Top 5 Stories Buried or Deliberately Ignored by Mainstream Media In 2017

From the government"s disregard for civil liberties, to new research showing the power of cannabis, here are the stories the mainstream media missed in 2017

Police Kick Off Program to Warrantlessly Test Saliva to Check for ‘Drugged Driving’

Civil liberties experts are up in arms over the police state rolling out a warrantless saliva testing program to test people for drugged driving.

Ron Paul: We Are Reaching A Point Of No Return

This article was originally published by Adam Taggart at PeakProsperity

Dr. Ron Paul has long been a leading voice for limited constitutional government, low taxes, free markets, sound money, civil liberty, and non-interventionist foreign policies.

Dr. Paul served as the US Representative for Texas’s 27^th Congressional District from 1976 to 1985. He then represented the 14^th district from 1977 to 2013. He ran for the office of US President, three times, most recently in the 2012 Republican primaries. Dr. Paul also had a long career as an OBGYN over which he delivered more than 4,000 babies.

The recent author of the book, The Revolution At Ten Years, Dr. Paul looks ahead at the future of the movement he helped launch — tackling central planning, the military empire, cultural Marxism, the surveillance state, the deep state, and the real threats from these institutions to our civil liberties.

As a multi-term member of Congress, Dr. Paul knows the players and policies responsible for the growing unfairness and inequality now rampant in society. He does not expect the offenders will reform willingly. Instead, he predicts the system will collapse under its own unsustainability — offering a rare and valuable chance then for more sound and fair solutions to prevail:

Wealth doesn’t come from the creation of money, especially a fiat system. With too much fiat money and all this credit, eventually the economy becomes exhausted and engulfed with debt and mal-investments. The treatment for this is a correction; you have to allow the debt to be liquidated. You have to get rid of the mal-investment and you have and to allow real economic growth to start all over again. But that wasn’t permitted in ’08 and ’09, which is why there’s been stagnation. It’s hard to believe that today we have negative interest rates — real rates are negative and people still aren’t grabbing them up! A shortage of money isn’t the problem here; rather, it’s a shortage of understanding market conditions.

We’re over-taxed and over-regulated. This is resulting in a destructive system that has divided the country into two groups: those who haven’t recovered from the Great Financial Crisis versus those who are getting very rich because they’re on the receiving end of the new money created by the Federal Reserve. The people who get to create the credit get to distribute the credit, which always results in a situation where money becomes unfairly distributed, as its allocation is no longer dependent on productivity.

We haven’t changed anything. We still have a system where we encourage people to borrow money, that debt doesn’t matter, and we’re not going to cut taxes, and we’re not even going to admit that we spend too much money. Nobody can cut anything — that’s why Washington is at a stalemate. A lot of people don’t like Obamacare, but there’s enough people who do like it. Once it has been implemented, it’s very hard to get rid of a program. I also don’t think that the proposed tax reforms will actually lower taxes. They never do.  Our politicians won’t admit where the real problem lies: overspending, monetizing the debt, taking over the whole world through the monetary system, financing wars, financing welfare and the military industrial complex. It’s going to continue until this whole thing comes apart.

The eventual event will be driven by the marketplace. When it comes undone, they will no longer be able to prop things up just by printing more money. If we have a sharp downturn and they decide, “Well, QE didn’t work because it wasn’t enough.” and they double QE, there’ll be a point of no return and all confidence will be lost. We’ll dump the dollar. Interest rates will go up instead of down. That will make all the difference in the world because it will be unsustainable and create real challenges for the dollar remaining the reserve currency. When the dollar no longer serves as the world’s key currency, that’s when the ballgame will be over.

Click the play button below to listen to Chris’ interview with Dr. Ron Paul (29m:56s).

Click here for full transcript

Big Brother’s War on Cash

Everyone is surely aware by now that all of our digital communications are being sent to government databases for storage. If our American ancestors could see it, they wouldn’t believe their eyes. We still, however, have the ability to use cash. All of our economic decisions are not under constant government surveillance. Ron Paul discusses the dangers of Big Brother’s War on Cash.

_{»crosslinked«}

Horrific New Revelations On CIA Torture

The CIA has been forced to declassify nearly 300 documents about a secret torture site in Afghanistan where CIA psychologists devised some of the most cruel and inhuman ways of torturing. Some were killed. The psychologists made millions of dollars. It was more than ten years ago. Past history? Not if you listen to President Trump on torture. Waterboarding? “I love it,” he said at a rally.

US Senators Pushing for 20 Years in Prison for Citizens Who Support Boycotting Israel

(ANTIMEDIA)  — United States senators from both the Republican and Democratic parties are pushing to implement a bill that would make it a felony to support boycotting Israel, punishable by up to twenty years in prison. On Monday, the ACLU issued a letter to the Senate opposing the proposed legislation, which was introduced in March by Sen. Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) and Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH). It was “drafted with the assistance of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee [AIPAC],” according to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

The Israel Anti-Boycott Act (S.720), which has a total of 43 sponsors in the Senate (14 Democrats and 29 Republicans), seeks to broaden the the Export Administration Act of 1979 “to include in the prohibitions on boycotts against allies of the United States boycotts fostered by international governmental organizations against Israel and to direct the Export-Import Bank of the United States to oppose boycotts against Israel, and for other purposes.”

