No matter how many times I speak out against war there's always some guy playing Call of Duty in the background chiming in with: "What about the Nazis? World War Two was the only just war." Funny you should mention that. Not only did we not finish the job the first time, but they're fighting on our side now with SS Galizien patches on their uniforms.
Face the clear light of reality. For the fifteen millionth time there are ultranationalist flag sucking Nazis still in Ukraine. These are leftovers from Operation Barbarossa when almost half the country collaborated with Germany during the Soviet invasion. The CIA has been supporting them since 1951. I thought everybody knew this. Maybe I’m experiencing the Ukrainian Mandella Effect. Russia invades Ukraine and all of a sudden there were never any Nazis anywhere.
Didn't anybody watch the History Channel on cable in the 90s? They used to play so many Nazi documentaries back-to-back we called it the Hitler Channel. I hate to be the one to burst your freedom bubble but unless Putin was able to go back in time to forge fake CIA documents, rewrite William Shirer's The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich and hack into my cable box we have only two available options. Either Nazis are still in Ukraine or we're dealing with sneaky Russian time traveling disinformation agents.
Quick question, how can Ukraine be simultaneously winning the war and also need our support, a no-fly zone, tanks, billions of dollars in weaponry, NATO intervention and MIG-29 fighter jets from Poland? Because it's Schrödinger's Ukraine! Nobody really knows if they're winning or not until we look under the box twenty years later. By that time, it's either a dead cat or fifteen more battalions of well-armed Nazis. In this version they win and become heroes like Philip K. Dick's classic The Man in the High Castle or a live cosplay version of Wolfenstein.
Okay, so now the CIA is telling us again Russia is trying to interfere in our next election. Nobody finds that a little bit strange? That the CIA, which is our clandestine, highly secretive, intelligence service tasked with all things—TOP SECRET—somehow finds the need to tell everybody Russia is planning on fucking up our next election, again?
Isn't that your one job? You're supposed to fix the problem in secret and not tell everybody what you're doing. Why are you always telling us what's going on but not doing anything about it? And why are you telling me? What can I do about it? It's not my job. That's your job. Just do your job. And your job doesn't include tricking people on TV how much you suck at your job.
First off, it's not ever your place to tell anybody anything, let alone CNN, NY Times or the Washington Post. We pay you to figure this shit out in the background and find a way to make it go away. We don't pay you to be hanging around the breakroom at CNN. It just looks weird is all I'm saying.
Back in the day Bob Woodward would meet Deep Throat in a parking garage after the bars closed looking over his shoulder. Now you're on primetime with your "intelligence assessments" once a week telling us stuff you're not supposed to tell us. And everything is flipped upside down. Liberals used to be the ones skeptical of our intelligence services, now it's the Republican party calling out their bullshit. Rachel Maddow has CIA cock shoved so far down her throat it's amazing she can still walk and talk at the same time.
Some fifteen years ago I remember asking our fearless leader, George T. Mortimer, what he thought of Alex Jones and Info Wars. He paused to think, I could see the alien symbols and algorithms crunching numbers in his brain. It was a very measured response to the question, “He seems a bit sketchy to me.” At the time I thought that was odd. George and Alex were both in the same business together looking beyond the veil of your average mainstream media take on the news. Little did I know how prescient this observation would be.
The thing I always found strange about the Alex Jones ban was on the surface he seemed dangerous. But when accused of promoting violence and taken down off his platforms why no violence at all after he got banned? Nothing happened. No attacks on Google, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube or Instagram by any of his followers?
If you ever scanned his website and read the comments it was creepy as fuck. Half of them were calling for armed revolution, the other half talk of shooting federal agents. It was literally nothing but guns and violence, 2nd Amendment crap and defending the constitution every other comment. Yet when he gets banned no revolt? Nothing blows up? No armed attack on any of the companies that banned him?
I'm not defending the clownhole. I'm saying how unbelievably strange it was. What if most of his so-called dangerous followers in the comments section were sock puppets and fake accounts? What if Alex Jones The Great Truth Crusader was merely playing a role? If you've read any books on disinformation tactics he fits the mold perfectly. What if the reality is more frightening than most people can imagine? What if the whole thing was straight up government funded disinformation?
The U.S. and the Russians had over 25,000 nuclear tipped missiles pointed at each other during the Cold War (still have over 8000) and we almost destroyed all life on the planet accidentally several times. Not just once. Several times we nearly set off the goddam apocalypse by a misplaced cunt hair.
Here's the deal. I know Trump sucks. But he's a product of the Cold War like we all are. I think whether you're a Republican or Democrat, dove or hawk, deep inside, we all knew eventually one day we would make friends with the Russians because the Cold War was fucking insane. After Trump's Helsinki steaming turd trip does anyone find it just a tad hilarious to watch all these geriatric blind distempered hawk Cold Warriors lose their shit? Come on. It's comedy gold. Obviously, he's not doing what they want him to do. Something's up and they're not getting their way like they ALWAYS get their way. This time he didn't say what they wanted him to say. So the fuck what? The CIA has been treating our own presidents like their own puppets to put their OWN words up our leader's ass. Maybe this time a President said, "You know what? I'm cool. I can speak for myself thank you. You do know you work for me right? Not the other way around. I'm the elected leader. No one really elects you. You guys have been slinging the same shit for 70 fucking years and not much has changed. Whether you like me or not that's how our system works. I think, if I'm not mistaken, Eisenhower warned us about you fuckers."
What did Mueller do during the Anthrax Attack? Oh, right I forgot, he tried to pin it on a lone nut when it couldn't have possibly been Bruce Ivins. It would have taken him 6000 man hours to make those spores. Have we ever seen the 70 some videos of what hit the Pentagon? Nope. The FBI couldn't even get all the hijackers straight because more than a few showed up alive after they were dead. They never even said "Anyone can fake a passport!". They just wanted us to believe they were dangerous, clever, evil terrorists from the Middle East somewhere, so we could start Operation Oil Change. And we were told our intelligence agencies dropped the ball on 9-11. Mistakes were made. I think they were still high on that MKULTRA acid when they came up with the plan if you ask me. That shit was pure Sandoz.
