Slashdot Mirror

When he was leaking things that made Bush look bad you loved Julian Assange so hard that Benedict Cumberbatch played him in the movie.

""First Facebook and now Wikileaks as the Guardian reports that studio executives have picked up the screen rights to the forthcoming Julian Assange biography 'The Most Dangerous Man in the World' by award-winning Australian writer Andrew Fowler. The book details Assange's life from his childhood on Magnetic Island in Queensland, Australia, all the way through to his founding of the whistleblower website in 2006 to publish classified material. Producers Barry Josephson and Michelle Krumm, who have optioned The Most Dangerous Man in the World, say they are planning a 'suspenseful drama' in the vein of All the President's Men and with the thrill of a Tom Clancy novel. 'As soon as I met Andrew and read a few chapters of his profound book, I knew that â" with his incredibly extensive depth of knowledge â" it would enable us to bring a thought-provoking thriller to the screen,' says Krumm."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2011/jan/21/wikileaks-movie-biography-julian-assange

Have you seen what the Obfuscated C project can do?

Yes, obfuscated programming contests can serve as important learning tools for those who want to liberate themselves from continued ignorance driven by fear of the unknown.

I wouldn't trust NSA source code beyond 'print "Hello World";' and even that is iffy.

I think it's safe to say you won't be doing anything with the program (as far as you know) but programmers simply can't afford the luxury of being ignorant and non-programmers are not well served by inculcating fear. The result of your suggestion is to maintain a small group of elites who ought to be blindly trusted rather than kept in check through software freedom.

God help anyone who touches it if this release is binary only.

I'm not sure what constitutes 'touching' in this context but disassembling the binary and examining how that works (even running the code once understood on a spare computer or VM, perhaps one that isn't networked) should be encouraged particularly for the purposes of providing a free software replacement. Running the program temporarily might be necessary to provide a free software replacement. One hopes that any release comes with complete corresponding source code and build instructions. But really, there's no more reason to trust the proprietary software people run every day than there is to trust any code from the NSA. Proprietary software is often malware. We have no good reason to trust the NSA nor software proprietors; in fact, the proprietors sometimes work with the NSA (like when Microsoft specifically changed Skype to make it easier to spy upon).

Sometimes people don't want to see how the older free software movement (a social movement which advocates for the freedom to run, inspect, share, and modify published computer software) and the younger open source development methodology are philosophically different (1, 2) and that philosophical difference leads to radical differences on the ground. Objections to raising this difference tend to take the form of trying to make it look like any reminder of software freedom (which open source enthusiasts don't like because their philosophy was founded to reject software freedom) is being somehow rude. But time after time we see this difference in action and this article promoting Skype is no different.

Here a proprietary (non-free, user subjugating) program—Skype—is being advertised for use on what might be a free software system (unfairly referred to as a "Linux" system). No reminder of anything to do with software freedom except in a place where the proprietor thinks they can benefit from the conflation the open source philosophy was designed to achieve: "While Microsoft has long been viewed as an enemy of the Linux community -- and it still is by some -- the company has actually transformed into an open source champion." tries to get you to think of "open source" but not to the extent that one would wonder if even that group's weaker philosophy is going to be available to Skype's users by running Skype. No mention of GNU as in a GNU/Linux operating system; any mention of GNU is far too strong a reminder of the software freedom you're not getting with Skype. Better to stick to distracting technocratic details that are irrelevant compared with the profound problems of running Skype, details like the software's packaging. And to reinforce the notion that open source advocates will often abandon their own developmental philosophy if it gets in the way of a powerful proprietor, we get a quote from Canonical, an open source supporting company, further encouraging users to install the non-free communications software.

Nowhere will you find a reminder that not only is Skype non-free software (and that this alone carries horrible implications) but Microsoft is an NSA partner, and Microsoft changed Skype specifically for spying. Apparently the "seamless user experience" Canonical championed and the "high quality experience" Microsoft talked about doesn't include respecting a user's software freedom, their privacy, or the security of their computer.

"First Facebook and now Wikileaks as the Guardian reports that studio executives have picked up the screen rights to the forthcoming Julian Assange biography 'The Most Dangerous Man in the World' by award-winning Australian writer Andrew Fowler. The book details Assange's life from his childhood on Magnetic Island in Queensland, Australia, all the way through to his founding of the whistleblower website in 2006 to publish classified material. Producers Barry Josephson and Michelle Krumm, who have optioned The Most Dangerous Man in the World, say they are planning a 'suspenseful drama' in the vein of All the President's Men and with the thrill of a Tom Clancy novel. 'As soon as I met Andrew and read a few chapters of his profound book, I knew that â" with his incredibly extensive depth of knowledge â" it would enable us to bring a thought-provoking thriller to the screen,' says Krumm."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film...

Microsoft, owner of Skype (which Microsoft changed specifically for spying, not that Skype was trustworthy under its previous owner either as The Guardian tells us, "Eight months before being bought by Microsoft, Skype joined the Prism program in February 2011.") and NSA "provider" since 2007-09-11 (the NSA's first PRISM provider) wants us to understand their "commitment to our customers' security". Apparently that commitment is as little as they can get away with.

That's true of every software proprietor, Google included. The problem is the lack of software freedom which is designed to leave users at the mercy of the only programmers allowed to inspect, alter, and publish improvements to the proprietary software—these are the very programmers users couldn't trust with their security in the first place.

No, the UK does not say that - this has been settled three times in British courts with regard to this specific case, and each time the EAW has been found to be legal and correct, with many pages spent explaining the determinations in detail.

http://image.guardian.co.uk/sy...

