other than to make a self-post and find out if others have experienced the same phenomenon. A posse of shills is usually involved in this kind of activity, and they usually appear when important news has or is about to hit the net.


• The third way that Reddit is censored is by banning domains. There isn’t much you can do about this other than putting together a large group and creating a petition to reinstate a domain. Since I haven’t participated in any action like this I really can’t advise further.


• The fourth and most common form of censorship is when mods remove your post. There are three things you can do if this occurs:

  1) Delete the post and submit it again in a few hours and see where that takes you.
  
  2) Find and submit an article from a different source discussing the same issue that may pass under the gatekeepers’ radar.
  
  3) Appeal to the mods. Ask them why they have deleted your submission and argue your point as best as you can. Your voice may reach one of the nonpartisan mods. This is by far the main way I challenge censorship. An example of how I deal with this is presented below in Part IV.

If all else fails and you find that the censorship is too much, remember that Reddit is just a portal, a tool. So, one other option you do have is to create your own subReddit. You can do this either for archiving or sharing information. If you do take this step do it slowly so you can avoid pitfalls.

IV. An Example of How to Deal with Censorship

I try and challenge as many censored submissions as possible. Just like one should with all traffic fines, if the gatekeepers responsible for deleting posts are shills, I like to keep them occupied and make them earn their pay. This way they will have less time to censor others. We are in an information war and in my opinion one of the best ways to fight the good fight is to occupy your enemy’s time.

Below you will find a segment from Democracy Now! that I submitted to /r/politics that was censored by one of the mods.

I Was Beaten, Tortured: Pakistani Anti-Drone Activist Karim Khan on Being Abducted by Masked Men

I decided to follow up on the censorship of this piece since I believed the story is very important and wanted it to reach as many people as possible. As I have stated previously, our foreign policy is the main reason that our economy is in disarray, and this story highlights what’s wrong with our foreign policy, specifically the part where Karim Khan, in reply to Amy Goodman’s question on how his community feels about the United States, states that:

AMY GOODMAN: “Karim Khan, how does your community feel about the United States? How did they feel before the drone strikes? How do they feel now?”

KARIM KHAN: “We don’t know about America before these difficulties and these clashes so much more, but after these drone strikes and these difficulties, we said that they are—they are criminal. They are cruel people. They have no such things about humanity. And they destroyed humanity. For example, as man in search of lies have rights, but we, the Muslim, the Pakistani Muslim, and the tribal people have no rights in this world. They are targeting us. They are declaring us terrorists before coming in this world. For example, determined baby—they killed her, and they declared her a terrorist. So, it’s very strange, and it’s not good. And we, the people, are—hate America and hate the air forces and their people. And we are thinking that there is no care for human, and there are no humanity in these people. So, it’s very bad, on our part, that they are killing our innocent people.”

The reason given by one of the mods for censoring this submission was that the piece was ”Off Topic” – click to enlarge and see top left corner.



Luckily, /r/politics allows its users to challenge removal of posts so I messaged the mods to see if the decision would be reversed. A synopsis of the conversation follows (screen shot of the full conversation is provided below as well).

In reply to the post being “Off Topic”, I messaged the mods stating that, “This post is US politics, it's about US drone strikes.” A mod replied with, “That's a huge stretch.” I repeated myself, “It's about US drone strikes in Pakistan, how in the world is that a huge stretch? What!”

The mod responsible for removing the post provided a more detailed explanation:

“It talks about an incident in which an anti-drone activist was attacked by unknown assailants. If it had been proven it was some sort of US covert operation then maybe yeah, it would belong here. It is strictly speculative and more appropriate for /r/news or some other sub.”