I don't support Trump but I also don't support our intelligence agencies. They're not doing what you think they're doing. They want more war like a hard on. Trump probably doesn't want to go into Syria. They've been planning this war on terror since before 9-11. Remember the plan? They want to control 7 countries in the Middle East and Syria is the next one on the chopping block. Trump is probably getting cold feet because he knows it's going to mean war with Russia. He's stupid but not that stupid. In the Tao te Ching it says you'll always be safe with a selfish man because he wants to save his own golf course and own back yard. An ideological man will fuck shit up every time. The higher the ideals the lower the results. A real Capitalist like Trump wants to save his own ass. He's practical. Fuck ideals. What are they worth when we're all dead?
Never trust anyone with an extreme aversion to conspiracy. If they loath conspiracy theories and they're not a covert agent or provocateur themselves, they might as well be since they're doing the same work for them, wittingly or unwittingly. That may sound a tad harsh but trust me, the next time you're confronted by one of these rationalist con-artists and their incessant ridicule, be proud, stand firm and boldly proclaim, "You're goddam right I'm a conspiracy theorist! Fuck you."
Look, I get it. I know what it feels like to be rational, to grasp objective reality without bias. We’ve all experimented with it in high school but the conspiracy theorist, even the craziest test sample have always seemed much more curious to me. Even if they follow all the wrong paths, using flawed epistemology and illogic, at the very least they're still poking around, looking deeper, embracing their insanity or pushing limits. The rationalist seems too confident to me, too afraid to be wrong, too worried what other people think, too stuck in the way things are and too grounded in orthodox.
I'd much rather be batshit, out of my mind insane any day of the week than a reasonable man who sees everything at face value or views the world as it seems to be. To see each part for what it is, in itself and mistaking that part for the whole only leads to our inevitable doom, the abyss of boredom. The calculating mind skilled at complexity can build a car and fly it to the moon, it may one day count each star in the known universe, but do you have the insight and natural instinct to step outside and ponder the totality? The entire vista? The Alpha and Omega with all the dots connected?
Conspiracy theorists are the idea generators, creative thinkers and collectors of lost trivia, history and myth. They’re not serious philosophers but more like risk taking ecstatic thinkers, unattached to ideas, comfortable juggling all kinds of thoughts, points of view, rational or irrational, old and new. Not afraid to think, "What if everything is fucked? What if it’s all been covertly planned and set in motion by highly trained unicorns?" The rationalist will tell their little jokes and call this man a paranoid grotesque miscreant, but you could just as easily say this unqualified clown is not afraid to face his darkest most frightening ideas and visions. The scientific rationalists are too careful of the ideas they cultivate akin to the religious priest. Ever notice how they both have the same concern over what other people think? Always correcting wrong words, thoughts and ideas as if the whole world will explode into a geyser of purple molten shit without their solemn advice or official answer?
The conspiracy theorist is a lot like the artist or fool. They don't care if they're right or wrong so much as they want more ideas, more points of view and every scrap of information until everything is connected. Seeing a vast conspiracy everywhere is also like seeing illusion everywhere which is an unlimited skepticism too, until you begin to doubt your own mind, the deepest conspiracy.
"The fool who persists in his folly will become wise." - William Blake
I took a self-help class years ago back in the 90s at a Unitarian Church. We had a workbook, it was mostly psychology, dream work and imagination, etc. There were only three people in the group. One guy was an extremely sane, levelheaded Federal judge. The other was the richest man in Sioux City, Iowa - Radio Ray (he invented some kind of transistor for RCA). And then there’s me, comedian, conspiracy nut, Buddhist, impoverished artist. In one of the exercises we were told to lay back, close our eyes and imagine our own death. When it was time to tell our stories, the Federal judge said he saw himself dying in bed, old and grey drifting off to sleep. Radio Ray said he’d die at home in his bed, old, with his family all around - peacefully falling to sleep. When my turn came, without thinking said, "I saw myself die in some kind of biological or nuclear holocaust with fire falling from the sky and people running through the streets screaming and looting.” They both just sat there and stared at me. The look on their face was, “What the fuck is wrong with you?” I started feeling kind of uncomfortable, so I said, “What? You’ve never worried about the apocalypse? Am I the only one who thinks about that? Was I doing this wrong?” After the acute Dementophobia (fear of insanity) passed there was a brief moment when I felt kind of sorry for both of them in a weird way, stuck with their conventional imagination and corny thoughts on death but then, I was like, fuck it. They’re sane and rich. I need a beer. What time is it? I should get out of here.
I'm skeptical of this whole Russian hacking obsession. Everyone seems to agree on it. All 17 intelligence agencies claim Russian involvement in the 2016 election. It's all everyone seems to want to talk about. Hmmm let's see, when's the last time all the intelligence agencies agreed on something? Oh that's right, it was WMDs in Iraq. Turned out they were wrong about that too. All of them. Does anyone ask how the fuck that happened? How did all of our intelligence agencies get WMDs in Iraq so wrong without ONE calling bullshit? The only reasonable way it could have happened is if they wanted to be wrong. Essentially that's what they did. They tricked everyone. Now we're told to just trust them again (when they were ALL wrong before) yet this time it's for real.
I'm not saying this because I support Trump. I can't stand the guy. I also know he's said, when speaking of the Russian hacking intelligence assessment, "These are the same people who told us there were WMD's in Iraq." But Cheeto Jesus is not the first person to ever say that. And it wasn't that hard of an argument for him to make. But once he said it everyone else stopped saying it because they didn't want to sound like they support Our Landlord in Chief. But the truth is the truth regardless of who says it, even if it's Fuckface Von Clownstick. So what, he said one true thing.