Points 120 onward.

Well put.

Number of people killed by homeopathy: zero.

Number of people killed by the medical system. Well, that's awkward, the medical system itself if the third leading cause of death in the United States today.

Examining the actual evidence on all sides is appropriate at this juncture.

The medical system third-leading cause of death in the United States.
Starfield B (July 2000). "Is US health really the best in the world?". JAMA 284 (4): 483–5. doi:10.1001/jama.284.4.483. PMID 10904513.

Ioannidis JPA (2005) Why Most Published Research Findings Are False. PLoS Med 2(8): e124. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
http://journals.plos.org/plosm...

What is medicine's 5 sigma? - Richard Hortonemail - DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S014... http://www.thelancet.com/journ...

Pharmecutical companies write their own "clinical reports", then bribe doctors to put their names on them.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/soci...

Such "ghostwriting" is not uncommon at all.
Lacasse JR, Leo J (2010) Ghostwriting at Elite Academic Medical Centers in the United States. PLoS Med 7(2): e1000230. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000230
http://www.plosmedicine.org/ar...

"Apple bashing"? How inarticulate and ultimately blindly supportive of a known repeat bad actor to keep their customers from controlling the iThings they buy. It's hardly far-fetched to see how the company receives bad press. They've made an ugly history for themselves rife with mistreating workers, users, and harming the environment. They found they could get away with non-freedom in software also exploits app developers "mercilessly" as Richard Stallman put it on his reasons why one shouldn't do business with Apple. Apple also uses digital restrictions management on eBooks which is set up so that those eBooks won't work on jailbroken iThings, stuck users with a U2 album and made it hard to delete, censors bitcoin apps for iThings, deauthorized a Wikileaks access application, banned an erotic novel from iTunes because of its cover, left a security hole in iTunes unfixed for 3 years, and more.

"Apple bashing"? How inarticulate and ultimately blindly supportive of a known repeat bad actor to keep their customers from controlling the iThings they buy. It's hardly far-fetched to see how the company receives bad press. They've made an ugly history for themselves rife with mistreating workers, users, and harming the environment. They found they could get away with non-freedom in software also exploits app developers "mercilessly" as Richard Stallman put it on his reasons why one shouldn't do business with Apple. Apple also uses digital restrictions management on eBooks which is set up so that those eBooks won't work on jailbroken iThings, stuck users with a U2 album and made it hard to delete, censors bitcoin apps for iThings, deauthorized a Wikileaks access application, banned an erotic novel from iTunes because of its cover, left a security hole in iTunes unfixed for 3 years, and more.

"Apple bashing"? How inarticulate and ultimately blindly supportive of a known repeat bad actor to keep their customers from controlling the iThings they buy. It's hardly far-fetched to see how the company receives bad press. They've made an ugly history for themselves rife with mistreating workers, users, and harming the environment. They found they could get away with non-freedom in software also exploits app developers "mercilessly" as Richard Stallman put it on his reasons why one shouldn't do business with Apple. Apple also uses digital restrictions management on eBooks which is set up so that those eBooks won't work on jailbroken iThings, stuck users with a U2 album and made it hard to delete, censors bitcoin apps for iThings, deauthorized a Wikileaks access application, banned an erotic novel from iTunes because of its cover, left a security hole in iTunes unfixed for 3 years, and more.

Facebook and Twitter by troops using military computers

That seems to be for the troops' recreation and communications, not propaganda.

Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities [...] http://www.guardian.co.uk/tech...

That's the same article, that the AC above linked to, while making an allegation I rebutted. Your description of it is misleading — at the time it was written, the software did not exist. Only the contract to develop it is actually asserted as existing. Moreover, that is the article, from which I quoted the following: "none of the interventions would be in English, as it would be unlawful to "address US audiences" with such technology". You are citing that same link again to "prove", that "US audiences" were targeted after — and even before — the law banning the practice was abolished? Wow...

phony fan club websites, were set up to disparage USA TODAY reporters [...] Camille Chidiac, admitted to setting up some of the sites

So, it was not done by a government program, but by one guy — seemingly at the behest of one private tax-evading company. And he got punished for it...

Slim pickings — your earlier bold claim, that "the domestic propaganda has been going on since before 2013" is not supported... At all.

I got plenty of citations

Military Announces New Social Media Policy (Feb. 26th 2010)
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com...
"Many months behind schedule, the Department of Defense on Friday issued a new policy that, on the surface, seems likely to expand access to popular social networking sites like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter by troops using military computers."

Well, that's pleasant, but.. just how "expanded" has the "access" been?

Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media ( March 17th 2011)
Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities to spread pro-American propaganda
http://www.guardian.co.uk/tech...
"A Californian corporation has been awarded a contract with United States Central Command (Centcom), which oversees US armed operations in the Middle East and Central Asia, to develop what is described as an "online persona management service" that will allow one US serviceman or woman to control up to 10 separate identities based all over the world."

Convinced yet? Want to explain why US contractors had an active online social media presence in 2011, if they couldn't make money off of it?

Propaganda programs hard to justify, Panetta says
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

"USA TODAY found that the owners of the top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan, Leonie Industries, had failed to pay $4 million in federal taxes on time despite earning more than $200 million in contracts from the government. Their tax bills were paid after the story was published.

Shortly after USA TODAY made inquiries about the tax bills, fake Facebook and Twitter accounts, as well as phony fan club websites, were set up to disparage USA TODAY reporters. The co-owner of the company, Camille Chidiac, admitted to setting up some of the sites but said he did not use company resources in doing so. He had been suspended from receiving federal contracts because of the campaign, but the military lifted the suspension late last year."

