When The S*** Hits the Fan

#CIA ‘Accidentally’ Destroyed 6,700 Page #Torture Report? #Snowden Calls Bullshit

by

(ANTIMEDIA) The world’s most famous whistleblower, Edward Snowden, took Twitter by storm when he created an account last year. Since, he has criticized everyone from the FBI to Google, so his latest post on the CIA should come as no surprise.

Commenting on revelations the CIA “inadvertently” destroyed a copy of the 6,700-page torture report, Snowden questioned the agency’s official story.

“I worked @CIA. I wrote the Emergency Destruction Plan for Geneva. When CIA destroys something, it’s never a mistake,” he tweeted Wednesday, openly challenging the CIA’s claim. He also shared an article detailing the news.

Snowden previously worked for the CIA and as an NSA contractor before leaking documents revealing the U.S. government’s extensive mass surveillance programs and subsequently fleeing the country. He has been an outspoken voice against government overreach and privacy issues ever since.

On Monday, Yahoo News reported on the CIA’s apparent fumble that inspired Snowden’s Wednesday tweet:

“The CIA inspector general’s office — the spy agency’s internal watchdog — has acknowledged it ‘mistakenly’ destroyed its only copy of a mammoth Senate torture report at the same time lawyers for the Justice Department were assuring a federal judge that copies of the document were being preserved.”

The Senate Intelligence Committee was reportedly informed of the ‘mistake’ last summer, but it was never disclosed to the public, nor to the federal judge presiding over a Freedom of Information Act case seeking access to the lengthy document.

Douglas Cox, a professor at the City University of New York School of Law, who specializes in “tracking the preservation of federal records,” commented on the CIA’s self-described mistake. “It’s breathtaking that this could have happened, especially in the inspector general’s office — they’re the ones that are supposed to be providing accountability within the agency itself,” he said. “It makes you wonder what was going on over there.”

The clandestine organization came under fire for its use of torture after 9/11 (and before, though it’s lesser-known), as exposed by a Senate investigation in December 2014. Following embarrassing reports of everything from sexual assault and forced rectal feeding to beatings, sleep deprivation, and other degrading practices, the CIA has since tried to clean up its image. Amid presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump’s calls to implement waterboarding and more torture, in general, CIA Director John Brennan disavowed the agency’s infamous practice. “I will not agree to have any CIA officer carry out waterboarding again,” he said in April.

But the CIA has a track record of deception, and has had at least one issue with destroyed documents before — that time concerning records on the agency’s coup in Iran in 1953.

The 2014 Senate report “relied on the CIA’s own records to document a pattern of an agency consistently understating the brutality of the techniques used on detainees and overstating the value of the information they produced,” the Associated Press reported in 2014.

“This is a tremendous amount of CIA misrepresentation. It is difficult to read these pages and wonder whether a system of accountability can work,” Mother Jones observed, in a thorough article examining the many ways the CIA deceived lawmakers and multiple federal agencies about its torture program.

As Democratic Senator Mark Udall flatly said, “The CIA lied.”

No doubt, according to Snowden, the CIA continues to lie — and his tweet highlights growing mistrust of establishment narratives as Americans increasingly lose faith in government and other institutions.

Read Snowden’s recent article on political resistance here.

This article (CIA ‘Accidentally’ Destroyed 6,700 Page Torture Report? Snowden Calls Bullshit) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Carey Wedler 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 at edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

We Found a Preview of the 28 Redacted Pages — and It’s a 9/11 Game-Changer

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) United States — On Tuesday, the New York Times revealed a document published by the National Archives that appears to offer a glimpse into potentially damning information contained in the so-called ‘missing’ 28 pages concerning the attacks on September 11, 2001.

Those 28 pages are “an entire section within the official report of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks … Conducted by the House and Senate intelligence committees, its 838-page report was published in December 2002.”

Over the past several weeks, discussion has reignited debate over the need to release the redacted section for several reasons — the most striking being a bill to allow the families of 9/11 victims sue Saudi Arabia over its potential involvement in the attacks. In what cannot be considered a coincidence, also on Tuesday, the Senate voted to approve that exact legislation — called Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) — in direct defiance of vows from Pres. Obama that he will summarily veto the bill should it land on his desk.

“I think we easily get the two-thirds override if the president should veto,” stated Sen. Charles Schumer on the bill’s passage.

Separate legislation, which coincides with JASTA — S.B. 1471, Transparency for the Families of 9/11 Victims and Survivors Act of 2015 — would require the president to declassify those currently-redacted pages. This would almost certainly be imperative for JASTA to have the teeth necessary for affected families to pursue justice.

Tuesday’s disclosure from the National Archives appears to show why those families might, indeed, have a justifiable reason to hold the Saudis at least partly responsible for damages — despite its contents only hinting at information potentially contained in the 28 pages.

Former member of the 9/11 Commission, John Lehman, came forward in the past week calling for a new and thorough investigation into Saudi involvement in the attacks. In measured and precise language, Lehman noted that “we have found no evidence that the Saudi government as an institution or senior Saudi officials individually funded the organization” — but also stressed “our report should never have been read as an exoneration of Saudi Arabia.”

Perhaps, as Lehman suggested, the institution of the Saudi government did not play a role; however, as found in the document in the Times, at least a partial connection already stands.

A shady cast of characters are briefly outlined in the document under the heading, “A Brief Overview of Possible Saudi Government Connections to the September 11th attacks” — and simply in context it appears a number of notable associations may have been made.

Omar Al-Bayoumi, a Saudi national, encouraged two of the hijackers to move to the San Diego area where he was located. As the document describes:

“Al-Bayoumi has extensive ties to the Saudi Government and many in the local Muslim community in San Diego believed that he was a Saudi intelligence officer. The FBI believes it is possible that he was an agent of the Saudi government and that he may have been reporting on the local community to Saudi Government officials.”

Osama Bassnan “received considerable funding from Prince Bandar and Princess Haifa, supposedly for his wife’s medical treatments. According to FBI documents, Bassnan is a former employee of the Saudi Government’s Educational Mission in Washington, D.C.”

Though some officials privy to the redacted section have claimed any connection to kingdom officials is tenuous, at best, one solid link already stands. Fahad al-Thumairy, a former diplomat at the Saudi consulate in Los Angeles, associated himself with al-Bayoumi in San Diego before the revocation of his visa and his subsequent return to Saudi Arabia in May 2003.

In fact, the document lists a pilot for the Saudi royal family who ferried Osama bin Laden back and forth between Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia during his “exile.” A number of others are listed with less than questionable ties to either the Saudi government, the royal family, or both.

But perhaps most telling are the questions the document appears to be proposing for the investigation — or, more specifically, what seems to be implied in those questions.

“1. How aggressively has the U.S. Government investigated possible ties between the Saudi Government and/or Royal Family and the September 11th attacks?

“2. To what extent have the U.S. Government’s efforts to investigate possible ties between the Saudi Government and/or Royal Family and the September 11th attacks been affected by political, economic, or other considerations?”

On their own, such questions seem basic, obvious, and even mundane as so essential to the investigation to be needless to state — but taken with the details of this outline and the context of what their answers may constitute in those redacted 28 pages, the repercussions become apparent. If, for instance, the U.S. decided not to thoroughly pursue avenues of investigation due to economic interests in Saudi affairs, that would show fealty to another country over the best interests of the victims of those attacks.

Perhaps that murky obstruction is best seen in the document’s discussion of an FBI informant located in San Diego. Buried among other questions, the document asks: “Why did the FBI, Department of Justice, and White House refuse to allow the Joint Inquiry to interview or depose the informant?”

With the firestorm swirling once again around the redacted 28 pages, this basic outline of a document offers a serious glimpse into what might prove to be a fundamental shift in the narrative of 9/11 the U.S. government has spoonfed for over a decade.

As U.S.-Saudi relations have recently deteriorated to an arguable new low, perhaps it remains just a matter of time before we all know the truth.

This article (We Found a Preview of the 28 Redacted Pages — and It’s a 9/11 Game-Changer) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

#Iceland’s Biggest Political Party Is Now The “ #PirateParty” — and It’s Amazing

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) Iceland’s anti-establishment Pirate Party continues to lead nationwide polls as the most popular choice for the next elections. The party — whose policies include internet freedom, drug decriminalisation, and open democracy — has consistently led the polls for the last year and, as a result, has secured more funding than any of its rivals.

The 2008 financial crisis hit Iceland hard. The following year, the krona was devalued by around 50%, unemployment doubled, and capital controls were introduce. Miraculously, the country rose from the ashes to become one of Europe’s top performers in terms of growth. More recently, the political establishment has been in turmoil since three government ministers were implicated in the global Panama Papers scandal.

Despite their struggle, or perhaps because of it, the list of reasons to admire Icelanders keeps on growing. Whether it’s the sentencing of senior bankers — or the mass outrage at the offshore leak, which propelled 10% of the population to the streets and ousted the Prime Minister — the radical refusal of Icelanders to bow down and accept establishment corruption is admirable.

Because of this, the surge in popularity of the once-fringe Pirate Party comes as little surprise — recent polls suggest almost half the nation supports them. In Iceland, financial support for political parties is allocated based on how well they have done in polls.

Although the party doesn’t have formal leadership, chair of the parliamentary group and spokesperson, Birgitta Jonsdottir, said they did not expect the funding. Claiming their campaign was, so far, funded at a flea market, she said that was enough and that all the party needs is to be able to pay the salaries of its employees.

“We did not expect this. We don’t care. Democracy doesn’t revolve around getting loads of money from the government,” she added.

This article (Iceland’s Biggest Political Party Is Now The “Pirate Party” — and It’s Amazing) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

The #FBI Has 80,000 Documents on #Saudi Ties to 9/11 It Tried to Suppress

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) The classified 28-pages of the 9/11 report have made global headlines lately as a handful of lawmakers battle to release them to the public. Those pages are believed by activists and members of Congress — who have seen them — to expose the role of Saudi Arabia, including government officials, in the terrorist attacks.

But according to a new report based on years of investigative journalism, it turns out there are far more than 28 classified pages on Saudi Arabia and 9/11 — there are 80,000 kept secret by the FBI. And though not all 80,000 are expected to concern the Saudi family — and the FBI insists their investigation of the documents came up empty-handed — journalists, at least one lawmaker, and heavily-redacted documents suggest otherwise.

As the Daily Beast reported, the discovery of the 80,000 pages came when Irish investigative journalists Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan were contacted by an unnamed counterterrorism official in 2011. The reporters were preparing to publish a book on the 10th anniversary of the terror attacks and were told  by the source that a Saudi family who had been living in Sarasota, Florida, prior to the attacks had connections to the attackers. Specifically, they were linked to Mohamed Atta, the Egyptian terrorist widely recognized as the ringleader of the attacks.

The unnamed official’s tip conflicted squarely with the FBI’s prior conclusions on that family. Abdulazzi al-Hiijjii, his wife Anoud, and their three small children lived in an upscale Sarasota community, along with Anoud’s father, Esam Ghazzawi, a financier and interior designer, who owned the home, and Ghazzawai’s American-born wife. The FBI had received multiple calls from the family’s neighbors expressing concerns over erratic behavior. Two weeks before 9/11, they left the house in a huge hurry, leaving dirty diapers and toys strewn about, a fully stocked refrigerator, and three cars in the driveway.

Though the FBI opened an investigation in April 2002, it still insists it never found any significant connection between the family and Atta. The agency acknowledged they had suspected a connection, but “not until after the Tampa field office opened an investigation that claimed to find ‘numerous connections’ between the family and the 9/11 hijackers,” the Daily Beast explained. The 80,000 classified pages in question stemmed from that investigation.

The FBI says “the bureau’s own agents did initially suspect the family was linked to some of the hijackers.” But “on further scrutiny, those connections proved unfounded, officials now say.”

But Summers and Swan contacted Dan Christensen, a veteran Florida reporter, and together they published an exposé on these connections in Sarasota in September 2011. As they reported, following the 9/11 attacks:

“[L]aw enforcement agents not only discovered the home was visited by vehicles used by the hijackers, but phone calls were linked between the home and those who carried out the death flights — including leader Mohamed Atta — in discoveries never before revealed to the public.”

