Slashdot Mirror
DHS Detains Mayor of Stockton, CA, Forces Him To Hand Over His Passwords
schwit1 writes: Anthony Silva, the mayor of Stockton, California, recently went to China for a mayor's conference. On his return to San Francisco airport he was detained by Homeland Security, and then had his two laptops and his mobile phone confiscated. They refused to show him any sort of warrant (of course) and then refused to let him leave until he agreed to hand over his password.
still has not won the *real* war on terror. The terror on 9/11 still inspires fear on the mind of Americans. So the real war is yet to be won.
Way to go, murica.
CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
The Supreme Court has ruled that warrants are not required or needed at border checkpoints. Fix that wording now editors.
I think that this is a good thing. Not the idea of people being searched without warrants. I think it's good that a government official, even a lowly one like the mayor of Stockton, suffered this. It is only when government officials are subjected to this outrageous breach of The Constitution, that there is any real hope of it being changed.
So long as it's only the sheeple complaining, illegal searches will continue to be "permissible". When congress critters start getting inconvenienced and their predilection for gay porn starts being made public, then things will change, for our safety.
I hope that many more government officials will be forced to endure these absurd detainments and searches.
I'm not a huge fan of the border search exception. Technically DHS and CBP can demand access to laptops or cell phones as part of entry into the country. They don't have the right to detain for passwords. They can hold the equipment and return it later.
A US citizen has an absolute right to re-enter the country.
The only three lines you need to learn:
"Am I being detained?"
"I would like my lawyer present."
"No comment."
Isn't their some law that gives border agents essentially unlimited rights to search and confiscate (no warrant required) so long as they are within 100 miles of any US border? I remember seeing something like that a few years ago and thought, gee, I wonder how many people live in houses that are within 100 miles of the border....
The recent rulings have been that laptop searches are unconstitutional. The courts have said this is so because a ) laptops and phones contain highly personal information, much more so that suitcases normally do, and b) customs is to be searching for things like products being smuggled in, or drugs. Hard drives can't contain drugs and wouldn't contain smuggled products. Two recent examples include:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ru...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...
The Obama administration has argued that they don't need a warrant, but the courts have ruled against them.
Despite my general distaste for the tactics of the TSA, I understand; I find politicians suspicious, too.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
I find politicians suspicious, too
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
Hearts and minds, baby - that's where you win a war. And they've got us right where they want us.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
I know, attending a mayor's conference. But seriously, they're bankrupt. He's got no business traveling to China for some junket.
Shame about his laptops and all, but it would be interesting to know what they're looking for.
The agents must have been taxpayers of Stockton.
In related news, the DHS required Obama to turn over his passwords before allowing him to keep his phone and laptop when he returned to the country. Same for the guy carrying the nuke control suitcase.
people would have missed a mayor. job blow of course not but when a day or 2 passes and the mayor hasnt made contact people will start searching. FBI most likely would have been called. Fox"News" would have reported it and it would have shed some light on the practice. he should have just sit still.
If the phone was encrypted, I can see why they might need a password for it. But PCs aren't difficult to access without the password, for example, by using the built-in administrator account (which by default has no password), or by physically removing the hard drive.
Constitutional issues aside, this seems pretty inept. to me.
The rest of us keep being treated routinely like criminals without the media getting interested, because we aren't the mayor of Stockton.
Why should this guy get special treatment (by the TSA or by the press) just because he's a minor elected politico?
"A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
surrenders them to Chinese authorities without a peep of complaint, and brings them back to the US and is surprised when federal spooks demand to have a look at the physical and software surveillance devices that have been installed into it, isn't paying any attention to the world and has zero grounds to complain TLDR if you're important or powerful, don't willingly allow yourself to become an espionage attack vector for our first or second most powerful enemy
"Outdated business models" is code for "I don't like paying for things, but want them anyway"
was politely decline to give passwords without a warrant. Then, if he was not released in a timely manner, make life as difficult as possible for the bureaucrats in question. And if his devices are not returned in a timely manner, make life even more difficult for them. There are devious and not so devious ways to do this, and mostly it isn't difficult. Bureaucrats rely on cooperation from the sheep, and the sheep need to stop being cooperative.
Though the technology is there.
It is a good thing when high profile and medium profile people get caught in these stupid things.