Evidence based medicine is commonly wrong because the evidence is interpreted incorrectly.

Around the 1600s, cedar leaf tae saved Jacques Cartier's crew from scurvy, 25 died the rest were save and when he got back to France was told there as no evidence this worked.

Prior to that Vasco de Gamma nearly diet near the Cape of Good Horn but his crew found eating citrus fixed it.

Hundreds of years later, evidence showed citrus prevented scurvy and it became institutionalized. Later it was boiled on copper kettles (which neutralize the C) and nobody noticed it didn't work any more as diets had improved, until sailors and polar explorers began dying. Similarly at around the same time the new process of warming babies milk to kill bacteria also killed the vitamin C and a new disease of the rich emerged: infantile scurvy. By 1933 vitamin C had be found and scurvy became much less widespread.

The point is scurvy has been around for 20 million years, it' s in recorded history for 5500 years but as of the Scott Antarctic expedition people were still dying of it despite cures being known since Egyptian times ("bitter herbs" all have ascorbate). It's not that the evidence is lacking, it's that there's a disruptive influence from commerce and industrialization. Some unintentional, some because of vested interest. History records that "the evidence was contradictory" and while this is true it never stopped being true that two fresh citrus a day prevented and even cured scurvy, of course more was better, ascorbate does not take up into the body in hours it takes days. so any time i the past 500 years it's been true people have been saying "look I know if I eat fresh fruit I won't get sick" while the medical community insisted, no, it' something else we disproved that. During Scott's antarctic mission the medically accepted ce for scurvy was a brew called "vitriol" containing sulphuric acid. That where evidence based medicine got you and this is one of the reason it's a UN right that you can deterring your own course of treatment to any illness. Science is just a sure it's right the nit's wrong as it is when it's right and it's been worn as recently as elat year, the recent fats ans cholesterol deacle as well as finding out sugar is the cause of cholesterol is proof at least to me that the conventional wisdom is neither.

It cannot be said this does not exist today. I'm not a TV guy and have only a very casual knowledge of the claims he made. ome I know are wrong and know why there are right and I know why but are rejected by industry. Given the near complete control by industry of antu to do with pharmaceuticals they are not the best ones to adjudicate this. The belief that if it's in our pharmacopoeia it's good and anything that isn't is bad it fatally flawed in many many ways.

I don't think they'll pursue this very far. All it's going to take is one thing Oz says that works that they say doesn't but actually does and now everything else they say is in question.

If you have unwavering faith in the pharmaceutical industry to be acting only out of the best interests of your health in an ethical manner at all times then you must not have seen these:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
http://projects.propublica.org...
https://web.archive.org/web/20...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/soci...
http://www.plosmedicine.org/ar...
http://www.nature.com/nature/j...

Are you saying that the CIA would trump up a fake rape charge just because someone was foolish enough to threaten U.S. interests, only for the truth to come out as soon as they got what they wanted?

That's just ludicrous!

Assange? I was talking about Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF chief who made the foolish mistake questioning the primacy of the U.S. dollar. He was publicly arrested for rape shortly thereafter in what the prosecutor called at "rock solid" case. Then three days after his successor at the IMF took office, all charges were dropped.

Don't fuck with the CIA.

It stays strong because if anyone with the ability to actually do something about it is stupid enough to speak out against it, we make them regret it.

FTFY

I never have understood the world's fetish with the US dollar.

It stays strong because if anyone is stupid enough to speak out against it, we make them regret it.

Don't fuck with the U.S. Dollar.

This wasn't a rape, it was a CIA setup. Anyone remember Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF chief who made the tragic mistake of challenging the U.S. dollar? A few months aftr he started proposing a new global currency to replace the dollar, he suddenly became a rapist. They dragged him off a plane in New York in handcuffs and everything. Prosecutor announced it was a rock solid case. His political career was destroyed, he was ousted as IMF head. Then exactly three days after his successor at the IMF was sworn in, suddenly the prosecutor dropped the charges and admitted that the case was bogus.

DSK? The guy who was accused of forcing a hotel maid to give him a beej against her will? The guy who said he never met the maid and has no idea what anyone's talking about? The guy who then said yeah, he met her when she cleaned his room, but the door was open and nothing happened? The guy who then said, yeah, the door was closed, but nothing happened? The guy who then said, well, he was naked and the door was closed, but nothing happened? The guy who then said, well, she gave him a beej, but she was totally into it? The guy who then said the torn rotator cuff in her shoulder was because she really liked rough sex? No, he's totally credible. You just have to pick which of his many contradictory stories you believe.

This wasn't a rape, it was a CIA setup. Anyone remember Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF chief who made the tragic mistake of challenging the U.S. dollar? A few months aftr he started proposing a new global currency to replace the dollar, he suddenly became a rapist. They dragged him off a plane in New York in handcuffs and everything. Prosecutor announced it was a rock solid case. His political career was destroyed, he was ousted as IMF head. Then exactly three days after his successor at the IMF was sworn in, suddenly the prosecutor dropped the charges and admitted that the case was bogus.

Character assassination it *SO* much easier than assassination with a bullet. I'm just surprised that Edward Snowden hasn't been accused of being a child molester yet.

interesting. Do you have any proof of this, or are you just spouting conspiracy theories.

This wasn't a rape, it was a CIA setup. Anyone remember Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF chief who made the tragic mistake of challenging the U.S. dollar? A few months aftr he started proposing a new global currency to replace the dollar, he suddenly became a rapist. They dragged him off a plane in New York in handcuffs and everything. Prosecutor announced it was a rock solid case. His political career was destroyed, he was ousted as IMF head. Then exactly three days after his successor at the IMF was sworn in, suddenly the prosecutor dropped the charges and admitted that the case was bogus.