They were also never revealed to lawmakers. The 2011 story caught the attention of Bob Graham, a Florida Democrat who has since led the campaign to release the 28 pages on the Saudi connection, which are said to contain information showing Saudi government officials were involved in orchestrating the attack.

At the time, he said the journalists had “open[ed] the door to a new chapter of investigation as to the depth of the Saudi role in 9/11.” Graham attempted to view some of the documents, and told the Daily Beast (for a forthcoming article) they did show a connection between the family and three hijackers. He was soon after confronted by then-deputy director of the FBI, Sean Joyce. According to Graham, he said, “Basically everything about 9/11 was known and I was wasting my time and I should get a life.”

Christensen filed a Freedom of Information Act request in the hopes of either confirming or refuting their original reporting. Thomas Julin, his lawyer, said the FBI initially denied having any records. When Graham said he was willing to testify he had seen some, the Department of Justice conveniently admitted to having 35 relevant pages. They released them, but they were heavily redacted. In spite of the overt censorship guarding that information, they reportedly still made clear the FBI had suspicions about the family — and that they had found several connections between them and the hijackers. The pages also include the FBI’s dismissals of those suspicions.

U.S. District Court Judge William Zloch, who presided over the Freedom of Information case, was unconvinced and demanded the FBI conduct another search of its records. This time,“the FBI found some additional responsive documents which it produced,” Juline told the Daily Beast. “But it also found 80,266 pages of material in the Tampa Field Office of the FBI which had been marked with the file number for the FBI’s PENTTBOM investigation.”

PENTTBOM was the FBI term for its investigation into the 9/11 attacks. Though the New York Post had previously reported on these 80,000 pages, the DoJ’s small release of documents clarified suspicions. Zloch ordered the FBI to hand over all the documents in May 2014 — and he is still going through them to determine which pages can be released. He has given no indication of when he will be finished.

The Daily Beast explained “Zloch’s task is made all the more painstaking by the strict security rules governing review of classified documents, even for a sitting judge. The files are kept in a secure facility, and he can only remove a portion at a time.”

It remains unclear how many of the 80,000 pages pertain directly to the Tampa FBI field office’s investigation of the family in Sarasota — and their ties to the attackers. Though Christensen says he’s ready to be proven wrong, he believes “those files will reveal the underlying reasons for the FBI’s early suspicions.”

As the Daily Beast laid out:

“The FBI, for instance, says that phone records searches showed no links to the house and the hijackers. Christensen’s confidential source says the opposite is true. If the FBI is right, Christensen asks, then why not just release the information and put the dispute to rest?”

The FBI has attempted to discredit the pages, claiming the agent who filed the first reports on the family and their potential connection to the hijackers was “not a good writer and should not be taken as the last word,” according to Graham. However, that agent was promoted shortly after 9/11, casting doubt on assertions they were incompetent.

In a similar evasion of accountability, President Obama vowed to block a legislative effort to release the 28 pages amid pressure from the Saudi Arabian government, which threatened to remove $750 billion in American assets should the legislation pass. The president cited concerns that allowing families of 9/11 victims to sue a foreign government could, in turn, open the United States government up to prosecution, itself. The White House has since indicated it intends to release part of the 28 pages.

Though Julin says the 28 pages likely aren’t linked to the Sarasota Saudi family, he hopes their eventual release “might help Judge Zloch see the wider significance of the events in Sarasota and persuade him that some or all of the records have not been properly classified.”

Last week, a former member of the 9/11 commission said he believes six Saudi officials supported the 9/11 hijackers. John F. Lehman said Wednesday, “There was an awful lot of participation by Saudi individuals in supporting the hijackers, and some of those people worked in the Saudi government,” he said. “Our report should never have been read as an exoneration of Saudi Arabia.”

The FBI’s trove of documents also requires further examination. Julin dismissed suspicions Judge Zloch is intentionally lagging in his investigation of the 80,000 pages. “I believe this is not a stalling tactic at all,” he said. “The judge is doing what he has to comply” with the stringent rules surrounding the release of the classified documents. “But I would urge him to speed it up,” he said.

This article (The FBI has 80,000 Documents on Saudi Ties to 9/11 It Tried to Suppress) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Carey Wedler 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 at edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

5 Huge Stories the Media Ignored While Arguing Over Which #Bathroom to Use

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) Americans are prone to obsessing over seemingly frivolous headlines. Over the past year, we’ve seen the media drive emotional feeding frenzies on everything from the Starbucks red cup scandal or the superficial Confederate flag saga that ultimately glossed over the true foundations of racism in the U.S. Regardless of what the subjective opinion may be, the United States populace tends to feel inclined to indulge in heated, dramatic conversations about the morality of apparently inanimate objects.

But sometimes, they focus on more substantive issues.

One consistent subject that repeatedly riles up the masses is the subject of transgender rights. Last year, America (and the world) erupted in glee, rage, and overall chaos after Caitlyn Jenner debuted her new identity on the cover of Vanity Fair. More recently, many Americans have zeroed in on the ongoing controversy over transgender bathroom rights — sparked by North Carolina’s recent LGBT law. Some champion equal rights for all; others lament the destruction of American values. Headlines have detailed high-profile boycotts against North Carolina, the viral petition condemning Target for allowing transgender people to use whatever bathroom they prefer, and now, the topic is trending again amid news of President Obama’s call on Friday for public schools to respect transgender bathroom rights.

As important as these developments may be — no matter your views on the subject — as tends to happen, other highly important stories have fallen by the wayside. Though they have not been wholly blacked out by the corporate media, they have implications of equal, if not more , importance than America’s obsession with transgender issues — and most Americans will likely never hear about them.

Here are five stories you might want to review before diving back into the transgender imbroglio:

1. Hillary’s Conflicts of Interest Continue to Mount: As we reported, it was revealed this week that employees at the Department of Justice — one of the agencies tasked with investigating Clinton’s allegedly improper use of private email servers — gave $75,000 in donations to the presidential front-runner. “Hillary’s donations from the Department of Justice completely swamp those of the other candidates, in fact, as Sanders’ total from 51 donors was just $8,900 and Trump garnered an inconsequential $381,” we reported. David Bossie, president of watchdog group, Citizens United, argued “Attorney General Lynch must appoint a special counsel to determine if Hillary Clinton or her agents broke the law and compromised our national security. This investigation needs to be conducted free of political influence once and for all.”

As our own Claire Bernish explained, “Critics have previously pointed to Lynch personally donating over $10,000 to Democratic candidates as evidence of her lack of impartiality — and sufficient reason she should not be charged with overseeing the investigation of Clinton’s emails.” Further, Judge Andrew Napolitano revealed Russia has obtained some 20,000 emails from Hillary’s personal server — and is debating whether or not to leak them publicly. Ultimately, this conflict of interest represents deeply-rooted, systemic glitches in American democracy, where accountability is often flouted to protect the oligarchy. This reality does not mean the transgender conversation is unimportant — however, it does provide a sad commentary on whom Americans will accept as their ruler while they trade insults over bathroom rights. In this case, it’s a corrupt career politician whose misdeeds have thus far failed to thwart her designs on power.

2. Somebody was finally arrested for voter fraud, but it wasn’t the people committing it: This week, Anti-Media also reported on a Florida-based hacker, David Michael Levin, who exposed security flaws in the website of the Lee County Elections Office and the Division of Elections in Tallahassee. He shared them with authorities in the hopes of fixing the problem, but instead was arrested and charged. “According to the somewhat redacted police report, Levin’s associate, Daniel Sinclair, sent a security report about the SQL vulnerability — including details of the security flaw and a screenshot — to ‘an employee within the Department of State, Division of Elections,’” we reported. Shortly after, a special investigation was launched and Levin was arrested. “Levin’s foray into the elections data had not been undertaken with the appropriate permission — and because he didn’t alert the authorities as soon as he discovered vulnerabilities, law enforcement is required to be blind to his good intent,” we noted. He spent six hours in jail, even though he complied with all searches and confiscation of electronic devices.

Sinclair is running for a seat on the Lee County elections board, drawing some suspicion the hack was a publicity stunt, but as we noted, “with rather overt fraud disenfranchising voters across the country, arresting the one hacker who attempted to help secure elections seems oddly ironic.” Here’s a list of the many irregularities plaguing the electoral process this year.

3. Former Facebook employees revealed how the site censors news stories: Last week, Gizmodo published an in-depth story on how journalists working for the “Facebook Trends” feature of the social networking site were mistreated and quarantined from the rest of the staff. This week, Gizmodo published a follow-up piece documenting allegations from former employees that curators of the trending section excluded stories from conservative outlets and deliberately failed to include conservative topics from the IRS discrimination scandal to Rand Paul. Though these exclusions appeared to be unintentional displays of bias from individual employees, they dominated coverage of the story. But other manipulations of the feed were more deliberate. One official policy of the department included censoring stories about Facebook from trends.

“When it was a story about the company, we were told not to touch it. It had to be cleared through several channels, even if it was being shared quite a bit. We were told that we should not be putting it on the trending tool,” said one former employee. Further, in another official policy, employees were allowed to artificially inject stories into that trending pool, even if they were not trending on Facebook — as long as they were covered by mainstream outlets.

Though Republican lawmakers demanded answers from Facebook, perhaps the real story is Facebook’s complicity in perpetuating corporate media narratives; Facebook has long-partnered with corporate outlets (and the U.S. government), and has also been accused of censoring stories critical of Hillary Clinton, while blocking grassroots groups supporting Bernie Sanders. While Facebook is ultimately a private company that can make its own decisions, its users would do well to take the revelations as an opportunity to decide whether they trust the outlet to responsibly and equitably provide them with information.

No matter one’s view on Facebook’s rights as a private institution, the news of their practices runs in direct violation of their assertion the feed is comprised of “topics that have recently become popular.” The whistleblowers expressed hope that with the increased use of algorithms, Facebook Trends will be less subject to human bias and manipulation. In case that doesn’t happen, sign up for the weekly Anti-Media newsletter to get information unfiltered by Facebook.

4. Rat DNA, Human DNA, and Pathogenic Germs… in your hamburgers: According to an independent analysis conducted on over 250 burger brands in the United States — ranging from fast food to frozen food, and even vegetarian products — America’s love for burgers faces some snags. Though the report by Clear Labs, a California-based food industry researcher, praised overall improvements in the hamburger industry, they noted severe shortcomings, particularly with product labeling and the presence of germs. Rat DNA was found in three vegetarian burger samples while human DNA was found in one — but those were not the most concerning findings, the researchers noted, because though their presence is revolting, they are not necessarily considered dangerous to humans.

More worthy of alarm, they explained, was the mislabeling of vegetarian products, the presence of meat in some of those purportedly meatless burgers, and the total absence of black beans in a black bean burger. The report notes “23.6% of vegetarian products showed some form of discrepancy between product and label, compared to the 13.6% of all samples. We found pervasive issues in food quality and end-product consistency in these non-meat samples.”

Further, they found pathogens known to cause illness in 11 samples, four of which were found in vegetarian burgers. Though their tests could not determine whether the pathogens were alive or dead, their presence at all should raise eyebrows. Another top concern of analysts was the finding that “nearly 81 percent (38 of 47) of the fast food burgers tested contained more calories than reported in the product’s nutritional information,” and that“these discrepancies are potentially worrisome for customers who make decisions about what to order based on calorie counts and other available nutritional information.”

Though food contamination in the United States is nothing new, these findings are relevant not only because they document ongoing issues with food quality, but because they represent an attempt by a private organization to pick up the FDA’s slack. As Anti-Media pointed out, “Perhaps most telling is Clear Labs’ subtle, if not unintentional, commentary on the failures of the FDA to keep food safe for consumers; they stress their goal is to improve the safety and quality in hamburgers — ‘regardless of whether or not they are acceptable according to FDA guidelines,’” ultimately providing a silver lining to the unsettling report.

5. American foreign policy continues to have unintended ramifications: Americans have by and large accepted aggressive militarism as a linchpin of U.S. policy, and though the overwhelming civilian casualties and military failures are widely-known, this week Anti-Media reported on another consequence of the longest war in U.S. history: the war in Afghanistan has turned a generation of children into heroin addicts.

“The psychological damage of war, together with the flood of cheap heroin, has led to a doubling in addiction rates over the last five years. In the Channel 4 documentary, Unreported World, Ramita Naval explores a harrowing escalation in child addiction. In the ravaged country, where access to drug treatment is severely limited, she visits a rehabilitation centre where children as young as four or five — haunted by horrors they have witnessed — attempt to regain lost childhoods,” Anti-Media noted.