My problem with all of this Russian coverage since the election is what they're not talking about. They're not talking about how we could have hacked our own election. We write the software for the Diebold voting machines. We run the election servers. Anyone could have given those DNC emails to WikiLeaks. We have our own ways of rigging an election. We've been doing it all over the world for years.
Here's a story I find a bit creepy. A hard drive on one of our election servers got erased. Do you seriously think Russia has the ability to infiltrate the IT department and plant a technician inside the Center for Elections Systems at Kennesaw State University to completely wipe a server the very day after a lawsuit was filed to retrieve that very data? No they don't and it doesn't even matter if you think Russia might have been responsible because we admitted we wiped it. The IT guys, the technicians who run those servers said they did it. They even made a statement and admitted the server wiping was due to "standard operating procedures".
Oh really? I'll let you in on a little secret. IT guys rarely delete anything unless someone specifically tells them to. It's way too easy to save stuff now on another hard drive. Hard drive space is cheap. They may have deleted crap back when they used floppy discs but today you can buy a four terabyte hard drive for $99 (this one looks like a sweet deal). Do you have any idea how much simple election data you can save on a four terabyte hard drive? It would be close to all the data from every election in the U.S. since we started voting for fuck sake. No one, (if they know what they're doing and they do because they're running the goddam server) deletes shit these days unless they have to wipe it or they're trying to hide something.
Anyway I thought this story was interesting because it's something no one is talking about while all 17 intelligence agencies are pointing in the opposite direction. (AP article).
The Las Vegas shooting conspiracy! Yeah whatever. Don't care. What I find interesting is occasionally I'll come across articles on conspiracy theorists, their warped epistemology, their need to feel unique or in possession of insider knowledge, "I know things you don't know", etc. My only problem with this theory is the sheer number of intelligent, rational, sane, professionals who still believe something is not quite right with the official story on 9-11. I know you can find lists online of 9-11 Truthers with master's degrees, architects and engineers, Ph.D.s, scientists, military, former CIA agents, but what I'm talking about are those that I personally know. These are people I'm friends with, college professors, people with master's degrees, one has a Ph.D. in clinical psychology - who fully believe something is still fucked with 9-11.
My only question is this: How is it, these types (who don't believe any other conspiracy theories like vaccine, flat earth, fake moon landing, New World Order, government gun grab, Sandy Hook or Las Vegas shooter crap) are able to accept 9-11 Truth conspiracy when they're obviously not the type to talk about it openly, don't want to be seen as special, know the definition of epistemology and are quite literally very sane people? How does that happen? Now what?
Several Zogby polls over the years have shown at least 50% of the American population don't believe the official story when there is a virtual corporate media blackout on 9-11 Truth (and most progressive media too like The Nation, PBS and Democracy Now) yet at the same time, in addition, when they do mention 9-11 conspiracy over the corporate airwaves it's been completely ridiculed or explained away for the past 16 years. How is it that many people are still delusional? How are they unable to trust the mainstream view on 9-11? How is it the private perception (just sitting around at a bar, family reunion or casual conversation) and the public perception (NY Times, MSNBC, CNN, Fox, BBC, History Channel) are at such odds? Half the people I talk to in private don't believe the official story on 9-11 but it's the complete opposite when you turn on the TV. That, in and of itself, is frightening to me for some reason.
And this Anti-Conspiracy Trust Me The Official Story Is Totally Legit guitar solo has been going on for literally 16 years. On November 10th 2001 George W. Bush gave a speech at the U.N. and said this:
"Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories concerning the attacks of September the 11th; malicious lies that attempt to shift the blame away from the terrorists, themselves, away from the guilty."
That was only one month after the attacks. Wrap that around your Adderall XR 20 mg addled brain. Remember, this is way back when everyone was still shitting their pants, we were on the doorstep of Armageddon and nobody was even thinking about conspiracy, very few people were asking questions online, there were no 9-11 conspiracy books, websites or YouTube documentaries. None of my friends were talking about it. It's just creepy to me that he would say that. I'll bet half the assembly, in a deep coma bored out of their minds, cracked open their eyes thinking: "Wait, what? What the fuck did he just say? Conspiracy? Jesus Tits!"
Telling someone to not think about conspiracy one month after 9-11 is like coming home at three in the morning saying, "Honey, before I tell you why I'm late and the horrifying experience I just had I want you to know I wasn't out with any hookers so don't think about hookers. Anyone that might tell you I was with a hooker is feeding you malicious lies to shift the blame. I know this looks weird because I'm still covered in cocaine, I smell like Chanel No. 5, there's a very clear video online of my pants coming straight down at freefall speed, all three of our cars are wrecked even though the criminals hit only two, I have five frames of a surveillance video of whatever it was that hit our fourth car, I didn't do that myself but you can't see anything at all in the video anyway. Don't worry about it. I do have 70 other videos of the same wreck but I can't show you those for your own safety. The police were trying to stop these assholes from wrecking into our cars but all their vehicles were in Wichita or some shit getting worked on. They only had like two cop cars available to protect the entire town so they didn't make it in time. The fucking dispatch was all confused. You know how those 911 calls can be so crazy. Anyway, it wasn't hookers so don't even think about hookers, and cocaine, but we're going to need more cocaine, so I'm going to need more money."
This is old news in conspiracy circles but things are heating up. There's a new film coming out calledKill The Messenger. Glenn Greewald has just posted about the CIA/Cocaine connection on his blog The Intercept.
'Eighteen years after it was published, Dark Alliance, the San Jose Mercury News’s bombshell investigation into links between the cocaine trade, Nicaragua’s Contra rebels, and African American neighborhoods in California, remains one of the most explosive and controversial exposés in American journalism. The 20,000-word series enraged black communities, prompted Congressional hearings, and became one of the first major national security stories in history to blow up online. It also sparked an aggressive backlash from the nation’s most powerful media outlets, which devoted considerable resources to discredit author Gary Webb’s reporting. Their efforts succeeded, costing Webb his career. On December 10, 2004, the journalist was found dead in his apartment, having ended his eight-year downfall with two .38-caliber bullets to the head.