Character assassination it *SO* much easier than assassination with a bullet. I'm just surprised that Edward Snowden hasn't been accused of being a child molester yet.

"The government" is not an organized entity with a secret agenda.

In this case some agency is paying shills to post nonsense on the internet, and which agency--be it the FBI, the originators of COINTELPRO, or the CIA, or any other alphabet soup entity--isn't relevant to the fact of those trolls existing. Hence, "the government". If I said it was the NSA, you'd be busy telling me how incompetent the NSA is. Instead you've chosen to conveniently overlook the cooperation of the NSA and its pet, the GCHQ.

But I'll go ahead and tear about your stupid shit about there not being web propaganda, because why not.

Leon Panetta publicly admits to web propaganda efforts by the Pentagon. However, it's a contractor performing the propaganda, which would confuse your poor mind into wanting to associate it with some government agency, since "the government" after all is too much of a summary for you. http://www.usatoday.com/story/...

USA TODAY found that the owners of the top propaganda contractor in Afghanistan, Leonie Industries, had failed to pay $4 million in federal taxes on time despite earning more than $200 million in contracts from the government. Their tax bills were paid after the story was published.

Shortly after USA TODAY made inquiries about the tax bills, fake Facebook and Twitter accounts, as well as phony fan club websites, were set up to disparage USA TODAY reporters. The co-owner of the company, Camille Chidiac, admitted to setting up some of the sites but said he did not use company resources in doing so. He had been suspended from receiving federal contracts because of the campaign, but the military lifted the suspension late last year.

Domestic propaganda legalized in 2013, for the first time since the cold war: http://rt.com/usa/propaganda-u...
Military Announces New Social Media Policy: http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com...
Many months behind schedule, the Department of Defense on Friday issued a new policy that, on the surface, seems likely to expand access to popular social networking sites like YouTube, Facebook and Twitter by troops using military computers.

And most importantly: Revealed: US spy operation that manipulates social media: Military's 'sock puppet' software creates fake online identities to spread pro-American propaganda http://www.guardian.co.uk/tech...

In summary, you're bad at this, and should feel bad.

This is why not:

Crop yields are expected to decline because plants need more water as the temperature goes up:
http://www.qaafi.uq.edu.au/mai...
http://www.circleofblue.org/wa...
http://www.seeddaily.com/repor...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

Also try this on for size; The spread of pests and disease:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scie...
http://www.wunderground.com/ne...

As for the rest of your assumptions: http://www.skepticalscience.co...

That's comparing the output from one year to another, in this case 2008 & 2009.

I couldn't read the zoomed graphic but this PDF shows the same info: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sy...
Recall that Kyoto required reductions of 6 GHGs, not just CO2 but measured in CO2-equivalents. The claims for the USA meeting those requirements are looking ONLY at CO2 when it's known that all that fracking has been releasing significant amounts of the much more powerful GHG, methane.

You are rather backed by your opinions and guesses ABOUT science... Now those opinions might be reasonable and the guesses could be educated... but they are not science.

They are not "opinions" or "guesses". They are probabilities, backed by a great deal of evidence - like virtually everything in science. Higgs Boson existence? Probability. The Big Bang? Probability. Quantum mechanics? Yeah, a lot of that. To be scientific, a theory does not have to be a certainty at all; the probability just needs to be carefully quantified, and backed by observation and/or experiment.

...you have overstated your reasonable degree of confidence on issues for political gain. This has been done repeatedly which is why many of the IPCC reports have come under such savage criticism

Citation needed. The IPCC reports all state their conclusions in probabilities, which are carefully quantified, and are backed by citations of peer-reviewed studies at every stage. The vast majority of the evidence presented in the IPCC reports has proved under very close examination to be solid (NOT absolutely certain, but of sound scientific methodology). This is why they are accepted as, not the gospel truth, but the best information on the subject that we have, by every major scientific institution and government, as well as by the great majority of scientists (and nearly all climatologists).

It is THAT which is ultimately causing most of the controversy. Not the science but rather the political solution to the science.

I do agree that this is the source of the controversy. Solutions are indeed often political, but unfortunately all too often, peoples' political views about some of the solutions contaminate their views of the science, which usually leads to claims that the science itself is being politicised. I disagree with that.

Or you must sit down and talk about solutions we can all find palatable.

If only we could do that. Unfortunately, there are still far too many strident voices still trying to undermine the science, which blocks any reasonable discussion of solutions. If those voices actually had any peer-reviewed evidence of a quality that could convince a reasonable number of experts, that would be fine, but sadly these dissenting voices tend to rely on volume instead.

I'm also of the opinion that many people misunderstand the solutions that have been proposed (for example, see all the claims that a phased transition to a carbon-neutral economy would be a disastrous burden on society, whereas many economists are seeing it as an opportunity for actually reducing the many existing external costs of carbon emissions).

Point of Fact: He dared challenge the U.S. Dollar

A while back, a certain IMF chief tried that. Ask him what happened next.

Give me the publicantions (sic) and research where Pro-AGW factions engaged in scientific fraud.

Well, this comes to mind. Why cover up the data? Maybe he was cleared of all wrong-doing, but this was one of the first hits when I searched for "Global Warming Fraud".

Okay, I read the report, and personally if that is fraud, then most everything is.

It boils down to a researcher was worried about some of the data. Then he was reluctant to release some of the data to a climate change "skeptic".

Okay, I hope that what you not are saying that this incident completely disproves AGW?