A Kabul-based doctor told Naval rates of addiction had jumped 60 percent in the last two years at the only treatment center in the city that helps children. Naval spoke to a thirteen-year-old boy whose parents were killed by shelling when he was eight. He ended up working as a guard for drug dealers, eventually becoming addicted to opium himself. He said he prostitutes himself to be able to maintain his habit.

Another young boy’s addiction began when, “after witnessing a suicide bomb attack in Kabul, he went to stay with relatives in the countryside. While he was there, U.S. forces bombed his village, killing dozens of people; he described seeing bodies scattered everywhere. The young boy and other villagers had to pick up the body parts and put them in plastic bags. Claiming the war breaks his heart — and making his descent into drug use more understandable — he said, ‘I’d rather not live, than live through this war.’”

“What’s happened in Afghanistan over the last 13 years has been the flourishing of a narco-state that is really without any parallel in history,” Kabul-based journalist Matthieu Aikins told Democracy Now back in 2014.

Afghanistan now produces 90 percent of the world’s opium, and even the CIA has been linked to key players in that trade. Clandestine operations aside, however, a generation of children lives in a country where opium is cheaper than food — and where unrelenting violence chronically traumatizes their young psyches, driving them deeper into addiction.

Of course, it is possible to care about transgender rights and political corruption, censorship, contaminated food, and the unintended victims of the Afghanistan War. As Facebook highlights transgender rights and Americans preach from the bully comment thread pulpits, however, it’s important to remember the broad view of current affairs.

This article (5 Huge Stories the Media Ignored While Arguing Over Which Bathroom to Use) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Carey Wedler 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 at edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

#DOJ Employees Investigating Hillary Email Scandal Gave $75K to Her Campaign

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) United States — In what must be described as a massive conflict of interest, Hillary Clinton has amassed nearly $75,000 in campaign donations from individuals listing their place of employment as “Department of Justice.” Considering Clinton is the subject of a sweeping investigation by the FBI — for which the DoJ will determine whether or not charges will be levied — such donations seem at least somewhat dissonant.

As the Washington Free Beacon reported, of all the presidential hopefuls, Clinton received by far the heftiest sum from DoJ employees — $73,437 total, including 228 individuals contributing the maximum allowable by law, $2,700. On its own, the total could be considered substantial, but as the Free Beacon noted, Clinton’s previous presidential run wasn’t favored as heavily by DoJ employees — in 2008, she raised just $15,930 from 23 contributors.

Hillary’s donations from the Department of Justice completely swamp those of the other candidates, in fact, as Sanders’ total from 51 donors was just $8,900 and Trump garnered an inconsequential $381.

“I’m not surprised in the least to see more evidence that shows the politicization of the Justice Department,” said watchdog group, Citizens United, president David Bossie, in a statement to the Free Beacon. “How can Democrat political appointees fairly investigate someone who is about to become their nominee for president? That’s why last July I called on Attorney General Lynch to appoint an impartial special counsel to investigate the private Clinton email server.

“Today, I renew my call that Attorney General Lynch must appoint a special counsel to determine if Hillary Clinton or her agents broke the law and compromised our national security. This investigation needs to be conducted free of political influence once and for all.”

Critics have previously pointed to Lynch personally donating over $10,000 to Democratic candidates as evidence of her lack of impartiality — and sufficient reason she should not be charged with overseeing the investigation of Clinton’s emails.

As if the DoJ connections to the Clinton investigation weren’t enough, the former secretary has also received a number of hearty contributions from the private prison industry.

As The Intercept reported nearly a year ago, two of Clinton’s top campaign donors are Corrections Corporation of America and the Geo Group — two of the biggest private prison corporations on the planet.

For Clinton to not only claim to follow the letter of the law in the face of evidence to the contrary — in her use of a private email server for official State business — but to also tout her devotion to minorities and social justice, while accepting donations from for-profit prisons, belies the flimsiest of façades.

As usual, Hillary Clinton’s stances run the gamut of personal convenience while flouting the public interest. Though evidence grows stronger by the day that at least one of her many wrongs is deserving of an indictment, the levying of charges remains an open question — if not downright doubtful.

This article (Dept. of Justice Investigating Hillary Email Scandal Gave $75K to Her Campaign) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Marc Nozell. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

Hacker #Arrested and Jailed After Exposing Flaws in #Election Website

by

(ANTIMEDIA) Lee County, FL — A hacker in Florida exposed security vulnerabilities in one county’s elections web domains so officials could fix the problem — but, instead, he ended up behind bars.

Hacker David Michael Levin, owner of Vanguard Cybersecurity, was arrested on Wednesday after the Florida Department of Law Enforcement received a referral from the Lee County Sheriff’s Office after his apparently misguided attempt to help prevent election fraud by pointing out online vulnerabilities.

After spending six hours in jail, where he was held on $15,000 bond, Levin now faces three counts of gaining unauthorized access to a computer, network, or electronic instrument — despite the fact he had not only been doing his job, but also alerted the county to a potentially serious security concern.

To hack the Lee County Elections Office and the Division of Elections in Tallahassee, Levin performed Structured Query Language (SQL) injection attacks — which he documented on video and later uploaded to YouTube. According to the somewhat redacted police report, Levin’s associate, Daniel Sinclair, sent a security report about the SQL vulnerability — including details of the security flaw and a screenshot — to “an employee within the Department of State, Division of Elections.”

That employee then forwarded all the information to Special Agent Christopher Tissot, and the investigation began.

Though superficially, the case appears to be one of an unwelcome security breach despite that it was attempted for otherwise laudable purposes. But some aspects of what led to Levin’s arrest deserve further consideration.

Levin’s associate, Sinclair, is currently running against incumbent Sharon Harrington, Lee County Supervisor of Elections — whose name and password were used in the SQL hack. In the YouTube video about the attack, Levin and Sinclair explain how they obtained data from the elections website, which wasn’t even encrypted.

The possibility Levin chose Harrington’s account to perform the SQL injection as a publicity stunt to make Harrington’s job performance appear untenable must be taken into consideration. That being said, Levin’s foray into the elections data had not been undertaken with the appropriate permission — and because he didn’t alert the authorities as soon as he discovered vulnerabilities, law enforcement is required to be blind to his good intent.

However, in Levin’s defense, the privacy concerns of millions of voters — and any other potential issues with unencrypted and unsecured information — on the official Elections website should perhaps trump the strictures of law. Levin cooperated fully during a raid of his property — during which electronics were confiscated — and has in no way been deceitful regarding the hack.

Considering the sheer volume of complaints so far during the 2016 election cycle, it would seem counterproductive for law enforcement to go after a credentialed individual who obviously has the voting public’s best interests in mind.

With rather overt fraud disenfranchising voters across the country, arresting the one hacker who attempted to help secure elections seems oddly ironic.

This article (Hacker Arrested and Jailed After Exposing Flaws in Election Website) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

Whistleblowers Confirm #Facebook #Censors Certain Types of News Stories

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) Former Facebook employees who managed the “Trending News” section of the site are accusing the behemoth social media platform of censoring news stories and “injecting” others to artificially inflate their popularity. Unsurprisingly, in light of these accusations, the developing story appears to have been censored from the site’s list of popular stories, underscoring deeply-rooted problems in the way information is presented online.

The fresh allegations follow a story published last week by Gizmodo, which detailed how some of the journalists tasked with populating the trending news list were overworked and mistreated. The reporters, “a small group of young journalists, primarily educated at Ivy League or private East Coast universities,” select stories for the feed, and also write the headlines and three-line descriptions that show up on the right-hand side of the Facebook home screen.

Gizmodo points out the influence of this seemingly small operation, noting the list of trending stories, “constitutes some of the most powerful real estate on the internet and helps dictate what news Facebook’s users—167 million in the US alone—are reading at any given moment.”

Since the publication of last week’s initial story, other former Facebook employees have come forward to describe the types of stories that were intentionally included in — and excluded from — the feed, which purports to be determined by the stories’ popularity among users.

Rather than reflecting users’ organic interests, however, one of the most glaring components of the Facebook trending stories tool — according to the effective whistleblowers — is the company’s policy of excluding stories about Facebook. According to Gizmodo, “When stories about Facebook itself would trend organically on the network, news curators used less discretion—they were told not to include these stories at all.”

As one former news curator said, “When it was a story about the company, we were told not to touch it. It had to be cleared through several channels, even if it was being shared quite a bit. We were told that we should not be putting it on the trending tool.”

This former employee’s experience was substantiated by at least one other. “We were always cautious about covering Facebook,” another former curator said. “We would always wait to get second level approval before trending something to Facebook. Usually we had the authority to trend anything on our own [but] if it was something involving Facebook, the copy editor would call their manager, and that manager might even call their manager before approving a topic involving Facebook.”

But limiting the exposure of Facebook-centered articles is only one tactic in the social media platform’s manipulation of news stories. As Gizmodo explained:

“When users weren’t reading stories that management viewed as important, several former workers said, curators were told to put them in the trending news feed anyway. Several former curators described using something called an ‘injection tool’ to push topics into the trending module that weren’t organically being shared or discussed enough to warrant inclusion—putting the headlines in front of thousands of readers rather than allowing stories to surface on their own.”

Often, some former employees said, the injected topics would eventually become the most popular trending stories. While on the surface, this practice may seem like a proactive effort to provide more news for users, the injected stories were firmly rooted in establishment pillars of information.

“We were told that if we saw something, a news story that was on the front page of these ten sites, like CNN, the New York Times, and BBC, then we could inject the topic,” said one former curator. Indeed, all three of these outlets epitomize “mainstream” journalism, and, unsurprisingly — or even synonymously — all three outlets have been thoroughly accused of censorship, deception, and bias.

Facebook’s policy to artificially inject stories, as long as they were validated by coverage from outlets like these, reflects the platform’s clear, albeit perhaps unwitting, connection to perpetuating establishment narratives. As the former curator said, “If it looked like it had enough news sites covering the story, we could inject it—even if it wasn’t naturally trending.”

Though boosting placement of relevant news stories seems like a noble cause, the practice clearly violates Facebook’s efforts to make the trending news feed appear as strictly “topics that have recently become popular” on the site.

Whereas censoring stories on Facebook and injecting others were a matter of policy, the subjective biases of the journalists curating stories also reportedly affected the neutrality of the stories presented to users. Though no former curator interviewed by Gizmodo said this was an official protocol, many said stories from conservative outlets were routinely excluded from the trending news list.

One former curator who, as a political conservative was a minority on the curating team, said, “Depending on who was on shift, things would be blacklisted or trending.” He added, “I’d come on shift and I’d discover that CPAC or Mitt Romney or Glenn Beck or popular conservative topics wouldn’t be trending because either the curator didn’t recognize the news topic or it was like they had a bias against Ted Cruz.”

For example, stories about Lois Lerner, the head of the IRS implicated in unfairly targeting conservative groups, were not included in trending stories. Stories from conservative aggregator, Drudge Report, were also censored, along with stories about conservatarian politician, Rand Paul. “It was absolutely bias[ed]. We were doing it subjectively. It just depends on who the curator is and what time of day it is,” a former curator said, revealing the lack of consistency in Facebook’s reporting practices.

Further highlighting Facebook’s establishment philosophies, Gizmodo noted “stories covered by conservative outlets (like Breitbart, Washington Examiner, and Newsmax) that were trending enough to be picked up by Facebook’s algorithm were excluded unless mainstream sites like the New York Times, the BBC, and CNN covered the same stories.”

While to some left-leaning Facebook users the omission of conservative stories seems like a fair — or even necessary — practice, these fundamentally exclusionary practices should be cause for concern to anyone obtaining news from the trending stories list.

Facebook declined to comment on these allegations, but the site is no stranger to accusations of censorship and manipulating information. The platform was recently caught censoring at least one story unfavorable to Hillary Clinton while multiple groups supporting presidential candidate Bernie Sanders have been suspended. On a different note, Facebook also works closely with the United States government to enable surveillance of the internet, a role that better illustrates the company’s establishment culture than the left-wing biases of individual employees.

