Subscriptions, Current Issue & Back Issues

Shop Website | Annual Subscriptions | Back Issues |

Tag: New World Order

North Korea to be ROCKED by seismic aftershocks for MONTHS following major earthquake : Was it a HAARP Job?

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/880190/North-Korea-earthquake-aftershock-Korean-Peninsula-Sea-of-Japan-Ring-of-Fire-1978

NORTH Korean citizens have been warned to expect “large aftershocks” for months following the 5.4-magnitude tremor that struck South Korea on Wednesday.

“South Korea has been relatively safe from major earthquakes, but geologists have expressed concern over the rising number of tremors felt in recent years and warned of bigger seismic movements to come.
When the earthquake hit on Wednesday it shook buildings and caused books to fall from shelves sending tremors as far as Seoul – kilometres away from where it struck.
Mark Zastrow, who lives in Seoul, tweeted: “Woah, an earthquake in Pohang and just felt it in Seoul, a few seconds after I got the alert on my phone.”
According to a US Geological Survey (USGS) chart the intensity, tremors from the earthquake would have been felt in North Korea.
The head of the nuclear test monitoring agency CTBTO has said that its analysts were “looking at unusual seismic activity” in North Korea.”

Note that the quake and it’s 4.7 aftershock were both at exactly 10km depth: Prime HAARP/seismic weapon territory.

But why South Korea? A misfire? (This was close to the border) , Or was this just a natural event?

…or does North Korea have seismic weapons technology now?

https://ds.iris.edu/seismon/eventlist/index.phtml?region=Central_Asia&lon=129.32&lat=36.05

 

Grace Mugabe: Why is the President’s wife at the centre of Zimbabwe’s crisis?

He’s 93. She’s 52. And they’ve both been put under house arrest by Zimbabwe’s army.
At the centre of the crisis currently gripping Zimbabwe is President Robert Mugabe’s wife Grace.

Her rise from political obscurity to become the front-runner to succeed her ageing husband appears to have prompted the country’s military to step in, with tanks on the streets and Mr Mugabe confined to his home.
The military insists it hasn’t staged a coup, but is rather targeting “criminals” around Mr Mugabe.
And that has been taken to be a reference to supporters of the first lady.
Find out who she is and how she got to the position she’s in.

Grace from obscurity to front runner
Their affair started as Mugabe’s wife lay dying
Mr Mugabe admitted in a fly-on-the-wall South African television documentary that they started an affair while his first wife, Sally, lay terminally ill with kidney disease.
Sally died in 1992, after which Grace and Robert married in 1996. They have three children.
Ms Mugabe has been a fierce defender of her ailing husband, declaring that he could run as a “corpse” in next year’s election and still remain in power.

Her rise to potential president had been swift

Ms Mugabe addressed her first political rally in 2014, just months after being nominated to head the ruling party’s women’s league.
Since then she has openly indicated her interest in taking the presidency herself, even publicly challenging her husband to name a successor.
“Some say I want to be president. Why not? Am I not Zimbabwean?” Ms Mugabe said at a rally in 2014.
She has the support of party leaders in their 40s and 50s (the so-called “G40”) and appears to have the support of the party’s youth wing.
She represents a generation change; unlike many top ZANU-PF leaders, Grace played no part in the 1970s armed struggle which rid Zimbabwe, then known as Rhodesia, of its white-minority government.
After the purge of Vice-President Emmerson Mnangagwa last week, the path looked like it had been cleared for her to succeed her husband.
She appeared positioned to become one of Zimbabwe’s two-vice presidents next month.
Her life of luxury has seen her dubbed ‘Gucci Grace’
The 52-year-old first lady is unpopular among many socially conservative Zimbabweans for her lavish spending on mansions, cars and jewels.
Last month, she went to court to sue a diamond dealer for not supplying her with a 100-carat diamond that she said she had paid for.
Her lavish spending has touched a nerve in a country whose economy has fallen apart, and has earned her the moniker “Gucci Grace”.

READ THE REST:

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-16/who-is-grace-mugabe/9156340

We Don’t Need a Special Counsel to Investigate the Clinton Foundation…..

WHAT WE NEED IS A CREDIBLE PROSECUTOR. Republicans, whether in the White House or on Capitol Hill, do not seem to appreciate how much they may be undermining what they say they want — a serious investigation of the Clinton Foundation and such related matters as the Uranium One transaction, the interplay between the foundation and the operation of the State Department during Secretary Clinton’s tenure, and the question of whether that interplay explains the uClinton foundationse of the improper private email system and the destruction of tens of thousands of emails.