You need to go here. http://retractionwatch.com/ Lots and lots of retractions. And they have real ones, not just the ones that the press and the deniers orgasm over.

But there is a reason for that. Hackers that worked their way into emails, and cherry picking the data, and that is all they can come up with?

I suspsect the deniers would love to take down retraction watch, because of gems like this:

http://retractionwatch.com/201...

Don't worry though, because AGW deniers refuse to believe that the paper is not real and the honest truth. SO I guess they can still quote the retracted paper

Amazingly enough, Character assassination, the second tool of the deniers, has even had a "scientific paper put out. Oops, it was retracted.

http://retractionwatch.com/201...

Lest you believe this site deals only with anti-AGW papers being retracted, here is a case of a really bad AGW study

http://www.guardian.co.uk/envi...

Retracted, and rightfully so

This one was a bit less dumb:

http://retractionwatch.com/201...

However, here is the biggie:

http://retractionwatch.com/201... For those who don't read articles, the Journal, "Pattern Recognition in Physics", is a journal favored by climate change skeptics, And Published by Copernicus Publications. While th einitiators asserted that the aim of the journal was to publish articles about patterns in the full spectrum of physical disciplines, events proved otherwise.

In a special issue entitled "Pattern in Solar variability, their planetary origin, and terrestrial impacts, the paper authors cast doubt upon global warming.

Okay, so far, so good. But nothing gets published in scientific journals without review. The main page of that Retraction watch proves that. It's a matter of course. What we found out:

The "peer" review process was done on a nepotistic basis. Scientific publishing considers that as malpractice and unethical.

The writers plagiarized themselves. Always a trigger for retraction.

The editor in chief of the journal is employed by the Algerian Petroleum Institute.

Copernicous Publications has ceased publication of the journal.

Revealed: secret plan to push'happy' pills
http://www.theguardian.com/soc...

Big Pharma Could Win International Price Monopoly, Unlimited Profits in 'Free Trade' Deal
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

US patent moves are 'profoundly bad' in leaked TPP treaty
http://www.theverge.com/2013/1...

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is a proposed free trade agreement under negotiation between Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, the United States and Vietnam. Leaked documents show the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) is pressuring TPP countries to expand pharmaceutical monopoly protections and trade away access to medicines.
http://www.citizen.org/TPPA

The medical industry the third-leading cause of death in the United States; after heart disease and cancer.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...

Big Pharma Shamelessly Shills Dangerous Bone Drugs You Don't Need
http://www.alternet.org/story/...

The H1N1 Swine Flu Pandemic: Manipulating the Data to Justify a Worldwide Public Health Emergency
http://www.globalresearch.ca/t...

"Somewhere in Rayong or Chon Buri on the coast of Thailand, a young woman may at this very moment be baring her arm for a shot of an experimental Aids vaccine that many of the leading scientists in the field say categorically has no hope at all of working.

She will be one of 16,000 volunteers recruited for the second large-scale Aids vaccine trial, a $119m exercise many scientists believe is a farce."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/scie...

Fraud has become so endemic in this country that it's woven its way into America’s DNA. 2). Big Pharma Fraud.
http://www.alternet.org/story/...

Drug Makers New Targets for U.S. Fraud Inquiries, Report Says
http://prescriptions.blogs.nyt...

Merck drew up a "hit list" of doctors that needed to be "neutralized" because they criticized the now banned drug Vioxx.
http://science.slashdot.org/st...

Merck invents its own journal to publish bogus research findings to promote it's own products.
http://blog.bioethics.net/2009...

Why Aren't These Fraudulent Papers Retracted?
http://truth-out.org/news/item...

Doubts about Johns Hopkins research have gone unanswered, scientist says
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

A National Survey of Physician–Industry Relationships
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/1...

Here is an interesting article from a few months before his arrest that may give you a good idea of why they wanted him out of the IMF so bad.

A lot of people don't understand that the CIA realized that character assassination is MUCH more effective (and less messy) than physical assassination a long time ago. It's also a great way to deal with an IMF head who suddenly decides to start challenging the dollar.

This sounds like the latest salvo in a concerted effort to assassinate Assange's character (since Ecuador and the UK would probably frown on anything more direct). Not sure how they got to his ghostwriter (or if he was perhaps a plant all along). But it's clear that they did.

I would be surprised if they had the resources to write an entire OS from scratch.

Why? *nix has been reimplemented or ported many times in many computer languages on many different computer architectures. Both Unix and Linux were originally written and maintained by a small number of people, and the same goes for many other capable operating systems. I seem to recall that Unix version 6 or 7 was ported to new architectures several times by 1 or 2 people in three to four months. Writing a new GUI has been done in about one person-year. Both the design and code for *nix like operating systems are openly available. I have no problem believing that if they wanted to they could do so.

It would probably be something of a waste of resources, but since they have roughly the population of California (from where many operating systems have launched) while having the largest military in the world (combined active & reserve) just sitting on its hands waiting for order to go South to liberate their "brothers," it would seem that wasted resources aren't necessarily a big issue to them. They also have some unusually powerful incentives: get that new GUI working in 1 year or you will be considered a "wrecker", judged a traitor, and you and three generations of your family will go to be "test subjects". If you do get it working, everyone in your family will have their daily calorie allocation increased from 2,150 to 3,750, your meat ration will double, your salary will be increased 25%, you will jump 3 years in the apartment allocation queue, and you will be eligible to take trips to the new People's Amusement Park free of charge. (Stalin's ways haven't died out there.)