'These days, Webb is being cast in a more sympathetic light. He’s portrayed heroically in a major motion picture set to premiere nationwide next month. And documents newly released by the CIA provide fresh context to the Dark Alliance saga - information that paints an ugly portrait of the mainstream media at the time.
'On September 18, the agency released a trove of documents spanning three decades of secret government operations. Culled from the agency’s in-house journal, Studies in Intelligence, the materials include a previously unreleased six-page article titled Managing a Nightmare: CIA Public Affairs and the Drug Conspiracy Story. Looking back on the weeks immediately following the publication of Dark Alliance, the document offers a unique window into the CIA’s internal reaction to what it called “a genuine public relations crisis” while revealing just how little the agency ultimately had to do to swiftly extinguish the public outcry. Thanks in part to what author Nicholas Dujmovic, a CIA Directorate of Intelligence staffer at the time of publication, describes as “a ground base of already productive relations with journalists,” the CIA’s Public Affairs officers watched with relief as the largest newspapers in the country rescued the agency from disaster, and, in the process, destroyed the reputation of an aggressive, award-winning reporter.' (The Intercept article).
'Scientists at IBM Research have created by far the most advanced neuromorphic (brain-like) computer chip to date. The chip, called TrueNorth, consists of 1 million programmable neurons and 256 million programmable synapses across 4096 individual neurosynaptic cores. Built on Samsung’s 28nm process and with a monstrous transistor count of 5.4 billion, this is one of the largest and most advanced computer chips ever made. Perhaps most importantly, though, TrueNorth is incredibly efficient: The chip consumes just 72 milliwatts at max load, which equates to around 400 billion synaptic operations per second per watt - or about 176,000 times more efficient than a modern CPU running the same brain-like workload, or 769 times more efficient than other state-of-the-art neuromorphic approaches. Yes, IBM is now a big step closer to building a brain on a chip.
'The animal brain (which includes the human brain, of course), as you may have heard before, is by far the most efficient computer in the known universe. As you can see in the graph below, the human brain has a “clock speed” (neuron firing speed) measured in tens of hertz, and a total power consumption of around 20 watts. A modern silicon chip, despite having features that are almost on the same tiny scale as biological neurons and synapses, can consume thousands or millions times more energy to perform the same task as a human brain. As we move towards more advanced areas of computing, such as artificial general intelligence and big data analysis - areas that IBM just happens to be deeply involved with - it would really help if we had a silicon chip that was capable of brain-like efficiency.
'Enter TrueNorth, the culmination of the six-year-old SyNAPSE project at IBM Research. The work, which has been partly funded by DARPA since 2008, resulted in a prototype chip with just 256 neurons in 2011, and the Corelet programming language in 2013. This new chip is a second-generation version of the 2011 prototype, based on a new process (Samsung 28nm vs. IBM 45nm) and is orders of magnitude more complex, functional, and efficient. TrueNorth is implemented in standard CMOS transistors, just like the CPU in your PC - but that’s where the similarities end.' (Smart Engineering article).
'The story of the most ambitious project ever conceived on the Internet, and the people who tried to stop it. In 1937 H.G. Wells predicted the creation of the World Brain, a giant global library that contained all human knowledge which would lead to a new form of higher intelligence. Seventy years later the realization of that dream was underway, as Google scanned millions and millions of books for its Google Books website. But over half those books were still in copyright, and authors across the world launched a campaign to stop them, climaxing in a New York courtroom in 2011. A film about the dreams, dilemmas and dangers of the Internet, set in spectacular locations in China, USA, Europe and Latin America.' (Pirate Bay magnet link).
I know U.S. wars may seem like old news but this is well worth the time. It's the kind of dark absurdity that you can't actually laugh out loud at because you know the horrible reality but I'll bet you'll place both hands on your face and shake your head back and forth mumbling WTF? The first thing that came to mind reading this article is the book Catch-22. I'm going to have to read that again.
'The absurdity runs deep: America is using American military equipment to bomb other pieces of American military equipment halfway around the world. The reason the American military equipment got there in the first place was because, in 2003, the US had to use its military to rebuild the Iraqi army, which it just finished destroying with the American military. The American weapons the US gave the Iraqi army totally failed at making Iraq secure and have become tools of terror used by an offshoot of al-Qaeda to terrorize the Iraqis that the US supposedly liberated a decade ago. And so now the US has to use American weaponry to destroy the American weaponry it gave Iraqis to make Iraqis safer, in order to make Iraqis safer.
'It keeps going: the US is intervening on behalf of Iraqi Kurds, our ally, because their military has old Russian-made weapons, whereas ISIS, which is America's enemy, has higher-quality American weapons. "Kurdish forces are literally outgunned by an ISIS that is fighting with hundreds of millions of dollars of U.S. military equipment seized from the Iraqi Army who abandoned it," Ali Khedery, a former American official in Iraq, told the New York Times.
'So now we're bombing the guns that we didn't mean to give ISIS because we didn't give guns to their enemies because then ISIS might get guns.' (Truth Out article).
I'm not sure how this film slipped through the cracks here at Media Underground. Mortimer's prime directive is about bringing you news and information totally unavailable in the mainstream press. We like to keep on top of things and make sure you get the latest inside dope on shit you can't find anywhere else. Maybe this got posted on Disinformation first and I ignored it. Maybe I thought it was you're average UFO debunking documentary. Maybe I just thought the title sucked. I don't know. But we're only a year late. This film came out in 2013. I'm not even sure if this got posted here before and I just forgot. But it needs to be posted again because I just started watching it for the third time today. This is a goddam rabbit hole of fun house mirrors inside a maze fucking a unicorn. I may lose my mind. Anyway, read the review, download and watch. I highly recommend it...
'Is there anything new to say about UFOs and people who believe fervently they have seen one? I wouldn't have thought so, either - but the intriguing Mirage Men casts new light on the topic, unearthing the bizarre fact that the US Air Force and intelligence services have been running a campaign of disinformation about UFOs.
