Wednesday, March 04, 2015

US ambassador in Seoul Mark Lippert slashed in razor attack

DateMarch 5, 2015 - 11:59AM

US ambassador to South Korea Mark Lippert leaves after he was slashed in the face by an assailant at a public forum in central Seoul. Photo: Reuters

Seoul: The US ambassador to South Korea was slashed in the face by a razor-wielding assailant at a public forum in the capital early on Thursday.

Mark Lippert was attacked before he was due to give a speech at a breakfast event organised by the Korean Council for Reconciliation and Cooperation, a non-profit organisation promoting exchanges between the two Koreas.

Mr Lippert, 42, was bleeding from a facial wound but was walking after the attack as he was taken to Kangbuk Samsung Medical Centre. His wounds were reportedly not life-threatening. 

Security personnel detain the man who allegedly attacked Mark Lippert. Photo: Reuters

The attacker, identified only as Kim, was shouting slogans opposing military drills as he was taken into custody, Yonhap News reported.

The man involved in the attack received a suspended two-year jail sentence for throwing a piece of concrete at Japan's ambassador to South Korea in 2010, Yonhap said.

This week, South Korea and the US began joint annual military drills that are opposed by North Korea and its sympathisers.

The White House said it was aware of, and tracking reports of, the attack.

Mr Lippert took up his post in Seoul last October.

Ben Carson Launches Presidential Exploratory Committee

The Huffington Post | By Igor Bobic

Posted: 03/03/2015 9:57 am EST Updated: 03/03/2015 10:00 am EST

Neurosurgeon Ben Carson announced Tuesday that he is formally exploring a run for president in 2016.

Terry Giles, Carson's likely campaign chief, announced the formation of an exploratory committee that will allow the conservative darling to raise funds ahead of a likely bid for the White House.

"In every aspect of Dr. Carson's life, he has exemplified true leadership. Overcoming dire poverty in his youth to become head of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins, Dr. Carson is uniquely situated to understand the needs and hopes of all Americans," Giles said. "His undeniable abilities and extraordinary life experiences drive his passion to ensure that, through hard work and perseverance, the American dream remains attainable to all. For the next few months, Dr. Carson looks forward to listening to the American people to gauge support for a presidential candidacy."

Carson is known for making controversial statements about President Barack Obama and Nazi Germany. He finished fourth in last week's straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference, an annual gathering of activists and party leaders outside Washington, D.C., and received a warm reception at the Iowa Freedom Summit in January.

Check out Carson's GQ-esque committee website here.



Is the world ready for a Seventh-day Adventist President?

Follow up:

Does Ben Carson think he can ever win such a race?

Tuesday, March 03, 2015

UPDATE 1-FBI investigating reported shots near U.S. spy agency headquarters

Tue Mar 3, 2015 8:59pm EST

(Recasts with FBI leading investigation, adds Maryland transportation police)

(Reuters) - The FBI is leading an investigation into reported shots fired on Tuesday near National Security Agency headquarters in Maryland and damage to an NSA building, an NSA spokeswoman said.

There were no reports of injuries to NSA personnel, spokeswoman Meagan Roper said in an email.

U.S. Park Police spokeswoman Sergeant Lelani Woods said shots were reported near an exit to Fort Meade, site of the spy agency, along the Baltimore-Washington Parkway.

Officers found damage to an NSA building "and they are investigating if it is damage from shots fired," Woods said.

The incident came after Maryland Transportation Authority Police reported two people suffered minor injuries from shots fired at a vehicle on the Inter-County Connector, a highway about 12 miles (19 km) from the NSA.

There was no indication the incidents were related, "but obviously, investigators are looking at all leads," a Transportation Authority Police spokesman said.

(Reporting by Ian Simpson; Editing by Peter Cooney)

In Speech To Congress, Netanyahu Blasts 'A Very Bad Deal' With Iran

MARCH 03, 2015 9:37 AM ET


Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks before a joint meeting of Congress on Capitol Hill in Washington on Tuesday. He called the deal the U.S. and its allies are negotiating with Iran "very bad."Susan Walsh/AP

Updated at 2:09 p.m. ET

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said a deal the U.S. and its allies are pursuing with Iran over its nuclear program is "very bad" because, according to him, it doesn't take away the Islamic republic's ability to ultimately obtain nuclear weapons.

"This is a bad deal — a very bad deal," Netanyahu told a joint meeting of Congress today. "We're better off without it."

He said such a deal will "guarantee" that Iran gets nuclear weapons because it allows the Islamic republic to keep much of its nuclear infrastructure in place. And, he added, the alternative to a bad deal is not war, as some supporters of the deal with Iran have said, but "the alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal."

Noting that he has a "profound obligation" to speak about the dangers posed by Iran, the Israeli leader outlined the threats made by the Islamic republic and its proxies against Israel.

"Iran's supreme leader ... spews the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology," Netanyahu said. "He tweets that Israel must be ... destroyed."

The prime minister spent the early part of his speech outlining the strength of the U.S.-Israeli relationship, saying it must "always remain above politics," and he thanked President Obama for his support of Israel.

Obama, speaking at the White House, said, "as far as I can tell, there was nothing new" in Netanyahu's speech, adding, "the prime minister didn't offer any viable alternatives." He said he didn't watch the speech because it coincided with a video conference with European leaders.

As we have reported, the speech — along with its topic: Iran — was controversial from the moment it was announced last month by House Speaker John Boehner.

The White House wasn't consulted about the invitation, and called it a departure from protocol. Obama, citing the proximity of Israel's March 17 election, said he won't meet the Israeli prime minister; neither will Vice President Joe Biden or Secretary of State John Kerry, both of whom are traveling. Several Democrats skipped the Israeli leader's talk today.

Kerry has questioned Netanyahu's judgment regarding talks about Iran's nuclear program; Susan Rice, Obama's national security adviser, said recently that the prime minister's speech had "injected a degree of partisanship" that is "destructive to the fabric of the relationship."

Obama, in an interview with Reuters on Monday, said a long-term deal with Iran is the best way to ensure the Islamic republic doesn't obtain a nuclear weapon. He said Netanyahu's speech to Congress "isn't permanently destructive" to the U.S-Israeli relationship.

But, Obama added, when the U.S. and its allies signed an interim deal with Iran that would freeze its nuclear program, "Prime Minister Netanyahu made all sorts of claims: This is going to be a terrible deal. This was going to result in Iran getting $50 billion worth of relief. Iran would not abide by the agreement. None of that has come true." (You can see the president's complete remarks here.)

Netanyahu, Rice and Samantha Power, who is the U.S. envoy to the U.N., all addressed the 2015 American Israel Public Affairs Committee Policy Conference in Washington on Monday, and they each emphasized the strength of the U.S.-Israeli alliance.

Here is our live blog of Netanyahu's remarks to Congress today:

Update at 11:43 p.m. ET: 'A Very Bad Deal'

"This is a bad deal — a very bad deal. We're better off without it," Netanyahu says.

And there you have it — the money quote. The prime minister's comment refers to a deal the U.S. and its allies are trying to negotiate with Iran over its nuclear program.

The Israeli leader says, "The alternative to this bad deal is a much better deal" not war.

Netanyahu gives a shout-out to Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust survivor and Nobel laureate, who is in the audience.

"I wish I could promise you, Elie, that the lessons of history have been learned," he says.