Despite their isolation, oppression, and starvation, North Korea is an industrialized state that has built and detonated atomic explosives, designs and manufactures long range missiles, has manufactured both chemical and biological weapons, updated both Chinese and Soviet/Russian designs of weapons, and attempted satellite launches. They have provided both Iran and Syria with valuable assistance in their nuclear programs. They have problems with quality and corruption, but nobody really wants to have to fight them. There have been many stories on their hacker academy.

IT'S a chart that no one wants to top, but global warming's worst offenders, in absolute terms, are the US, China, Russia, Brazil, India, Germany and the UK. New calculations suggest that these nations are responsible for more than 60 per cent of the global warming between 1906 and 2005.

Basically, they cherry picked a small period of time. The fact that they stopped at 2005 is even more telling. Since 2005, US's emissions have dropped, while ALL of BRICS have gone way up.
Heck, here is a better map that shows more CURRENT data. It came from CO2. In this case, it shows 2008's. What is truely wicked is that China has been going up 10-15% EACH YEAR for the last 10 years.

Secondly, Europe out did America in coal emissions for centuries. In fact, they emitted more CO2 UNTIL 1998 when suddenly, they started downwards. In fact, even the UK says that they are the global historical cause of climate change.
Third, check out the following 2 reports:
Here and Here.
What do you see?
That the west, esp. USA, is dropping their emissions, but china alone, emits more each year that destroys those savings. IOW, China is increasing faster than what the entire west can cut. This does NOT include other nations.

So, if you really were the least bit honest, you will get off the high horse and realize that we are in this together. Either all nations work together on this, or we all sink. And if USA takes the same approach that EU took, it will actually RAISE emissions, not lower them. It is EU's racism against China that keeps them from moving more work to there. And sadly, American businesses have taken a non-responsibility approach to issues, so they go on over to China, while ignoring the fact that China is cheating on everything.

The CIA these days prefers a trumped-up sexual assault charge over a bullet. Less messy and just as effective. Just ask a former IMF chief who dared to question the supremacy of the U.S. dollar.

US Military Commissions Sock Puppet Program

What's old is new again

http://yro.slashdot.org/story/11/03/18/023239/us-military-commissions-sock-puppet-program

"The Guardian and The Telegraph are reporting that US based Ntrepid Corporation has been awarded a $2.76 million contract to develop software aimed at manipulating social media. The project aims to enable military personnel to control multiple 'sock puppets' located at a range of geographically diverse IP addresses, with the aim of spreading pro-US propaganda. The project will not target English speaking web sites (yet) but will be limited to foreign languages, including Arabic, Farsi, Urdu and Pashto. The project will be funded as part of the $200 million Operation Earnest Voice program run by US Central Command."

http://www.ntrepidcorp.com/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/17/us-spy-operation-social-networks
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/8388603/US-military-creates-fake-online-personas.html

Actually, I was also referring to Dominique Strauss Kahn (seems to be a common tactic these days). Poor boy made the mistake of challenging the supremacy of the U.S. dollar as IMF chief. Within a few months he was in handcuffs, with the prosecutor announcing a "rock solid" rape case--forcing him to resign. Three days after his successor was sworn in as the new IMF chief, the prosecutor dropped all charges and announced the case had no merit.

I guess the lesson here is, don't fuck with the U.S. government.

Hey, anyone remember when the head of the IMF started criticizing the supremacy of the U.S. Dollar and then decided to become a rapist a few months later? Then how three days after his IMF successor was sworn in, the prosecutor decided he wasn't a rapist after all?

Funny how many enemies of the U.S. Government end up becoming rapists.

I'm just surprised they haven't tried yet to trump up some pedophilia or sexual assault charge on Snowden. That particular brand of character assassination seems to have replaced the old-fashioned assassination-by-bullet in the CIA arsenal of late, when someone starts leaking or questioning the U.S. dollar. It's probably only because they know he's in a country that isn't going to extradite him no matter what they try to trump up (or maybe they're afraid of overusing the technique and having the press realize it).

Careful, the last person to challenge the U.S. dollar found himself in a U.S. jail on a trumped-up rape charge just a few months later.

I'm just surprised how whistleblowers and IMF chiefs who question the value of the U.S. dollar always turn out to be peodophiles and rapists. I would almost suspect that someone is setting them up on those charges in an attempt to discredit them in the public eye (and erode any support they may have for their whistleblowing). But that's just silly. Besides, the only one capable of pulling that off is our fine, noble, honest government. And they would surely never do anything like that.

I dispute that these vigilantes should decide what should be "declassified" or what isn't.... I just strongly object to the methods being used by the anti-secrecy crowd, and I don't trust their motivations at all.

That is a fair enough opinion and nobody can argue with it, it is good to have a healthy dose of skepticism about any information that is presented to us via any channel. However what is more difficult to dispute is when a leaked document reveals heinous war crimes - should focusing on the messenger still be more important than a message of that significance? Also remember that Washington leaks information all the time (for example the Bin Laden operation) - why are leaks that expose crimes be worse than leaks that make the president look good? To most people that just reeks of hypocrisy.

The usual reply to this logic is "what war crimes, there were no war crimes exposed - but look over there - Assange is a narcicist and Manning is a traitor!!". However even a basic search and read of the documents they destroyed their lives to bring to us show that this claim is absolutely false:

Revelations from the Afghanistan and Iraq war logs detailed the use of paramilitary death squads, complicity in the torture of Iraqi citizens, the indiscriminate killing of civilians by private military contractors and many other abuses. Meanwhile, the leaked State Department cables brought to light scores of secret drone strikes in countries we are not even at war with, and uncovered the collusion between the U.S. and Yemini governments to lie about American responsibility for the massacre of 41 people in the Al-Majalah region. They also revealed U.S. interference with judicial efforts in Spain to investigate the Bush administration's torture practices. In Tunisia, leaks exposing the opulence and corruption of Ben Ali's government were a catalyst for the revolution that brought down the repressive regime and ignited other pro-democracy movements throughout the Arab world. The list could go on but the point is simple: it would have been a disservice to democracy to withhold this important information.

expanded Gitmo to house people who he thought didn't deserve the rule of law.