'Here's how it apparently works: a high-ranking intelligence agent takes an outspoken UFO conspiracy theorist into his confidence, tells him (it's usually a him) that his theories are not only on the right track but the US government is itself secretively pursuing similar theories. The agent also sprinkles some deliberate falsehoods about UFO sightings into his disclosures.
'This has the effect of seducing the UFO-believer, making him feel part of some charmed circle of knowledge, but also encouraging him to spout facts that sound absurd outside (and even within) the 'UFO community. Why would the Air Force and US government do it? To 'neutralise' the conspiracy nut, and possibly to throw America's enemies (oh, OK, Russia) off the scene about US defence development.
'Complicated, isn't it? Watching Mirage Men plunges you into a vortex of half-truths, lies, manipulation, bluffs and double bluffs. It's not quite clear who we should believe. And that's before we even confront Special Agent Richard Doty, a government official whose task it was to plant these falsehoods. Doty, a timid, deeply ordinary-looking man blinking behind large spectacles, admits to cynical trickery aimed at throwing gullible UFO believers off the scent.' (The Telegraph review & The Pirate Bay magnet link).
Algorithmic Filtering is a good enough term but I think someone needs to dumb it down so everyone can understand exactly what's going on here. I may be overstating the obvious but I like to be completely clear. People tend to ignore wild eyed conspiracy nuts screaming on the sidewalk. I also strive for simplicity and readability. Just imagine the next paragraph is written all in caps. Something like...
"With the right kind of hacking Facebook can make a story almost disappear even though everyone assumes it's a tool to give the general public complete freedom to post whatever they want. News stories can be ignored just as easily as they are in mainstream outlets. Just as Google can target ads from what's written inside your email, Facebook has software that can read your posts and bury certain topics or at least control content from becoming viral to a certain extent. This is especially insidious because the very nature of social media gives people the illusion that it's some kind of tool to give a voice to the voiceless. Nothing can be further from the truth."
'For me, last night’s Ferguson "coverage" began when people started retweeting pictures of armored vehicles with heavily armored "robocops" on top of them, aiming their muzzle at the protesters, who seemed to number a few hundred. It was the fourth night after an unarmed black man, Michael Brown, was shot by a - still unnamed - police officer after a "jaywalking" incident. Witnesses say he died hands in the air, saying "don’t shoot".
'The first night Mike Brown was shot, a friend asked on Twitter whether this would ever make the national news. It deserved to be national news as multiple significant, ongoing crises intersect at Ferguson: the loss of jobs which hit these communities worst; the militarization of US police departments; race; chronic multi-generational poverty.
'But those very factors often make it less likely such places make the news, except as trouble spots. Places to be ignored. Avoided. "We" hear it only through official statements, often dismissing local concerns, painting them as looters, thugs, troublemakers.' (Medium article).
I was looking all over for this for a year and I finally found it. I just uploaded it to The Pirate Bay. You're welcome.
'Winner of the University of Toronto Film Festival, 9/11 In The Academic Community is a unique film that documents academia’s treatment of critical perspectives on 9/11 by exploring the taboo that shields the American government’s narrative from scholarly examination. Through a powerful reflection on intellectual courage and the purpose of academia, the film aims at changing intellectual discourse on 9/11 and the War on Terror.
'As well as probing the repercussions several scholars have endured due to their investigation of 9/11, this documentary provides an analysis of impairments in professional inquiry, ranging from the failure to critically reflect on terms functioning as thought-stoppers (such as “conspiracy theory”) to the structural approach that restricts inquiry to the broad implications of 9/11 while shutting out enquiry into the events of the day itself. Morton Brussel, Professor Emeritus of Physics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, has stated: “The main thesis of the film concerns the silence of the academic community on this vital issue. I think it is extremely important and very well produced.”
'As 9/11 served as the rationale for the Global War on Terror, the expansion of the military and intelligence complex, the invasion of other countries in violation of international law, and the curtailing of civil liberties, the film provides an inspiring demonstration of intellectual courage that will cause many scholars to reflect on the academy’s role and strength to dismantle the war system. As Alvin A. Lee, President Emeritus of McMaster University, has stated in his endorsement of the film: academics should “stand sufficiently outside society intellectually to see, understand, and interpret what is going on.' (Pirate Bay magnet link).
Is Edward Snowden a disinformation agent? What would be the motive? Could it be a test to study our reaction when confronted with the fact the NSA is actually spying on Americans? Maybe they knew it was going to come out eventually and wanted to control the leak? Or frighten everyone into submission to put a chilling effect on what we say and do online? Ease us into the truth before they trash the Bill of Rights? I'm revisiting a year old conspiracy I thought was total bunk when I first heard the idea but now it seems somewhat believable.
Remember the NSA not only listens in on conversations and stores everything we do online but they also filter, analyze, measure and interpret data much like what a corporate marketeer would do. It's basic data mining to study trends. It would be the most accurate type of poll ever conceived in human history. So they could have easily studied what most people thought about the NSA itself, our reaction to total surveillance or whether or not we even cared.
My gut feeling is most people in the US probably already took for granted the NSA was spying on them to begin with. They would fully know it wouldn't be much of a risk for Edward Snowden to come out and tell the truth (the rest of the world has always known because that's been the NSA's job all along). But for the US population they probably already calculated the psychology behind the leak and possible reaction most people would have AND predicted the outcome. You can do a whole hell of a lot with that much data. It's understanding group psychology on a mass scale and knowing how far they can put their dick in our ass.
'Now that the dust has settled after the Edward Snowden affair, it’s time to ask some tough questions about The Guardian’s scoop of the week. Snowden’s story is that he dropped a $200,000 a year job and a (very attractive) girlfriend in Hawaii for a life in hiding in Hong Kong in order to expose the evils of the NSA's Prism programme. But bits of the story are now being questioned.' (The Telegraph article).