Between the individual biases of employees and the broader, more controlling policies of injection and censoring stories about the site, Facebook has proven its incompetence in accurately informing users. Gizmodo reports some former curators said as algorithms were increasingly employed, biases became less pronounced, also noting that the employees worked for Facebook between 2014 and 2015, so if changes have been made, the whistleblowers would not be aware of them.

At the very least, however, the confessions of former curators should raise fundamental questions about journalistic integrity among users who trust the friendly social networking site to deliver information in a responsible, education-oriented manner. As Gizmodo noted, “the revelations undermine any presumption of Facebook as a neutral pipeline for news, or the trending news module as an algorithmically-driven list of what people are actually talking about.”

Perhaps most telling is the trending news section’s reaction to Gizmodo’s breaking story on Facebook news practices: it’s nowhere to be found.

This article (Whistleblowers Confirm Facebook Censors Certain Types of News Stories) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Elizabeth Montag 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 at edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

The Government Just Declared #War on #Vaping

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) As people have taken up vaping in droves, it was only a matter of time before the joy police pulled up and slapped rules on the electronic substitute. This week, the Food and Drug Administration did exactly that when it announced U.S. tobacco regulations will be extended to e-cigarettes.

The latest era of prohibition, aimed at the fast-growing vaping industry, not only signifies the end for thousands of small business, but is a slap in the face to e-cig users who are trying to reduce their risk of harm. Unsurprisingly, Thursday’s ruling has led to vaping advocates accusing the FDA of gifting the market to Big Tobacco.

The FDA states the historic rule helps implement the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act of 2009, which is intended to allow the agency to improve public health and protect future generations. Until now, the act gave the FDA the power to regulate the industry, but e-cigs and other tobacco related products were left out.

The new ruling now gives the agency jurisdiction over all tobacco products in the US — including the $3 billion e-cigarette industry, which wasn’t previously under its control.

In April 2014, when the first proposal to extend authority over the products was launched, it attracted over 100,000 comments, and the FDA was forced to include lengthy responses in the final rule. Consequently, the 499-page rule has been broadened to include hookah and pipe tobacco, as well as premium and small cigars (among other products); it also banned the sale of e-cigs to individuals under 18.

In a press statement, Health and Human Services secretary Sylvia Burwell said, “We have more to do to help protect Americans from the dangers of tobacco and nicotine, especially our youth.” She said that while cigarette smoking among those under 18 has fallen, the use of other nicotine products has taken a drastic leap.

The Vape Debate

No matter where you turn, the vape debate is conflicting. With hundreds of brands and thousands of flavours, the smoke-free, tobacco-free substitute is either hailed as a successful harm reduction tool or a looming public health threat. As with anything, the importance of establishing who is behind any research, statements, and articles can never be underestimated — but it’s safe to assume that the electronic devices are less damaging to smokers than conventional cigarettes.

“Some harm from sustained exposure to low levels of toxins over many years may yet emerge, but the magnitude of these risks relative to those of sustained tobacco smoking is likely to be small,” the Royal College of Physicians wrote.

The only thing for sure so far is that evidence is limited regarding the long-term effects of e-cigs. At the same time, it remains to be seen whether they help people to give up smoking altogether, or how they will affect the use of other tobacco products.

While anti-tobacco groups have welcomed the FDA ruling as a step forward, e-cig advocates warn it could lead to the end of small businesses. Within two years, companies must submit premarket tobacco application papers with the FDA at a whopping estimated cost of $1 million or more for each flavour, nicotine strength, and device. Once applications are submitted, there is no guarantee they will get the green light.

Unsurprisingly, the crackdown means the increasingly popular market is likely to undergo significant changes that will include price hikes, reduced choice, more research, and the potential of an emerging black market as prohibition drives vaping underground.

This article (The Government Just Declared War on Vaping) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: micadew. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

#Government Chemist Was Making #Crack in the Lab, Stealing Meth and Cocaine

by

 

(ANTIMEDIA) As if the futility, destruction, and absurdity of the decades-long war on drugs were not already painfully apparent, a Massachusetts state chemist involved in testing evidence for drug prosecutions was high on a variety of illicit substances, including crack, cocaine, meth, and acid, for most of the nine years she worked for the government, including one year working directly for a police lab.

The chemist was not only high on drugs she stole throughout her tenure — she cooked and consumed crack cocaine at work. Additionally, throughout the years she testified in scores of drug cases, whose verdicts — along with the Drug War itself — have now been called into question.

Sonja Farak worked as a chemist for the Massachusetts Department of Public Health (DPH) from 2003 to 2012, switching labs twice throughout the years. She spent most of her time with DPH at a lab in Amherst, but also worked as a chemist for the Massachusetts State Police from 2012 to 2013.

As a Massachusetts Attorney General (AG) investigation released this week summarized, her responsibilities included “testing, for authenticity, various controlled substances submitted by law enforcement agencies throughout the Commonwealth. Additionally, she was required to testify in court as to her test results, which served as evidence in criminal cases.”

The implications of her behavior are nothing short of disturbing. “Anything that went through that lab while she was there is in question,” said Anthony Benedetti, chief counsel of the Committee for Public Counsel Services. “It’s too soon to know how many, but it clearly is in the thousands.”

In at least one case, she appeared to have consumed drugs submitted by police and replaced them with counterfeit substances. Farak was reportedly also overly inquisitive about large arrivals of new drugs at the lab, which tipped off others who worked there when considered along with the absence of other drugs.

According to the AG report:

“Farak began to consume the Amherst Lab’s standards [drugs purchased from drug companies to be used as controls in testing] on a fairly regular basis beginning in late 2004 or early 2005. The first standard she admitted to using was the methamphetamine standard, which was the largest or most voluminous standard at the Amherst Lab. The methamphetamine standard was a base sample, meaning its form was oil base and it was not cut or diluted with any other substance, essentially making the standard the purest form of a controlled substance.”

By 2009, her addiction was so consuming she had “nearly exhausted” the lab’s methamphetamine standard supply. As the report notes, “by 2009, she also began using other standards at the Amherst Lab including ketamine, MDMA, MDEA, and LSD (including police-submitted evidence samples),” as well as cocaine. She eventually took it a step further, ultimately manufacturing crack for her own consumption. By Farak’s own admission:

“During mid to late 2012, she would enter the Lab after hours or when she was working overtime, remove powdered cocaine from samples, and cook it to produce crack. Specifically, Farak would dissolve the powdered cocaine in water, add baking soda, and heat up the mixture so that the moisture would dissipate and form crack,” the AG report says.

Though she only did so three or four times, she said she made large batches to “make a quantity worth [her] time.”

“All told,” she said, according to the AG report, “she estimated that she was smoking crack ten to twelve times a day.” She says her colleagues never suspected anything. One later testified that in 2012, her appearance had begun to deteriorate, as had the quality and volume of her work.

Farak was only caught when it was discovered in 2013 that drug samples were missing from the lab. Farak was arrested and ultimately served 18 months after pleading guilty in 2014. She was convicted of “evidence tampering, theft, and possession charges relating to a handful of criminal cases.” Though she was sentenced to two-and-half years, the rest of her sentence was suspended for five years.

The state is currently reviewing cases from individuals convicted, in part, as a result of Farak’s lab work and testimonies against them. “We are deeply concerned whenever the integrity of the justice system is called into question or compromised,” said Cyndi Roy Gonzalez, a spokeswoman for Attorney General Maura Healey. “The information we gathered during the course of our investigation is disturbing and will no doubt have implications for many cases.”

Considering another former lab employee was found, also in 2013, to “have fabricated evidence in thousands of samples she tested at a second state lab in Jamaica Plain, possibly tainting as many as 40,000 cases,” the underlying moral of Farak’s story is perhaps best illustrated by Matthew Segal, the legal director for the ACLU’s Massachusetts branch.

“It’s easy to get caught up in these scandals, zooming in on the specific misconduct because it’s so salacious,” he said.

“But it’s also important to zoom out, and take a look at what the drug war in Massachusetts has wrought. It hasn’t cured us of an addiction problem. It has obliterated the integrity that is supposed to be the foundation of the criminal justice system.”

No doubt, his observations can apply to the United States as a whole, where corruption and drug addiction plague the very individuals and institutions tasked with the fantastical — and futile — obsession with eliminating drug use.

This article (Government Chemist Was Making Crack in the Lab, Stealing Meth and Cocaine) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Elizabeth Montag 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 at edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

How #Facebook, #Instagram, Google, and Twitter Use Censorship to Kill Free Speech

by

Michaela Whitton
May 3, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — Social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter play an increasingly important role in our lives, but a brand new study into online censorship has revealed a number of developing trends regarding how social media platforms are attempting to regulate their users’ speech.

While most readers have likely been lucky enough to evade Facebook jail, others might have friends who have been kicked off the social networking site for designated periods of time for ‘violating community standards.’ Some may even have had their Facebook accounts closed permanently due to the site’s  ‘real names’ policy. Others have likely have had posts flagged or removed for containing nudity or other allegedly offensive content.

“UNFRIENDING CENSORSHIP: Insights from four months of crowdsourced data on social media censorship” is a brand new report that draws on data gathered from users of six social networking sites between November 2015 and March 2016. The inaugural study by Onlinecensorship.org — a collaborative effort between the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and Visualizing Impact — asked users to submit reports when their content was reported or their accounts were removed from Flickr, Facebook, Twitter, Google+, Instagram, and YouTube.

“Account suspensions, the most stringent form of moderation, were the most frequent type of content takedown in our dataset,” the report notes.

After analysing the collected data across geography, platform, content type and issue areas, the analysis revealed a number of trends in social media censorship. Here are some highlights of the information gathered from 161 submissions across 26 countries, with content in 11 languages:

censorship-3

– Facebook was the most frequently reported platform, with account suspensions the most reported content type.

– Nudity and false identity were the most frequent reasons given for the removal of  content on Facebook.

– Of 119 reports received from Facebook users, 13% had been asked to prove their identity to Facebook under its name policy.

– Instagram users tended to report “inappropriate content” as the reason their content was taken down.

– Twitter takedowns tended to be linked to targeted abuse, harassment, or fraud/spam.

– Nearly half of copyright-related takedown submissions came from YouTube.

– 53% of users did not appeal the takedown of their content, 50% said they didn’t know how, and 41.9% said they didn’t expect a response. In four cases content was restored, but in 50 cases the user didn’t receive a response.

– There were widespread reports that flagging is being used for censorship, and 61.6% of users believed that this was the cause for the removal of their content.

“The content was the Wikipedia photo of human anatomy showing a man and a woman in full frontal nudity. It is against Facebook’s guidelines about nudity,” reads one case study.

Although measures were used to help verify reports — and users were given the opportunity to send screenshots to support their claims — onlinecensorship.org did not work with the social media companies to obtain their data. Consequently, the study does not claim to be representative of all content takedowns or user experiences.

EFF explained the importance of tracking how social media companies are regulating the speech of their users:

“As self-ordained content moderators, these companies face thorny issues; deciding what constitutes hate speech, harassment, and terrorism is challenging, particularly across many different cultures, languages, and social circumstances.”

EFF added that while the U.S.-based companies don’t believe their policies constitute censorship, the purpose of onlinecensorship.org is to challenge this assertion by examining how their policies (and their enforcement) may be having a chilling effect on freedom of speech.

After examining how the policies of social media platforms are being enforced — and how this affects the lives of users — the report goes on to make a set of recommendations for how the social media sites can improve the experiences of users and boost their commitment to free expression.

READ NEXT: Wikileaks Drops Hillary Email Bomb That Could End Her Campaign but FB Censored It

Those who wish to report content blocking and online censorship can do so here.

This article (How Facebook, Instagram, Google, and Twitter Use Censorship to Kill Free Speech) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Tyler Menezes. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

#Obama Jokes About the “End of the #Republic,” Giving Speeches to #GoldmanSachs

by

 

Elizabeth Montag
May 2, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) If the corporate media wasn’t gushing over Justin Bieber’s new haircut or the nation’s lingering transphobia bathroom drama this weekend, it was lauding President Obama for his speech at the final White House Correspondents’ dinner of his presidency.

The black-tie dinner draws the nation’s top celebrities, journalists, and politicians and includes a stand-up comedy routine from the president. The assemblage of attendees often resembles the elite crowd that populates the lavish capital in the Hunger Games — and the president’s statements this weekend detail an oligarchical American society similar to that depicted in the dystopic novels.