There are only two alternatives to detaining prisoners in Gitmo:

1. release them to go free;
2. kill them on the spot.

Guess, which of the two Obama has chosen to expedite closing of the camp? All things considered, I prefer Bush's approach — it is far less bloody.

Why can't the CIA shoot him?

Because everyone would see right through that, and it would cause a major international incident. Discrediting is so much more effective, and much less risky. When the head of the IMF starts challenging the primacy of the U.S. dollar for example, you don't assassinate him. Way too messy and risky. Instead, you arrange for something a little more subtle, but just as effective.

I really did - until I caught wind of that xKeyScore deal going on too!

Man... that did it for me, don't know about the rest of you guys.

* :(

(Yes - I openly "shot my mouth off" MORE than a few times here, & I am NOT "hiding behind" any handle/nickname either etc.-et al... imo, probably risky to do, but I am a HUGE FAN of truth, & those guys weren't telling it!)

I don't understand them - I really don't:

They're given this GIGANTIC position of trust by the people, & they're outright telling us bullshit about "DIRECT" intercepts (when Narus devices + discrete math directed graphs pretty much tell them what-is-what ANYHOW... then that xKeyScore deal came out today too, completely making me realize that what I've been spewing here all week was correct, that "absolute power, corrupts absolutely").

Someone PLEASE, convince me otherwise! I would like that, since we're THE greatest nation on this planet, that proves the planet CAN live as one nation, achieving levels of excellence that are unparalleled in history!

(I mean, hey: For Pete's sake - This crap's right up there with when you find out your woman's screwing around on you - you DON'T want to believe it, even when it's staring you in the face!)

---

1.) Clapper & Alexander outright LIED to congress (twisting words using DIRECTLY! Well, might as well be, using directed multigraph discrete math work & NARUS devices set @ the "choke point" nexus of communique.

2.) Just like how they CLAIM there is no easy CENTRAL way to query their own mail but they do it to everyone else - I found that hilarious & disgusting, since mail is really DBMail and to select/insert/update/delete into those, you NEED to have abilities for that... What they told us, unless someone can show me otherwise, is total bullshit. Hypocritical bullshit). I.E.-> We can do it to you, but nobody can to us @ the NSA... that's bullshit.

3.) Screwing with protesters was from the FEEBS http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy [guardian.co.uk]

4.) The IRS used against political opponents of the current regime in office http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_IRS_scandal [wikipedia.org] & got caught - nobody lost their job.

Same with Clapper & Alexander... WTF!

Heck, they lied to Congress, nothing was done. The head of the IRS didn't lose her job either. I suspect that Clapper, Alexander, & the IRS head told Obama "Pal, you fire me? I will let the dogs out on the FACT you gave ME THE 'GO-AHEAD' to do these things and I will take you down with me. Try it!". That's how "politicians" operate. Thuggery, bribery, etc.!

Then - again: Out came xKeyScore! So much for not "directly" tapping us!

---

This guy had it RIGHT, as far back as 1997 imo:

Why shouldn't I work for the NSA http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UrOZllbNarw

Prophetic... what's below is as well.

APK

P.S.=> Why was I so "bent outta shape"? This: I was told decades ago by a history professor of mine in collegiate academia this:

"Totalitarian regimes start with 'little laws' they pass, getting an inch, & reaching for a mile: Before you know it, you are Nazi Germany/Soviet Russia USA: DO NOT THINK IT CANNOT HAPPEN HERE" & what's going on fits that pattern, & imo @ least, the "ROI" on it being effective vs. "terrorists" is FAR OUTWEIGHED by the potential for misuse (especially by "mortal men").

and

Then this http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2013/07/money-nsa-vote/ (the "infamous they" say "talk is cheap"? Not when it's OUR tax monies in the BILLIONS it isn't & when it's clearly being used against us)...

... apk

Apple has 145 billion dollars in cash and other liquid assets it could use for a buyout as of April supposedly. Tech crunch

They had 120 billion dollars in long term investments as of October The guardian on 120 billion dollar investment strategy

The different in counting depends on what you're counting exactly as 'cash'. Your yahoo link gives apple as 176 billion dollars in assets, 15 billion of which are property 800 million as inventory, 1 billion in goodwill, and 4 billion in intangibles. There are about 40 billion dollars in outstanding cash liabilities.

The difference is in what exactly you want to count as 'cash'. Companies usually take their money and buy stuff with it, if they don't want to buy other companies or to give the money to shareholders they can buy other companies bonds (sometimes even for overnight), they can buy government debts etc. etc. etc. As per the guardian link, Apple has a lot of money waiting to repatriate it to US investors whenever congress can be bought into offering a 'one time' tax break for doing so.

What Apple could use for a buyout (of anyone really) would be their cash, cash equivalents, short term investments and long term investments. They might end up with some complex web of borrowing money against those assets too, but that's relatively normal.

"Absolute Power Corrupting Absolutely" in the long-haul. There is a reason that old adage exists you know... it usually comes true, and history's FULL of examples of it & if you keep reading? You'll see WHERE I got that idea, and from whom (an expert in the field, without a doubt).