When celebrities, including political celebrities, get caught by government aggression it draws a spotlight on the programs that are harassing millions. With the spotlight on them, they tend to withdraw or become legally curtailed.
Sadly many of the abuses committed by government are against the dregs of society, the people already in trouble with the law, the despicable criminals, drug dealers, child abusers, rapists, murderers, and more. Most of society doesn't care when government abuses these people, which is why so many lawsuits are filed against agencies and officers that people dismiss as just another attempt to get out of being caught. If those same abuses were publicly made against people of celebrity status the programs would be quickly curtailed, or pushed further into the darkness of secrecy.
Good job DHS, keep targeting popular people. Best thing you can do for the country.
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
Coercing passwords where the law says you can't require the person to give up the passwords is un-American and may even be illegal (I am not a lawyer).
Coercing them instead of getting a court order requiring the owner to divulge the password when the law says you can get a court order is also un-American - use the courts, that's what they are there for (recent court rulings make me wonder if this sentence even applies anymore if the owner is an US citizen and the request is on US soil or made by US officials at a port of entry as the person is returning to US soil).
If you, as the front-line Homeland Security guys in the airport - have a legal justification to seize the laptop and your professional training and professional judgment says that there is really a problem that requires seizing it, just seize the laptop, but don't coerce the person to give up his passwords.
Ideally, you would go to a judge within 24 hours (or in a busy international airport, within 1 hour) of seizing it and explain why you need to keep it. If the judge rejects your argument give it back. If he accepts your argument, the owner should get a "de novo/start-from-scratch" second hearing as soon as his lawyer has had time to prepare a counter-argument.
By doing it this way, not only would you avoid coercing people, but your bosses would be under political pressure to make sure you, the front-line guys at Homeland Security, didn't abuse their discretion on seizing equipment because they - the bosses that is - know that too may unjustified seizures would eventually make the papers - and not in a good way. They also know that if the political winds turn a certain way, they or their bosses might be hauled in front of Congress to explain things just because some politician wants to score political points in front of the cameras.
Yes, I know this isn't going to happen this way any time soon. That's why I said "ideally." The closest we can expect any time soon is that law enforcement will stop asking for passwords but that the delays will be so long and the process to get the seized equipment back so onerous that most owners who think they have nothing to hide (and more than a few who naively believe they don't or who stupidly believe that law enforcement won't abuse the password to trawl for crimes unrelated to their initial suspicions) will offer to give them the password just to be on their merry way. Some or even most of them will be let go with their equipment once law enforcement determines that 1) the person is being cooperative and 2) their initial suspicions were unfounded. Word will get around "if they ask for your password, don't fight it, just give it to them."
Unfortunately (or fortunately, if you value "law and order" and "public safety" more than civil liberties) my hunch is that authorities know that this state of affairs - where the person they have inconvenienced knows that if they really are innocent it's very likely in their best short-term interests to "volunteer information without being asked to do so" - serves the interest of law enforcement in a way that makes it very, very difficult for the person to later claim they weren't acting completely voluntarily.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Folks, before you all go off the deep end about being asked for passwords.. It *is* possible that the mayor is a suspect in a crime. We recently had state legislators who are alleged to have been gun runners, etc.
It is also possible that his laptop, etc. are owned by the city, state, and not him, in which case, he has no substantive privacy rights with respect to the contents, just like you don't have any substantive privacy rights in your work PC.
Welcome to the Stazi States of America. All your possessions are belong to us.
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
So your first assumption is that China has installed devices in the computer, Why? The idea that any device is secure is so laughable it's absurd, China I dare say has either the same or better tech as the US why would they target a minor official with a device that could be traced or "proven" to be chinese it's so funny that you even consider it a possibility.
If a First world Govt wants to get your documents they can and you will never trace is back to them if they have any level of competence, The TSA is just playings its "we protect you from EVil terrorist! card again to show that the billions spent on them is worthwhile, while real threats to border security are stopped by everyone but the TSA. (check out what the coastguard dose with a fraction of the budget and with actually results that can be documented, then read about the TSA's ban on Tinfoil in suitcases because of "solar powered bombs"
Sorry, are you telling me it's just as easy to gain utter control of a device over the interwebs as if you have unrestricted physical access to it? And also you think that the Chinese don't do this? With all that confident knowledge, you should be on the Secret Service. You could have let Obama know it was safe to stay in the Waldorf, because if the Chinese wanted to build an espionage apparatus there, they could have done it already via GoToMyPC !