The bill in its current form would also make it illegal to even request information about boycotts against Israel, and violations would carry a minimum civil penalty of $250,000 and a maximum criminal penalty of $1 million and 20 years behind bars. If passed, this legislation would effectively put U.S. citizens behind bars for up to twenty years for nothing more than their political beliefs.

“The impacts of the legislation would be antithetical to free speech protections enshrined in the First Amendment,” the ACLU wrote.

The organization also pointed out the contradictory nature of the proposed measure, explaining it“cannot fairly be characterized as an anti-discrimination measure, as some would argue. For example, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 already prevents businesses from discriminating against customers based on race, color, religion, and national origin. This bill, on the other hand, aims to punish people who support international boycotts that are meant to protest Israeli government policies, while leaving those who agree with Israeli government policies free from the threat of sanctions for engaging in the exact same behavior.”

It continues:

“Whatever their merits, such boycotts rightly enjoy First Amendment protection.1 By penalizing those who support international boycotts of Israel, S.720 seeks only to punish the exercise of constitutional rights.”

If passed, this tyrannical bipartisan bill would blatantly violate the constitutional rights of every United States citizen by punishing individuals based on nothing but their political opinions and decisions as consumers.

There is no coming back from that.

Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo

Trump Flip-Flops, Now Backs the Permanent Spying Powers of Big Brother

(RPI) — Despite his opposition to surveillance during the campaign, Trump has flip-flopped once again and now supports the surveillance state.

His Homeland Security advisor, Tom Bossert, who worked with the Bush administration, penned an editorial for The New York Times this week calling for a reauthorization of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. Section 702 allows for vacuuming up emails, instant messages, Facebook messages, web browsing history, and more in direct violation of the Fourth Amendment.

“Cabinet officials and security professionals from different agencies will testify on this matter on Wednesday,” writes Bossert. “President Trump stands with them 100 percent on the need for permanent reauthorization of Section 702. Officials from the past two administrations also agree that we cannot have a blind spot in our defenses simply because a foreign terrorist on foreign land chooses an American email provider.”

Former NSA Director Gen. Keith Alexander and Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Rogers have repeatedly claimed NSA snooping has thwarted 54 terrorist attacks. This claim has been completely debunked. Like the baseless and politically motivated claim Russia hacked the election, the 54 terrorists claim is little more than fiction. It’s propaganda to justify a surveillance state.

Jenna McLaughlin writes “the reason there haven’t been any large-scale terror attacks by ISIS in the US is not because they were averted by the intelligence community, but because — with the possible exception of one that was foiled by local police — none were actually planned.”

The NSA and the government insist they only conduct surveillance overseas but this was dispelled after a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union showed the NSA intentionally violated the law and spied on American citizens.

The surveillance state was created not to protect Americans from terrorists. It was created to spy on political targets in the United States. Evidence of this arose in 2014.

“Inside NSA there are a set of people who are — and we got this from another NSA whistleblower who witnessed some of this — they’re inside there, they are targeting and looking at all the members of the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Congress, both House and Senate, as well as the White House,” NSA whistleblower William Binney said in March.

Binney said nothing will change “until we put people in jail, because they have violated laws and the Constitution, as well as the Constitution and laws in Europe and around the world. Until we start putting people in jail to make sure they don’t do this again, and start cleaning up what is going on, I don’t see this changing.”

Trump and his advisers will make sure nothing changes and the surveillance state continues to grow until it becomes the sort of totalitarian leviathan portrayed in George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen-Eighty Four.

Finally, is the move to make Section 702 permanent supported by Trump loyalists and the alt-right? Thus far, they have supported everything Trump has done, including killing people in Syria and Iraq. Trump’s pathological lies made during the election do not seem to bother them in the least.

Besides, the alt-right is too busy attacking the left and vice versa in a never-ending ideological running battle that serves as a huge distraction.

That’s why I call Trump Republicans and the alt-right neo-neocons. They are continuing the forever war and police and surveillance state agenda of the Bush neocons.

By Kurt Nimmo / Republished with permission / Another Day in the Empire / Report a typo

The Most Controversial DNA Test You’ve Never Heard Of

(ANTIMEDIA) A vote on whether to approve a proposal that would allow familial DNA searching in certain criminal cases has been delayed by New York state’s Forensic Science Committee. The controversial proposal has been sent back to a special subcommittee to “tighten up the language.” If approved, the new policy would allow police to investigate family members of New Yorkers whose DNA closely matches DNA found at crime scenes.

Because familial searching has gotten little to no coverage in mainstream media, many people have no idea what it is — or that it’s already being used in California, Colorado, Florida, Michigan, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming, and Ohio.

The FBI describes the investigatory process as follows:

“Familial searching is an additional search of a law enforcement DNA database conducted after a routine search has been completed and no profile matches are identified during the process. Unlike a routine database search which may spontaneously yield partial match profiles, familial searching is a deliberate search of a DNA database conducted for the intended purpose of potentially identifying close biological relatives to the unknown forensic profile obtained from crime scene evidence. Familial searching is based on the concept that first-order relatives, such as siblings or parent/child relationships, will have more genetic data in common than unrelated individuals. Practically speaking, familial searching would only be performed if the comparison of the forensic DNA profile with the known offender/arrestee DNA profiles has not identified any matches to any of the offenders/arrestees.”