Netanyahu, to thunderous applause, says he knows America stands with Israel.

The Israeli prime minister ends his speech to sustained applause and a standing ovation with a quote from Moses: "Be strong and resolute."

Update at 11:28 p.m. ET: Nuclear Deal

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says the current deal that the U.S. and its allies are discussing with Iran will "guarantee" that the Islamic republic gets nuclear weapons.

He says the deal will allow Iran to keep its major infrastructure — with a short breakout time for a bomb. Not a single facility will be demolished, he says, and thousands of centrifuges will be allowed to continue to spin.

He compares Iran's actions to North Korea's — saying both countries have deceived international nuclear inspectors.

"Iran has proven once and again that it cannot be trusted," the prime minister says.

He says a second major concession under the deal would allow Iran to get to the bomb after 10 years.

"That's why this deal is so bad. ... It paves Iran's path to a bomb," he says.

Netanyahu says the deal "won't change Iran for the better, it will change the Middle East for the worse," saying Iran's neighbors, presumably Saudi Arabia and others, will pursue their own nuclear programs.

"We can insist that restriction on Iran's nuclear program not be lifted as long as Iran continues its aggression in the region and the world," he says.

He says Iran must do three things: Stop aggression against its neighbors; stop supporting terrorism around the world; stop threatening "to annihilate my country — Israel, the one and only Jewish state."

He says that if Iran changes its behavior, the restrictions will be lifted.

"If Iran wants to be treated like a normal country, let it act like a normal country," he says.

Update at 11:17 p.m. ET: Iran

Netanyahu says he has a "profound obligation" to speak about the threat posed by Iran's nuclear program. It's worth noting here that Iran denies that it is pursuing nuclear weapons — though Israel and the West believe that the Islamic republic is indeed pursuing such weapons.

"Iran's supreme leader ... spews the oldest hatred of anti-Semitism with the newest technology," Netanyahu says. "He tweets that Israel must be ... destroyed."

The Israeli leader says the people of Iran are "very talented people" who were "hijacked by religious zealots" in 1979, the year of the Islamic revolution.

He says Iran's mission is "death, tyranny and the pursuit of jihad," and cites the instability across the region, including in Syria, Gaza and Yemen.

"The time when many hoped that Iran will join the community of nations — Iran is busy gobbling up nations," he says.

He says Iranian President Hassan Rouhani and his foreign minister, Mohammed Javad Zarif, came to power promising "change and moderation," but that Iran still "hangs gays, persecutes Christians" and journalists. He goes on to compare Iran and the self-described Islamic State, or ISIS, saying they might be fighting each other, but "Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam."

If Iran threatens to walk away from a nuclear deal, Netanyahu says, call their bluff.

"They need the deal a lot more than you do," he says.

Update at 11:11 p.m. ET: 'Deeply Humbled'

Netanyahu says he is "deeply humbled" to talk for a third time before the "most important legislative body in the world — the U.S. Congress."

He refers to the controversy surrounding the speech, saying that was never his intention. He thanks lawmakers from both parties for their bipartisan support of Israel. At this, there's more applause.

He says U.S.-Israeli relations "must always remain above politics."

He says Israel appreciates what presidents from Truman to Obama have done for Israel. And he's listing all the things Obama has done, some of which, he says, are less well known — such as supplying Interceptor missiles during Israel's war last year with Hamas in Gaza. And, he says, some of the help can never be revealed — given its confidential nature.

"I will always be grateful to President Obama for that support," Netanyahu says.

He also thanks Congress for its support, including for the Iron Dome missile defense system.

Update at 11:07 p.m. ET: Netanyahu Enters House

Netanyahu enters the House to a standing ovation. He is making his way through the chamber, shaking the hands of lawmakers, and is stopping to talk to some of them.

There's a sustained standing ovation as he waves to the crowd.

He makes his way to the top, and shakes hands and exchanges words with House Speaker John Boehner, the man who invited him here, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah.

Boehner is announcing the Israeli leader — who gets another sustained round of applause and standing ovation.

Update at 11:04 p.m. ET: Dozens Of Lawmakers Skipping Talk

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is to address Congress shortly. The lawmakers are assembled, though about 50 of them are skipping the talk. Here's a list.


Cybergeddon: Why the Internet could be the next “failed state”

If you think the Internet can go on being just like it is, here's some bad news.

by Sean Gallagher - Feb 24, 2015 6:30pm EST

Aurich Lawson

In the New York City of the late 1970s, things looked bad. The city government was bankrupt, urban blight was rampant, and crime was high. But people still went to the city every day because that was where everything was happening. And despite the foreboding feelings hanging over New York at the time, the vast majority of those people had at most minor brushes with crime.

Today, we all dabble in some place that looks a lot like 1970s New York City—the Internet. (For those needing a more recent simile, think the Baltimore of The Wire). Low-level crime remains rampant, while increasingly sophisticated crime syndicates go after big scores. There is a cacophony of hateful speech, vice of every kind (see Rule 34), and policemen of various sorts trying to keep a lid on all of it—or at least, trying to keep the chaos away from most law-abiding citizens. But people still use the Internet every day, though the ones who consider themselves "street smart" do so with varying levels of defenses installed. Things sort of work.

 An actual brochure created by the police union in New York City during the 1970s as part of a campaign to stave off job cuts.

Just like 1970s New York, however, there's a pervasive feeling that everything could go completely to hell with the slightest push—into a place to be escaped from with the aid of a digital Snake Plissken. In other words, the Internet might soon look less like 1970s New York and more like 1990s Mogadishu: warring factions destroying the most fundamental of services, "security zones" reducing or eliminating free movement, and security costs making it prohibitive for anyone but the most well-funded operations to do business without becoming a "soft target" for political or economic gain.

That day is not yet nigh, but logic suggests the status quo can't continue forever. The recent rash of major breaches of corporate networks, including the theft of personal information from the health insurer Anthem and the theft of as much as a billion dollars from over 100 banks are symptoms of a much larger trend of cybercrime and espionage. And while the issue has been once again raised to national importance by the White House, it could be argued that governments have done more to exacerbate the problem than address it. Fears of digital warfare and crime are shifting budget priorities, funding the rapid expansion of the security industry and being used as a reason for proposals for new laws and policy that could reshape the Internet.

“If we think our kids and grandkids are going to have as awesome and free an Internet as the one we have, we really have to look at why we think that," Jason Healey, director of the Cyber Statecraft Initiative at the Atlantic Council of the United States, told Ars.

The soothsayer

The alternative futures for the Internet are not pretty. In presentations at multiple security conferences, Healey has suggested that the Internet could “start to look like Somalia”—a failed state where security is impossible, going about daily life is hazardous, and armed camps openly wage war over the network.

Healey's analysis has been reinforced by events over the past two years: record data breaches, zero-day vulnerabilities released that affected a preponderance of Internet services, and visibility into the vast state surveillance of the Internet. The Internet has been “weaponized,” not just by the NSA and its foreign counterparts but by other states and Internet crime organizations. A thriving market for vulnerabilities attracts the bright and ambitious to work on discovering "zero days" for profit.

While a total breakdown of the Internet is unlikely, Healey and others believe that it's nearly as unlikely that today's status quo can be sustained. Other possible scenarios wouldn't bring networked life to its knees, but they all would make the Internet a very different "place" than it is today.