"Outdated business models" is code for "I don't like paying for things, but want them anyway"
As much as I would love to say "be polite but never give any information to police beyond what is required by law if you think they have you on their radar," the reality is that it is frequently in your best short-term interest to do so if in fact you have not done anything wrong and can easily prove it.
I say "frequently" because there are obvious exceptions. If you think the cop really is out to get you personally or would be happy to find any unrelated reason to make your life miserable (as an example from the past that I hope doesn't apply today: If you have an out-of-state license plate and you've got a good reason to think the local cops are looking for a reason to shake down out-of-state residents) is the most obvious but there are others.
It should go without saying that it's in everyone's long-term interest if nobody cooperated with police under these circumstances and we as a country developed a "culture of non-cooperation" where it was simply expected that once you had any inkling that the police believed that you might be guilty of something - even a crime not related to the actual or ostensible reason they wanted to talk to you - that you would simply stop talking to them without your lawyer present, and as a result, they would not bother talk to people they suspected were guilty without either getting the person's lawyer or a court involved (such as a summons from a grand jury or a court-ordered deposition*) because it would be a waste of their time.
*In both cases a person who is actually guilty can "plead the fifth" but a witness who is a "on the police's radar" but who is innocent generally cannot.
--
Note - I realize this is slightly off-topic and that it repeats something I said earlier in this discussion, but it needed to be said and it's worth a stand-alone comment.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
... then he may rightfully be able to say "I have a duty to my employer to not reveal the password, I won't reveal it unless my supervisor or a court orders me to."
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
One does not have to be a fear monger, considering the recent and ongoing breaches of U.S.-government databases, to appreciate the need to make sure employees and officials of *all* government entities' computers are safe from being hacked unknowingly while overseas.
This is PC gone wild.
...of being involved in illegal gun running, shady land deals, and strip clubs with motorcycle gangs. After all, the NSA intercepted the video evidence of such a conspiracy in Stockton.
Hard drives can't contain drugs and wouldn't contain smuggled products
If you listen to Hollywood, hard drives can contain bootleg movies, which are "smuggled products" in the eyes of Hollywood's lawyers.
They can also contain smuggled trade secrets and for that matter, smuggled state secrets.
They can also contain smuggled physical goods. In theory - but likely not in practice - you could build a hard drive that had small quantities of illegal drugs inside the drive itself. The reality is that it's simply not cost-effective for drug dealers to try to smuggle drugs in this way.
Another possibility is that the hard drive itself is being smuggled. Again, this is likely not cost-effective unless it's something "bigger," such as industrial espionage where you steal an prototype drive from a competitor and put it in your laptop (and clone your original drive to it of course so everyone will assume it's the original unless they look closely or physically inspect it), then waltz back to your home country as if nothing had happened.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Also, they're investigating what happened to the motorcyle gang leader who ran headlong into a semi-truck at highway speeds.
Sad... we have become what we fought against...
This is no longer the land of the free, home of the brave...
R.I.P USA
if you're prepared to spend a night in jail to make your point!
My hope is that every American who loves our Constitution would be prepared to do just that.
My fear is that I, myself, am not.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Does nobody in your country have a backbone?
A simple "Go fuck yourself. Your move." to force the police state in waiting to either put up or shut up. Either they ship him to Guantanemo, or release him and give him a hefty compensation package once he gets his lawyers involved.
Mindless acquiescence isn't going to stop them.
Obama's arguments make no sense. Sure they can see the laptop as a container. They can open it and see if there isn't any drugs or explosives inside. The laptop of a person is not just a container. It's a gateway to basically his/her whole existence. Will these people just check the hard-drive? Of course not. They will check the facebook account, the gmail account, the browser history, the messaging history, etc... Access to the laptop doesn't equate to a simple body search without a warrant. It equates to a full free lunch search that would otherwise require tens of warrants to tens of big tech companies.
Perhaps this example will serve:
The cops arrive at a bar fight. There are 20 people there. There is 1 person seriously injured an unconscious and a couple of people who were obviously involved who are not cooperating.