This article came out two days ago. Maybe you've seen it. Here at Media Underground we don't post too many stories that hit the mainstream but I had to post this just to prove I'm not making this shit up. And by the way I looked all over for an article with the downside to this new app or even a realistic take but they all seemed to have very little or no problem with it. I suppose it doesn't matter anymore if we live under the umbrella of a New Techno Stasi. People are watching it live, these psychopaths are shaking it right in our face and no one cares. And you don't need an army of riot police when the people are this apathetic.
And what is it with the new techno geeks who think this shit up? Are they virtual illiterates? Have they never read Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four? Surely they've seen a few dystopian science fiction films but they probably think: "Oh those are just movies and they don't mean anything. You're paranoid. Just look at this new technology! Isn't it cool?".
It will be the same thing with the new Mark of the Beast app. Here at the Underground we don't have to believe in Jesus to understand why an implantable chip might be creepy. It's just fucking creepy, okay? I don't know why. Some people just feel like they don't want to have a tracking device on their body that's connected to a huge database. Does that mean I'm a paranoid Christian? No it just means I don't want you in my shit. I wonder how they'll spin that one. I’ll bet they’ll find a way to get everyone begging for it. People will wait in line and camp out overnight to be the first ones to get the new iBeast.
"But James if you're not doing anything wrong why would it matter to you?" I don't know. It's just weird for some reason. I can’t explain it. And why in the fuck am I the paranoid freak? How come no one thinks the people who design these surveillance tools aren’t paranoid? You built a fucking gadget that records everything in the room or tracks everyone wherever they go? What kind of person would think of that? What kind of person would buy into that? Those are the people who are never labeled as paranoid. They're just concerned with your safety. Don’t you want to be safe? Or isn’t it cool that a giant corporation is listening in to everything in your room?
'Say, you don't mind if Facebook sticks one of your earbuds into its data-mining cranium, do you?
'As Facebook said in a message posted Thursday, over the next few weeks, it's introducing an optional music, TV and movies recognition feature in the US for Android and iOS gadgets - or what the praiseworthy Register calls "fondleslabs."
'The feature will be off by default. If a user gives it permission to slurp up sound, it will tap into the mic on a mobile device and eavesdrop on whatever's playing in the background.
'The feature will then grind through its recognition machinery to identify the song, movie or TV show you're listening to.
'Facebook didn't say anything about listening in on background noise, including private conversations.' (Naked Security article).
'In 2011 Barack Obama led an allied military intervention in Libya without consulting the US Congress. Last August, after the sarin attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, he was ready to launch an allied air strike, this time to punish the Syrian government for allegedly crossing the ‘red line’ he had set in 2012 on the use of chemical weapons. Then with less than two days to go before the planned strike, he announced that he would seek congressional approval for the intervention. The strike was postponed as Congress prepared for hearings, and subsequently cancelled when Obama accepted Assad’s offer to relinquish his chemical arsenal in a deal brokered by Russia. Why did Obama delay and then relent on Syria when he was not shy about rushing into Libya? The answer lies in a clash between those in the administration who were committed to enforcing the red line, and military leaders who thought that going to war was both unjustified and potentially disastrous.
'Obama’s change of mind had its origins at Porton Down, the defence laboratory in Wiltshire. British intelligence had obtained a sample of the sarin used in the 21 August attack and analysis demonstrated that the gas used didn’t match the batches known to exist in the Syrian army’s chemical weapons arsenal. The message that the case against Syria wouldn’t hold up was quickly relayed to the US joint chiefs of staff. The British report heightened doubts inside the Pentagon; the joint chiefs were already preparing to warn Obama that his plans for a far-reaching bomb and missile attack on Syria’s infrastructure could lead to a wider war in the Middle East. As a consequence the American officers delivered a last-minute caution to the president, which, in their view, eventually led to his cancelling the attack.
'For months there had been acute concern among senior military leaders and the intelligence community about the role in the war of Syria’s neighbours, especially Turkey. Prime Minister Recep Erdoğan was known to be supporting the al-Nusra Front, a jihadist faction among the rebel opposition, as well as other Islamist rebel groups. ‘We knew there were some in the Turkish government,’ a former senior US intelligence official, who has access to current intelligence, told me, ‘who believed they could get Assad’s nuts in a vice by dabbling with a sarin attack inside Syria - and forcing Obama to make good on his red line threat.' (London Review Of Books article).
'One of the many pressing stories that remains to be told from the Snowden archive is how western intelligence agencies are attempting to manipulate and control online discourse with extreme tactics of deception and reputation-destruction. It’s time to tell a chunk of that story, complete with the relevant documents.
'Over the last several weeks, I worked with NBC News to publish a series of articles about “dirty trick” tactics used by GCHQ’s previously secret unit, JTRIG (Joint Threat Research Intelligence Group). These were based on four classified GCHQ documents presented to the NSA and the other three partners in the English-speaking “Five Eyes” alliance. Today, we at the Intercept are publishing another new JTRIG document, in full, entitled “The Art of Deception: Training for Online Covert Operations.”
'By publishing these stories one by one, our NBC reporting highlighted some of the key, discrete revelations: the monitoring of YouTube and Blogger, the targeting of Anonymous with the very same DDoS attacks they accuse “hacktivists” of using, the use of “honey traps” (luring people into compromising situations using sex) and destructive viruses. But, here, I want to focus and elaborate on the overarching point revealed by all of these documents: namely, that these agencies are attempting to control, infiltrate, manipulate, and warp online discourse, and in doing so, are compromising the integrity of the internet itself.' (The Intercept article).
'Today I found out that during the height of the Cold War, the US military put such an emphasis on a rapid response to an attack on American soil, that to minimize any foreseeable delay in launching a nuclear missile, for nearly two decades they intentionally set the launch codes at every silo in the US to 8 zeroes.
'We guess the first thing we need to address is how this even came to be in the first place. Well, in 1962 JFK signed the National Security Action Memorandum 160, which was supposed to ensure that every nuclear weapon the US had be fitted with a Permissive Action Link (PAL), basically a small device that ensured that the missile could only be launched with the right code and with the right authority.
