tor-freaks (1)

I posted on this back when it broke.

“I contract for the United States Government to build anonymity technology for them and deploy it.”

— Roger Dingledine, cofounder of Tor, 2004

How leading Tor developers and advocates tried to smear me after I reported their US Government ties

Finally, I pointed out that Tor was not nearly as secure as many of its proponents claimed. For people with really something to hide from the state, Tor very likely offered the opposite of anonymity: it singled out users for total NSA surveillance, with intel agencies potentially sucking up and recording everything they did online. Recent events have proven yet again that Tor is not as secure as its fans claim, or as its own developerssay they hoped.

screen-shot-2014-11-20-at-10-24-35-v1-620x277

Amnesty International’s anti-spyware tool is the epitome of post-Snowden software

Amnesty and other groups have vouched for this. It appears to have an open source code available for inspection.

DETEKT

shining-kubrick
I love Terry Gilliam…

Kubrick’s top ten films list.

blog-nsa-toon

This rises to the level of geeky, but falls slightly short of douchey. So here you go…

ukrainian-right-wing-militias
Russia invades Ukraine. Again. And again. And yet again … using Saddam’s WMD

by William Blum

“Russia reinforced what Western and Ukrainian officials described as a stealth invasion on Wednesday [August 27], sending armored troops across the border as it expanded the conflict to a new section of Ukrainian territory. The latest incursion, which Ukraine’s military said included five armored personnel carriers, was at least the third movement of troops and weapons from Russia across the southeast part of the border this week.”

None of the photos accompanying this New York Timesstory online showed any of these Russian troops or armored vehicles.

“The Obama administration,” the story continued, “has asserted over the past week that the Russians had moved artillery, air-defense systems and armor to help the separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk. ‘These incursions indicate a Russian-directed counteroffensive is likely underway’, Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said. At the department’s daily briefing in Washington, Ms. Psaki also criticized what she called the Russian government’s ‘unwillingness to tell the truth’ that its military had sent soldiers as deep as 30 miles inside Ukraine territory.”

Thirty miles inside Ukraine territory and not a single satellite photo, not a camera anywhere around, not even a one-minute video to show for it. “Ms. Psaki apparently [sic] was referring to videos of captured Russian soldiers, distributed by the Ukrainian government.” The Times apparently forgot to inform its readers where they could see these videos.

“The Russian aim, one Western official said, may possibly be to seize an outlet to the sea in the event that Russia tries to establish a separatist enclave in eastern Ukraine.”

This of course hasn’t taken place. So what happened to all these Russian soldiers 30 miles inside Ukraine? What happened to all the armored vehicles, weapons, and equipment?

“The United States has photographs that show the Russian artillery moved into Ukraine, American officials say. One photo dated last Thursday, shown to a New York Times reporter, shows Russian military units moving self-propelled artillery into Ukraine. Another photo, dated Saturday, shows the artillery in firing positions in Ukraine.”

Where are these photographs? And how will we know that these are Russian soldiers? And how will we know that the photos were taken in Ukraine? But most importantly, where are the fucking photographs?



Read the rest of this entry »

lead_large

I have a response to Drake’s characterisation of the Bush regime’s malfeasance:

Thomas Drake only sees a thin slice of the picture, and he makes excuses for the Bush regime’s deliberate actions, their desired “New Pearl Harbor.” They were not just concerned about Iraq, as he contends, but were pointedly avoiding any action on the Al Qaeda threat, which they were repeatedly informed about. That type of suspicious behavior should raise red flags, as they sought “plausible deniabilty” by floating these other alleged “priorities” in order to fool their own underlings (like Drake). Another far too credulous voice has been Richard Clarke, who specifically blew the whistle on having Al Qaeda intelligence hidden from his office (by George Tenet, CIA Director) when he was the president’s counter-terrorism advisor!!!

Neither Clarke nor Drake will suggest the obvious conclusion: HIGH TREASON. The Bush neocons wanted the attack to succeed. The attack gave them everything and more that they desired. The attack was long planned, long under surveillance and aided and abetted by their good friends the Saudis. Every effort that American law enforcers tried to take was deliberately thwarted and shut down. This is what treason looks like.

These guys are gullible to the point that they deceive themselves. The Bush neocon junta (unelected), signed the “new Pearl Harbor” document. They are on record. They needed the attack. They wanted the attack. Cheney was more than capable of monkey-wrenching the underlings into line (underlings like Drake).

NY Times:

“By May 1, (2001) the Central Intelligence Agency told the White House of a report that “a group presently in the United States” was planning a terrorist operation.”

A GROUP PRESENTLY IN THE UNITED STATES
  • MAY 1
  • 2001

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/opinion/the-bush-white-house-was-deaf-to-9-11-warnings.html?_r=1&

Wake up, Tom.

Read the rest of this entry »

1832676-6

Why Google May Be More ‘Evil’ than the NSA