Five years ago, Healey was on a team advising the Department of Defense about the structure of its future IT workforce. To do that, the team needed to understand what the networked world would look like in the next decade. Healey was researching the issue, and he started to look at scenarios where “maybe the future is going to look very different from the past,” he said. “Attackers have had an advantage for 35 years—what if that relationship is going to shift?”

The potential answers Healey found were presented in a 2010 paper. He further refined them in a 2011 article in the Georgetown Journal of International Affairs called “The Five Futures of Cyber Conflict and Cooperation.” The most optimistic and least likely of Healey’s scenarios was a “cyber paradise," he told Ars. "Defense is way better than offense—you’d have to be really amazing, like the NSA or KGB, to get anything done as an attacker.” But as he looked at trends, he realized that maybe the classic relationship above wouldn't be shifting. “It’s way more likely that it’s going to go in the other direction—that offense is going to have a significantly larger advantage than it does now.”


Monday, March 02, 2015

Red Skelton's Pledge of Allegiance



Uploaded on Aug 3, 2008

Red Skelton's Pledge of Allegiance

How to Fake an Alien Invasion

How to Fake an Alien Invasion

Published on Feb 8, 2015


We all know about the crude pie-plate-on-string UFO hoaxes that have been perpetrated in the past. But what if I were to tell you the greatest UFO hoax of all time is being prepared right now, and it has Rockefeller backing and UN/Vatican/presidential support? Join us this week as we peek under the bluebeam curtain at the great alien invasion false flag.

Media Blackout on US ‘Smart Grid Deployment’

February 19, 2015

David Dees

By James F. Tracy

Over the past several years a conspiracy of silence has surrounded the implementation of the Smart Grid across the United States, perhaps with good reason. If the public was aware of what lay behind this agenda there would likely be considerable outcry and resistance.

“Smart meters”–the principal nodes of the Smart Grid network–are being installed on homes and businesses by power utilities across the United States under the legal and fiscal direction of the United States government. In December 2007 both houses of the US Congress passed and President George W. Bush signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA).

This 310-page piece of legislation employs the dubious science of anthropogenic CO2-based climate change science to mandate an array of policies, such as fuel efficiency standards for vehicles and “green” energy initiatives. Tucked away in the final pages of this law is the description and de facto mandate for national implementation of the Smart Grid that the Bush administration promised would result in “some of the largest CO2 emission cuts in our nation’s history.”[1]

The bill unambiguously lays out the design and intent behind the Smart Grid, including surveillance, tiered energy pricing, and energy rationing for all US households and businesses through round-the-clock monitoring of RFID-chipped “Energy Star” appliances.[2] Congress and “other stakeholders” (presumably for-profit utilities and an array of Smart Grid technology patent holders[3] whose lobbyists co-wrote the legislation) describe the Smart Grid’s characteristics and goals via ten provisions.

  • (1) Increased use of digital information and controls technology to improve reliability, security, and efficiency of the electric grid.
  • (2) Dynamic optimization of grid operations and resources with full cyber-security.
  • (3) Deployment[4] and integration of distributed resources and generation, including renewable resources.
  • (4) Development and incorporation of demand response, demand-side resources, and energy efficiency resources.
  • (5) Deployment of “smart” technologies (real-time, automated, interactive technologies that optimize the physical operation of appliances and consumer devices) for metering, communications concerning grid operations and status, and distribution automation.
  • (6) Integration of “smart” appliances and consumer devices.
  • (7) Deployment and integration of advanced electricity storage and peak-shaving technologies, including plug-in electric and hybrid electric vehicles, and thermal-storage air conditioning.
  • (8) Provision to consumers of timely information and control operations.
  • (9) Development of standards for communication and interoperability of appliances and equipment connected to the electric grid, including the infrastructure serving the grid.
  • (10) Identification and lowering of unreasonable or unnecessary barriers to adoption of smart grid technologies, practices, and services [emphases added].[5]

Less than two years after EISA’s enactment President Barack Obama directed $3.4 billion of the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act to Smart Grid development. Matching funds from the energy industry brought the total initial Smart Grid investment to $8 billion.[6] The overall completion of the Smart Grid will cost another $330 billion.[7] Today a majority of energy delivery throughout the US is routed to homes equipped with smart meters that monitor power consumption on a minute-to-minute basis.

As noted, the American public remains largely unaware of the numerous designs and monied interests behind the Smart Grid–not to mention how smart meters themselves pose substantial dangers to human health and privacy. This is because the plan for tiered energy pricing via wireless monitoring of household appliances has been almost entirely excluded from news media coverage since the EISA became law on December 19, 2007.

A LexisNexis search of US print news outlets for “Energy Independence and Security Act” and “Smart Grid” between the dates December 1, 2007 to January 31, 2008 yields virtually no results.

An identical LexisNexis search of such media for the dates December 1, 2007 to February 18, 2015 retrieves a total 11 print news items appearing in US dailies (seven in McClatchey Tribune papers; one article appearing in each of the following: New York Times 8/14/08, Santa Fe New Mexican, 5/12/09, Providence Journal, 2/24/11, Tampa Bay Times, 12/13/12).[8]

Even this scant reportage scarcely begins to examine the implications of the EISA’s Smart Grid plan. The New York Times chose to confine its coverage to a 364-word article, “The 8th Annual Year in Ideas; Smart Grids.” “It’s a response to what economists would call a tragedy of the commons,” the Times explains.

[P]eople use as much energy as they are willing to pay for, without giving any thought to how their use affects the overall amount of energy available … Enter Xcel’s $100 million initiative, called SmartGridCity, a set of technologies that give both energy providers and their customers more control over power consumption … Consumers, through a Web-enabled control panel in their homes, are able to regulate their energy consumption more closely — for example, setting their A.C. system to automatically reduce power use during peak hours.[9]

News in far more modest papers likewise resembles the promotional materials distributed by the utilities themselves. “There will soon be a time when homeowners can save electricity by having appliances automatically adjust power for peak-demand times and other periods of inactivity by a signal sent through the electrical outlet,” an article in Sunbury Pennsylvania’s Daily Item reads. “‘Right now, it’s at the infant stage,'” a power company executive observes. “‘We didn’t worry about this until two years ago. Nobody cared when electricity was five cents per kilowatt hour. People just bit the bullet and paid the bill.'”[10]

Smart Grid Czar Patricia Hoffman

Along these lines, the Department of Energy’s Assistant Secretary for the Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability Patricia Hoffman, is charged under the EISA with federal oversight of nationwide Smart Grid implementation. In other words, Hoffman is America’s “Smart Grid Czar.” Yet despite heading up such a dubious program since 2010, she has almost entirely escaped journalistic scrutiny, having been referenced or quoted in only four US daily papers (Washington Post, 2/8/12, St. Paul Pioneer Press, 4/26/12, Palm Beach Post, 5/12/13,Pittsburgh Tribune Review11/13/13) since her tenure began.

In an era where news media wax rhapsodic over new technologies and fall over each other to report consumer-oriented “news you can use,” the Smart Grid’s pending debut should be a major story. It’s not. Indeed, almost the entire US population remains in the dark about this major technological development that will profoundly impact their lives.

When one more closely examines the implications and realities of the federally-approved Smart Grid scheme—from the adverse health effects of electromagnetic radiation to surveillance and energy rationing—there should be little wonder why this degree of silence surrounds its implementation. Such a technocratic system would never be freely accepted if subject to an open exchange and referendum.