There is reason to believe that of the remaining people, a 1 or 2 others were involved and the cops intend to find out who they were and arrest them for disorderly conduct or possibly more serious charges if the facts warrant. The cops also believe that almost everyone saw what happened. For the sake of this example, there is no "duty to intervene" and there is no sign that anyone is legally drunk, so those who stood by and did nothing will not face any criminal charges and neither will the bar owner or his employees.
For this example, assume that the witnesses and those involved in the bar fight don't know each other and that their cooperation or failure to cooperate with the police won't have any "social consequences" one way or the other. Whatever choice they make, they will not be banned from that bar and they won't gain or lose any friendships or business relationships.
Also, assume the cops have a reputation for being professionals who act professionally (contrast to the Waco "Twin Peaks" incident).
The cops detain everyone on-site for questioning, with the intent of letting all of them except the few guilty ones go as soon as they get things sorted out.
It's getting late and people want to get home so they can get some sleep so they won't be tired at work the next day.
If everyone clams up, the police will probably keep everyone there for a few hours before "giving up" and will get everyone's name and address. All potential witnesses - including the as-yet-unknown guilty parties - will get summoned to a grand jury or to a similar proceeding if it's a misdemeanor offense, and eventually (unless people forget, innocent people lie, guilty people lie in a convincing manner, or innocent people fraudulently "plead the 5th" to keep from testifying) things will get sorted out and the facts will come out.
It is clearly in the short term interest of those who were not involved to cooperate and give accurate statements right then and there. If they do, those who were not involved will go home sooner and may avoid having to go to a grand jury. Those who were involved will spend the night in jail and will know they will likely lose at trial so they will probably plead guilty, which means the witnesses won't have to take a day off of work to testify at trial.
All in all, for the innocent-bystander witnesses, it's a clear-cut case in favor of cooperating with the police if they are only considering their immediate and short-term need to get home and not have to waste time in court in the future.
Note - this example probably has flaws in it. However, if you are smart enough to spot them, you are probably smart enough to come up with many better examples that show that, on the whole, it is better for a person who is both innocent and who has every reason to believe he is not "a target of an investigation" or "a target of the police" to cooperate.
As I said in an earlier post, there are situations where it is clearly NOT in a person's short-term interest to cooperate with the police. My list may have been incomplete. However, once it is complete the remaining situations will be common enough that, unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your perspective), my general statement still stands.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
I'm very disappointed that he capitulated. What about the privacy of everyone who's corresponded with him? Business plans for land use? Negotiations on zoning or leniency granted to companies for failure to comply with ordinances? Political strategies and information on opponents? Resumes, performance reviews, salary information of staff?
On the other hand, it looks bad if a politician can't be "clean enough" to hand over his computers to authorities. Even if those authorities are underpaid, undertrained thugs which demand all kinds of rights, but take no responsibility for their failure to protect people.
They put him in a very, very awkward position.
from SFGate article:
Silva was also told he had “no right for a lawyer to be present” and that being a U.S. citizen did not “entitle me to rights that I probably thought.”
If they had probable cause that he was working with or spying for China, they should have arrested and charged him openly; not detained him without telling him what he is suspected of and denying him access to legal council. If they didn't have probable cause, they should fuck off and leave him alone.
That goes for everyone, not just mayors of third-tier cities.
Imagine all the people...
His goal of enforcing the consitution and privacy is quite appealing.
The economy doesn't need to enslave us to foster and it's in auto pilot, I think curbing back government from our life won't change how good the economy is, in fact it will force corporate types to take more responsibilities.
It is based on taking things by force from people that created or traded things through peaceful actions.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
"Unfortunately, they were not willing or able to produce a search warrant or any court documents suggesting they had a legal right to take my property. In addition, they were persistent about requiring my passwords for all devices,” Silva said.
I always get a big kick out of hearing the reactions of middle-class people when they run into law enforcement, and aren't treated like middle-class people. They're never prepared for the reality, because they were taught in school that they had "rights", and all that other baloney.
"Silva was also told he had “no right for a lawyer to be present” and that being a U.S. citizen did not “entitle me to rights that I probably thought.”
Yep. I tell ya, if middle-class people always got the same treatment as poor folk, it'd be a different country pretty quickly.