This year, the president seemed unusually candid about the country’s state of affairs — even if he articulated them in a comedic, albeit smug, way.

“It is an honor to be here at my last — and perhaps the last White House Correspondents’ dinner,” he said as he opened his set, obviously referencing the increasingly doomed presidential race.

“You all look great. The end of the republic has never looked better,” he said to laughs and applause.

“If this material works well, I’m gonna use it at Goldman Sachs next year,” he said.

The joke could have been referencing his former Attorney General, Eric Holder’s new job at a law firm that lobbies for corporate banks — or, more likely, Hillary Clinton’s exorbitant fees for giving speeches to the loathed company. His comments are particularly jarring considering he accepted massive donations from Goldman Sachs and its employees during both of his presidential campaigns, and upon taking office, invited former Goldman Sachs employees to join his cabinet. He has famously failed to take any meaningful action against big banks.

In spite of his acknowledgment of Goldman Sachs as an influential player in American politics, he appeared to indirectly endorse Hillary Clinton’s candidacy, which has been marred by the influence of special interests, including Goldman Sachs.

“Next year someone else will be standing here in this very spot, and it’s anyone’s guess who she will be,” he said. The president dished out tame insults to all of the presidential candidates, ultimately turning his attention to the chairman of the Republican Party, whom Donald Trump has said “should be ashamed of himself” for the Republicans’ attempts to thwart his nomination.

“GOP chairman Reince Priebus is here as well. Glad to see you feel you earned the night off. Congratulations on all your success. The Republican Party, the nomination process … it’s all going great,” Obama sarcastically quipped.

The president also focused his attention on journalism and freedom of the press in the United States. Whether or not he intended to highlight the revolving door between government and corporate news, he did exactly that.

“Key staff are now starting to leave the White House. Even reporters have left me. Savannah Guthrie, she’s left the White House Press Corps to host the Today show. Norah O’Donnell left the briefing room to host CBS This Morning. Jake Tapper left journalism to join CNN,” he said.

He also joked about the power of journalists to hold politicians and government accountable, referencing a recent award-winning film about reporters:

“As you know, Spotlight is a film, a movie about investigative journalists with the resources and the autonomy to chase down the truth and hold the powerful accountable. Best fantasy film since Star Wars. Look — that was maybe a cheap shot.”

Adding insult to injury, the president, who has worked tirelessly to silence journalists, told reporters in attendance that though they have not always seen eye to eye with him, he still appreciates their work:

“But we’ve always shared the same goal  — to root our public discourse in the truth; to open the doors of this democracy; to do whatever we can to make our country and our world more free and more just. And I’ve always appreciated the role that you have all played as equal partners in reaching these goals.”

Obama has presided over the country’s slip in press freedom rankings, the prosecution of whistleblowers, and the intimidation of journalists. The corporate media he addressed in his speech has, in that same time, shown its corruption and lack of concern for the truth. Amid the current election cycle, establishment news outlets have shown their role is not to educate, but to manipulate, yet Obama maintained “[their] power and [their] responsibility to dig and to question and to counter distortions and untruths is more important than ever.”

As the media celebrated his epic “mic drop” at the end of his stand-up routine, those reading between the lines of his performance witnessed the not-so-secretive mechanisms of chaos, power, and corruption in Washington — as joked about by a president who maintained them.

This article (Obama Jokes About the “End of the Republic,” Giving Speeches to Goldman Sachs) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Elizabeth Montag and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11 pm Eastern/8 pm Pacific. Image credit: Edalisse Hirst. If you spot a typo, please email the error and name of the article at edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

Activist Faces #Extradition and 99-Year Sentence on #Hacking Charges

by

Michaela Whitton
April 28th, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) United Kingdom — A British activist is fighting extradition to the U.S. after allegedly taking part in a hacktivist protest against the U.S. government. Accused of hacking into government websites — including those of the U.S Army, FBI, NASA and the privately-run Federal Reserve Bank — computer scientist Lauri Love now has three U.S. extradition requests with his name on them. Lawyers have warned he could face 99 years in jail.

First arrested in 2013 for alleged offences under the U.K.’s Computer Misuse Act, Love’s equipment was also seized. Britain’s National Crime Agency attempted to force him to hand over his encryption keys, but he refused to cooperate and was released on bail.

He was arrested again last year at the request of the U.S. government, which issued a number of indictments and corresponding extradition warrants. The FBI and Department of Justice accused Love of hacking into websites including the U.S. Army, NASA, the Federal Reserve and the Environmental Protection Agency. Operation Last Resort (#OpLastResort) was a series of online protests in 2013, which Anonymous hacktivists claimed responsibility for. The cyber attack followed the persecution and untimely death of Aaron Swartz and prompted the federal websites to demand legal reform.

Data protection expert Kevin Cahill has described Love’s case as unbelievably ironic, pointing out that the very same people seeking to extradite the political activist have been convicted of hacking in the U.K. “The United States government was convicted on October 6th of the criminal offence of interception of emails in the United Kingdom,” he told  RT’s Harry Fear.

What’s also ironic is that while Big Brother keeps a beady eye on all of us, the very same governments that classify hackers as criminals are secretly exploiting their expertise, according to documents provided by whistleblower Edward Snowden.

Just weeks away from his June hearing, Love remains on extradition bail and is required to sign on at a police station twice a week. Claiming he wants the court deciding his fate to be a British one, he says he has been informed the British authorities have no intention of charging him. “The U.S. government has attempted to fight a war against information transparency and hacktivism in general, and I’ve become swept up in that,”  said the 31-year-old activist, who has been described as one of the U.K’s most expert cyber-security scientists.

“I believe that if I am extradited to the U.S., my life is effectively over,” he added.

Love has Asperger’s Syndrome, as did British hacker Gary Mckinnon, who escaped U.S. extradition after a ten-year battle. Central to Mckinnon’s eventual win was the risk that his vulnerable health would decline during U.S. incarceration. Naomi Colvin, of the Courage Foundation, said Love’s case will be a vital test of whether the U.K.’s outdated extradition laws have changed since the Mckinnon case.

Tor Ekeland, Love’s lawyer, called the case a draconian and heavy-handed prosecution. Insisting the U.K. authorities are very much acting on behalf of the U.S., he said he fails to see what the major harm is. He added that while the U.S. has a particular “puritanical zeal”  in its punishment of hackers compared with other countries, it doesn’t do much to deter the real bad actors, which are usually nation states and criminal gangs.

“I don’t think I’ve committed any crimes,” Love said, before adding, “Whether I have done anything illegal is something that gets determined in court.”

The computer scientist’s extradition hearing is at the end of June, with a decision expected in July. You can read more about the case and show him support here.

This article (Activist Faces Extradition and 99-Year Sentence on Hacking Charges) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Michaela Whitton and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

Watch #Comedian Rip #US Government Over 9/11 and 28 Pages in Under 4 Minutes

by

Claire Bernish
April 28, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) While President Obama recently vowed to veto a bill offering families of victims of 9/11 the chance to seek justice from foreign governments that may be complicit, outrage largely centered on the families — for the most part ignoring what the veto intimated. Though designed to lift immunity from the litigation traditionally provided to parties culpable in terror attacks — specifically, attacks on U.S. soil, and specifically in this case, Saudi Arabia — the bill could feasibly expose the U.S. to the same.

And therein lies the problem. Because, as Lee Camp wryly highlighted on Redacted Tonight recently, the United States government nefariously meddles in global affairs — often employing terroristic tactics or direct acts of terrorism for hegemonic, imperialistic goals.

To wit, Camp’s critique of U.S. violent hegemony includes a rundown of 30 examples — a telling figure in itself — but his list constitutes an exceedingly limited overview of the stultifying hubris of American foreign policy, past and present. Is there any doubt why Obama and a bipartisan Congress sought to withhold potential justice for loved ones of victims from September 11, 2001?

Sure, the Saudis threatened to yank three-quarters of a trillion dollars in U.S. assets from the already fragile economy should Obama pass the bill — but, in consideration of the aforementioned meddling, this political and economic blackmail appears an awfully convenient excuse for a veto.

As indicated in the length of the following far-from-complete list, the number of violent interventions the United States government would have to explain makes apparent Obama’s desire to veto this bill.

This article (Watch Comedian Rip US Government Over 9/11 and 28 Pages in Under 4 Minutes) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

#Cop Saves a Man From #Suicide, Somehow Igniting Serious Debate on Social Media

by

 

Claire Bernish
April 27, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Riverdale, NJ — In a swift and valiant move, a New Jersey police officer rushed to tackle a man who attempted to end his life by jumping from a highway overpass bridge on Monday.

Sgt. Greg Bogert, an 18-year veteran of the Riverdale Police Department, responded to  multiple 911 calls concerning a man in apparent distress who had been wandering in and out of traffic on I-287. “When I first got the call at about 11:30 Monday morning, it was about a man walking back and forth, looking at the edge of the bridge and jumping in front of vehicles,” Bogert explained, according to NorthJersey.com.

“I could kind of tell he was trying to commit suicide,” Bogert continued. “I didn’t want to spook him, so I cracked the door to my car open and started to get out slowly.”

Though Bogert said he attempted to verbally persuade the distraught man not to jump, telling him, “Don’t do it, don’t do it,” the unidentified man ignored the pleas — and as can be seen on dashcam footage released by the department, suddenly took drastic measures.

Without warning, the man sprinted toward the edge barricade with the obvious intent to jump, “and I took off after him,” Bogert said. “He had one leg up and over, and he was trying to get the other leg up when I grabbed him.” Bogert’s lightning reaction saved the man from a split-second decision.

Lt. James MacIntosh noted in a press release cited by NorthJersey.com that before his attempt to jump over the edge, the man had yelled, “My family is dead. I just want to die.”

After Bogert eventually calmed the man down enough to load him into an ambulance, he was taken to a hospital for evaluation and observation.

Though the majority of discussions surrounding Bogert’s move commended his actions, there has been some debate about the unidentified man’s right to do with his life — and death — as he saw fit. And perhaps Bogert interfered with his right to bodily liberty, not just in preventing the man’s suicide, but in the mandated psychiatric evaluation that will restrict his freedom even further.

While this critique certainly bears consideration, as one commenter keenly noted, the hospital evaluation — and Bogert’s speedy intervention — could ostensibly act as a stay for him to consider if suicide is, indeed, the route he truly wishes to take. Perhaps if he had thoroughly considered and acted to take his own life while in his own home — and not in a public setting in such a drastic manner — outrage over Bogert’s move might be more clear-cut.

Bogert claimed police did learn the man’s family was unharmed, despite what he had said before attempting the jump.

In the end, Bogert’s expeditious tackle — whether you feel it was heroic or otherwise — gave a distraught man another chance to consider an abrupt and likely hastily made decision. For once, at least, the debate involves a cop preserving — rather than ending — another human being’s life. Perhaps, that in itself should be worth celebrating.

This article (Cop Saves a Man From Suicide, Somehow Igniting Serious Debate on Social Media) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

Man #Beaten Then Jailed 3 Days for NOT Stealing a Tomato from #Walmart

by

 

Carey Wedler
April 26, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Atlanta, GA — An Atlanta, Georgia man has sued an off-duty officer who beat him viciously over the incorrect assumption he was stealing a tomato from Walmart. Though he says he was innocent, he was ultimately jailed for three days before the charges against him were dropped. He sustained permanent injuries from the beating.

Tyrone Carnegay was leaving Walmart in October of 2014 when an off-duty police officer working as a security guard approached. Video footage of the incident shows Carnegay attempting to exit the store when Atlanta police officer Trevor King begins questioning him. After no more than a few seconds, King begins beating Carnegay with his baton.

Carnegay says he was never told why he was being questioned, though according to court documents, a manager on duty at the time told the officer he had stolen the tomato.

“He’s giving me a verbal command. As he’s grabbing me, he’s beating me at the same time. ‘Get on the ground.’ Beating me at the same time,” Carnegay said as he re-watched surveillance video with WSB-Atlanta’s Craig Laurie. “My leg started giving out.”

King hit Carnegay at least seven times, ultimately cracking two bones in his leg and rupturing an artery. He now has a titanium rod in his leg and walks with a limp. Carnegay says he was never asked for the receipt — which he says he had. According to Carnegay, after he was on the ground in handcuffs, the officer reached into his pocket and found the receipt — along with his change from paying for the tomato.