[1] “Fact Sheet: Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007,”, December 19, 2007.

[2] “ENERGY STAR is a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) voluntary program that helps businesses and individuals save money and protect our climate through superior energy efficiency. The ENERGY STAR program was established by EPA in 1992, under the authority of the Clean Air Act Section 103(g).”

[3] Jeff St. John, “Who’s Got the Most Smart Grid Patents?”, August 5, 2014.

[4] The word “deployment,” commonly used in government and technical plans for the Smart Grid’s launch, is a military term. From the Latin displicāre, “to scatter,” the modern definition is “[t]o distribute (persons or forces) systematically or strategically.”

[5] Public Law 110-140, Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, Title XIII, Section 1301, Washington DC: United States Congress, December 19,2007.

[6] “President Obama Announces $3.4 Billion Investment to Spur Transition to Smart Energy Grid,”, October 27, 2009.

[7] Jon Chavez, “Expert Sees $2 Trillion Benefit For Country in Smart Grid,” Toledo Blade, January 16 2013.

[8] In contrast, seven times as many articles (78) appeared in law journals over the same seven year period.

[9] Clay Risen, “”The 8th Annual Year in Ideas; Smart Grids,” New York Times, December 14, 2008.

[10] Jaime North, “Devices Will Soon Monitor Themselves,” Daily Item, October 4, 2008.


Sunday, March 01, 2015

What awaits Bergoglio the Bishop of Rome when he speaks before a joint session of Congress in September 2015?

The first thing that the Pope will see is good old Southern Hospitality.
Which is something that is not being offered, 'officially' to the Prime Minister of Israel Benyamin Netanyahu, who will speak before a Joint Session of Congress (a coincidence) on Wednesday, March 3, 2015.
MARCH 3, 2015
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress and is expected to focus much of his remarks on the ongoing nuclear talks with Iran.
Airing LIVE Tuesday, Mar 03 10:45am EST on C-SPAN
When the Bishop of Rome arrives at Capitol Hill (just like Rome's Capitoline Hillmore coincidences), there will be demagoguery, and a whole bunch of sychophancy.

However, the biggest surprise will be when he meets the 535 Senators and Representatives of the United States;  At the Capitol he will meet many co-religionists such as VP Joe Biden, John Boehner - Speakef of the House of Representatives, and Nancy Pelosi, Minority Leader of the House of Representatives, plus according to the latest Pew Research findings135 fellow Roman Catholics in both the Senate and the House of Representatives.

It's a dichotomy

Yet, the biggest surprise will come when the Pope meets the Chaplains.

The Chaplain of the House of Representatives is Jesuit Priest (just like the Pope), Patrick J. Conroy, S.J.  What a coincidence?

And, the Chaplain of the Senate is Seventh-day Adventist, Barry Black, Ret. Rear Admiral, USN.

Now, ain't that grand?
To come to speak to folks who understand you, who look up to you?  Nice, right?

I can see clearly now, as the old song said...



This Isn't your Grandmother's Great Controversy

Published on Jan 30, 2015

David Mould gives a tour through the first chapter of the revised edition of The (New, Illustrated) Great Controversy.

Ron Goss Message Sept. 21, 2013, Cartersville SDA Church, Virginia.

Published on Sep 30, 2013

Ron Goss, President of Project Restore updates us on the Great Controversy project and includes video spots from Oprah Winfrey (Oprah Winfrey Network) and Glenn Beck before presenting a very powerful and sobering message regarding the nearness of Christ's Coming.

Saturday, February 28, 2015

Examining America’s First Foray into the Middle East (REVIEW)

FEBRUARY 17, 2015 1:19 AM


Asaf Romirowsky

Headquarters of the U.S. Department of State. Photo: wiki commons.

At the turn of the 21st century through today, American involvement in Middle Eastern politics runs through the Central Intelligence Agency.

In America’s Great Game: The CIA’s Secret Arabists and the Shaping of the Modern Middle East, historian Hugh Wilford shows this has always been the case.

Wilford methodically traces the lives and work of the agency’s three most prominent officers in the Middle East: Kermit “Kim” Roosevelt was the grandson of president Theodore Roosevelt, and the first head of CIA covert action in the region; his cousin, Archie Roosevelt, was a Middle East scholar and chief of the Beirut station; while Miles Copeland was a covert operations specialist who joined the American intelligence enterprise during World War II.

Skillfully drawing on personal papers, autobiographies and other primary sources, Wilford illustrates the diplomatic history that created America’s Great Game. More importantly, he underscores the political and ideological dogmas of these individuals – specifically, the rabidly pro-Arab and anti-Zionist views that shaped the CIA in its early years.

The CIA was created in 1947 and drew on the remains of the wartime Office of Strategic Services, which had been dissolved in 1945. Leaders of the new CIA were drawn from OSS veterans, but they were also members of a fading patrician class of American Protestants – with deep ties to elite universities like Harvard and Yale, and to missionaries with connections throughout the Middle East.

Navigating the organizational labyrinth of American bureaucracy was easier with family and social ties like that of the Roosevelts. Moreover, controlling the CIA’s Middle East agenda – opposing Zionism and Communism, supporting Arab regimes in its early years – was made possible by connecting the agency to outside groups, through what today would be called “astro-turfing.”

In 1948, Roosevelt and leading anti-Zionist Virginia Gildersleeve, a former dean of Barnard College, had formed the Committee for Justice and Peace in the Holy Land, which warned that “extreme Zionist pressure” was in “danger of disruption of our national unity and encouraging anti-Semitism.” The group worked in close coordination with the anti-Zionist American Council for Judaism, and with State Department officials.

Roosevelt kept forming anti-Israel groups, such as 1949′s Holy Land Christian Committee, ostensibly to assist Christians in Israel. Careful to include anti-Zionist Jews, “HELP” featured Lessing J. Rosenwald, former chairman of the board of Sears and Roebuck and onetime president of the American Council for Judaism; and Allen Dulles, a former State Department and OSS official and future director of the CIA. HELP was directed by CIA employee William A. Eddy, a former US minister plenipotentiary to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and consultant to Aramco.

In its press releases, HELP warned that “lasting peace is not possible until relief, rehabilitation and reconstruction are effected,” and that the “hundreds of thousands of starving, sick and shelterless create a fertile field for Communist intrigue.”

As Bronson Clark of the American Friends Service Committee, then doing refugee relief work in Gaza, noted after a meeting with HELP: “This body, composed entirely of pro-Arab, anti-Zionist elements, was not to be an operating agency but was to serve as a publicity front for the operating agencies.

“This meeting represents another move in a series of moves which, like an iceberg, show only one-quarter on the surface what goes on, while three-quarters of the maneuverings are hidden.”

Finally, in 1951, Roosevelt – together with two dozen pro-Arab American educators, theologians and writers, including Gildersleeve and Harry Emerson Fosdick – founded an anti-Zionist group called American Friends of the Middle East (AFME). It was Roosevelt who used his role at the CIA to ensure the organization would fund the group through the CIA and Aramco.

It was through groups like the AFME and anti-Zionist activists like Rabbi Elmer Berger, a leader of the American Council for Judaism, that the Roosevelts were able to shape the CIA’s prism of the Middle East. With Kim Roosevelt’s blessing, the AFME led the way in educating policy- makers, journalists and others as to the Middle Eastern “reality” – which coincided with their political biases.