The president has been railing about his own Justice Department’s apparent inaction (after signaling, post-election, that he did not want to see the Clintons further investigated and prosecuted). A group of House Republicans has taken up this cause and is pushing for the appointment of a special counsel. In essence, it is a tit-for-tat maneuver: There is a special-counsel probing Trump ties to Russia, they reason, so why not a special-counsel to probe Clinton ties to Russia? This suggests a basic misunderstanding about what triggers a special-counsel investigation: There must be potential offenses that warrant investigation as to which the Justice Department has a conflict of interest that would make its conducting the investigation inappropriate. Preliminarily, we should note that there is no such thing as an independent counsel. In our constitutional system, prosecution is an executive power, so even special counsels ultimately report to the Justice Department’s leadership. That being the case, we should never have a special counsel unless one is absolutely necessary.

It is pernicious to have a prosecutor who is assigned to make a case on a single target (or set of targets). These prosecutors are insulated from the pressures of an ordinary prosecutor’s office, where cases have to compete for resources and only the meritorious ones are pursued. Thus, the sorry history of the special counsel (and its predecessors — the “special prosecutor” and “independent counsel”) is empire-building, investigations that go on for years, and cases involving trivial charges often far removed from the suspected offense that was the original rationale for appointing the special counsel. I argued against the appointment of a special counsel to probe Trump-Russia because, for all the chatter about collusion, no concrete offenses warranting a criminal investigation were identified. (Recall that Robert Mueller was appointed to take over a counterintelligence investigation, not to investigate specific crimes. As I’ve repeatedly contended, this was outside the regulations.) But let’s assume for argument’s sake that there were such offenses. It would then be proper to have a special counsel, because otherwise the administration would be investigating itself. If the president and/or his campaign is the subject of the investigation, then the entire Justice Department — run by presidential appointees and subordinate to the president — has a conflict of interest. This situation does not currently obtain with respect to the Clintons. It is commonplace for the Justice Department to conduct corruption investigations involving members of the president’s opposition party (as well as members of the president’s own party who are not among the Justice Department’s executive-branch superiors). There is no structural reason to believe the Justice Department is unable to conduct a fair investigation of the Clinton Foundation. (There may be a credibility problem, which we’ll get to momentarily.) And importantly: We do not know that the Justice Department is not already conducting a fair investigation.

When the Justice Department is functioning properly, it is not speaking publicly about pending investigations, nor is it consulting with the White House about them. It may be that we haven’t heard about any investigation because there is not anything to say at the moment. It was widely reported a year ago that the FBI was looking into Clinton Foundation activities — I wrote about it, here, when it was reported that the Obama Justice Department was blocking the bureau from access to key evidence. On this point, a letter sent to the House Judiciary Committee by Assistant Attorney General Stephen E. Boyd, reported on by the New York Times, is instructive. In pertinent part, the Boyd letter states: Senior prosecutors will report directly to the attorney general and the deputy attorney general, as appropriate, and will make recommendations as to whether any matters not currently under investigation should be opened, whether any matters currently under investigation require further resources, or whether any matters merit a special counsel. [Emphasis added.] This implies that there are relevant matters currently under investigation, and that these matters are being explored in the normal course, without the need of a special counsel. That is as it should be.

As the Times points out, Attorney General Jeff Sessions has recused himself from matters related to the 2016 election, and that recusal is apparently being expansively construed to include matters related to the Democratic nominee, Mrs. Clinton, even if such matters had no direct connection to the 2016 election. This recusal should not trigger a special-counsel appointment. It is not unusual for attorneys general to be recused from some investigations owing to conflicts of interest. (Often, the conflicts stem from the AG’s prior work as a private lawyer representing business clients who become enmeshed, for whatever reason, in investigations.) When that happens, the deputy attorney general becomes the AG for purposes of the investigation. In the event, such conflicts have little bearing on how cases are handled because the investigation is led by the FBI with the assistance of a district U.S. attorney’s office that does not have a conflict. (And if it does, each U.S. attorney’s office has procedures to screen out a conflicted prosecutor; or the Justice Department can assign the case to a different district U.S. attorney who has no conflict.)

Read more at:

https://www.nationalreview.com/article/453717/clinton-foundation-investigation-prosecutor-special-counsel

 

Web Pioneer Sir Tim Berners-Lee: “We Must Resist These Technologies”

Hot on the heels of Facebook’s Sean Parker’s concerns about his creation, now the man who came up with the concept of the Web Browser expresses his own concerns about the intrusiveness of emerging Internet technologies (what I refer to as “Data Storage and Patterning” technology):

 

The web is 28 years old but these days it often appears to have the growing pains of a teenager.
There’s the scourge of fake news, growing pockets of censorship around the world, the fiery debate over net neutrality and more.