It became evident that this mod did not fully grasp the concept of cause and effect and was stuck in a loop, obviously hypersensitive to anything resembling a conspiracy, so I decided to explain myself in more detail. Not that I believed that this mod would change his or her point of view, but because I was hoping that another mod was also reading this conversation, and maybe they would approve the post. My reply was:

“It's US foreign policy, the drone strikes, that are the issue here, not the kidnapping. This is not about any conspiracies, this is about US foreign policy. This belongs in /r/politics. This is the reason for much of US domestic policy. This gave birth to the NSA [should have included, as it is now], the Patriot Act, NDAA. It's connected to Guantanamo, renditions, and secret detention sites. It's what makes up a huge part of the budget. Of course this is relevant to the United States. Of course this belongs on /r/politics. If you don't want to allow the post because you don't agree with it then please say so, but don't say it's not relevant to the US, because it is.”

That’s when another mod stepped in and approved the post, stating that:

“He is right, the article clearly states that the drones are US drones and it is talking about an activist against US drone strikes, which is relates to US politics since it is US policy when it comes to these drone strikes.

“I say it is perfectly fine in this sub.”

A rare reversal, but well worth it, and my many thanks to the approving mod. The full conversation below - Note: I was able to get the post approved, but the time stamp on the post could not be reset and since 20 hours had passed, the odds of it making to the front page were zero. On the recommendation of the mod that approved the post, I deleted the original submission and reposted the piece which in turn reset the clock. (click image to enlarge):

Fragmentation of Bitcoin Community Begins after the Collapse of Mt. Gox and Secondmarket’s Wall Street Exchange Proposal

Additional article on Bitcoin: "The Bitcoin Bubble, or Is It? Two Charts, Historical Price Movement, and the Conspiracy".

---

A few comments regarding Bitcoin and the recent developments with Mt. Gox (2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) and the announcement that SecondMarket is stepping into the game and planning to launch the “first New York-based Bitcoin exchange” (emphasis added):

“SecondMarket CEO Barry Silbert says that he's modeling it after the early days of The IntercontinentalExchange (ICE), and that he hopes to have a set of founding members in place by the end of March (i.e., a ‘seat’ model). These members are expected to include Wall Street banks and well-funded Bitcoin startups (think Circle and Coinbase). Non-member firms or individuals would not be allowed to trade -- at least at the outset -- but likely could do business via the member firms.”

When Wall Street insiders announce that they are joining your game, but not allowing you to play on their field, which is what is implied with “Non-member firms or individuals would not be allowed to trade”, one should be concerned that the fundamental rules of the game may be changing, but, unfortunately, with fear running rampant within the Bitcoin community due to the collapse of Mt. Gox, many welcomed this news from SecondMarket.

For me, I shuddered when I read this announcement and in my opinion that should have been the reaction across the board, but it wasn’t. On the contrary, the prospect that a new exchange would put Bitcoin regulation in the hands of Wall Street bankers was largely dismissed:

“Multinational financial corporations helping shape Bitcoin’s evolution is a contentious prospect for many bitcoiners who spent years investing in the digital currency. To some, forsaking the anarcho-capitalist spirit that spawned Bitcoin feels apocryphal. But, to those who anticipate future calamity after the downfall of Mt. Gox, sacrificing Bitcoin’s decentralized nature in exchange for assurance and framework is a necessary, if not unavoidable evil.”

When the news about Secondmarket’s Wall Street exchange proposal came out some of us spent some time on a few threads trying to explain why this is a bad idea, but we didn’t get far. The common rebuttals to our comments were that we needed a stable market and this may require regulation through Wall Street insiders and involvement of big banks, and that’s when I shuddered again and slowly backed away.

In November 2013, when Bitcoin was trading at an all-time high of $1,200+, I put a little piece together entitled, “The Bitcoin Bubble, or Is It? Two Charts, Historical Price Movement, and the Conspiracy”, where I stated that:

“I’ve been tracking bitcoin for almost three years, since it was trading for less than a dollar. I even mined it a little a couple of years ago and recommended friends to buy them. Now that bitcoin has breached $1,200 and counting, would I still be giving it a buy recommendation? Absolutely not. Would I be recommending friends to keep most of their bitcoins at these valuations? Absolutely not. I would be telling them to sell almost all of their holdings, letting 1% ride. This is also one of the great features of bitcoin; very few early adopters should still be holding in any type of market like this….