I.E.-> You put that much power in anyone's hands, sooner or later, it goes to their heads, & they abuse it (not sure I'd be "above it" either myself - 1 'bad day' & poof - you've got Caligula!).

I figure it this way: When the ONLY guy foreign dignitaries often will talk to since he has honor and is trustworthy says this http://now.msn.com/jimmy-carter-says-the-nsa-has-eliminated-a-functioning-democracy it's spot-on.

Lastly - this fellow? I'd put his intelligence FAR above politicians, and I will go with the insights of intelligent folks every time vs. the less intelligent. How about you?

No - I suspect that YOU are 1 of those getting "fat & happy" off of this somehow, hence your statement. Defunding the NSA would "upset your applecart" - the powers that be WANT to keep the status quo.

Why?

Heck - transparently simple: They're ALL wealthy men (including our politicians the puppets of the REAL controllers) getting wealthier is why & at OUR expense as taxpayers. Are they doing a good job? Please, lol... HELL NO! Look @ the economy, the US credit rating, etc./et al!

I can think of MANY WAYS to spend that money more wisely, to greater efficacy/ROI & for the greater good & I am no "genius" or economist either (then neither is our "rule of law" (secret law/secret courts, wtf - they're civil servants NOT masters, nothing more)!

It doesn't take one to fix our main problem: The economy. Instead of building war machines, build jobs. Be "good government" for real, & do "laissez faire" but, as good government say "Ok, fine - but we're going to tax your profit gains on offshoring, hit you with a fine too - you'll stop: It will defeat your 'raison d'etre' as business: Profit". Do right by the MAJORITY of your constituents instead of only yourselves & those that TRULY control "the best politicians money can REALLY buy", for real.

Plus - Who the hell made us the "policeman (gestapo) of the planet anyhow? Why are we sticking our noses into others' lives overseas when we have issues @ home to fix?? Oh, we KNOW who (the real puppeteers/war profiteers is who that REALLY run things - the infamous 1% is who!).

APK

P.S.=> Nobody in their RIGHT MIND likes this stuff going on, period. Nobody That is, unless they too are part of the "good ole' boy" network getting fat, rich & happy from it on NO BID CONTRACTS (halliburton) - they won't bitch @ all, while the rest of us get unions busted, jobs offshored, and seeing these "brainiacs" (not) fuck the economy up spending on bullshit like this used against us, and spent on NO WMDs FOUND WARS (false pretense to go after someone who had something you want, or crossed the "powers that be").

---

1.) Clapper & Alexander outright LIED to congress (twisting words using DIRECTLY! Well, might as well be, using directed multigraph discrete math work & NARUS devices set @ the "choke point" nexus of communique.

2.) Just like how they CLAIM there is no easy CENTRAL way to query their own mail but they do it to everyone else - I found that hilarious & disgusting, since mail is really DBMail and to select/insert/update/delete into those, you NEED to have abilities for that... What they told us, unless someone can show me otherwise, is total bullshit. Hypocritical bullshit). I.E.-> We can do it to you, but nobody can to us @ the NSA... that's bullshit.

3.) Screwing with protesters was from the FEEBS http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/dec/29/fbi-coordinated-crackdown-occupy

It's true. The Mujahideen are what is now called the Taliban. Same people, same ideology. UK funding helped turn dysfunctional communism into extremist Islam.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/mar/26/afgantsy-rodric-braithwaite-review

The UK government never acted out of evil, they only wanted to beat Russia back to their borders to make the world more stable. However funding radicals created serious future problems. The same kind of problems that will be created if the UK government fund the radicals now trying to take over Syria.

Do you have a citation for the monarchy stuff?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_United_Kingdom

These laws are on the books, they have were apparently tested as recently as 2003 but are outweighed by the human rights act and the various international human rights treaties the UK has signed so the law is unenforceable.

It is beyond moronic and deceitful, but the general public will not see it that way. They will see "porn" in the same category as "terrorist content" and once they hear about a friend or relative "opting-out" of the filter, it will paint a picture for them. And somehow I am not convinced it's not by design. This is what we get when the unwashed masses get their information from Daily Mail and do not receive proper schooling in topics like democracy, personal freedoms, etc.

I actually do not see a major problem with that. I do not see any benefit of having professional athletes anyway. The olympic ideals are all overdue.

The Olympic ideals are a modern myth that was born when the Olympics were rebooted in the modern era. The original Olympics did not live up to this ideal. This article is well worth reading: http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/jun/22/olympic-games-ancient-modern

"Jack had exposed a security flaw in insulin pumps that could be made to dispense a fatal dose by a hacker 300ft away, pushing some medical companies to review the security of these devices." http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/jul/26/hacker-barnaby-jack-san-francisco-dies many don't contribute that much in their whole lifetime but he did that and more.

Japan is at a crossroads and drones are not the only form of military expansion that is being considered. They are giving a lot of thought to the task of guarding their trade routes along with the protection of disputed islands and areas of sea close to home rich in oil, minerals and fish http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jan/08/china-japan-drone-race http://defense-update.com/20120917_uas-on-maritime-surveillance-pacific.html and so are seeking to modernise and change the mix of the JMSDF http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/ship.htm assets. This has resulted in the 22DDH a new light aircraft carrier http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/japan/cv-newcon.htm built upon ideas gained from the existing Hyuga-class helicopter carrier http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/hyuga-class/. Some are already beating the drum be it only in model form http://www.informationdissemination.net/2013/06/jmsdf-in-action.html but others in the area may well have other ideas of the future http://blogs.defensenews.com/intercepts/2012/12/what-china-wants-for-christmas/