Though familial searching is already being used in ten states and has led to the arrests of numerous violent criminals, it is not always accurate.

“Anyone who knows the science understands that there’s a high rate of false positives,” Erin Murphy, a New York University law professor and the author of Inside the Cell: The Dark Side of Forensic DNA told Wired magazine.

Further, civil liberties experts have expressed concern that the method violates personal privacy. According to comments from the New York Civil Liberties Union, “criminal suspicion will attach to innocent persons merely because of their biological relation to a person whose DNA is in the state’s databank.”

David Loftist, the attorney in charge of post-conviction and forensic litigation at the Legal Aid Society, told Gothamist:

“You are creating a ‘suspect class’ of citizens. If you have a family member that has been convicted of fare beating, his DNA is in the database. Now all of his family members would be subject to searching in perpetuity.”

He also pointed out that the state DNA bank is disproportionately black and Latino, adding, “This creates a dragnet for the entire community now…all of their relatives are possible suspects. It’s a genetic stop and frisk.”

Queens District Attorney Richard Brown, however, is a huge advocate for familial DNA searching. “This technology has proven effective at generating important DNA investigative leads in cold cases,” he said. “We have an obligation to use every means at our disposal to identify the murderer.”

The Forensic Committee decided last week that the requirements for initiating a familial search are too broad at this point. It has postponed the vote until a new draft can be completed. The next official meeting is set for June 16th.

Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo

Ridge Affiliation Warrants Heightened Skepticism over Gun Detection System

So what safeguards are in place to protect your privacy and ensure you’re not erroneously turned into a target?

“Patriot One Technologies, Inc. is about to kick off an experiment of its new detection system,” Concealed Nation reports. “They’ve partnered with Westgate Las Vegas Resort & Casino to implement the system in public for the first time.”

“Detection system”?

So much for “concealed” carry — and for being secure in your person and effects…

“[T]he system uses ‘Cognitive Microwave Radar’ to detect any unwanted items, and ‘related hardware can be installed in hallways and doorways to covertly identify weapons and to alert security of an active threat entering the premises,’” the report elaborates. “If this test proves to be successful in their eyes, it could open the flood gates for companies looking to use this technology in their own locations.”

And not just companies. If it actually works, this could be installed in public places to flag down any and everyone carrying a gun. And that should raise all kinds of civil liberties concerns, including the way it could “mine” a patchwork of public and private zones that becomes impossible to navigate, and make invasive privacy intrusions the norm every time you step out of the house. Add in a rapidly expanding presence of “security” cameras, an increased use of facial recognition technology for everything from airport security to dispensing toilet paper (!), and it’s clear we’re living in a culture with citizen surveillance capabilities Orwell’s Big Brother nightmare couldn’t even come close to approximating.

Perhaps instead of being deemed an anxiety disorder, agoraphobia should be viewed as a healthy and rational reaction.

Then consider there have been no long-term studies on regular and prolonged exposure to what “Low-power impulse radar… from 500 MHz to 5 GHz” might do after a few decades. It is interesting to note that while they were intially presumed “safe” enough to subject the public to, the European Union banned backscatter X-ray scanners from airports over “citizen’s health and safety” concerns. And while we’re told alternative millimeter-wave systems “do not expose passengers to ionizing radiation,” it’s undeniable that technologies presented as benign can merit a second look when several years of field experiences yield new information. Case in point, cell phones and potential cancer risks…

Employees who need to be scanned every day, possibly several times as they leave and then reenter “secured” areas, may be serving as unwitting guinea pigs. Will OSHA take an interest?

Still, that’s all theoretical at this point.  But the liberty concerns are undeniable, particularly with the potential to infringe on the Second and Fourth Amendments. So it’s curious the outfit behind the surveillance devices calls itself “Patriot One.”

Hey, what could be more patriotic than defending lives and property, providing freedom is also being protected? Will trust in benevolent and protective intentions be well placed?

So what’s “necessary to the security of a free State” is … this?

I’d feel better about it, first of all if they weren’t Canadian, but also if they hadn’t issued a press release praising and welcoming former Congressman, Pennsylvania Governor ,and Homeland Security “czar” (how come they never say “führer”?) Tom Ridge to their advisory board.

That would be “Oathbreak Ridge.” He voted to ban semi-autos demonized as “assault weapons.”  He opposed arming pilots after 9/11.  And he thumbed his nose at those who asked about the Second Amendment by essentially saying he could do whatever he wanted because “Those people aren’t registered. Nor do they vote.”

As an establishment RINO, he has since attempted to torpedo conservative political candidates. And he’s still out there in the media trying to push gun and magazine bans, and showing that privacy concerns over his new venture are not unfounded:

“And it’s a little more complicated than just bans and background checks,” he added. “People talk about the 2nd Amendment, but they ought to start talking about privacy and whether individuals have a right to keep their own medical history to themselves, or under certain circumstances are obliged to provide it.”

With this guy’s track record, can anyone be sure those “certain circumstances” he’s talking about do not result in prior restraints and denial of due process? Or that his new associates aren’t as enthusiastic about his views on guns and privacy as they are about welcoming him on board?