As Wilford writes, “In December 1958, AFME drafted a pamphlet, ‘Story of a Purpose,’ which eloquently articulated the group’s founding values: sympathy towards Arab nationalism and the drive toward Arab unity, rejection of the last vestiges of colonialism and imperialism, and the belief that the Palestine Question is the very heart of the Middle East problems, requiring a US policy of friendly and sympathetic impartiality.”

The AFME organization still exists today as AMIDEAST, “a leading American nonprofit organization engaged in international education, training and development activities in the Middle East and North Africa.”

Wilford’s historical account helps explain how modern NGOs’ evergreen anti-Zionist views remain cornerstones today, along with the convenient core belief that all Middle East problems reside in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Characterizing the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and other Zionist groups as the center of a nefarious “Israel lobby” is also not new.

Times may have changed, but the seeds of the Great Game laid out by the CIA Arabists remain visible today.

This article was originally published by The Jerusalem Post.


New York churches face questions about afterlife

The Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York, citing declining attendance, rising costs and a looming priest shortage, announced plans to merge scores of parishes and close dozens of churches this year. USA TODAY’s Rick Hampson reports on the reaction Robert Deutsch and Matthew Colby, USA TODAY

Rick Hampson, USA TODAY

6:15 p.m. EST February 27, 2015

(Photo: Robert Deutsch, USA TODAY)

NEW YORK – Our Lady of Vilnius Church, built by families of immigrant Lithuanian longshoremen, started out a century ago as a beloved worship space. Now, it's a coveted real estate asset.

In 2013, six years after the church was closed, it was sold for $13 million to one of the city's biggest developers. The following year that company flipped it like a pancake to another developer for $18.4 million.

Now the yellow brick church near the entrance to the Holland Tunnel awaits demolition to make way for an 18-story luxury apartment house.

"It makes you cynical,'' says Christina Nakraseive, a former parishioner who supported the legal case against the church closing until it was rejected by the state's highest court. "It seems like it's all about real estate.''

The issue has taken on added significance since the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of New York, citing declining attendance, rising costs and a looming priest shortage, announced plans to merge scores of parishes and close dozens of churches this year.

The move raises an issue that has been faced by thousands (no one seems to know exactly how many) of shuttered houses of worship across the Northeast and Midwest: What to do with buildings that are often architecturally important and always sentimentally important, especially since a church's shape, age and location makes the building hard to reuse?

The booming residential real estate market in parts of Manhattan and Brooklyn offers a solution, albeit controversial: Demolish them for -- or even convert them to – housing.

Several closed churches have been torn down to make way for apartment houses, including Mary Help of Christians in the East Village, which preservationists failed to save.

A few have been converted to apartments. A developer who paid $13.8 million in 2011 for St. Vincent de Paul Church in the Williamsburg section of Brooklyn turned it into The Spire Lofts, a 40-unit apartment house. A former Pentecostal church in the Greenpoint section was converted into three apartments, each renting for about $100,000 a year. Wood-beamed ceilings and peaked windows remind residents of the building's ecclesiastical roots.

Several other such projects are in the works. The Episcopal Church of the Redeemer in Brooklyn probably will be torn down, and St. Mark's Evangelical Lutheran Church in the same borough will be converted into apartments, with a triplex in the steeple.

There are worries that real estate values might undercut Gospel ones.

The Our Lady of Peace Church on East 62nd Street in New York City was established by Italian immigrants who felt unwelcome in other parishes. (Photo: Robert Deutsch, USA TODAY)

Robert Corti worships at Our Lady of Peace, whose red brick 1866 building will close when the parish merges with another on the East Side under the archdiocesan program called "Making All Things New" (which skeptics have dubbed "Making All Things Condo'' or "Making All Things Revenue").

Our Lady of Peace was established by Italian immigrants who felt unwelcome in other parishes. Corti's grandparents were married there; he, his mother, his aunt, his sister and his grandchildren were all baptized there. He walks eight blocks to go there, even though another church is closer.

Corti, a former CFO of Avon Products, understands cost cutting and downsizing. But he says closing a church in good physical and fiscal condition will alienate its loyal and generous parishioners.

The church sits in an official city historic district. Its façade is protected, but the building could be sold and its interior changed or demolished. Corti notes that the ongoing, five-year renovation of the 137-year-old St. Patrick's Cathedral in Midtown Manhattan will cost $180 million, of which about $70 million has yet to be raised. That's a big gap,'' he says. As for a possible connection between his church's real estate value and the decision to close it, he wonders, "Could it be a factor? They say not.''

Robert J. Corti, a former CFO of Avon Products, worships at Our Lady of Peace Church on East 62nd Street in New York City. (Photo: Robert Deutsch, USA Today)

The archdiocese says that some churches in merged parishes will not totally close (Our Lady of Peace may be used on unspecified "special occasions''); those that are closed will not be sold any time soon; and that any sale proceeds will be used to endow things like Catholic schools and religious education -- not for archdiocesan operating expenses or St. Patrick's.

A church closing is not a quick way to turn real estate into cash, if only because it takes time to deconsecrate a church when the process is contested. The 2007 closing of St. Vincent de Paul in Manhattan is still on appeal to the Vatican.

About a mile uptown from Our Lady of Peace, St. Thomas More parish also finds itself endangered (even though it's not yet clear the parish will be merged with another or what might happen to its buildings, which are not city landmarks).

St. Thomas More is a rich church in a rich neighborhood. Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis worshiped there, and it was the site of John F. Kennedy Jr.'s memorial service. Its building, which has a 19th century pastoral elegance, is usually filled on Sunday.

It's also the parish of The Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan, who wrote a testy column in which she reported that parishioners wonder if "the archdiocese is driven by what drove Henry VIII, politics and real estate.''

She wrote that the church and its land "could bring in $50 million, maybe $100 million, adding: "Any developer would jump at the chance.'' Instead, she suggested that Cardinal Timothy Dolan sell his palatial residence on Madison Avenue.

In a testy rebuttal, Bishop John O'Hara, a Dolan aide who has supervised the consolidation, wrote that "the process has nothing to do with real estate.''

Dolan says his archdiocese can't keep spending $40 million a year to support "unneeded'' parishes. "We have too many parishes!'' he wrote in a pastoral letter. "We no longer need 368 parishes in their current locations! … There are 29 parishes in the South Manhattan Vicariate alone — all concentrated on 14th Street or below!''

It's not just money, Dolan says. The archdiocese will soon face a critical shortage of priests to administer its parishes.

They no longer include Our Lady of Vilnius, once a touchstone of Lithuanian Catholic identity and closed in 2007 because of what the archdiocese described as a dwindling congregation, a weak roof and a pastor who could not "understand, read or speak Lithuanian.''

Candles at Our Lady of Peace Church in New York City. (Photo: Robert Deutsch, USA TODAY)

Former parishioners like Chris Nakraseive still gather occasionally on Sunday to pray outside their old church's locked front doors. They came Thursday, the eighth anniversary of its closing, to display icons, burn candles, sing hymns in Lithuanian and say the Hail Mary.

They're not the only ones who mourn the church. A neighborhood resident, Laura Barker, also stopped by. "I still miss the sound of the bells,'' she said.