Carnegay’s attorney, Craig Jones, said the entire incident could have been avoided with one question. “Somebody could have come up to him and said, ‘Excuse me sir, do you have [a] receipt for that tomato?’ and he would’ve shown him the receipt.”

Instead, Jones says, “The officer went into Robocop mode and beat the crap out of him.” Carnegay claims the cop “found the receipt and stood there like he hadn’t done nothing.”

In spite of this, Carnegay was still sent to jail and charged with simple battery against police, as well as willful obstruction of law enforcement officers. He was first taken to Grady Memorial Hospital, where he was chained to his bed, and then transferred to Fulton County Jail.

He was released after three days and the charges were dropped, but between the false accusations, brutal attack, and subsequent incarceration, Carnegay does not feel justice was served. According to his lawsuit, filed April 6 against Walmart, the manager on duty, and King, he is seeking damages for “pain and suffering, damage to his reputation and legal fees he incurred defending himself,” the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported. The lawsuit could take three years to complete, according to WSB-Atlanta.

Walmart offered a tepid statement on the incident and subsequent lawsuit. “We take the matter seriously. We will review the allegations and respond appropriately with the court,” a representative told WSB-Atlanta.

Atlanta police declined to comment — but the audacity their off-duty officer displayed by brutally attacking a man for not stealing a tomato speaks volumes.

This article (Man Beaten Then Jailed 3 Days for NOT Stealing a Tomato from Walmart) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Carey Wedler 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 at edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

Cops Seize $53,000 Raised for #Charity by #Christian Band

by

 

SM Gibson
April 26, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Muskogee County, Oklahoma – Eh Wah is a refugee from Burma who became a citizen of the United States more than a decade ago. Today, the 40-year-old resides in Dallas, Texas, where he regularly attends church and helps out as a volunteer manager for a Christian rock band from Burma, Klo & Kweh Music Team.

The group has been touring all over the United States in order to raise money for a Christian college in Burma and an orphanage in Thailand, but recently hit a setback when Eh was pulled over by a cop on his way back home to Texas to see his family. He had been on the road with the band for 19 concerts.

Eh, who is in charge of keeping up with all the money raised from the band’s merchandise and album sales, as well as donations received, had $53,249 on him when was pulled over in Muskogee County, Oklahoma for a busted taillight. And because Eh’s first language isn’t English, the officers had a difficult time understanding the explanation he provided, even when they interrogated the man for hours back at the police station.

“I just couldn’t believe it. An officer was telling me that ‘you are going to jail tonight.’ And I don’t know what to think. What did I do that would make me go to jail? I didn’t do anything. Why is he saying that?” he said.

As the Washington Post reported:

“Eh Wah even had the officers call one of the band’s leaders, Saw Marvellous Soe, who was living in Miami while the band was on a break. ‘The police officer started asking questions,’ Marvellous recalled. ‘I explained: ‘We are a music team. We came here for a tour.”‘ Marvellous tried to explain that the band was from Burma. ‘He kept telling me, “You are wrong, you are wrong,”‘ Marvellous said. ‘Everything I said, [he said,] “You are wrong.” I said: “We are doing a good thing! And now you are accusing us of being like a drug dealer or something like that.”’”

“I realized that they were seizing all of the money. I was like, ‘This can’t be happening.’ But I didn’t know what to do,” Eh said.

Although the property receipt states Eh was brought in for possession of drug proceeds, he was released that night — but five weeks later was charged with a felony for “acquir[ing] proceeds from drug activity.”  It is worth noting that absolutely no weapons or drugs were found in Eh’s possession, despite a drug-sniffing dog extensively searching the vehicle for illegal paraphernalia or items.

The officers’ theft of the money earmarked for the orphanage and college is called asset forfeiture and is perfectly legal in Oklahoma, a state that does not require any conviction whatsoever for police to remain in possession of 100% of all property confiscated from citizens.

Having taken Eh’s case on pro bono, the Institute for Justice had the criminal and civil charges against him thrown out on Monday afternoon after his case was reviewed by Muskogee County District Attorney Orvil Loge. After his decision, the District Attorney said, “I looked at the case and met with the officers, and determined that we would not be able to meet the burden of proof in the criminal case and in the civil case.” A check will be sent to Eh’s lawyers for the full amount taken from him, according to Loge.

The Institute for Justice says that despite the ultimately positive outcome in Eh Wah’s case, his is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the injustice of civil asset forfeiture laws in the United States.

Nevermind that it should have never been allowed to happen in the first place.

This article (Cops Seize $53,000 Raised for Charity by Christian Band) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to SM Gibson and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

This Woman Woke Up To An #Unidentified #Cop Creepily Sitting on Her 4-Year-Old’s Bed

by

 

Claire Bernish
April 26, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Ontario, Canada — If you woke to find someone in your four-year-old daughter’s bedroom who refused to identify themselves to you or explain their presence in your house, what would you do? In the case of Cheryl Yurkowski — who lives in Ontario, Canada — you attempt to defend your child, your home, and yourself.

Cheryl’s ordeal began after having an argument with her husband and his mother at a restaurant. Tired from the disagreement and wishing to avoid further conflict with the intoxicated man, she left separately to go home and go to bed. Not realizing his wife had already arrived at home and was asleep, Cheryl’s husband began yelling on a phone call — but his raised voice concerned neighbors, who then summoned the Kawartha Lakes Police.

Cheryl explained what happened next, from her perspective, in a self-made video and subsequent interview with Larken Rose:

“I woke up to my four-year-old daughter crying in her room. I was wrapped in a blanket, and I went to go see why she was crying — and lo and behold, I walked right into a female police officer. She did not identify herself; and she was then sitting next to my child, touching her … hair. So I said, ‘Get out of my house. You have no warrant to be here. Who let you in? Nobody let you in. Get out — get the fuck away from my child; get the fuck out of my house.’”

Since Sergeant Janette Drew and Officer Mark Ryan Donaldson didn’t bother to identify themselves, Cheryl understandably acted as any mother would in such a situation — she went on the defensive. In an interview with Anti-Media, she described her immediate thoughts upon awakening to strangers in her home:

“What the fuck are they doing here? How did they get in? Why are they touching my child and asking her questions? Who called them?”

Cheryl readily admitted to using profanities to address the officers; but, instead of explaining to her why they were there in the first place — and acting as if she had no right to free speech, even in her own home — Drew took drastic measures.

“She then slammed me into the wall, in front of my four-year-old daughter, in my daughter’s room,” Cheryl recalled, adding she then flipped off the lights to try to avoid having her daughter witness violence against her mother. And violence there was.

After Cheryl was shoved into the wall, the physical altercation escalated — by the cops’ own doing. Drew, while attempting to arrest Cheryl for defending herself in her home, yanked the young mother’s arm out of its socket and slammed her to the ground. Drew then sat on her, forcing her bad arm behind her back — “She was squeezing so hard, that I heard my shoulder pop,” she explained — but would not let go despite Cheryl’s repeated requests through screams of pain.

With no choice left to defend herself from the searing pain, Cheryl bit the officer — who immediately released her grip — as she had been taught to do in self-defense courses.

But this seemed to enrage the officers, as Donaldson took Drew’s former position on top of Cheryl — wrapping his hands around her neck and choking her, to the point, she described, “my eyes were rolling in the back of my head. And I was gargling [sic] for air — and I almost went unconscious. So, they almost killed me — all in front of my four-year-old daughter who [had] crept up the stairs. She saw all of this — and that is the worst part about it,” she said, nearly in tears. “My daughter almost saw her mom get killed by police officers.”

Once the officers ultimately loaded Cheryl into the back of their squad car, hitting her head against the window in the process, Donaldson turned to face her with his fist aimed at her face, and as she explained, he said, “I will personally make sure you never see your fucking child again,” repeating the threat “three or four times.”

There are several telling details that should be highlighted in this incident. Cheryl emphasized in the interview with Anti-Media that she has “NO criminal record,” the officers came to her house to essentially ensure the safety of the residents, and the officers — not Cheryl — escalated the situation in their refusal to identify themselves or explain their presence in her home. Later, she explained, the officers lied about a number of details in the incident — and completely left out Donaldson’s nasty threats.

But perhaps the worst part about the whole ordeal is that Cheryl now faces charges  for defending herself against unidentified-at-the-time strangers in her home — including threats to a ‘peace’ officer, resisting arrest, and assault causing bodily harm. She explained they’re seeking to lock her in jail both before and after trial — and she could end up spending three to five years behind bars.

Her next court date is set for Thursday the 28th, though she plans to ask for an adjournment, or extension, as she attempts to have the inexplicable charges thrown out. Cheryl has been fortunate to have her mother intervene on her daughter’s behalf to prevent her from being taken by child services.

Though what she endured could hardly be called an isolated incident, Cheryl still emphasized the need to defend yourself and your family from any act of aggression — and said she would do the same if presented with a similar situation. The police, after all, had been dispatched to check on people’s welfare in a domestic disturbance and nearly killed the person whose safety might have been at stake — all in front of a four-year-old little girl.

Anti-Media would like to thank Cheryl Yurkowski for taking time to discuss what happened to her.

To hear Cheryl’s story in full from her own mouth, make sure to tune in to AntiMedia radio tonight at 11pm est/ 8pm pst.

This article (This Woman Woke Up To An Unidentified Cop Creepily Sitting on Her 4-Year-Old’s Bed) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

6 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

Here’s A Rundown of #Election #Fraud in the 2016 Presidential Race So Far #feelthebern

by

 

Op-ed by Claire Bernish
April 25, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Supporting an anti-establishment candidate, as the 2016 election cycle has thus proven, at best amounts to little more than a maddening exercise in futility. Yet, droves continue flocking to the polls, ignoring that fixing a corrupt, authoritarian system by validating it through participating in its carrot-on-a-string illusion will somehow — this time — all work out for the greater good.

Though participation through voting might offer the feeling of power and control — as well as comfort in the illusion — the establishment maintains a thorough stranglehold on the current system, by design. If you’re still unconvinced, consider the evidence thus far — some blatant, some subtle — found in virtually every primary and caucus this year.

Iowa

To grasp how arbitrarily the popular vote can be manipulated to fit the establishment’s intended outcome, the Iowa caucus would be a good place to start. As if insufficiently trained volunteer staff, voter confusion, inadequate voter registration forms, and general disorganization weren’t telling in themselves, in multiple locations the awarding of delegates came down to coin tosses — literally.

While described as “the closest Democratic caucus in Iowa history” by the state’s Democratic Party, according to Salon, apparently the same Party felt the need to give Hillary Clinton an advantageous edge. One of Bernie Sanders’ delegates was sneakily awarded to Clinton amidst the confusion, but the Iowa Democratic Party didn’t bother to inform the precinct secretary it had done so. It then refused, despite the somewhat suspect happenings, to perform an audit.

“What happened Monday night at the caucuses was a debacle, period,” The Des Moines Register penned in an editorial afterward. “Democracy, particularly at the local party level, can be slow, messy, and obscure. But the refusal to undergo scrutiny or allow for an appeal reeks of autocracy.”

Nevada

Though Nevada didn’t have to resort to its deck-of-cards method to figure the awarding of delegates — as Iowa had done with its coin tosses — that didn’t stop anecdotal picture and video evidence from proving rampant issues and possible fraud.

Inexcusably hours-long lines, a lack of paper ballots, and poorly trained elections workers meant general disenfranchisement pervaded caucus locations. The situation so outraged voters, it was characterized a “fiasco.” Those who did manage to procure a ballot discovered Clinton propaganda in plain sight; though electioneering is prohibited at polling locations, one Reddit user posted a photo of a sign-in sheet emblazoned with the Hillary for Nevada logo at the top. Asked for an explanation, the poll worker handing out the not-at-all neutral sign-in claimed it was “for the democratic party,” US Uncut reported.

13059378_564451887047722_500157089_n

Worse, a Twitter user discovered Hillary supporters allowed to caucus without registering, to which a precinct volunteer offered the rather effrontery explanation that they’d be permitted to register after casting a ballot — and it was all captured on video.

Worse still, another Reddit user claimed a poll volunteer registering new Democratic voters automatically marked them as favoring Clinton — and not only seemed stubbornly hesitant to correct the error, but later appeared working for the “Hillary group’s tables.”