-- sudon't
Air-ride Equipped
By giving up his password, he is in violation of his city's computer security protocols. The same is true for probably just about everybody on slashdot. We have no right or authority to give over our passwords to anyone. We also have no right to allow anyone to view any information on our company's computer equipment. In some cases, anyone viewing that information may be in violation of state or federal laws. At my previous position, anyone viewing that information would first have to take an approved HIPAA training class and then sign a release and notify all of the affected parties.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
As long as they make Obama drag out his laptops and his Blackberry every time he re-enters the country, then I am fine with them doing that to mayors and to us, too. After all, a leader must lead by example, or he is no leader at all.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
America has won; it now does a better job of terrorizing its citizens than the Islamists everywhere else.
None of which has anything to do with border security and customs. Do you really think that anyone cares enough to spy on the mayor of a small town in rural California?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Which do you think is the lesser of two evils right now, the federal government or your state?
this.
US research scientists routinely surrender their "travel" laptop and smartphone to the DHS/TSA/Whatever folks when they return to the US from China.
problem solved.
...no warrant is required to search your person and property. Though there is a recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruling saying this does not apply to digital content on an electronic device and that people can't be forced to provide passwords, I doubt it stands up when the Supremes rule, we'll see.
One of the big things the customs people look for on laptops and the like is child pornography. A lot of perverts travel to the far east to play with little boys and girls, taking pictures to remember their fun.
As far as I am concerned, if you are crossing a border, expect a thorough search and behave accordingly.
...is why I don't go to the U.S. anymore. I simply refuse to deal with any of this crap.
I will bet everything I own that they could not find anything hidden on a drive more than 3 directory's deep and embedded in anything at all.
The Amount of incompetency is like a public educator.
Defending Privacy at the U.S. Border: A Guide for Travelers Carrying Digital Devices
https://www.eff.org/wp/defending-privacy-us-border-guide-travelers-carrying-digital-devices
Apparently, they can do this.
The rest of us keep being treated routinely like criminals without the media getting interested, because we aren't the mayor of Stockton. Why should this guy get special treatment (by [...] the press) just because he's a minor elected politico?
Dog bites man isn't news. Man bites dog is news.
They slipped up and used the tactics they usually use on civilians on a civilian official. They don't usually do that, so the event was newsworthy.
Whether it leads to action against the TSA, just a little more care on their part to identify VIPs, or squat is yet to be seen.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Correct me if I'm wrong but this sort of thing happens regardless of which country you came back from.
... still has not won the *real* war on terror ...
Where the hell have you been??
America has _won_ the war on terror hands down, so much so that all of us are goddamn ***TERRIFIED BY OUR OWN FUCKING GOVERNMENT*** !!!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Stockton is the deepest (in both geography and depth) port in California. There is a Port of Sacramento, but as I understand, it is too shallow to recieve oceangoing vessels, making the Port of Stockton the closest transfer point outside of Vallejo for Central and Northern California's international shipping needs.
I don't know what all the outrage is all about. This is a good example of the DHS and a few other three-letter agencies performing their primary duty - prevent (and perpetrate) industrial espionage. Why do you think warrantless wiretapping the whole country is so important? It has nothing do do with terrorism, that doesn't even pass the giggle test. It's about serving US business interests.
The USA's political system is intentionally based on something else.
Yes, it is. But the USA isn't a democracy. It's a constitutional republic. So the highest level concern isn't what the majority wants, instead, it is the constitutionality of the "want.". A concrete example: if the popular opinion, say 75% of the electorate, wants deep south-style-1800's style slavery, the government is prohibited from implementing it even so, by the over-riding authority of the constitution.
Democracy has been very accurately described as "3 wolves and 2 sheep voting on what's for dinner."
A republic such as ours is also vulnerable to this kind of problem if the representatives are poorly chosen. The USA is presently deep in the throes of exactly that; in fact, so deep in it that it has also infected the non-elected agencies and bureaus that the politicians control; and further, now the control inputs to the politicians are coming from a relatively small set of moneyed and otherwise powerful interests. This has turned the USA into a de-facto oligarchy.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Yes, the healthcare system that congress implemented has had an effect on the economy. Congress-care, as it were.
Obama suggested single-payer. Congress made very sure he didn't get it.
Instead we got welfare for the insurance companies.
Same story, different day.
The president's own limited power can only really come into effect WRT foreign policy (which options include a broad, thought not unlimited, palette of military actions.) On other matters, you should probably think of him as the "suggester-in-chief."
Then again, there are executive orders, sigh.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The TSA is the secret police of the US state. They obey none of the limits imposed on the power of the state by the constitution. The USA may be the home of the brave, but it is no longer the land of the free.