Published on Feb 26, 2015

"Emerging Errors" - Steve Wohlberg

"Emerging Errors" - Steve Wohlberg

Published on Jan 12, 2015



When religious teachers are pointing forward to long ages of peace and prosperity,..

The sins that called for vengeance upon the antediluvian world exist today. The fear of God is banished from the hearts of men, and His law is treated with indifference and contempt. The intense worldliness of that generation is equaled by that of the generation now living. Said Christ, "As in the days that were before the Flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and knew not until the Flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." Matthew 24:38, 39. God did not condemn the antediluvians for eating and drinking; He had given them the fruits of the earth in great abundance to supply their physical wants. Their sin consisted in taking these gifts without gratitude to the Giver, and debasing themselves by indulging appetite without restraint. It was lawful for them to marry. Marriage was in God's order; it was one of the first institutions which He established. He gave special directions concerning this ordinance, clothing it with sanctity and beauty; but these directions were forgotten, and marriage was perverted and made to minister to passion.

A similar condition of things exists now. That which is lawful in itself is carried to excess. Appetite is indulged without restraint. Professed followers of Christ are today eating and drinking with the drunken, while their names stand in honored church records. Intemperance benumbs the moral and spiritual powers and prepares the way for indulgence of the lower passions. Multitudes feel under no moral obligation to curb their sensual desires, and they become the slaves of lust. Men are living for the pleasures of sense; for this world and this life alone. Extravagance pervades all circles of society. Integrity is sacrificed for luxury and display. They that make haste to be rich pervert justice and oppress the poor, and "slaves and souls of men" are still bought and sold. Fraud and bribery and theft stalk unrebuked in high places and in low. The issues of the press teem with records of murder--crimes so cold-blooded and causeless that it seems as though every instinct of humanity were blotted out. And these atrocities have become of so common occurrence that they hardly elicit a comment or awaken surprise. The spirit of anarchy is permeating all nations, and the outbreaks that from time to time excite the horror of the world are but indications of the pent-up fires of passion and lawlessness that, having once escaped control, will fill the earth with woe and desolation. The picture which Inspiration has given of the antediluvian world represents too truly the condition to which modern society is fast hastening. Even now, in the present century, and in professedly Christian lands, there are crimes daily perpetrated as black and terrible as those for which the old-world sinners were destroyed.

Before the Flood God sent Noah to warn the world, that the people might be led to repentance, and thus escape the threatened destruction. As the time of Christ's second appearing draws near, the Lord sends His servants with a warning to the world to prepare for that great event. Multitudes have been living in transgression of God's law, and now He in mercy calls them to obey its sacred precepts. All who will put away their sins by repentance toward God and faith in Christ are offered pardon. But many feel that it requires too great a sacrifice to put away sin. Because their life does not harmonize with the pure principles of God's moral government, they reject His warnings and deny the authority of His law.

Of the vast population of the earth before the Flood, only eight souls believed and obeyed God's word through Noah. For a hundred and twenty years the preacher of righteousness warned the world of the coming destruction, but his message was rejected and despised. So it will be now. Before the Lawgiver shall come to punish the disobedient, transgressors are warned to repent, and return to their allegiance; but with the majority these warnings will be in vain. Says the apostle Peter, "There shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying, Where is the promise of His coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning." 2 Peter 3:3, 4. Do we not hear these very words repeated, not merely by the openly ungodly, but by many who occupy the pulpits of our land? "There is no cause for alarm," they cry. "Before Christ shall come, all the world is to be converted, and righteousness is to reign for a thousand years. Peace, peace! all things continue as they were from the beginning. Let none be disturbed by the exciting message of these alarmists." But this doctrine of the millennium does not harmonize with the teachings of Christ and His apostles. Jesus asked the significant question, "When the Son of man cometh, shall He find faith on the earth?" Luke 18:8. And, as we have seen, He declares that the state of the world will be as in the days of Noah. Paul warns us that we may look for wickedness to increase as the end draws near: "The Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils." 1 Timothy 4:1. The apostle says that "in the last days perilous times shall come." 2 Timothy 3:1. And he gives a startling list of sins that will be found among those who have a form of godliness.

As the time of their probation was closing, the antediluvians gave themselves up to exciting amusements and festivities. Those who possessed influence and power were bent on keeping the minds of the people engrossed with mirth and pleasure, lest any should be impressed by the last solemn warning. Do we not see the same repeated in our day? While God's servants are giving the message that the end of all things is at hand, the world is absorbed in amusements and pleasure seeking. There is a constant round of excitement that causes indifference to God and prevents the people from being impressed by the truths which alone can save them from the coming destruction.

In Noah's day philosophers declared that it was impossible for the world to be destroyed by water; so now there are men of science who endeavor to show that the world cannot be destroyed by fire--that this would be inconsistent with the laws of nature. But the God of nature, the Maker and Controller of her laws, can use the works of His hands to serve His own purpose.

When great and wise men had proved to their satisfaction that it was impossible for the world to be destroyed by water, when the fears of the people were quieted, when all regarded Noah's prophecy as a delusion, and looked upon him as a fanatic--then it was that God's time had come. "The fountains of the great deep" were "broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened," and the scoffers were overwhelmed in the waters of the Flood. With all their boasted philosophy, men found too late that their wisdom was foolishness, that the Lawgiver is greater than the laws of nature, and that Omnipotence is at no loss for means to accomplish His purposes. "As it was in the days of Noah," "even thus shall it be in the days when the Son of man is revealed." Luke 17:26, 30. "The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up." 2 Peter 3:10. When the reasoning of philosophy has banished the fear of God's judgments; when religious teachers are pointing forward to long ages of peace and prosperity, and the world are (is) absorbed in their (its) rounds of business and pleasure, planting and building, feasting and merrymaking, rejecting God's warnings and mocking His messengers--then it is that sudden destruction cometh upon them, and they shall not escape. 1 Thessalonians 5:3.

Patriarchs and Prophets, pp.101-104

Friday, February 27, 2015

EndrTimes: Redmond Washington Blog?

EndrTimes: Redmond Washington Blog?:

As I check my blog and the Feedjit traffic feed on it... I notice that Redmond Washington is 9 of the 10 last visitors to EndrTime...

Seventh-day Adventists Urged to Leave the United States.

Seventh-day Adventists Urged to Leave the United States.

A statement that "the day is coming, and is not far off, when every Seventh-day Adventist will wish . . . that he were out of the United States," has been incorrectly attributed to Ellen G. White.

It is part of a sermon by Alonzo T. Jones, published in the General Conference Bulletin, April 16, 1901, pages 265, 266.

Thursday, February 26, 2015

FCC Approves Net Neutrality

FCC approves new net neutrality rules
USA Today‎ - 3 hours ago
FCC approves net neutrality rules to assert more govt authority over the Internet & provide ...

Net Neutrality Begs A Big Legal Question: What Changed About The Internet?
Forbes‎ - 1 hour ago

Charlie Hebdo And The Pope's Visist To Congress

Published on Feb 19, 2015

The Charlie Hebdo attack. While Parisians by the millions took to the streets to pour out their grief and support a free press, the Pope took a different tack. David Mould explores the Pope's reaction.


Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Nothing But The Truth: The Greatest Deception Since The Garden Of Eden

Published on Feb 12, 2015

Another part of this series, 'a conversation with joggler66' from Talkshoe internet broadcast platform with Michael Adams and Jörg Glismann (joggler66) featuring Tom Friess from and

Why the title 'the greatest deception since the Garden of Eden?'