—–

If you believe in the mission of Oath Keepers, to defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, please consider making a donation to support our work.  You can donate HERE.

What the Supreme Court Battle Tells Us About Trump’s Plans for Guantanamo

(ANTIMEDIA) Even though Democrats on Capitol Hill are fighting tooth-and-nail against Neil Gorsuch’s confirmation to the Supreme Court, it’s almost impossible to win the battle. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has asserted “it’s up to the Democrats” whether or not Gorsuch gets confirmed, but many political analysts interpret his statement to mean that he’ll pull their filibuster — essentially changing the rules of the Chamber.

Assuming he is confirmed, Gorsuch is likely to see a Guantanamo Bay case early in his time on the bench. The Cuba-based American prison has been one of the most hotly contested legal debates in the past two decades. It’s an ethical and legal dilemma for a number of reasons. First, most of the prisoners have not been charged, and a large segment of them have been cleared for transfer. In 2013, a Boston University article noted that only six of the 166 detainees “face[d] any formal charges.”

Many believe the way Guantanamo operates is in violation of the Geneva convention. The Bush administration took the stance that “the Geneva Conventions did not apply to ‘unlawful enemy combatants,’ such as al-Qaeda and the Taliban.” In 2006, the Supreme Court presided over Hamdan v. Rumsfeld and sided with Hamdan. Unfortunately, that did little to change the conditions in Guantanamo Bay or the way it operates.

We"re revolutionizing the news industry, but we need your help! Click here to get started.

Now the Supreme Court is once again being asked to rule on issues related to the notorious facility. The first defendant, Yemeni-born Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al Bahlul, was convicted on three charges relating to his role as a propagandist for al-Qaeda. However, those are not international war crimes — remember, the government’s defense of the center was that it was used to detain war criminals. Bahlul’s lawyers posit that his offenses are not international war crimes. A Harvard Law blog outlined the case, essentially writing that Bahlul was tried for domestic crimes under a military court.

The second case, al Nashiri v. Obama, features a defendant who is facing charges for bombings he may have been involved in during 2000 and 2002. His attorneys are making a similar argument — that the statute that allows him to be tried by a military commission was not put in place until 2001. Therefore, they argue, there is no basis to try him as a foreign agent of war rather than as a civilian.

CNN reported that “the Trump administration is likely to respond within 30 days,” but if President Trump’s campaign rhetoric is any indication, it certainly doesn’t look good for Nashiri and Bahlul. During his stump speeches, Trump eloquently declared that he intended to “fill [Guantanamo Bay] up with some bad dudes.” Obama promised — and failed — to shut down the facility, though at the time he left office there were fewer than fifty detainees still being held at the Cuban base. That’s a big step down from the 680 who were at the prison in 2003.

With Neil Gorsuch on the court, conservatives will have the majority. And like Trump, Gorsuch is an admirer of Guantanamo Bay. According to the New York Times, the judge actually toured the facility in 2005 — the same year a C.I.A. memo showed two suspected terrorists had been waterboarded 266 times. Following his visit, Gorsuch wrote a letter to the warden stating his visit made the “job of helping explain and defend it before the courts all the easier.”

The New York Times also acquired a series of emails between Gorsuch and a number of lawmakers from around the time of the 2006 Supreme Court case. In the opening of those emails, Gorsuch even referenced the defendant and tried to find ways to structure a bill that might shore up the power of the military courts.

It’s likely it will be a few more months before the two Guantanamo cases will come before the Supreme Court, by which time Gorsuch will almost certainly be on the court. But if his past leanings are any indication, it seems inevitable that he will rule against the suspected terrorists. In particular, he will likely rule against their argument that they cannot be tried as war criminals when charged with domestic crimes.

Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo

Nobody’s Safe From The PATRIOT Act

Multiple K9s Unleashed, Half Dozen Cops Dispatched — to Catch 3 Teens Smoking a Plant

Knightdale, NC — The Knightdale Police Department, in North Carolina, boasts their K-9 unit provides, “a number of valuable services to the Knightdale community.” Apparently, one of those community interactions using their trained attack dogs involves busting juveniles with weed.

In a WNCN local news story titled, “3 teens smoking pot busted when Knightdale police officer drives by, officials say,” the town is getting a bit of recognition for tracking down those potheads and giving them a dose of canine justice. “Three teens were nabbed in Knightdale Sunday afternoon when they were smoking marijuana outside as a police officer drove by, authorities say,” the article states indicating the officer of the peace’s olfactory senses were alerted to the skunky smell of freshly burned cannabis.

The article continues, “According to Knightdale officials, three boys – two who were 16 and one who was 18 — were smoking marijuana outside when an officer pulled up in his squad car,” apparently busted red handed with the Maryjane. “The trio ran into nearby woods and more police were called in for a search,” the story continues indicating the potheads made a break for it.

Here’s where the story gets dangerous, and in light of the juveniles’ ages, the search should have been called off. The police decided to bring in the attack dogs. “A K-9 police unit was also involved in the search, which eventually found the three teens,” reports WNCN adding, “Their identities and specific charges were unavailable.” As The Free Thought Project recently reported, police K9s can be uncontrollable and quite unpredictable, even ripping off the face of one such suspect.