What you are arguing here is that following the constitution is inconvenient for the government in that it makes some part of its job (catching contraband) more difficult.
Now go read the constitution. The entire bill of rights is an exercise in making things more difficult for the government. Can they restrict your speech? No. Doesn't matter if you're calling them a bunch of numb-nutted fucktards. They still can't. There are no exceptions. Can they infringe on your right to bear arms? No. Even if that means you walk into the courtroom with a sword on your hip. There are no exceptions. Can they require you to quarter soldiers in your home? No. No matter what. There are no exceptions.
Now, ask yourself: WTF is going on when a judge - at any level - or congress - says otherwise? It's as plain as day: They are violating the constitution.
There is not one word in the fourth that says, or in any way implies, "except at the border." Including the word "unreasonable", which simply is telling you that any process that does not comply with the fourth IS what is unreasonable. The fourth lays out the precise formula for reasonable:
"no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
Anything else is unreasonable.
Otherwise, the fourth has no teeth whatsoever and might as well not be there at all. Which is straight-up absurdity.
Therefore, no such "at the border" exception actually exists.
Much less in a band of land extending 100 miles into the body of the country.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Mahatma Gandhi — 'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ.'
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Just so you know, your phone is almost certainly always on, as long as the battery is in place and holding a charge. The suggestion that you have to "turn it on" has no relation to what the phone will be doing before it is turned on, which is basically anything the software/firmware in place tells it to do. Turning it on means you get to see and interact with the UI, and not much else.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Re-posting this above Goldsteinberg's comment.. np. Anti-Christians are guaranteed psychopaths and sociopaths. Jews are anti-Christians.
http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=8113013&cid=50655219
Bernie is sounding better all the time.
What is Bernie's plan for the TSA?
Irrelevant. We are at maximum overjew already. Yellen, Bernanke, Greenspan... 18 trillion in debt... We have been living the Jewish dream for a while already, and I don't see anybody cheering for more of it.
Presidential candidates pledging allegiance to Israel before being elected... seriously?
Hollywood is full Jewish...
Dinosaur media full Jewish...
Social media... well you figure it out... (pretty Jewish)
Windows 7/8/8/1/10 global spyware? (Jew-like, at the least)
When you have a cultural minority making decisions for multiple cultural majorities... expect 18 trillion and a bunch of wars against sand people etc. Expect kids/adults to be indoctrinated by whatever fancies a producer's mind when they sell movies and tv commercials. Expect bias.
Accidentally in charge of banks-that-fail, accidentally in charge of 18 trillion in-the-red economy, accidentally in charge of domestic/international financial instruments, accidentally selling propaganda literally by every possible worldwide propaganda conduit... while at the same time countries oh... like say Germany... grilling Facebook for anti-Semitic posts? Poor Jews after all? Managing the global reserve currency (USD) is so pleb and victimized. (mismanaging)
http://www.eutimes.net/2015/09/germans-opposing-immigration-on-facebook-facing-jail-fines-kids-stolen-and-job-loss/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3249667/Germany-state-SIEGE-Merkel-cheered-opened-floodgates-migrants-gangs-men-roaming-streets-young-German-women-told-cover-mood-s-changing.html
Just all big accidents and coincidences right. All tin foil stories. No way in Hell it could be related right.
The 1st republican debate on Fox News was sponsored by Facebook and Fox News. It was subscriber only. Seriously.
So Bernie Sanders' plan should be somewhere between retirement and microphone sales. Nothing about TSA is relevant.
Relevant is that Judaism is anti-Christian.
http://www.zerohedge.com/category/tags/otc-derivatives
http://investmentwatchblog.com/90-of-700-trillion-derivatives-market-contracts-held-by-jpmorgan-goldman-sachs-bofa-citigroup-and-wells-fargo/
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/16/who-owns-bank-of-america.aspx
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/20/who-owns-wells-fargo.aspx
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/19/who-owns-jpmorgan-chase.aspx
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/22/who-owns-goldman-sachs.aspx
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/02/21/who-owns-citigroup.aspx
http://ftmdaily.com/preparing-for-the-collapse-of-the-petrodollar-system/
http://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fiatmoney.asp
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu_VqX6J93k
http://www.bis.org/statistics/derstats.htm