Because there, for the first time in man's history, Satan deceived the WHOLE WORLD and ever since the proclamation of the futurist ANTICHRIST LIE again Satan twists the WORD of GOD and deceives the WHOLE WORLD for the second time.

Fool me once, shame on me, fool me twice shame on YOU (SATAN)!
What does this embody?

The founding of ISRAEL after WW2 by deceiving the people through faked persecution and real inquisition to have a reason to have a nation state of Israel and jews living in that area as there was in Daniel's prophecy:

Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

The building of the Temple that is being planned in Jerusalem now, the allowance given to the jews to worship under the trees between the buildings of the Temple are the next steps.

This deception will convince the world we are NOW living in the 70 week prophecy.

This is the denial of Christ Jesus's FIRST coming so that the ANTICHRIST who claims to BE CHRIST will be accepted by the whole world as Messiah!

John 5:43 I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

The fulfillment of the 1590 founded jesuitical futurist deception of the ANTICHRIST being a single individual in the (then) distant future taking the heat of the refomers interpretation of the papacy being the biblical, historical and prophetic ANTICHTIST!

Dispensational futurism versus historicism!

The truth that is written all along in the bible will prevail and will be understood by minds reading the word of GOD who are intellectually honest!

Rapture vs. Resurrection?

The Rapture will be Cancelled!

Almost forbidden books (PDF library!)


Hindu leader questions Mother Teresa's motives

By Ed Adamczyk | Feb. 24, 2015 at 3:11 PM

Nobel Peace Prize winner Mother Teresa at the White House, June 13, 1986. File Photo by Vince Mannino/ UPI
|License Photo

NEW DELHI, Feb. 24 (UPI) -- A prominent Hindu leader in India was criticized Tuesday for suggesting Mother Teresa's humanitarianism was aimed at converting India's poor to Christianity.

Mohan Bhagwat, leader of Rashtriya Sawyamsevak Sangh (RSS), a Hindu nationalist group, made his remarks Monday at the opening of an orphanage and home for poor women in the Indian state of Rajasthan. "There are no services like Mother Teresa's here," Mr. Bhagwat said, noting the Catholic nun's work among India's poor had "a motive behind it, that those who are rendered the service should become Christian. It is their question if somebody wants to convert and make someone Christian or not, but if that is done under the garb of service, then that service is devalued."

Mother Teresa devoted her life to the poor and sick of Kolkata, then called Calcutta, receiving global admiration. She won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1979 and died in 1997. The Catholic Church beatified her, the third of four steps leading to sainthood, in 2003.

Bhagwat's comments came as India deals with attacks on Christian churches, and campaigns of Hindu nationalists urging those who converted to other faiths to return to Hinduism. The tension was noted last week by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, whose Bharatiya Janata party has ties to Bhagwat's organization; Modi said India believes "not only in religious tolerance, but we accept all religions as true."

Other political leaders have demanded Baghwat's apology. Sunita Kuma, of the Missionaries of Charity, Mother Teresa's religious order in Kolkata, commented, "Mother believed in all faith, there was never any attempt to convert, the tradition continues even today. We are not worried about the RSS chief's comment, we have nothing to hide, we live in peace."


Nothing But The Truth – Satan’s Paradise

Published on Feb 18, 2015

The entire title should read as follows:
Nothing But The Truth – Satan’s Paradise: The Consequences Of The Greatest Deception Since The Garden Of Eden

In this broadcast we will go into the consequences we ALL have to face when not understanding the greatest deception since the garden of Eden as explained in part 1 ( ) of this vital to understand subject. Please read the description from that video for further understanding.

The world has been run by the roman catholic church since 538 AD now, assisted by their Knighthoods (The Knights Of the Temple of Jerusalem during the crusades and the society of Jesus to name the most important).

Since the whole world today is living in a system created by the society of Jesus (the Jesuits) to fit their agenda (…that the end justifies the means…) all of education, formation, information, economics and politics is controlled by this still growing Luciferian secret society that is not at all so secret anymore.

Their actions lay the foundation of how we perceive the world and they handle us from cradle to grave in such a manner that people don’t even recognize it.

Only when you are prepared to question the ‘facts’ presented to you and question them you will have a chance to see the system many refer to as a kind of ‘Matrix’ that makes you go along because it’s comfortable – even though you face many problems and don’t understand why they are not being taken care of.

The answer has been given to us by the WORD of GOD that the roman catholic church so desperately wants to get rid of once and for all.

If GOD is silenced in our hearts and minds all we can hear is Satan and we’ll be dancing to his music until we die and he stole our god given right of eternal life by our ignorance to the love that GOD offers freely to everyone who listens and obeys him.

The choice everybody has to make for himself, that’s why we were given free will.
But we also have to live with the consequences of our decision…

Another part of this series, 'a conversation with joggler66' from Talkshoe internet broadcast platform with Michael Adams and Jörg Glismann (joggler66) featuring Tom Friess from and

Rapture vs. Resurrection?

Almost forbidden books (PDF library!)

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

As Republicans Concede, F.C.C. Is Expected to Enforce Net Neutrality


FEB. 24, 2015

Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota, conceded that Democrats are lining up with President Obama in favor of the F.C.C. position on net neutrality. 
Credit Jabin Botsford/The New York Times

WASHINGTON — Last April, a dozen New York-based Internet companies gathered in the Flatiron Building boardroom of the social media website Tumblr to hear dire warnings that broadband providers were about to get the right to charge for the fastest speeds on the web.

The implication: If they didn’t pay up, they would be stuck in the slow lane.

What followed has been the longest, most sustained campaign of Internet activism in history, one that the little guys appear to have won. On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission is expected to vote to regulate the Internet as a public good. On Tuesday, Senator John Thune, Republican of South Dakota and chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, all but surrendered on efforts to overturn the coming ruling, conceding Democrats are lining up with President Obama in favor of the F.C.C.

“We’re not going to get a signed bill that doesn’t have Democrats’ support,” he said, explaining that Democrats have insisted on waiting until after Thursday’s F.C.C. vote before even beginning to talk.

How Net Neutrality Works

Video by Natalia V. Osipova and Carrie Halperin on May 15, 2014.

The future of protecting an open Internet has been the subject of fierce debate, and potential changes to the rules by the Federal Communications Commission could affect your online experience.

“I told Democrats, Yes, you can wait until the 26th, but you’re going to lose the critical mass I think that’s necessary to come up with a legislative alternative once the F.C.C. acts,” he said.

In the battle over so-called net neutrality, a swarm of small players, from Tumblr to Etsy, BoingBoing to Reddit, has overwhelmed the giants of the tech world, Comcast, Verizon and TimeWarner Cable, with a new brand of corporate activism — New World versus Old. The biggest players on the Internet, Amazon and Google, have stayed in the background, while smaller players — some household names like Twitter and Netflix, others far more obscure, like and Urban Dictionary — have mobilized a grass-roots crusade.

“We don’t have an army of lobbyists to deploy. We don’t have financial resources to throw around,” said Liba Rubenstein, Tumblr’s director of social impact and public policy. “What we do have is access to an incredibly engaged, incredibly passionate user base, and we can give folks the tools to respond.”