'There was particularly a concern that the nuclear missiles the United States had stationed in other countries, some of which with somewhat unstable leadership, could potentially be seized by those governments and launched. With the PAL system, this became much less of a problem.’ profits.
'Beyond foreign seizure, there was also simply the problem that many U.S. commanders had the ability to launch nukes under their control at any time. Just one commanding officer who wasn't quite right in the head and World War III begins. As U.S. General Horace M. Wade stated about General Thomas Power:
"I used to worry about General Power. I used to worry that General Power was not stable. I used to worry about the fact that he had control over so many weapons and weapon systems and could, under certain conditions, launch the force. Back in the days before we had real positive control [i.e., PAL locks], SAC had the power to do a lot of things, and it was in his hands, and he knew it."' (Gizmodo article).
'In recent years, Facebook has become an unexpectedly crucial tool for activism. The social media platform allows activists to efficiently connect and communicate with one another in order to arrange meetings, protests and boycotts. Unfortunately, activists who once found that Facebook helped make organizing easier are now encountering obstacles – and the resistance is coming from Facebook itself.
'With little explanation, Facebook has been disabling pages related to activism. In some cases, administrators who set up the pages are no longer able to add updates. In others, the pages are being deleted entirely. Understandably, activists are frustrated when a network of 10,000 like-minded individuals is suddenly erased, leaving no way to reconnect with the group.
'Realistically, that’s the downside of relying on a hundred billion dollar company. Facebook is a pro-business enterprise with countless partnerships that undoubtedly pressure the site to limit the types of socializing progressives may engage in, particularly activities that might harm advertisers’ profits.' (Films For Action article).
'Scientists in Spain have reported the first self-healing polymer that spontaneously and independently repairs itself without any intervention. The new material could be used to improve the security and lifetime of plastic parts in everyday products such as electrical components, cars and even houses.
'The researchers have dubbed the material a 'Terminator' polymer in tribute to the shape-shifting, molten T-100 terminator robot from the Terminator 2 film. The research is published in the Royal Society of Chemistry journal Materials Horizons.
'Self-healing polymers that can spontaneously achieve quantitative healing in the absence of a catalyst have never been reported, until now. The scientists have prepared the self-healing thermoset elastomers from common polymeric starting materials using a simple and inexpensive approach.' (Phys.Org article).
'Two days after the world learned the National Security Agency logs practically every American phone call, the agency had started cracking down on entrepreneurs who made fun of it. That’s according to Dan McCall, founder of politically themed T-shirt company Liberty Maniacs.
'On June 5, the Guardian posted the first of many documents, leaked by former contractor Edward Snowden, that detail NSA‘s spy practices. Two days later, McCall put up a handful of T-shirts and bumper stickers for sale on the custom goods marketplace Zazzle, which distributes most of Liberty Maniacs’ goods. Each of those items had the NSA logo, plus a common joke as a slogan: “The only part of the government that actually listens.”
'“Within an hour or two,” as McCall told the Daily Dot, Zazzle emailed him to say the shirt had been removed from the Zazzle site. (Zazzle didn’t respond to the Daily Dot’s request for comment, nor did the NSA.)
'Zazzle’s first email, which McCall forwarded to the Daily Dot, said in part: “Unfortunately, it appears that your product, The NSA, contains content that is in conflict with one or more of our acceptable content guidelines. We will be removing this product from the Zazzle Marketplace shortly. Result: Not Approved. Policy Notes: Design contains an image or text that may infringe on intellectual property rights. We have been contacted by the intellectual property right holder and we will be removing your product from Zazzle’s Marketplace due to infringement claims.”'(Salon article).
'In an effort to buck the expensive rates of unreliable corporate telecom companies, a community in Athens, Greece, has created its own private Internet. Built from a network of wireless rooftop antennas, the Athens Wireless Metropolitan Network (AWMN) now has more than 1,000 members. Data moves “through” the AWMN mesh up to 30 times faster than it does on the telecom-provided Internet.
'According to Mother Jones, this off-the-grid community has become so popular in Athens and on nearby islands that it has developed its own Craigslist-esque classifieds service as well as blogs and an internal search engine. "It's like a whole other Web," AWMN user Joseph Bonicioli told the magazine. "It's our network, but it's also a playground."
'The AWMN began in 2002 in response to the poor Internet service provided by traditional telecommunications companies in Athens. However, the past few years have illustrated another use for these citizen-run meshes: preserving the democratic values of the Internet.' (The Daily Dot article).
Here at Media Underground Headquarters we don't generally use The New York Times as a stepping off point to steer you to an interesting documentary but in this case I couldn't find any other good reviews of this film. And that doesn't mean this documentary sucks it just means most of the reviewers were too stupid, corporate lackeys or had no idea how frightening this film is.
Anyway, read the review, check out their clever website, download and watch. I highly recommend it...
'The title of Terms And Conditions May Apply is unlikely to excite, but the content of this quietly blistering documentary should rile even the most passive viewer. Investigating our casual surrender of privacy rights every time we click the “Agree” button on those dense (and typically unread) online user contracts, the director Cullen Hoback outlines the real-life dangers of digital heedlessness. As the film illustrates, a random tweet or innocent Google search could summon a SWAT team to your door or transform you into a suspected terrorist.
'Actual horror stories aside, this concise and lively summary of the many ways corporations, law enforcement and government agencies gather, share and use our information - assisted by digital giants like AT&T and Google - is creepily unnerving.
'“Anonymity isn’t profitable,” one of the film’s more than 30 interviewees points out, and whether it’s cameras on Main Street or preinstalled software on your smartphone recording every keystroke, there has been an alarming rise in surveillance programs. While legal rulings on the programs remain shrouded in secrecy, they continue to serve multiple purposes, from attracting profits to deterring whistle-blowers and identifying protesters. If you’re planning a revolution - or just a political discussion group - better not tweet the location.' (N.Y. Times review & The Pirate Bay magnet link).