Chaos in the Republican caucus mirrored that in the Democratic event, including reports of ballot mismanagement; one was allowed to fall to the floor and was ripped up by a volunteer unsure of its validity. Another witness tweeted “some guy voted for trump twice.” Caucus volunteers, who are required to forego campaign gear, sported Trump paraphernalia and, as another Twitter user claimed, were “Actively bullying folks. Not checking IDs.”

Super Tuesday

Super Tuesday’s primaries and caucuses offered no relief to the election madness, as Colorado and Massachusetts, in particular, similarly devolved into messy embarrassments.

Polling sites for the Democratic caucus in Colorado seemed to arbitrarily switch locations, voters were turned away upon arrival, volunteers were unprepared, and, in one case, a private residence intended to be a caucus location met voters with a locked door.

13084101_564452343714343_1913507696_n.png

So marred by troubles was the situation in Colorado, one Twitter user asserted, “I honestly cannot say enough negative things about the caucus system. Disorganized, undemocratic, just generally bad. Primary please!” Another voter summarily tweeted, “The caucus process in Colorado is bullshit!” Indeed, after the debacle, swaths of voters called for a return to the primary system, which had been in place until 2002.

Massachusetts saw an appearance by Bill Clinton, who took advantage of the opportunity to electioneer for Hillary, both inside and outside polling locations in a likely illegal violation of state law. So egregious and unusual was the situation, Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin told the New York Times his office “had to remind some of our poll workers that even a president can’t go inside and work a polling place. He can go in, but he can’t approach voters.”

A petition created afterward calling for Bill Clinton’s arrest and prosecution has since garnered over 127,000 signatures.

While not fraudulent, the Republican Party garnered its own firestorm of criticism by eliminating the popular vote from the nominating process — much to the ire of Trump supporters. As the Denver Post explained:

“Colorado GOP leaders canceled the party’s presidential straw poll in August to avoid binding its delegates to a candidate who may not survive until the Republican National Convention in July.

“Instead, Republicans selected national delegates through the caucus process, a move that put the election of national delegates in the hands of party insiders and activists — leaving roughly 90 percent of the more than 1 million Republican voters on the sidelines.”

“The people of Colorado,” Trump, in part, proclaimed afterward on Twitter, “had their vote taken away from them by the phony politicians.” Later, Trump expounded further, declaring in an interview, “The system is rigged. It’s crooked.”

To wit, the Colorado GOP hubristically boasted on Twitter, “We did it. #NeverTrump” — but likely realized the potentially damning repercussions of its candor and swiftly deleted the tweet.

13059897_564451810381063_640136424_n

Arizona

“We’ve received complaints throughout the whole day of lifelong Democrats showing up to the polls and being told they are either independent or have no party affiliations,” stated Arizona Democratic Party spokesman Enrique Gutierrez, according to the Phoenix New Times.

Though locations across Arizona experienced massive voter turnout — which, as in many states before, overwhelmed grievously unprepared volunteers — Maricopa County, home of Phoenix, reported average wait times of up to 90 minutes. Long waits had been anticipated, to an extent, as Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell had drastically cut the total number of polling places from 200 four years ago to just 60 — questionably citing expected low voter turnout for the reduction.

To grasp the magnitude of difficulty this presented, one person tweeted, “Most counties I surveyed had enough polls for 2.5K or fewer voters per site. Maricopa County? 20,833 voters per polling site.” A local NBC affiliate reporter also noted on Twitter:

“Consider: 2012 primary had 300,000 voters and 200 polling places. 2016 primary has estimated 800,000 voters at 60 polling places.”

In predominantly Latino neighborhoods, that consolidation of polling sites was exponentially magnified — so few polling sites were available to Phoenix’ nearly 41 percent Latino population, even politicians publicly rebuked Purcell’s cuts.

“In my district, there is only one polling place,” Democratic State Senator Martin Quezada noted in a written statement, cited by AZCentral.com. “In my neighboring district, LD 30, there are no polling places.”

New York

In what could only be dubbed a farce, so copious were the complaints lodged about the New York City primary, city Comptroller Scott Stringer announced the Board of Elections would be the subject of an audit — hours before the close of polling. In fact, before voting even commenced, over 126,000 voters had been wholly purged from the records.

Diplomatically describing “widespread reports of poll site problems and irregularities,” Stringer wrote in a letter to New York City Board of Elections (BOE) Director Michael J. Ryan:

“Voters across the city have complained about poll workers erroneously redirecting them to different poll sites, poll workers unable to operate voting machines, poll workers unable to produce the correct party ballot for an individual voter, and poll workers giving conflicting information.

“Of particular concern are numerous allegations of widespread removal of eligible voters from voter-registration rolls, as well as instances of incorrect party affiliations on individual registration records. These errors have conspired to bar first time and longtime voters from exercising their fundamental democratic right.”

Mayor Bill de Blasio swiftly backed the call for an audit, and despite repeated denials from Ryan any major issues had tarnished the day, State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman claimed his office had received “by far the largest volume of complaints” from any election since 2011, according to Politico. Both the comptroller’s and attorney general’s offices began investigations following the debacle.

A top official for the NYC BOE has since been suspended without pay and an internal investigation has been launched over discrepancies in voter records and purging of voter rolls in Brooklyn.

✱✱✱

This list is woefully incomplete — Ohio is now investigating its primary, and Sanders managed to lose Wyoming, despite winning by a margin of 12 percent; this article didn’t even delve into superdelegates. Even so, the pattern of suspicious activity before, during, and after elections presents clear evidence many have not been willing to admit.

Your vote — if you’re able to jump enough hurdles to cast it — doesn’t matter. But worst of all, this farce of an election simply amounts to a theater of illusion, designed to distract people who might otherwise realize the change they seek through politicians could best be implemented by all of us, now, without needing to validate the very system of our modern-day enslavement.

This article (Here’s A Rundown of Election Fraud in the 2016 Presidential Race So Far) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

3 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

New Report Proves US #Law Enforcement Preparing for #Rioting on a National Scale

by

 

Claire Bernish
April 22, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Fascism doesn’t often sweep in overnight and take over some hapless nation’s government; rather, it gradually seeps into the cultural fabric — as is quietly taking place all around the globe, evidenced by an upsurge in sales of riot equipment that has gone largely unnoticed.

A new report from analysts with industry research group, Sandler Research, forecasts the Global Riot Control System Market for the next four years — but beyond a burgeoning market to parallel the expanding global police state, it appears world governments are also keenly aware of civilian discontent. Sandler predicts the market will have an annual growth of 3.5 percent, and makes a telling juxtaposition, emphases added, involving the United States:

“Law enforcement agencies around the world are the biggest market for riot control systems. This market is expected to generate revenues of over USD 3.5 billion by the end of 2020. Countries such as the U.S., Iran, Egypt, Russia, China, and Thailand have started procuring riot control equipment and are investing heavily in [non-lethal weapons]. Moreover, special vehicles that are equipped with water cannon and reservoirs have been designed for security personnel, for use in areas of conflict to handle large crowds and demonstration. Demand for such equipment is expected to rise during the next few years.”

Note the last sentence in its truncated time frame.

Specifically, the analysts continue:

“In North America, the prominent markets are Canada and the U.S. and law enforcement agencies in these nations are best equipped with the upgraded weapons. The militarization of the police department and other law enforcement agencies in the Americas has encouraged the use of advanced riot control equipment.”

While swaths of the country debate the finer points of which lesser evil should take the helm of the corporate plutocracy, various U.S. law enforcement agencies have been gearing up for the virtually inevitable unrest both during and following those elections.

Militarized police forces have become de rigueur, even in the nation’s smallest towns — but arming law enforcement with the weapons of war, rather than protecting civilians, has birthed a chasm of distrust and animosity on both sides. It isn’t as if this equipment is being produced by a marketplace intent on keeping civilians safe from an ostensible outside threat.

As the report, which does not offer a breakdown of specific agencies it might be referring to (though may in its body which can be purchased for $2,500 here), definitively states:

“Law enforcement agencies use riot control systems to maintain the public order and safety and to enforce laws. They are used to disperse, control, and arrest people involved in riots and protests. Riot control systems include lethal and non-lethal weapons (NWLs), body-worn cameras, armored vehicles, and communications systems.”

As if released in conjunction with one another, a report by Lloyd’s intones the necessity of preparedness as mass civil unrest can not only spark without prior warning, but flare outward, unpredictably — what the insurer calls “Political Violence Contagion.” According to the report, instances of political violence “contagion (pandemics) have become more frequent, and the contagion effect ever more rapid and impactful.”

Considering massive worldwide demonstrations in the U.S. and elsewhere — as people finally grasp how corrupt governments actually are — it becomes apparent in these reports the politicians and their enforcement agencies comprehend the greatest threat to their power. As caucuses and primaries fall into chaos — and the City of Cleveland gears up for the Republican National Convention — voters and nonvoters alike harbor greater disillusionment than ever before.

Cleveland, whose police are currently under federal oversight following a Department of Justice probe that found a general pattern of brutality, plans to spend around $20 million to beef up security measures for the RNC. While part of the sum will focus on training, personnel expenditures, and the like, Vox reported 40 percent will be earmarked for “equipment and supplies” — including, in part, 2,000 sets of full-body riot gear. Additionally, if not ominously, the city “has put out bids for, among other things, 24 sets of ballistic body armor, 300 patrol bikes, and more than 3.7 miles of interlocking steel barriers, all of which can be used to curtail protestors,” according to Vox.

Together, the reports paint a dire prediction — not as much for its illustration of a world in chaos, but for its intimation authoritarian actors may act aggressively to quash even positive and peaceful change by the rest of us.

This article (New Report Proves US Law Enforcement Preparing for Rioting on a National Scale) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Claire Bernish and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

 

From theantimedia.org Team

Teen Charged With #Felony After Filling Water Cup With #Soda at #McDonald’s

by

SM Gibson
April 21, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Springdale, AK – On Monday, an 18-year-old man was arrested after filling a water cup with soda at an Arkansas McDonald’s.

The incident began when Cody Morris, who is now facing felony robbery charges, drove through his local McDonald’s drive-thru accompanied by two friends. He placed an order for three large waters. After receiving their complimentary drinks at the window, the trio parked the vehicle and went inside the establishment to fill the freshly emptied cups with soda.

A manager noticed the renegade group of thirst-queching teens and did not hesitate to confront the mischievous rabblerousers. Upon approach, two of the three handed over their McBooty to the employee without incident. Cody would not give back his free cup of liquid diabetes so easily.

The band of soda-guzzling pirates walked out of the establishment and got into the car to leave – but they couldn’t, because the manager decided to stand directly behind the path of the running vehicle to prevent the lads from driving away. According to police, Cody, who was driving, hit the fast food supervisor with the car. As the manager then reached into the vehicle to grab the keys, which were still in the ignition, the driver hit the manager with the car again. All of this over $1.49 cup of fizzy sugar.

According to USA Today:

“The car drove off, and the manager called police. Officers found the car and Morris at a bowling alley, and he was arrested on suspicion of felony robbery. (Allegedly hitting the manager with the car is what presumably elevated the charges.”

As reported by KHBS in Arkansas, despite allegedly hitting the manager with his car, “The police report lists one charge against Morris – that of felony robbery. The Washington County Detention Center website shows Morris was booked into jail Tuesday, and had a Rule 8.1 hearing scheduled for Friday morning.”

This article (Teen Charged With Felony After Filling Water Cup With Soda at McDonald’s) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to SM Gibson and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

1 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

Why #US Govt. And #SaudiArabia Don’t Want Americans Knowing the Truth About 9/11

by

 

Anti-Media Staff
April 21, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) In a rare show of bipartisanship, President Obama and top Republicans in Congress have come together to shield Americans from knowing the truth about who was behind the 9/11 terror attacks, which took the lives of 2996 people in 2001. However strange it is for neoconservative members of Congress to agree with Obama on anything, there is no doubt the issue must be serious if it warrants this level of partnership.

The issue at hand is the classified, 28-page section of the 9/11 commission report, which many experts and politicians with knowledge of the documents have said point to Saudi Arabian government officials’ direct role in the terror attacks. This is why the Saudis put out a stern warning several days ago threatening to dump up to $750 billion in U.S. assets if Senate Bill 2040 becomes law; S.B. 2040 would make public the 28 pages and also allow for victims of 9/11 to sue foreign governments found responsible.

The Saudis’ warning seems to have worked, with Obama now in the nation to “mend ties” with the monarchy and top Republicans sounding the alarm about the 9/11 bill. In an interview with Charlie Rose, President Obama claimed:

“If we open up the possibility that individuals in the United States can routinely start suing other governments, then we are also opening up the United States to being continually sued by individuals in other countries,” apparently referencing the U.S.’ own attacks overseas that have taken the lives of countless civilians.

Currently, Saudi Arabia enjoys “sovereign immunity” with the U.S., meaning even if the 28 pages proved Saudi officials were indeed behind the 9/11 attacks, Americans would not be able to seek justice for their losses. The new 9/11 bill would change that, and the Saudi response to the legislation moving through Congress reinforces suspicions the kingdom is somehow behind the 9/11 attacks.

The video below further explains why both Saudi Arabia and members of the U.S. government don’t want the 9/11 bill to pass:

This article (Why US Govt. And Saudi Arabia Don’t Want Americans Knowing the Truth About 9/11) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Robert J. Fisch. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

#UCDavis Spent $175,000 Trying to Hide This from You. Don’t Let Them

by

 

Jake Anderson
April 18, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) One of the most widely used forms of information suppression is legal and online. It’s known as negative SEO (search engine optimization), and companies use it to bury negative publicity. The most recent and glaring example of this technique can be seen in efforts by UC Davis to conceal search results related to the infamous brutal pepper spraying of protesting students at the University of California campus in 2011.

Evidently, UC Davis is upset the truth went viral — and spent $175,000 burying the thousands of negative stories that resulted from the incident. They hired a PR firm with the stated objective to “expedite the eradication of references to the pepper spraying incident in search results on Google for the university and the Chancellor.”

According to AJ+, the the firm “ran deep analytics on search term patterns.” They then saturated the web with positive stories, optimizing them to bury the negative stories.

As nefarious and outlandish as this sounds, it is actually standard practice. Search engine optimization is a multi-billion dollar industry that involves strategically using online content, social media, and website architecture to manipulate Google’s search algorithm. Companies hire ORM (online reputation management) agencies that use SEO tactics to boost the ranking of desired links on SERPs (search engine page results).

Link placement has been used to bury controversial or negative stories across a range of commercial enterprises. It is an entire industry of subterfuge —  a legal and ubiquitous form of information suppression that remains largely unseen by the public eye.

truth-cancer-ad

With examples like UC Davis’ information suppression, it is important to understand that while the Internet can be a democratizing tool for social enlightenment and grassroots activism, it is also prone to the same forms of oppression as the offline world. The same companies, organizations, and agencies who use money, cronyism and corruption to suppress the truth in real life use their vast wealth and corporatist connections to manipulate the flow of information online, as well.

The full complicity of Google in this widespread practice remains unclear. The search engine giant can claim this form of SEO is legal, which is true (even black-hat SEO is usually legal). They can also claim they are not the ones engaging in the suppression — that it’s independent firms who are gaming Google’s search algorithm. However, we already know of the collusion between Google and the federal government. Is it, perhaps, a bit naive to think there is not rampant collusion between billion dollar brands and the company that controls the vast majority of what we see online?

Now that news of UC Davis’ attempted suppression has gotten out, the pepper spray incident is receiving renewed interest from the internet thanks to the “Streisand effect.” Do free speech a favor: help win the censorship battle with UC Davis by spreading this information around the internet.

This article (UC Davis Spent $175,000 Trying to Hide This from You. Don’t Let Them) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Jake Anderson and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

0 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

#Whistleblower Says #CIA Behind #PanamaPapers Leak

by

 

Carey Wedler
April 12, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) A former Swiss banker-turned-whistleblower has accused the CIA of playing a key role the Panama Papers leak, which implicated numerous foreign leaders, companies, organizations and individuals in offshore tax evasion, among other offenses. Bradley Birkenfeld, a former American banker for Swiss firm UBS, told CNBC  “the CIA I’m sure is behind this, in my opinion,” in an interview conducted Tuesday from Munich.

Birkenfeld originally blew the whistle on American tax evaders using Swiss bank accounts to divert their funds away from the reach of U.S. authorities. He served two-and-a-half years for his involvement and was released from prison in 2012. Pursuant to whistleblower policy, Birkenfeld was awarded $104 million of the $780 million settlement UBS was forced to pay as a result of his cooperation with authorities. Since his release from prison in 2012, he has said he wants “to force the government to explain why it was so aggressive in prosecuting him, but let nearly everyone else involved in the scam get off with light penalties or none at all.”

Focusing on the CIA on Tuesday, Birkenfeld was careful to note his comments were his “opinion,” but nonetheless offered strong observations on the scope of the data leak, which is the biggest in history.

“The very fact that we see all these names surface that are the direct quote-unquote enemies of the United States, Russia, China, Pakistan, Argentina and we don’t see one U.S. name. Why is that?” Birkenfeld said. “Quite frankly, my feeling is that this is certainly an intelligence agency operation.”

Asked why a U.S. spy agency would release information that damages U.S. allies, like David Cameron, Birkenfeld said he was likely “collateral damage” in the purported overarching scheme to smear American adversaries.

He suggested the CIA had a calculated role in the way the leak was presented to the public:

truth-cancer-ad

“If you’ve got NSA and CIA spying on foreign governments they can certainly get into a law firm like this,” Birkenfeld said. “But they selectively bring the information to the public domain that doesn’t hurt the U.S. in any shape or form. That’s wrong. And there’s something seriously sinister here behind this.”

Birkenfeld’s comments seem even more perceptive considering German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung reported Tuesday that “secret agents and their informants have made wide use of [Mossack Fonseca’s] services,”as translated by Raw Story. Sueddeutsche Zeitung originally received the leaked data from an anonymous whistleblower before handing it over to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ).

“Agents have opened shell companies to conceal their activities… Among them are close intermediaries of the CIA,” the German publication noted. Other individuals reportedly mentioned in the leaks included players in the infamous 1980s Iran-Contra scandal, in which the CIA was involved. The Iran-Contra scheme involved the U.S. selling weapons to Iran in exchange for the release of American hostages, then using the profits to fund anti-communist rebels in Nicaragua.

Though the CIA was not explicitly named in Sueddeutsche Zeitung’s report, their “intermediaries” were. Regardless, these revelations taken alongside Birkenfeld’s suspicions can mean one of two things: either Birkenfeld is wrong, or the CIA actually is involved with the Panama Papers and considered reports on their “intermediaries” to be “collateral damage,” as Birkenfeld suggested of Cameron.

Regardless, the Panama Papers leak has faced scrutiny beyond Birkenfeld’s. Wikileaks has called on the ICIJ to make all data from the 11,500 leaked pages available to the public.

Wikileaks also said, “If you censor more than 99% of the documents you are engaged in 1% journalism by definition.”

Gerard Ryle, Director of the ICIJ, has said, “We’re not WikiLeaks. We’re trying to show that journalism can be done responsibly,” and the ICIJ has noted it will not release all of the data. However, it will continue to release parts of the leak in the coming months.

Wikileaks also took to Twitter to accuse the ICIJ of being a “Washington DC based Ford, Soros funded soft-power tax-dodge” that “has a WikiLeaks problem.”

Further, the publishing organization accused ICIJ and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, with whom ICIJ shared the data, of launching an attack against Russian president Vladimir Putin:

“Putin attack was produced by OCCRP which targets Russia & former USSR and was funded by USAID & Soros,” Wikileaks tweeted. Another Twitter post later clarified the Panama Papers were not an “attack” against Putin, but that “DC organization [ICIJ] & USAID money tilt coverage.” USAID, the U.S. Agency for International Development, has been previously accused of corruption. Billionaire George Soros has been accused of influencing narratives in the mainstream media.

Regardless of who was behind the leak — and who may or may not be clandestinely pulling the strings on the flow of information — the CIA has faced similar accusations of media manipulation before. Otto Ulfkotte, the former editor of the Frankfurter Allgemeine, a large German publication, said he was bribed by the CIA to write pro-American stories.

“It is not right what I have done in the past. To manipulate people and make propaganda,” he said in 2014. “I was bribed by billionaires, I was bribed by the Americans not to report exactly the truth.” Explaining how this relationship began, he said:

“Germany is still kind of a colony of the United States… And being a colony it is very easy to approach young journalists from transatlantic organizations.”

Noting that “all journalists from really respected and recommended big German newspapers” tend to be members of such transatlantic organizations, he said:

“They invite you [to see] the U.S. They pay for that, they pay all your expenses and everything, so you are bribed, you get more and more corrupt, because they make you good contacts. You won’t know that those good contacts are, let’s say, ‘non-official’ covers or officially people working for Central Intelligence Agency or other American intelligence agencies… so you make friends, you think you are friends, and you cooperate with them. They ask you, ‘Well, could you do me this favor? Could you do me that favor?’ And so your brain is more and more brainwashed.”

He said many reporters in countries around the world “play the [role of] respected journalists but if you look behind them you’ll find they are puppets on the string of the CIA.”

Though some may discount Ulfkotte’s account because it was not corroborated by a third party — and the interview aired on Russia Today, Russia’s state-funded news agency — the CIA has been known to work with other newspapers, including the Los Angeles Times, to manipulate news stories in their favor.

Regardless of whether or not Birkenfeld is correct in his assessment of the CIA’s role in the leaks, his statements on CNBC provide, at the very least, cause for continued skepticism among the many interests and motivations driving the ongoing leak.

This article (Whistleblower Says CIA Behind Panama Papers Leak) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Carey Wedler 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 at edits@theantimedia.org.

3 Total Shares

From theantimedia.org Team

Bill #Clinton May Have Just Cost #Hillary the #Black Vote

by

Nick Bernabe
April 8, 2016

(ANTIMEDIA) Philadelphia, PA — Hillary Clinton has been performing well with minorities so far in the 2016 Democratic primary, but that could soon be changing. Bill Clinton may have just severely damaged the former secretary of state’s reputation among African Americans by committing a major gaffe — one he is now “almost” apologizing for.

At a campaign stop in Philadelphia on Thursday, Bill was interrupted by protesters — a common theme this presidential election. The protesters, mostly young black Americans, interrupted Bill’s speech to air their grievances about his sweeping 1994 crime bill — the largest ever passed. The bill, sold as a way to effectively fight inner-city crime, actually helped expand an already developing trend of mass incarceration that had an overwhelmingly negative impact of the black community.

Signs reading “Clinton Crime Bill destroyed our community,” and “Hillary is a murderer” could be seen waving in the audience as Bill was interrupted Thursday. He caused a major backlash in the the African-American community when he decided to comment on the people who were incarcerated because of his crime bill.

“I don’t know how you would describe the gang leaders who got 13-year-olds hopped up on crack and sent them out in the streets to murder other African-American children.“Maybe you thought they were good citizens…You are defending the people who kill the lives you say matter. Tell the truth. You are defending the people who cause young people to go out and take guns,”  he said at the campaign event.

Hillary Clinton was a major supporter of her husband’s crime bill when she was First Lady. As we reported previously:

truth-cancer-ad

“Hillary Clinton lobbied Congress to pass the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act. Bill Clinton signed the act into law in 1994… The largest crime bill in history, it provided $9.7 billion in prison funding. From 1992 to 2000, the amount of prisoners in the U.S. increased almost 60%.”

In another recent incident, Hillary came under scrutiny for alluding to young black males as “super-predators” in a speech in 1996. She, like Bill, has been confronted by activists for her contribution to the nation’s mass incarceration problem.

Hillary is facing eroding support from the Latino community, as well. Recent polling shows her previous popularity among this key demographic has evaporated — leaving Bernie Sanders with a slight lead of 48% to Clinton’s 47% in Latino support.

Ironically, though he defends it now, Clinton previously disowned the crime bill, admitting in an interview with CNN last year that it had “too wide a net” that resulted in “too many people in prison.”

Regardless, Hillary Clinton is still raking in major cash from the private prison industry despite her haunting past with mass incarceration.

This article (Bill Clinton May Have Just Cost Hillary the Black Vote) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Nick Bernabe and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. If you spot a typo, email edits@theantimedia.org.

From theantimedia.org Team