In mid-October, the technology activist group Fight for the Future acquired the direct phone numbers of about 30 F.C.C. officials, circumventing the F.C.C.’s switchboard to send calls directly to policy makers at the agency. That set off a torrent of more than 55,000 phone calls until the group turned off the spigot Dec. 3.

In November, President Obama cited “almost four million public comments” when he publicly pressured the F.C.C. to turn away from its paid “fast lane” proposal and embrace a new regulatory framework.

Since then, the lobbying has only grown more intense. Last week, 102 small Internet companies, including Yelp, Kickstarter and Meetup, wrote the F.C.C. to say the threat of Internet service providers “abusing their gatekeeper power to impose tolls and discriminate against competitive companies is the real threat to our future,” not “heavy-handed regulation” and possible taxation, as conservatives in Washington say.

On Feb. 5, the Mozilla Foundation, makers of the popular Firefox web browser, posted a pro-net neutrality banner just below its search window, proclaiming, “In just a few days, the web could change forever,” and imploring users to sign the firm’s petition; close to 300,000 have signed, said Dave Steer, Mozilla’s director for advocacy, who has helped mobilize Silicon Valley for Net Neutrality.

“This is not East Coast-West Coast thing. It’s not a for-profit company versus nonprofit thing. It’s all of us,” he proclaimed. “We came together under the banner of Team Internet.”

Republicans who had branded net neutrality “Obamacare for the Internet” have grown much quieter under the barrage.

“Tech companies would be better served to work with Congress on clear rules for the road. The thing that they’re buying into right now is a lot of legal uncertainty,” said Senator Thune, who warned that the F.C.C.’s new rule would face litigation from opponents and a possible reversal from a future, more Republican F.C.C. “I’m not sure exactly what their thinking is.

The cable and broadband companies that have fought the new regulations are even more dazed. Brian Dietz, a spokesman for the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, said the pro-net neutrality activists have somehow turned a complex and technical debate over how best to keep the Internet operating most efficiently into a matter of religion. The forces for stronger regulation are for the Internet. Those opposed are against it.

Mr. Dietz said in no way were the Internet service providers trying to silence the Internet content companies. “They have a right to have an active voice in the public policy arena,” he said.

But, he said, the Internet companies in some case are misleading their customers, and in some cases, are being misled on the intricacies of the policy.


Monday, February 23, 2015

Feds Hold Hearing On Whether They Should ‘Regulate’ Sites Like Drudge, Infowars And The Economic Collapse Blog

By Michael Snyder, on February 11th, 2015

The control freaks that run our government always seem to want to “regulate” things that they do not like. And so it should be no surprise that there is a renewed push to regulate independent news websites. Sites like the Drudge Report, and The Economic Collapse Blog have been a thorn in the side of the establishment for years. You see, the truth is that approximately 90 percent of all news and entertainment in this country is controlled by just six giant media corporations. That is why the news seems to be so similar no matter where you turn. But in recent years the alternative media has exploded in popularity. People are hungry for the truth, and an increasing number of Americans are waking up to the fact that they are not getting the truth from the corporate-controlled media. But as the alternative media has grown, it was only going to be a matter of time before the establishment started cracking down on it. At the moment it is just the FEC and the FCC, but surely this is just the beginning. Our “Big Brother” government ultimately wants to control every area of our lives – and this especially applies to our ability to communicate freely with one another.

The Federal Election Commission is an example of a federal rule making body that has gotten wildly out of control. Since just about anything that anyone says or does could potentially “influence an election”, it is not difficult for them to come up with excuses to regulate things that they do not like.

And on Wednesday, the FEC held a hearing on whether or not they should regulate political speech on blogs, websites and YouTube videos…

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is holding a hearing today to receive public feedback on whether it should create new rules regulating political speech, including political speech on the Internet that one commissioner warned could affect blogs, YouTube videos and even websites like the Drudge Report.

If you do not think that this could ever happen, you should consider what almost happened at the FEC last October

In October, then FEC Vice Chairwoman Ann M. Ravel promised that she would renew a push to regulate online political speechfollowing a deadlocked commission vote that would have subjected political videos and blog posts to the reporting and disclosure requirements placed on political advertisers who broadcast on television. On Wednesday, she will begin to make good on that promise.

“Some of my colleagues seem to believe that the same political message that would require disclosure if run on television should be categorically exempt from the same requirements when placed in the Internet alone,” Ravel said in an October statement. “As a matter of policy, this simply does not make sense.”

“In the past, the Commission has specifically exempted certain types of Internet communications from campaign finance regulations,” she lamented. “In doing so, the Commission turned a blind eye to the Internet’s growing force in the political arena.”

As our nation continues to drift toward totalitarianism, it is only a matter of time before political speech on the Internet is regulated. It is already happening in other countries all around the globe, and control freak politicians such as Ravel will just keep pushing until they get what they want.

The way that they are spinning it this time around is that they desperately need to do something “about money in politics”

Noting the 32,000 public comments that came into the FEC in advance of the hearing, Democratic Commissioner Ellen L. Weintraub said, “75 percent thought that we need to do more about money in politics, particularly in the area of disclosure. And I think that’s something that we can’t ignore.”

And it isn’t just a few control freak Democrats that want these changes.

The Brennan Center for Justice, the Campaign Legal Center, the League of Women Voters and Public Citizen were all expected to testify in favor of more government regulation on the Internet at the hearing.

Fortunately, other organizations are doing what they can to warn the general population. For example, the following comes from the Electronic Frontier Foundation

Increased regulation of online speech is not only likely to chill participation in the public debate, but it may also threaten individual speakers’ privacy and right to post anonymously. In so doing, it may undermine two goals of campaign finance reform: protecting freedom of political speech and expanding political participation.

As we stated in our joint comments to the FEC back in 2005[pdf], “the Internet provides a counter-balance to the undue dominance that ‘big money’ has increasingly wielded over the political process in the past half-century.” We believe that heightened regulation of online political speech will hamper the Internet’s ability to level the playing field.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama and the FCC are using net neutrality as an excuse to impose lots of new regulations on Internet activity.

Ajit Pai is an FCC commissioner who is opposed to this plan. He recently sent out a tweet holding what he calls “President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet“…

Ajit Pai’s description of “President Obama’s 332-page plan to regulate the Internet” sounds Orwellian. He tweeted a picture of himself holding the 332-page plan just below a picture of a smiling Barack Obama with a comment, “I wish the public could see what’s inside.” The implication depicted Obama as George Orwell’s “Big Brother.”

Pai also released a statement: “President Obama’s plan marks a monumental shift toward government control of the Internet. It gives the FCC the power to micromanage virtually every aspect of how the Internet works,” he said. “The plan explicitly opens the door to billions of dollars in new taxes on broadband… These new taxes will mean higher prices for consumers and more hidden fees that they have to pay.”

Here is the photo that he posted with his tweet…

After what we went through with Obamacare, one can only imagine what is inside that monstrosity of a document.

Regulation of the Internet is here, and it is only going to get worse.

But at least we are not like Saudi Arabia just yet. Recently, a Saudi blogger was sentenced to 1,000 lashes for “insulting Islam“.

So we should be thankful for the freedoms that we still have. But without a doubt, governments all over the world are slowly but surely cracking down on Internet freedom.

If we do not stand up for our rights now, one day we may wake up and find that our freedom to communicate with one another over the Internet is totally gone.