I watch a shitload of these "made for the internet" documentaries and this one has to be the best. Whoever made this knows his history on the CIA. If you watch any of it make sure to watch part three. It's amazing.
'An extraordinary work by a gifted filmmaker, "Counter-Intelligence" shines sunlight into the darkest crevices of empire run amok. The film vividly exposes a monstrous and unconstitutional "deep state" in which multiple competing chains of command - all but one illegal - hijack government capabilities and taxpayer funds to commit crimes against humanity in our name. Anyone who cares about democracy, good government, and the future will want to watch all five segments of this remarkable film.' (Films For Action website).
'Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events.
'The most recent study was published on July 8th by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent. Entitled “What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories,” the study compared “conspiracist” (pro-conspiracy theory) and “conventionalist” (anti-conspiracy) comments at news websites.
'The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist.” In other words, among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority.' (PressTV Rebel article).
'For me, Žižek’s words are even more potent in light of recent news about domestic surveillance programs. As a former contractor with the US National Security Agency (NSA), these issues hit especially close to home. During my service in the Korean military, I worked for two years as special intelligence personnel for the NSA, learning first-hand how to extract information from defense targets. Our ability to gather vital SIGINT (Signal Intelligence) information was absolutely easy. But, these skills were only applied outwards for national security and defense purposes - not for overseeing American citizens. It appears that this has changed. Now, as a designer, I am influenced by these experiences and I have become dedicated to researching ways to “articulate our unfreedom” and to continue the evolution of my own thinking about censorship, surveillance, and a free society.'
'Over the course of a year, I researched and created ZXX, a disruptive typeface which takes its name from the Library of Congress’ listing of three-letter codes denoting which language a book is written in. Code “ZXX” is used when there is: “No linguistic content; Not applicable.” The project started with a genuine question: How can we conceal our fundamental thoughts from artificial intelligences and those who deploy them? I decided to create a typeface that would be unreadable by text scanning software (whether used by a government agency or a lone hacker) - misdirecting information or sometimes not giving any at all. It can be applied to huge amounts of data, or to personal correspondence. I drew six different cuts (Sans, Bold, Camo, False, Noise and Xed) to generate endless permutations, each font designed to thwart machine intelligences in a different way. I offered the typeface as a free download in hopes that as many people as possible would use it.' (The Gradient article).
This is the TWA Flight 800 documentary that's all over the media right now. It looks like some hacker got a rough cut of it and uploaded it to The Pirate Bay. It's not supposed to come out until July 17th.
'EPIX presents the World Premiere Original Documentary, TWA Flight 800, a thought-provoking ninety-minute documentary about the ill-fated Trans World Airline Flight 800 to Paris, France, which exploded on July 17, 1996 just 12 minutes after takeoff from JFK International Airport, killing all 230 people on board. The special features six former members of the official crash investigation breaking their silence to refute the officially proposed cause of the jetliner’s demise and reveal how the investigation was systematically undermined. In commemoration of the 17th anniversary of the traumatic event, TWA Flight 800 premieres Wednesday, July 17, 2013 at 8PM ET.
'TWA Flight 800 is written, directed, and produced by Emmy Award-winning journalist Kristina Borjesson. Co-producer, Dr. Tom Stalcup, PhD, Physics, who for 16 years, was determined to delve deeper into the original investigation to seek truth and closure for the family members of the victims of this tragedy, led the film’s investigation. The documentary features interviews with key members of the original TWA 800 Investigation team, including Senior Accident Investigator for the National Transportation Safety Board (Ret.), Hank Hughes (Ret.), Chief Accident Investigator for TWA (Ret.), Bob Young, and Air Line Pilot Association Representative/Investigator James Speer.' (The Pirate Bay magnet link).
'Kathryn Bigelow's Osama bin Laden revenge-porn flick Zero Dark Thirty was the biggest publicity coup for the CIA this century outside of the actual killing of Osama bin Laden. But the extent to which the CIA shaped the film has remained unclear. Now, a memo obtained by Gawker shows that the CIA actively, and apparently successfully, pressured Mark Boal to remove scenes that made them look bad from the Zero Dark Thirty script.
'The CIA's whitewashing effort is revealed in a cache of documents newly released under a Freedom of Information Act request about the CIA's cooperation with Bigelow and Boal. The documents include a 2012 memo - initially classified "SECRET" - summarizing five conference calls between Boal and the CIA's Office of Public Affairs in late 2011. "The purpose for these discussions was for OPA officers to help promote an appropriate portrayal of the Agency and the Bin Ladin operation," according to the memo (hundreds of pages of CIA documents about the film were released last year - the memo obtained by Gawker was approved for release late last month).
'During these calls, Boal "verbally shared the screenplay" for Zero Dark Thirty in order to get the CIA's feedback, and the CIA's public affairs department verbally asked Boal to take out parts that they objected to. According to the memo, he did.' (Gawker article).
Finally some reasonable questions on the Boston bombing...
'Speaking as an investigative reporter with almost 40 years’s experience, I can say that when government officials won’t talk, they’re generally hiding something embarrassing or worse.
'I tried, and nobody will talk about those Craft International Services private security personnel who were widely observed and photographed near the finish line of the Boston Marathon, wearing security ear-pieces, hats and T-shirts bearing the company’s skull logo, and all wearing the same dark coats, khaki pants and combat boots, some carrying what appear to have been radiation detectors (I got no hard answers, though there were some inadvertent hints given).
'I first contacted a man identifying himself as Jack Fleming, a public affairs person with the Boston Athletic Assn., sponsor of the marathon. Fleming advised me that “If you want to ask about that you should contact the Commonwealth (of Massachusetts) Executive Office of Public Safety.”
'I called that agency and spoke with the public information office there, a man named Terrell. He first said, "Did you call the Marathon organizers?" When I replied that I had, and that they had said to call his office, he replied, "They did?" Then he said, “You should call the City of Boston Police Department. They released a security plan to some media organizations.”' (This Can't Be Happening article).