READ MORE:  Excessive Force? Three Cops, One with a Boot on his Head, Hold Down and Taser a 60 Year Old Man

While many states across the country may find the story laughable, that multiple police officers had nothing better to do than to go after a few pothead wannabes, North Carolina still has not embraced any form of legalized marijuana.

As TFTP has reported on numerous occasions, weed has become somewhat of a wonder drug, healing children of seizures, treating ADD and ADHD, and has even demonstrated promise in helping heroin addicts kick their opiate addiction. Even with the anecdotal evidence, and growing medical research, states like NC and many Southern states have yet to embrace the natural remedies cannabis can offer.

Maybe it was Officer Thomes Cagle and his canine “Echo” who tracked down those vicious criminals (sarcasm), or Kevin Jorgenson and the PD’s other canine “Maverick” which tracked down the teenage drug users. At any rate, the police got their bad guys.

When not treeing young pot smokers like Carolina raccoons, Knightdale PD days their dogs “make appearances at local elementary schools and community events.” It’s unclear if the PD considers the arrest of said teenagers one of their “big arrest(s)” but they consider their use of canines an integral part of their “team’s commitment to community policing” is as strong as their desire to take a bite out of crime!

Probably less than 5 years from the date of this story, North Carolina will likely legalize medical marijuana, and the Knightdale Police department’s days of busting juvenile weed smokers will be seen as a thing as ancient as unleashing attack dogs on civil rights activists in 1960’s Selma Alabama. Either way, using cannabis is quickly becoming a right of the people to self-medicate using something as natural as saline for infections, and calcium for upset stomachs. Until then, stories like the ones coming out of Knightdale are enough to give us all a bad tummy ache.

16-Year Congressman Says CIA Leaks Prove USA Rapidly “Moving Toward Totalitarianism”

Democratic Congressman Dennis Kucinich recently published a searing critique of the federal government’s spying powers in light of Wikileaks data releases that allege various vulnerabilities inside the CIA, as well as the agency’s capabilities to pursue surveillance of Americans with impunity. For a great number of years, Kucinich has stressed the importance of privacy and the consequences of federal overreach and was one of relatively few in Congress to stand up against legislation including the Patriot Act that has led to widespread spying with scarce oversight.

“If Tuesday’s WikiLeaks document dump is authentic, as it appears to be, then the agency left open electronic gateways that make all Americans vulnerable to spying, eavesdropping and technological manipulation that could bring genuine harm,” Kucinich wrote.

“It is bad enough that the government spies on its own people. It is equally bad that the CIA, through its incompetence, has opened the cyberdoor to anyone with the technological skills and connections to spy on anyone else,” he said.

“The constant erosion of privacy at the hands of the government and corporations has annihilated the concept of a “right to privacy,” which is embedded in the rationale of the First, Third, Fourth, Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.

“It is becoming increasingly clear that we are sliding down the slippery slope toward totalitarianism, where private lives do not exist.”

Kucinich went on to warn that “We have crossed the threshold of a cowardly new world, and it’s time we tell the government and the corporations who have intruded to stop it.”

Unfortunately, voices of dissent such as Kucinich are much harder to find than reports that gloss over or dismiss the revelations shared by Wikileaks. In the wake of last week’s Wikileaks bombshell unveiling of “Vault 7” – the leak of an expansive and unsettling collection of documents that detail just how intrusive the CIA has become – the mainstream media’s collective reaction has been nearly as telling as the documents themselves. Rather than providing an objective look at the data within the leak itself, a number major news outlets have predictably opted to echo one another and focus instead almost entirely on their distaste for Wikileaks and its founder, Julian Assange.

READ MORE:  BREAKING: Assange Releases SMS Records Showing He Was Framed by Police in Rape Cases

A plethora of popular news articles over the last few days show passive yet unified rejection of the information’s legitimacy. The Washington Post wasted little time in attempting to minimize Wikileaks’ credibility, as well as questioning whether the Vault 7 leak has Russian ties. The Post claimed the release of documents “shifts the narrative away from the hacking of the DNC and Russia’s relationship with Trump” and suggesting that people should “consider where the information came from and the lack of credibility WikiLeaks has as a news source.” NBC’s Today similarly indicated a potential connection between Russia and the documents, although posed as a question.

However, as we’ve pointed out in the past, WikiLeaks has never released anything that was not entirely genuine and verifiable.

Fortune summarized the leak as a collection of “misinformation” and accused Wikileaks of  serving as “a well-oiled machine of information warfare, sowing panic, fear, and paranoia among the populace.”A Forbes article, titled “WikiLeaks Vault 7 CIA Dump Offers Nothing But Old News,” seeks to reassure the reader that “the overwhelming majority of us aren’t likely to be targeted by the CIA.”

A Foreign Policy post, titled “Wikileaks Has Joined the Trump Administration,” described Wikileaks as an “anti-American group” that “has become the preferred intelligence service for a conspiracy-addled White House.” This article centered around a possible Trump-Wikileaks kinship, noting that the president may be keeping quiet about the Vault 7 leaks because he could “benefit from” them.

However, beneath the surface of Vault 7 reports that seek to obfuscate the data, summaries, and analyses that expose the CIA’s troubling hacking capabilities are able to be found and are vital to bringing these disconcerting but crucial topics to light.