When teens get into trouble, you typically talk to the parents. For the web, that is Sir Tim Berners-Lee, a computer scientist who proposed the idea of using a tool called a web browser to visit distinct pages on the internet.

He was recently interviewed at at World Wide Web consortium meeting, and things got interesting, fast.

Reuters
Sir Tim Berners-Lee: “We must resist these technologies.”

When asked if he occasionally felt like Dr. Frankenstein, wondering, “What have I wrought?” while watching the unfolding saga of fake news on the web and its implications for democracies. “Yeah, I have,” he replied.

His concerns during the web’s first 25 years focused on expanding access to more people. But now he thinks the web has become as complex and intricate as a human brain-so the tech industry requires a multi-disciplinary approach to “look out for unintended consequences” and study the impact of services as they are introduced to the world.
But too often web companies just plow ahead without understanding the consequences.
He criticised the likes of Google, Facebook and Twitter for creating advertising systems that, for example, incentivised fake-news purveyors.
“They didn’t do that out of malice,” Berners-Lee said. “They did it completely commercially, not even caring about who won the election. But Google gave them money [to do it], and that trained them to think of headlines like, ‘Hillary really wants Trump to win.'”
Berners-Lee was also asked if he was worried that big tech companies have too much power.
He said the giants of the past, like AT&T, AOL and Microsoft, were once considered unassailable, only to be upended by unexpected competitors: “It’s amazing how quickly people can pick stuff up on the internet; it’s also amazing how quickly they can drop it,” he said. That said, he worries that “you can’t imagine having such a strong dominance in these markets without losing out on innovation.”
Turning abroad, we discussed efforts to censor internet content.
Early in the web’s history, there was a belief that “information wants to be free”-that internet users would find ways to route around attempts at censorship. Berners-Lee conceded that thinking was a “a bit simplistic.”
He says there’s “no magic recipe that the internet will be able to solve censorship, so censorship is something we have to protest against.”
Obliquely referencing countries that restrict internet content he said: “Openness is a sign of a strong government. You can be strong in lots of different ways. The ability to be strong enough to allow people to see the alternative views of the opposition is a particular strength which I hope various countries will find.”
Berners-Lee also said it was important for people to be able to own and control their own data and that companies should think twice before assuming it’s a business asset.
“It used to be said that data is the new oil,” he said. “Personally, I think it’s like nuclear fuel. It’s becoming toxic. Two years ago, the question from the board was, ‘How are we monetising the data?’ Now the question is, “How are we protecting ourselves from the damage of this getting out?'”
I asked Berners-Lee if he owned a connected assistant like the Amazon Echo or Google Home.
The answer, he said, is no; he believes that when conversations and queries are recorded in our home and transferred to the cloud, they inevitably become vulnerable to intruders and accessible to prying governments.
Sounding very unlike the web pioneer who created the web nearly three decades ago, he vowed, “We must resist these technologies.”
– Bloomberg

https://www.stuff.co.nz/technology/digital-living/98850665/the-father-of-the-web-confronts-his-creation

See Also:

Sean Parker: Facebook was designed to exploit human “vulnerability”

Sean Parker: Facebook was designed to exploit human “vulnerability”

Sean Parker, the founder of Napster and former president of Facebook, said the thought process behind building the social media giant was: “How do we consume as much of your time and conscious attention as possible?” Parker was interviewed by Axios’ Mike Allen Wednesday:
“That means that we needed to sort of give you a little dopamine hit every once in a while because someone liked or commented on a photo or a post or whatever … It’s a social validation feedback loop … You’re exploiting a vulnerability in human psychology … [The inventors] understood this, consciously, and we did it anyway.”

Interview:

https://www.axios.com/sean-parker-facebook-exploits-a-vulnerability-in-humans-2507917325.html

Facebook founder Sean Parker

Aaron Kesel of Natural Blaze and Activist Post writes:

“……This is also not the first time Facebook has been outed for manipulating perception. In 2014 they were exposed for blatantly targeting human emotions in an experiment without their users’ knowledge:
…Facebook revealed that it had manipulated the news feeds of over half a million randomly selected users to change the number of positive and negative posts they saw. It was part of a psychological study to examine how emotions can be spread on social media. (Source)
Besides being a social validation feedback loop, Facebook has demonstrated itself to be an echo chamber by labelling people under political labels as the New York Times reported.
The big social giant also hired a full list of liberal left-leaning fact checkers and has begun limiting the reach of sites like Activist Post; labeling alternative media, opinions, and editorials as “fake news.”
In fact, other former Facebook employees have confessed to the abhorrent censorship of conservative news and views. The nail in the coffin was actually placed in 2015 when Facebook admitted that they were censoring posts and comments about political corruption and content that some countries like Turkey and China don’t feel is appropriate for their citizens. Facebook is not new to censorship, and this will likely continue.
The main problem we all worry about is that Facebook is creating a political bubble for people where they will only hear one-sided politics leaving no room for healthy debates. This is doing a disservice to its users and is the real reason that Donald Trump won the U.S. presidency that has nothing to do with fake news. On one hand it prevents bickering, on another it blocks someone from expanding their consciousness by examining and challenging one’s own beliefs.”

READ THE REST AT ACTIVISTPOST:

https://tinyurl.com/ya9esqgw

Confessions of an Illuminati House Wife – Part 1 to 4 Unlimited funding, under the guise of security, corrupts BIG time!

Mrs. Katherine Griggs, wife of Colonel George Griggs (Special Operations) gives an insight of the twisted evil of the American Intelligence community and the methods they use to recruit and control operatives.

 

White Rabbits, White Pickups and White Washes: Police Incompetence

I watched with horror on the TV news the other night as Police officers in Providence pursued a white pickup truck, based on information that an escaped felon had abandoned a stolen Police car in favour of a “a white pickup”. "white pickup"

Now, I don’t know how many “white pickups” are cruising the streets over there, but there must be a few. In this case the Law picked a seemingly random target and chose to pursue it in typical “cops and robbers, reality TV” dramatic style. The result was disastrous, incompetent and an unnecessary Judge Dredd style execution., despite the claims that it was necessary “to protect the public”.

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/rhode-island/articles/2017-11-10/police-no-weapons-found-in-truck-officers-shot-on-i-95

In this day and age of high tech law enforcement gadgetry that would make Batman envious, surely there are more efficient methods of dealing with suspects who fail to pull over and co operate? We can read a license plate from outer space; we have surveillance drones that can outpace a Lamborghini; some vehicles can be remotely disabled.

How hard would it have been to follow the pickup truck to it’s destination covertly and without fuss?

Better still, do a quick of ALL white pickup trucks in the area and track them until you get the RIGHT white pickup?

As for the claim that the guy had to shot and killed (he was unarmed) because he was endangering the public? Shoot the car’s tires out? Shoot to disable as a last resort? Hell, they fired FORTY rounds into this guy, and wounded his passenger in the process.

There is no justification whatsoever for the incompetent and inefficient procedures that were followed during this failed attempt to apprehend the wrong guy, in the wrong car, at the wrong place and time.

Whether he had good reason to evade the police or whether he just panicked, we may never know.

Dead men tell no tales.

Martin H

 

No batteries Required: Now Even Your Clothes can be Part Of The ‘Net!

A new technology may make your clothes part of the internet of things (IoT) network. However, unlike other IoT devices, these smart fabrics aren’t dependent on electricity.
Instead, these fabrics use a special kind of conductive thread, which can function without any added electronics. Simply put, while these clothes can serve as data storage, they can also be washed, dried and ironed like regular clothes.
A team from the University of Washington has created a smart fabric, which can use the magnetic properties of conductive thread. Such smart fabrics can store a lot of information including 2D images. The data stored in such fabrics can be read by regular smartphones, using the device’s inbuilt magnetometer.
It works by putting in a binary code on the conductive thread using magnets. This code can then be easily decoded using a standard magnetometer, which is there in most smartphones. This lets the cloth store different kinds of data, which can be read by a smartphone using an app.

net clothes no batteries

The clothes can even communicate with a smartphone despite aberrations such as non-magnetized clothing — if a smartphone is inside a pocket and comes in contact with gloves containing conductive thread even from inside the pocket.
In the tests run by the researchers, the fabric survived in tests including running the cloth through the washing machine. In their tests, the researchers found that even though the fabric get demagnetized by 28-36 percent, but it soon gets remagnetized from the surrounding environment.
Furthermore, these fabrics can be stitched into different clothing items, like gloves and used for gesture-based commands. According to the researchers, the conductive thread can also be used in necklaces, ties, wristbands, and belts.
The fact that this thread can also store 2D images and such data also entails that it can be used for authentication. While authentication technology in smartphones has moved from fingerprint authentication to face recognition, the next technology in line might be authentication using wearable fabrics.

More:

https://a.msn.com/r/2/AAujUt5?m=en-nz

%d bloggers like this: