Cyborg | Designer-Babies | Futurism | Futurist | Immortality | Longevity | Nanotechnology | Post-Human | Singularity | Transhuman



Sen Rand Paul (R-KY) Files Lawsuit Against Pres Obama NSA Mass Surveillance – Andrew Nap
Burnett Paints Rand Paul As An Outsider Before Interview About NSA Lawsuit videos.. Please click here to subscribe to my channel.. Economic collapse and fina. Sen Rand Paul (R-KY) Files Lawsuit…

By: Henry Kasap

Go here to see the original:

Sen Rand Paul (R-KY) Files Lawsuit Against Pres Obama & NSA Mass Surveillance – Andrew Nap – Video



Arpaio Obama Investigator: Honing In On Birth Certificate Forgers; NSA Doc
Sheriff Arpaio's Obama Investigator: Honing In On Birth Certificate Forgers; NSA Doc Instructing How To Create Document Anomalies – 5/23/2014 – http://www.BirtherReport.comhttp://www.ObamaReleas…

By: BirtherReportDotCom

Read more from the original source:

Arpaio Obama Investigator: Honing In On Birth Certificate Forgers; NSA Doc – Video



ILLUMINATI 2014: CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM/HOAX
Presidents Climate Change Scam Explained and Response from AnarchyWorld ……. Barack Obama climate change is NATURAL!! We all know that you're trying to do is simply add another tax. A TAX…

By: AnarchyWorld

Go here to read the rest:
ILLUMINATI 2014: CLIMATE CHANGE SCAM/HOAX – Video



Cruz Obama to repeal the First Amendment
The Democratic party wants to overturn 1st amendment, Esau does his victory dance for One World Government, but he will not triumph. so death to Esau, death …

By: Brently Bennett

More here:
Cruz Obama to repeal the First Amendment – Video



POLICE STATE amp; BIG BROTHER USA NSA SPIES on AMERICANS With NO WARRANT End of Privacy in U.
POLICE STATE BIG BROTHER USA – NSA SPIES on AMERICANS With NO WARRANT – End of Privacy in U.S. videos.. Please click here to subscribe to my channel.. SUBS. OBAMA's AGENDA END…

By: Economic Collapse 2014

Read the original here:

POLICE STATE & BIG BROTHER USA NSA SPIES on AMERICANS With NO WARRANT End of Privacy in U. – Video



Paul Craig Roberts : The Obama Administration's Hypocrisy on Free Speech Twitter Faceb
Paul Craig Roberts and The Resistance. V For Victory. Alex talks with economist Paul Craig Roberts about his article, The Year America Dissolved. Roberts served as an Assistant Secretary…

By: henry

See original here:
Paul Craig Roberts : The Obama Administration’s Hypocrisy on Free Speech & Twitter & Faceb – Video

May 232014

Published: Thursday, May 22, 2014, 8:55p.m. Updated 9 hours ago

From the Nazis to the Stalinists, tyrants have always started out supporting free speech, and why is easy to understand. Speech is vital for the realization of their goals of command, control and confiscation. Basic to their agenda are the tools of indoctrination, propagandizing, proselytization.

Once they gain power, as leftists have at many universities, free speech becomes a liability and must be suppressed. This is increasingly the case on university campuses.

Back in 1964, it was Mario Savio, a campus leftist, who led the free speech movement at the Berkeley campus of the University of California, a movement that played a vital role in placing American universities center stage in the flow of political ideas, no matter how controversial, unpatriotic and vulgar.

The free speech movement gave birth to the hippie movement of the ’60s and ’70s. The longhair, unkempt hippies of that era have grown up and now often find themselves being college professors, deans, provosts and presidents. Their intolerance of free speech and other ideas has become policy and practice on many college campuses.

Daniel Henninger, deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal’s editorial page, updates us on the campus attack on free speech and different ideas in his article titled Obama Unleashes the Left: How the government created a federal hunting license for the far left ( tinyurl.com/mp5x428).

Former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, one of the nation’s most accomplished women, graciously withdrew as Rutgers University’s commencement speaker after two months of campus protests about her role in the Iraq War. Some students and professors said, War criminals shouldn’t be honored. One wonders whether these students would similarly protest Hillary Clinton, who, as senator, voted for the invasion of Iraq.

Brandeis University officials were intimidated into rescinding their invitation to Somali writer and American Enterprise Institute scholar Ayaan Hirsi Ali, whose criticisms of radical Islam were said to have violated the school’s core values. Brandeis decided that allowing her to speak would be hurtful to Muslim students. I take it that Brandeis students and officials would see criticism of deadly Islamist terrorist gang Boko Haram’s kidnapping of nearly 300 Nigerian girls, some of whom have been sold off as brides, as unacceptable and violative of the university’s core values.

Earlier this year, faculty and students held a meeting at Vassar College to discuss a particularly bitter internal battle over the school’s movement to boycott Israel. Before the meeting, an English professor announced the dialogue would not be guided by cardboard notions of civility. That professor might share the vision of Adolf Hitler’s brown-shirted thugs of the paramilitary wing of the Nazi party in their effort to crush dissent.

Western values of liberty are under ruthless attack by the academic elite on college campuses across America. These people want to replace personal liberty with government control; they want to replace equality with entitlement. As such, they pose a far greater threat to our way of life than any terrorist organization or rogue nation.

More:
Americas budding tyrants



Fed Spying Damages Tech Companies More Than Chinese Espionage
Cisco's CEO complains to Obama that NSA physically intercepting and bugging their equipment will/is destroying their business. We can already see this happening in Germany, especially with…

By: TheAlexJonesChannel

Read more:

Fed Spying Damages Tech Companies More Than Chinese Espionage – Video

Dear readers, we need to review this First Amendment thing again.

Since former Wolfeboro Police Commissioner Bob Copeland admitted calling President Barack Obama the n-word in public (Copeland resigned under pressure this week), some have claimed that demanding his resignation violates his right to free speech. Thats not how the First Amendment works.

Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, the amendment states. The 14th Amendment then applied that restriction to the states as well. Copeland was an elected government official who said something awful (he called President Obama the n-word), stuck by it, and doubled down on it. The Founding Fathers would hardly have objected to the idea that the people should hold elected officials accountable for what they say.

The First Amendment is not a shield to deflect all barbs tossed in response to ones words. It protects against government censorship and punishment, not the reproach of the people. Copeland remains free to call people names as often as he wishes. And the people of Wolfeboro remain free to hold their elected officials to higher standards of behavior.

Read this article:
Copeland's rights They were not violated

We like to think that as we age, we get wiser. But time after time we are confronted with the fact that age by no means guarantees wisdom.

Case in point: Robert Copeland, a police commissioner in Wolfeboro, N.H., who was heard to call Pres. Barack Obama a particularly offensive racial slur preceded by a particularly offensive modifier. Apparently, Copeland cursed the president in a private conversation in a public spot and was overheard by at least one other person.

What was the 82-year-old’s response after getting called out for uttering this despicable pejorative?

“I believe I did use the N’ word in reference to the current occupant of the Whitehouse (sic),” he wrote in an e-mail response to the controversy. “For this I do not apologize — he meets and exceeds my criteria for such.”

Copeland is the head of the town’s three-member police commission, which is responsible for hiring police officers. Because Copeland is an elected official and because there is no recall mechanism in Wolfeboro, the only way for him to be relieved of his position was to resign. On Monday afternoon, after pressure from the town manager, the board of selectmen, residents and people around the Granite State and the nation, Copeland resigned. But that’s surely not the end of the story.

Defenders of and apologists for Copeland have cited his First Amendment rights to say what he wants, when he wants and where he wants. But Keli Goff, writing for The Root, notes Copeland’s position of authority makes his comments especially disturbing.

“While freedom of speech is clearly one of the bedrocks of American culture, the right not to fear those sworn to serve and protect us should be another. But for too many, particularly men of color, that fear is all too real.”

Ken White, writing for Popehat.com, notes that while racist speech is not sanctionable, it should have social consequences.

“When you talk, people will draw conclusions about your intentions based on your words.”

That’s exactly what is concerning to Goff. If this is the way Copeland speaks, how does his opinion influence who he approved for hire in Wolfeboro’s police department?

See the original post here:
Our opinion: Free speech and the discussion we're not having

WASHINGTON As U.S. National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers seeks to repair the damage to the agency caused by leaks about its electronic spying programs, the abuses of government revealed in the wake of the Watergate scandal are very much on his mind. As a teenager growing up in Chicago in the 1970s, Rogers recalls watching news broadcasts with his family and being horrified by how the CIA, FBI and NSA had illegally spied on hundreds of thousands of Americans. I can remember being very impassioned with my father, and telling him: ‘Dad, what kind of nation would we ever want to be that would allow something like this to happen?’ Rogers recalled. Four decades later, and six weeks into his new job as director of the NSA, the agency is facing similar accusations: that it has used its vast and intrusive surveillance powers to trample on privacy. Unlike 1975′s congressional investigation into intelligence gathering by the CIA, FBI and NSA, today’s allegations of rampant U.S. surveillance have unfolded on a global scale, damaging American relations from Brazil to Germany and Indonesia. While Rogers dismissed direct comparisons – noting that the NSA programs exposed by former contractor Edward Snowden last year had all been deemed lawful – he said he understood the concerns that have been raised about balancing individual privacy rights against security needs. We have been down that road in our history, and it has not always turned out well. I have no desire to be part of that, Rogers, 54, told the Reuters Cybersecurity Summit in Washington. Still, Rogers’ declaration that he wants to continue the NSA’s controversial search of phone records, known as metadata, has prompted critics to question if the new director really favors change at all. In his first interview since taking office, Rogers, a four-star Navy admiral, stressed the need for transparency and accountability. To repair the agency’s ties with internet and telecom firms, as well as U.S. allies, the NSA has to shed some of its secretive culture and be more candid about what it is doing, he said. Some say Rogers’ position falls short of what is needed. I don’t think it’s a public relations problem. What they have is a trust problem, said cryptography author Bruce Schneier, who worked with the Guardian newspaper to analyze some of Snowden’s documents. Schneier said that transparency would have to be imposed from above – either by the White House or Congress – for it to be credible. A “crippy” rises Highly thought of in Navy and intelligence circles, Rogers is a career cryptologist – a specialist in the breaking and making of codes – with little experience in the public spotlight. During the 70-minute Reuters interview, he seemed confident but guarded, speaking in sharply punctuated sentences and batting away questions about events that took place before he took over the Fort Meade, Maryland-based NSA. I’m not focused on wasting my time on what was or has been, said Rogers, who is also commander of the U.S. military’s Cyber Command. Arizona Republican Senator John McCain welcomed Roger’s call for greater transparency and accountability, but said he remained skeptical that any administration official would be held responsible for any NSA programs that exceeded congressional authority. I expect Admiral Rogers to be much more transparent, McCain told reporters on Wednesday. Do I believe that people will be punished? Nobody’s ever been punished for the torture of prisoners by the CIA. With short-cropped hair that as yet shows no signs of gray, Rogers can be alternately deadly serious – talking about mission sets and second-order effects – and self-deprecating. Returning two years ago to New Trier High School in Chicago’s suburbs, where he graduated in 1977, Rogers told a class: I was terrible at math, according to an account in the Chicago Sun-Times. Failing to gain admission to the U.S. Naval Academy, but determined to be a Navy officer, Rogers enrolled in Auburn University and went through the Naval Reserve Officers Training Corps. His career was unusual in other respects. After six years as a surface warfare officer, considered the Navy’s premier career path, he became a cryptologist or crippy. Rogers has now risen higher in the Navy than any cryptologist before him. A former senior U.S. intelligence official who knows Rogers said talent spotters in the Navy channeled him into intelligence duties broader than cryptology. In 2007, he became intelligence chief for U.S. Pacific Command and two years later, intelligence director for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Before becoming NSA chief, he led Fleet Cyber Command, the Navy’s cyber warfare and electronic spying unit. Underscoring the sensitivities surrounding the NSA post, President Barack Obama personally interviewed Rogers before nominating him for the job. Rogers sailed through his Senate confirmation hearing, although only after having to explain how hackers believed to be from Iran were able to penetrate a Navy computer network. “A powerful message” Rogers faces big challenges. Morale among the NSA’s tens of thousands of employees has taken a hit, and Rogers said many people in the agency found it both uncomfortable and perplexing to be under public scrutiny. Retired Air Force General Michael Hayden, a former director of both the NSA and CIA, said it was instructive that Obama chose Rogers, and veteran NSA civilian Richard Ledgett to be his deputy, at a time when the president was under enormous pressure to conduct a house cleaning of the agency. It was, Hayden said, a vote of confidence in the NSA and its staff, and a sign that, despite some reforms, Obama plans no sharp cutback in the agency’s aggressive global surveillance. They were the obvious choices before Snowden, and they were the choices after Snowden. This is a powerful message to send to the workforce, Hayden said. A second former senior U.S. intelligence official who knows Rogers predicted he would be a much more inclusive leader than his predecessor, the sometimes-combative Army General Keith Alexander, who led the agency for more than eight years. When Rogers is not wearing his NSA hat, he runs Cyber Command, a rapidly growing organization tasked with defending U.S. military computer networks, penetrating and mapping adversary networks, and conducting offensive cyber warfare. Rogers, who has been married to his wife, Dana, for 29 years and has a son in the Navy and one in college, may have days where he wishes he had neither job. In a video message to NSA employees after he took command, Rogers is said to have remarked that he had promised his wife he would be retired by now.

Continued here:

NSA's Future Rests on Admiral Rogers' Shoulders

May 192014

President Obama has been asked to curb the NSA's surveillance after allegations that it targeted hardware made by networking firm Cisco.

Excerpt from:

Obama asked to curb NSA surveillance

Cisco Systems’ CEO John Chambers has written to U.S. President Barack Obama, asking for his intervention so that U.S. technology sales are not affected by a loss in trust as a result of reports of surveillance by the U.S. National Security Agency.

The letter follows reports that even as the U.S. warned customers that Chinese networking equipment may be used to spy on them, the NSA physically intercepted routers, servers and other network equipment to plant surveillance tools before repackaging the devices with a factory seal and sending the products to international customers.

[ PathSolutions solves the network monitoring maze -- and nets an InfoWorld Test Center Editor's Choice. | Pick up expert networking how-to advice from InfoWorld's Networking Deep Dive PDF special report and Technology: Networking newsletter. ]

“We simply cannot operate this way, our customers trust us to be able to deliver to their doorsteps products that meet the highest standards of integrity and security,” Chambers wrote in the letter to Obama, dated May 15, which was published by news website Re/code. “We understand the real and significant threats that exist in this world, but we must also respect the industry’s relationship of trust with our customers.”

A Cisco spokesman confirmed Sunday that the letter had been sent to Obama.

Referring to the reports, including a photograph of what appeared to be a Cisco package being tampered with, Chambers said if the allegations are true, the actions will weaken confidence in the ability of technology companies to deliver products worldwide.

Chambers asked the Obama administration to take a leadership role and ensure that guidelines and reforms are put into place that “can be honored across the globe.”

Referring to the reports that IT products including from Cisco were being compromised on their way to customers, Cisco’s General Counsel Mark Chandler wrote in a blog post last week that the company complies with U.S. laws, like those of many other countries, which limit exports to certain customers and destinations.

“We ought to be able to count on the government to then not interfere with the lawful delivery of our products in the form in which we have manufactured them,” he added.

In December, eight top technology companies including Microsoft, Google, Facebook and Yahoo called for the reform around the world of government surveillance laws and practices, and asked the U.S. to take the lead. Some Internet companies were charged in disclosures last year by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden of providing to the NSA real-time access to contents on their servers, which the companies denied. There were also reports that the agency was tapping into communications links between the data centers of Yahoo and Google.

Read more from the original source:

Cisco CEO tells Obama: NSA spying impacts technology sales



“Illuminati Exposed” | World Unites Against the Illuminati Professor Griff on Fire!
“Illuminati Exposed” | World Unites Against the Illuminati Professor Griff on Fire! groundbreaking interview with rap artist Professor Griff of Public Enemy. Professor Griff lists Obama's…

By: Illuminati Exposed

Here is the original post:
"Illuminati Exposed" | World Unites Against the Illuminati Professor Griff on Fire! – Video

The consequences of eliminating Fourth Amendment protections for all international communication with foreigners

Reuters

The U.S. government concedes that it needs a warrant to eavesdrop on phone calls between Americans, or to read the body of their emails to one another. Everyone agrees that these communications are protected by the Fourth Amendment. But the government also argues that Fourth Amendment protections don’t apply when an American calls or writes to a foreigner in another country.

Let’s say, for example, that the head of the NAACP writes an email to a veteran of the South African civil-rights struggle asking for advice about an anti-racism campaign; or that Hillary Clinton fields a call from a friend in Australia whose daughter was raped; or that Jeb Bush uses Skype to discuss with David Cameron whether he should seek the 2016 presidential nomination for the Republican Party. Under the Obama administration’s logic, these Americans have no reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to these conversations, and it is lawful and legitimate for the NSA to eavesdrop on, record, and store everything that is said.

The arguments Team Obama uses to justify these conclusions are sweeping and worrisome, as the ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer capturesin his analysis of the relevant legal briefs:

… the government contends that Americans who make phone calls or send emails to people abroad have a diminished expectation of privacy because the people with whom they are communicatingnon-Americans abroad, that isare not protected by the Constitution. The government also argues that Americans’ privacy rights are further diminished in this context because the NSA has a “paramount” interest in examining information that crosses international borders.

… the government even argues that Americans can’t reasonably expect that their international communications will be private from the NSA when the intelligence services of so many other countries … might be monitoring those communications, too. The government’s argument is not simply that the NSA has broad authority to monitor Americans’ international communications. The US government is arguing that the NSA’s authority is unlimited in this respect. If the government is right, nothing in the Constitution bars the NSA from monitoring a phone call between a journalist in New York City and his source in London. For that matter, nothing bars the NSA from monitoring every call and email between Americans in the United States and their non-American friends, relatives, and colleagues overseas.

All I’d add is that the Obama administration’s encroachments on the Fourth Amendment disparately affect naturalized citizens of the United States, almost all of whom still have friends or family members living in their countries of origin. When I call my parents, email my sister, or text my best friend, my private communications are theoretically protected by the Bill of Rights. In contrast, immigrants contacting loved ones often do so with the expectation that every word they say or write can be legally recorded and stored forever on a server somewhere.

Xenophobia is one factor driving this double-standard. It does real harm to immigrants whose speech is chilled, as is clear to anyone who has made an effort to speak with them.

Yet there has been little backlash against the Obama administration for affording zero constitutional protections to Americans engaged in speech with foreigners, and little sympathy for the innocent Americans, many of them immigrants, who are hurt by the approach Obama and many in Congress endorse.

Go here to see the original:

NSA Spying Has a Disproportionate Effect on Immigrants

Religious freedom is a fundamental human right of every person on earth. It has been recognized by international accords and by the Second Vatican Council. But religious liberty is under attack in many countries around the world.

The United States committed itself to the promotion of religious liberty through its foreign policy in the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act (IRFA). The law provides that it will be the policy of the United Sates to condemn violations of religious freedom and to promote and assist other governments in the promotion of the fundamental right to freedom of religion.

Congress felt it was necessary to make this clear in the IRFA because it is easy to forget about religious freedom when policymakers are so focused on national security, economic issues and other human rights that religious freedom is forgotten.

Although much of the motivation for passage of this act was concern over the persecution of Christians, the law is generic — it applies to all religions.

The IRFA provides for the creation of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), to which President Barack Obama recently appointed me. The purpose of the commission is to review annually the efforts of the U.S. government in implementing the IRFA.

The most recent USCIRF report, written before I was appointed, was released April 30. It is the 15th report issued by the commission and is divided into four parts, but in this column, I will focus on the first part: a discussion of the international standards for religious freedom.

What is religious freedom?

The first point to be made is that religious freedom is not just for believers. It also includes nonbelievers. Properly speaking, it is “freedom of religion or belief.” It protects a person’s right to hold or not hold any religion or belief. So religious freedom must also protect the atheist.

Nor is it only for religious minorities. It also applies to those of the majority who might want to debate or dissent from views within the majority religion.

One frequent mistake is to equate freedom of religion with freedom of worship. Even some American policymakers have spoken of freedom of worship rather than freedom of religion.

Link:
Religious freedom is a fundamental human right



First Amendment Fun Gun Shop Owner Speaks His Mind On Marquee Fox Friends
Mass Tea Party http://goo.gl/Z5ShLs First Amendment Fun – Gun Shop Owner Speaks His Mind On Marquee – Fox Friends I Like My Guns Like Obama Likes His Vot…

By: M10750calSASR

See the article here:
First Amendment Fun Gun Shop Owner Speaks His Mind On Marquee Fox Friends – Video



OBAMA VISION George Bush Caught Lying illuminati NSA all the newest GWB jokes

By: Margareta Schabel

Continue reading here:

OBAMA VISION George Bush Caught Lying illuminati NSA all the newest GWB jokes – Video

The consequences of eliminating 4th Amendment protections for all international communication with foreigners.

Reuters

The U.S. government concedes that it needs a warrant to eavesdrop on phone calls between Americans, or to read the body of their emails to one another. Everyone agrees that these communications are protected by the Fourth Amendment. But the government also argues that Fourth Amendment protections don’t apply when an American calls or writes to a foreigner in another country.

Let’s say, for example, that the head of the NAACP writes an email to a veteran of the civil rights struggle in South Africa asking for advice about an anti-racism campaign; or that Hillary Clinton fields a phone call from a friend in Australia whose daughter was raped; or that Jeb Bush uses Skype to call David Cameron to discuss whether he should seek the 2016 nomination for the Republican Party. Under the Obama Administration’s logic, these Americans have no reasonable expectation of privacy with regard to these conversations, and it is lawful and legitimate for the NSA to eavesdrop on, record, and store everything that is said.

The arguments Team Obama uses to justify these conclusions are sweeping and worrisome, as the ACLU’s Jameel Jaffer capturesin his analysis of the relevant legal briefs:

…the government contends that Americans who make phone calls or send emails to people abroad have a diminished expectation of privacy because the people with whom they are communicating non-Americans abroad, that is are not protected by the Constitution. The government also argues that Americans’ privacy rights are further diminished in this context because the NSA has a “paramount” interest in examining information that crosses international borders.

…the government even argues that Americans can’t reasonably expect that their international communications will be private from the NSA when the intelligence services of so many other countries… might be monitoring those communications, too. The government’s argument is not simply that the NSA has broad authority to monitor Americans’ international communications. The US government is arguing that the NSA’s authority is unlimited in this respect. If the government is right, nothing in the Constitution bars the NSA from monitoring a phone call between a journalist in New York City and his source in London. For that matter, nothing bars the NSA from monitoring every call and email between Americans in the United States and their non-American friends, relatives, and colleagues overseas.

All I’d add is that the Obama Administration’s encroachments on the 4th Amendment disparately impact naturalized citizens of the United States, almost all of whom still have friends or family members living in their countries of origin. When I call my parents, email my sister, or text my best friend, my private communications are theoretically protected by the Bill of Rights. In contrast, immigrants contacting loved ones often do so with the expectation that every word they say or write can be legally recorded and stored forever on a server somewhere.

Xenophobia is one factor driving this double-standard. It does real harm to immigrants whose speech is chilled, as is clear to anyone who has made an effort to speak with them.

Yet there has been little backlash against the Obama Administration for affording zero Constitutional protections to Americans engaged in speech with foreigners, and little sympathy for the innocent Americans, many of them immigrants, who are hurt by the approach Obama and many in Congress endorse.

Excerpt from:

NSA Spying Has a Disparate Impact on the Privacy Rights of Immigrants



NSA watching and recording everything you do Obama's Police State
THIS VIDEO IS UNDER “FAIR USE” (COPYRIGHT LAW) Any attempt to have this video blocked for any copyright reason is an illegal act. If you don't know what FAIR USE is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v…

By: enemyofthepolicestate

Read the original here:

NSA watching and recording everything you do Obama’s Police State – Video



FireFox! Start Your Own Web Hosting Company
Web Hosting Advertise Here $10 a Month Affordable web-hosting
Pierre Teilhard De Chardin




Designer Children | Prometheism | Euvolution | Transhumanism

Sign up below for the Prometheism / Designer Children Discussion Forum

Subscribe to prometheism-pgroup

Powered by us.groups.yahoo.com