READ MORE:  Newly Declassified Govt Docs Reveal Operation Mockingbird is Alive and Well

The Independent published a straightforward explanation of the Vault 7 leak as well as steps that can be taken to protect some personal data. The article also points out how Apple’s response to the leaks serve as an admission of sorts regarding vulnerabilities exploited by the CIA: “While our initial analysis indicates that many of the issues leaked today were already patched in the latest iOS, we will continue work to rapidly address any identified vulnerabilities.”

In addition, Edward Snowden publicly recognized the authenticity and implications of the information released through Vault 7. “Evidence mounts showing CIA & FBI knew about catastrophic weaknesses in the most-used smartphones in America, but kept them open — to spy,” he noted in one tweet. In another, he declared that the leaks are “first public evidence USG secretly paying to keep US software unsafe.”

It’s important to note that Wikileaks dumped a massive amount of data at once in its Vault 7 release, and proper, thorough analysis of this information is critical. When troves of documents are unleashed so quickly, it is possible for some parts of information to be initially overstated or misunderstood. But for the media to uniformly proclaim that all is settled- that the leaks are nothing but old news, insignificant bits of data not worthy of concern, or a nefarious disinformation campaign- is a disservice to the public.

New TSA Rules — More Aggressive Pat-Downs!

The Transportation Safety Administration has announced that it is going to get even more aggressive with innocent passengers. They said we must give up our liberty for security, but the TSA is an enemy of both. What can we do to fight back?

Watch Ron Paul’s famous anti-TSA speech entitled “Enough is Enough” (November 2010):

_{»crosslinked«}

Visualizing The Worrying Decline Of Freedom Around The World

The 20th century was a bull market for literacy, freedom, prosperity, health, and technology.

As a result of these gains, wealth has increased exponentially, and world poverty is now at all-time lows. Life expectancy continues to improve in most countries, global literacy is near 90%, and there are well over 100 democracies throughout the planet.

But, as VisualCapitalist"s Jeff Desjardins notes, not every positive trend can keep going forever. Sometimes things regress temporarily, only to be corrected later on. Other times things change more fundamentally – and that regression can be the beginning of a newer, long-term reality.

The Decline of Freedom: An 11-Year Trend

According to the Freedom in the World 2017 Report, which scores countries annually on various levels of freedom, there have been recent setbacks in political rights and civil liberties in a number of “Free” countries. These newest declines are partially the result of populist and nationalist forces making significant gains in democratic states.

But Freedom House, the international watchdog organization that produces the annual report, says that this is not an isolated occurrence. In fact, based on their data and methodology, freedom has actually declined on a global basis for the last 11 years.

Here are the aggregate gains and declines in freedom for each year – you can see that declines have been outweighing gains since 2006.

11 Years of Decline

While the trend is clear, the most worrying part is that the biggest aggregate declines happened in the two most recent years. Is that a coincidence, or is the decline of freedom accelerating?

Here are the specific countries that have had the biggest declines in freedom over the last decade:

Largest Aggregate Declines Over the Last Decade

Countries like Yemen and Ethiopia, which are classified as “Not Free”, have lost further freedom. However, “Free” countries like Hungary or Nauru also lost 10 or more points in the index.

2016: Another Year of Setbacks

The biggest mover in 2016 was Turkey, a country that the Washington Post says is in a “permanent state of crisis”.

A failed coup attempt, the assassination of a Russian ambassador, trouble in bordering Syria, and economic crises have accelerated the march to authoritarianism in the country – and it’s had a 15-point decline of freedom as a result, according to Freedom House.

Biggest Movers in 2016

Hungary and Poland are among the Western democracies that lost significant points in 2016, but the report also has its crosshairs on the United States for 2017. It notes the U.S. as a “country to watch” this year because of the Trump administration’s approach to civil liberties, as well as a potential redefinition of the United States’ role in the world.

Here are where things stand as of now:

Map: World Freedom in 2017

For the whole report, which is a highly-recommended read, go here.

WikiLeaks: CIA Plotted to Infiltrate Every Major French Political Party

(ANTIMEDIA) A fresh release of classified documents shows the CIA permeated France’s 2012 presidential election, according to Wikileaks. The agency targeted every major party, as well as the current and former president and other prominent candidates.

Wikileaks has been teasing its upcoming “CIA Vault 7” document dump. Thursday’s release of seven pages containing three CIA tasking orders regarding France’s 2012 election is the first such promotion to offer something of substance.

The documents show CIA spies working in human intelligence (HUMINT) and electronic, or signal, intelligence (SIGINT) were directed to infiltrate each major French political party and several leaders from November 21, 2011 to September 29, 2012. Elections took place between April and May of 2012, meaning the operation began about six months before the vote and lasted around four months afterward.

The operation targeted the French Socialist Party, the National Front, and the Union for a Popular Movement, along with current leading presidential candidate Marine Le Pen, current President Francois Hollande, then-President Nicolas Sarkozy, and former candidates Martine Aubry and Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

Assessing that President Sarkozy’s Union for a Popular Movement was “not assured of winning the presidential election,” the CIA issued the espionage order, entitled “Non-Ruling Political Parties and Candidates Strategic Election Plans,” in order to better inform U.S.-France policy, according to the documents.