“Does this mean that bitcoin and other secure digital currencies are not a valid form of currency? Absolutely not. Does this mean that they do not have a future? Absolutely not. I actually believe the opposite. The future of commerce is digital, global, decentralized, open source and secure. It’s everything that bitcoin offers; I just think we’re in a bubble.”

For that post, the majority of the Bitcoin community ripped me a new a-hole as if you are the enemy when you decide to call a spade a spade.

There are many problems with Bitcoin, and many hurdles that need to be overcome. One of the main problems that we - those of us who believe in the inevitable collapse of fiat currencies that are controlled by central banks which are in the business of transferring wealth from main street to Wall Street - must overcome is the willingness of those in the community who fear volatility and are only interested in the “to the moon” mentality that are willing to welcome Wall Street insiders within our midst.

Case in point; on 13 December 2013, Cameron Winklevoss, one of the Winklevoss brothers who sued “Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg for $140 million”, did an IAmA on Reddit with the following title, “I am Cameron Winklevoss and I love me some Bitcoin AMA!”.



I took the bait and started reading some of his thoughts and comments, and dare I say, shuddered again. In this treasure trove providing a glimpse into the mindset of an Ivy League insider’s view point of what Bitcoin is and should be we find the following two comments.


source


source

The first comment I agree with. Bitcoin has become and is for now a commodity, to the dismay of those who would like to think of it as a currency. The second comment proves the first point and highlights one of the other major hurdles facing Bitcoin – why would anyone sell a commodity that is “headed to the moon”?

There is fragmentation within the Bitcoin community. When Bitcoin enters a bubble stage, emotions peak and anger surfaces with those recommending liquidation. When the price of Bitcoin retracts, fear grows. When there is bad news and extreme volatility, it now appears that the community is willing to shed its core principles and look towards Wall Street and the beginning of centralization and regulation, in part anyway.

Fed Chair Janet Yellen: "Bitcoin is a payment innovation that's taking place outside the banking industry. To the best of my knowledge there's no intersection at all, in any way, between Bitcoin and banks that the Federal Reserve has the ability to supervise and regulate. So the fed doesn't have authority to supervise or regulate Bitcoin in anyway…. One concern with Bitcoin is the potential for money laundering. [FinCen] has indicated their money laundering statutes are adequate to meet enforcement needs…. The Fed doesn't have authority with respect to Bitcoin.… But certainly it would be appropriate for Congress to ask questions about what the right legal structure would be for digital currencies.... My understanding is Bitcoin doesn't touch [U.S.] banks…. It's not so easy to regulate Bitcoin because there's no central issuer or network operator. This is a decentralized, global [entity]….. We're looking at this."

When Bitcoin was trading at $1,200+, I recommended liquidation. Now that Wall Street is stepping into the game and the Bitcoin community seems to be approving this move, I would recommend buying two Bitcoins at whatever price it is right now ($550 at the moment). Just know this, you are no longer buying into a virtual decentralized currency – supporting a conduit to transfer funds anonymously - you are gambling that a scarcity based virtual commodity is about to “go to the moon” because the big banks are about to get into the game.

Growth is the name of the game on Wall Street and in geopolitics, and growth is what Bitcoin promises. So, for anyone that has money to gamble with and put aside for the long term, and is only interested in making money, buying some Bitcoins - quantity depending on your risk tolerance - would be a prudent move. For me, I got into this game for other reasons and I will now be stepping aside and focusing this extra energy towards my own disruptive project (disruptive innovation).

In the following video, James Corbett from The Corbett Report provides some additional comments that I agree with wholeheartedly. They are worth considering.

New World Next Week: Story #2 - Bitcoin under threat as MtGox goes offline