Among the specific instructions for spies were orders to obtain Sarkozy’s private talks “on the other candidates” as well as his own advisors. The agency valued information pertaining to changes in the party’s “perceived vulnerabilities to maintaining power” and its ideological direction, as well as Sarkozy’s interest in “the continuation of the party’s dominance,” the documents show.

Wikileaks cites a previous 2012 espionage order calling for the discovery of details on any potential French export contract or deal valued at $200 million or more as seeming to be connected to specific CIA tasks under the “Strategic Election Plans” order. Those tasks asked the questions: “What policies do they promote to help boost France’s economic growth prospects?” and “What are their opinions on the German model of export-led growth?”

Additionally, the CIA wanted to know the candidates’ positions on the Greek debt crisis and the roles of France and Germany in its management, along with information regarding the “specific proposals and recommendations” for and consequences of a Greek default on France’s government and banks.

The leaked documents were classified and for U.S. eyes only, marked “NOFORN” because they contained “Friends-on-Friends sensitivities.”

Wikileaks claims this most recent release will serve as “context” for its anticipated Vault 7 series.

It comes at a time of relentless speculation over Russia’s influence over the Trump administration and the November presidential election, as well as reported divisions in the White House since controversial leaks led to the resignation of General Michael Flynn as national security advisor to President Donald Trump.

Creative Commons / Anti-Media / Report a typo

Judge Forcing Town to Return $3 Million to Residents Fined by Traffic Cameras

February 10, 2017   |   Josie Wales

(ANTIMEDIA) New Miami, OH — A Butler County judge has ordered the village of New Miami to refund $3 million in fines to motorists ticketed for speeding by traffic light cameras. The ruling was issued Wednesday by Butler County Judge Michael Oster, who said the money amounted to unjust enrichment of the village.

The cameras were ruled unconstitutional in 2014 by Butler County Common Pleas Judge Michael J. Sage, who approved class action status. That ruling allowed the drivers to seek refunds. Nearly 45,000 citations were issued in just 15 months, and though motorists were permitted to challenge the tickets, the judge saw the administrative system as unfairly favoring the village and police.

Of the $3 million collected in fines, 60% of the revenue went to the village while 40% went to the traffic light company running the program. The village’s attorney plans to take the case to the Supreme Court, claiming the village should not be responsible for funds it did not receive, seemingly ignoring the fact that it was responsible for implementing the unconstitutional program and collecting the fines in the first place.

This article (Judge Forcing Town to Return $3 Million to Residents Fined by Traffic Cameras) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Josie Wales and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to edits@theantimedia.org.

‘Extreme Vetting’ – Homeland Security’s Attack On Liberty?

New Homeland Security Director, Gen. John Kelly, told Congress yesterday that under new “extreme vetting” measures, individuals wishing to come to the US from the countries subject to such measures will be required to provide their computer passwords and the websites they have been visiting, among other things. How long before such measures are expanded to include the rest of us…for our safety and security?

Politicians Are Now Making Plans in Case the Public Turns Against Them Violently

February 9, 2017   |   James Holbrooks

(ANTIMEDIA) Washington, D.C. — As protests continue to break out all around the nation over President Donald Trump’s desire to scrap Obamacare, Politico reported Tuesday that many politicians are beginning to worry about their own personal safety — to the point where some are having private sessions to discuss the matter.

Citing sources who were in the room, Politico writes:

“House Republicans during a closed-door meeting Tuesday discussed how to protect themselves and their staffs from protesters storming town halls and offices in opposition to repealing Obamacare.”

Some of the suggestions, the news outlet reports, include “having a physical exit strategy at town halls, or a backdoor at congressional offices to slip out of, in case demonstrations turn violent; having local police monitor town halls; replacing any glass office-door entrances with heavy doors and deadbolts; and setting up intercoms to ensure those entering congressional offices are there for appointments, not to cause chaos.”

While protests are popping up all over, the Republicans’ private session was no doubt prompted by events that happened over the weekend. While speaking before a raucous crowd in Roseville, California, Representative Tom McClintock had to be escorted from the stage and away from the event by local police officers.

McClintock, who held town hall meetings during the politically volatile days of both the Tea Party and Occupy movements, told The Hill he’s never seen anything like it:

“This was something very different. After an hour, the incident commander for the Roseville Police Department advised us the situation was deteriorating and felt it necessary to get me out of the venue. That’s never happened before.”

This sentiment appeared to be echoed at Tuesday’s closed-door session. Commenting on the meeting, Republican Study Committee Chairman Mark Walker of North Carolina stated:

“The message was: One, be careful for security purposes. Watch your back. And two, be receptive. Honor the First Amendment, engage, be friendly, be nice. Because it is toxic out there right now. Even some of the guys who have been around here a lot longer than I have, have never seen it to this level.”

Sources told Politico that the potential for violence is serious enough, in fact, that the House sergeant-at-arms has asked congressional offices to report any threat. That office is also passing out manuals on best practices to keep staffers safe.

Ironically, the backlash over the possible repeal of Obamacare that Republicans are facing now is similar to the backlash faced by Democrats years back as they were trying to force Obamacare into law.

“It’s not that you run from protesters,” Representative David Reichert of Washington said during an interview after the meeting, “but if someone presents some sort of physical threat or are espousing a verbal threat that could lead to a physical threat, if you feel that you’re in danger and your staff is in danger, call 911 and leave and go out the back door.”

In other words…run. Call the cops and run.

---

This article (Politicians Are Now Making Plans in Case the Public Turns Against Them Violently) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to James Holbrooks and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article to edits@theantimedia.org.

‘This Is the #NoDAPL Last Stand’: Tribe to Sue as Actions Planned Nationwide

February 8, 2017   |   admintam

(COMMONDREAMS) The Trump administration “will be held accountable in court” for its decision to grant the final easement on the Dakota Access pipeline (DAPL), Indigenous people and environmental allies vowed Tuesday.

And with actions planned nationwide on Wednesday, the administration won’t get off in the court of public opinion, either.

“The drinking water of millions of Americans is now at risk,” said Dave Archambault II, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, following the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ announcement (pdf) that it would give the official go-ahead within 24 hours. “We are a sovereign nation and we will fight to protect our water and sacred places from the brazen private interests trying to push this pipeline through to benefit a few wealthy Americans with financial ties to the Trump administration.”

In granting the easement, the Army Corps halted (pdf) the preparation of an environmental review ordered by the Obama administration. The Standing Rock tribe, which says DAPL threatens its clean water supply and violates Indigenous treaty rights, pledged to “challenge any easement decision on the grounds that the [environmental impact statement, or EIS] was wrongfully terminated.”

“Trump’s reversal of that decision continues a historic pattern of broken promises to Indian tribes and unlawful violation of treaty rights,” added Jan Hasselman of Earthjustice, lead attorney for the tribe. “They will be held accountable in court.”

Other next steps, according to the Standing Rock statement, include asking the court for DAPL-operator Energy Transfer Partners “to disclose its oil spill and risk assessment records for full transparency and review by the public,” and, “if DAPL is successful in constructing and operating the pipeline, the tribe will seek to shut the pipeline operations down.”

The tribe is not alone in its outrage. Multiple environmental groups voiced their opposition to the decision, while Democratic members of the House and Senate natural resources committees wrote a letter to President Donald Trump expressing their own dismay.

“This blatant disregard for federal law and our country’s treaty and trust responsibilities to Native American tribes is unacceptable,” the lawmakers wrote. “We strongly oppose this decision and any efforts to undermine tribal rights. We urge you to immediately reverse this decision and follow the appropriate procedures required for tribal consultation, environmental law, and due process.” Signatories included Sens. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), as well as Reps. Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) and Donald Beyer (D-Va.).

Grijalva, ranking member of the House Natural Resources Committee, also issued a separate statement: “Before the Women’s March and before thousands of people protested at airports, the Standing Rock Sioux and their allies were camping in the freezing cold to defend their rights,” he said. “The Obama Administration heard those concerns and agreed to take a step back; this Administration is ignoring them. In his first few weeks in office our new president has built a resume of discrimination, falsehoods, and sloppy work, and now the decision to trample the sovereignty of our First Americans is the latest entry on a growing list of shameful actions.”

A protest in front of the White House is planned for 5:00pm Wednesday, along with more than 30 actions taking place around the country on what the Indigenous Coalition at Standing Rock has dubbed “an international day of emergency actions to disrupt business as usual and unleash a global intersectional resistance to fossil fuels and fascism.”

“This is the #NoDAPL last stand,” the group declared online.

Find an action near you here.

“Donald Trump will not build his Dakota Access Pipeline without a fight,” said Tom Goldtooth of the Indigenous Environmental Network. “The granting of an easement, without any environmental review or tribal consultation, is not the end of this fight—it is the new beginning. Expect mass resistance far beyond what Trump has seen so far.”

Goldtooth continued:

The granting of this easement goes against protocol, it goes against legal process, it disregards more than 100,000 comments already submitted as part of the not-yet-completed environmental review process—all for the sake of Donald Trump’s billionaire big oil cronies. And, it goes against the treaty rights of the entire Seven Councils Fires of the Sioux Nations.

Donald Trump has not met with a single Native nation since taking office. Our tribal nations and Indigenous grassroots peoples on the frontlines have had no input on this process. We support the Standing Rock Sioux tribe, and stand with them at this troubling time.

In addition, a Native Nations March on Washington is in the works for March 10. “Our fight is no longer at the North Dakota site itself,” said Archambault. “Our fight is with Congress and the Trump administration. Meet us in Washington on March 10.”

An energetic divestment campaign, urging banks to pull their funding for the controversial project, is also gaining steam.

On that front, the Seattle City Council voted 9-0 on Tuesday to cut banking ties with Wells Fargo because of its role as a DAPL lender. “People might argue that Seattle’s $3 billion account is just a blip on the radar for Wells Fargo, but this movement is poised to scale up,” Hugh MacMillan, a senior researcher at Food & Water Watch, told YES! Magazine. “I think you’ll see more cities following Seattle’s lead.”

---

This article (‘This Is the #NoDAPL Last Stand’: Tribe to Sue as Actions Planned Nationwide) by Deirdre Fulton originally appeared on CommonDreams.org and is licensed Creative Commons 3.0. The Anti-Media radio show airs Monday through Friday @ 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: L May. Help us fix our typos: edits@theantimedia.org