All this time wondering if Glenn Beck and others were media whores for the NWO, and all we had to do was to check their Facebook pages...
Incredible.
I mean, everyone with two brain cells can see that, but this is definitive proof of it.
Great article. I never thought these people would have Facebook pages...

No need to anymore.

Wayne Madsen just brought that issue up on yesterday's edition of "The Alex Jones Show": http://www.archive.org/details/AlexJonesRadioShow-April12010

And, not wanting to divert attention from the main point I was making, here's another proof of how secure "https" is: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164903

From your description, it seems to me that the new version of Firefox for Windows is quite buggy - which is not an uncommon thing to happen whenever a new version of a program is released[1] - so, while they don't fix the bugs, perhaps it's a good idea to go back to an older version. (Maybe not too old, since the older ones should not be supported[2] in terms of security.)

Searching the web, I can find several sites from where you can download old versions of Firefox, including an ftp server of Mozilla, which should be the most secure option: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/

And, since they say in Firefox 3.6's release notes[3] that the bookmarks and such are not removed when you uninstall Firefox, you can then uninstall it, install again an older version of it, and try upgrading again when they release a new 3.6.x version.

You might also want try other browsers such as "Opera" or "Google Chrome" and see if you like them better than Firefox.


---
1. http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=143869
2. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/all-older.html
3. http://www.mozilla-europe.org/en/firefox/3.6/releasenotes/


P.S. - When asking for help in computers be VERY CAREFUL with the kind of advice you take, and don't delete stuff or execute commands you don't understand if you don't know what you're doing...

Great banners!

What a great idea!
That's something that never occurred to me - to make really large banners for your message to be really visible.
Not only will people surely notice it, but the ones who do, will know that, for a group to go through the effort of making such big banners, it's because they're really serious about their message.
Well done, We Are Change Los Angeles!

For some reason, for old pages of prisonplanet.com that describe editions of "The Alex Jones Show", the comments don't show up anymore. All we get now is a message "Comments are closed."

But I can still access the old version of the page I send people to in my first post through a Google cache.

And before that cache also shows only the more recent version of the page, I'll leave here the comments, as they used to appear in the old version, for everyone who wants to to be able to read them.


http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:SpYHnCqe0JgJ:www.prisonplanet.com/the-alex-jones-show-l-i-v-e-september-11th-with-william-engdahl-ralph-nader.html

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/packet-forensics/

Law Enforcement Appliance Subverts SSL

By Ryan Singel    March 24, 2010 | 1:55 pm | Categories: Surveillance, Threats



That little lock on your browser window indicating you are communicating securely with your bank or e-mail account may not always mean what you think its means.

Normally when a user visits a secure website, such as B*nk of America, Gmail, PayPal or eBay, the browser examines the website’s certificate to verify its authenticity.

At a recent wiretapping convention, however, security researcher Chris Soghoian discovered that a small company was marketing internet spying boxes to the feds. The boxes were designed to intercept those communications — without breaking the encryption — by using forged security certificates, instead of the real ones that websites use to verify secure connections. To use the appliance, the government would need to acquire a forged certificate from any one of more than 100 trusted Certificate Authorities.

The attack is a classic man-in-the-middle attack, where Alice thinks she is talking directly to Bob, but instead Mallory found a way to get in the middle and pass the messages back and forth without Alice or Bob knowing she was there.

The existence of a marketed product indicates the vulnerability is likely being exploited by more than just information-hungry governments, according to leading encryption expert Matt Blaze[1], a computer science professor at University of Pennsylvania.

“If the company is selling this to law enforcement and the intelligence community, it is not that large a leap to conclude that other, more malicious people have worked out the details of how to exploit this,” Blaze said.

The company in question is known as Packet Forensics, which advertised its new man-in-the-middle capabilities in a brochure handed out at the Intelligent Support Systems (ISS) conference[2], a Washington, D.C., wiretapping convention that typically bans the press. Soghoian attended the convention, notoriously capturing a Sprint manager bragging[3] about the huge volumes of surveillance requests it processes for the government.

According to the flyer: “Users have the ability to import a copy of any legitimate key they obtain (potentially by court order) or they can generate ‘look-alike’ keys designed to give the subject a false sense of confidence in its authenticity.” The product is recommended to government investigators, saying “IP communication dictates the need to examine encrypted traffic at will.” And, “Your investigative staff will collect its best evidence while users are lulled into a false sense of security afforded by web, e-mail or VOIP encryption.”

Packet Forensics doesn’t advertise the product on its website, and when contacted by Wired.com, asked how we found out about it. Company spokesman Ray Saulino initially denied the product performed as advertised, or that anyone used it. But in a follow-up call the next day, Saulino changed his stance.

“The technology we are using in our products has been generally discussed in internet forums and there is nothing special or unique about it,” Saulino said. “Our target community is the law enforcement community.”

Blaze described the vulnerability as an exploitation of the architecture of how SSL is used to encrypt web traffic, rather than an attack on the encryption itself. SSL, which is known to many as HTTPS, enables browsers to talk to servers using high-grade encryption, so that no one between the browser and a company’s server can eavesdrop on the data. Normal HTTP traffic can be read by anyone in between — your ISP, a wiretap at your ISP, or in the case of an unencrypted Wi-Fi connection, by anyone using a simple packet-sniffing tool.

In addition to encrypting the traffic, SSL authenticates that your browser is talking to the website you think it is. To that end, browser makers trust a large number of Certificate Authorities — companies that promise to check a website operator’s credentials and ownership before issuing a certificate. A basic certificate costs less than $50 today, and it sits on a website’s server, guaranteeing that the BankofAmerica.com website is actually owned by B*nk of America. Browser makers have accredited more than 100 Certificate Authorities from around the world, so any certificate issued by any one of those companies is accepted as valid.

To use the Packet Forensics box, a law enforcement or intelligence agency would have to install it inside an ISP, and persuade one of the Certificate Authorities — using money, blackmail or legal process — to issue a fake certificate for the targeted website. Then they could capture your username and password, and be able to see whatever transactions you make online.

Technologists at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who are working on a proposal to fix this whole problem, say hackers can use similar techniques to steal your money or your passwords. In that case, attackers are more likely to trick a Certificate Authority into issuing a certificate, a point driven home last year when two security researchers demonstrated how they could get certificates for any domain on the internet simply by using a special character in a domain name[4].

“It is not hard to do these attacks,” said Seth Schoen, an EFF staff technologist. “There is software that is being published for free among security enthusiasts and underground that automate this.”

China, which is known for spying on dissidents and Tibetan activists, could use such an attack to go after users of supposedly secure services, including some Virtual Private Networks, which are commonly used to tunnel past China’s firewall censorship. All they’d need to do is convince a Certificate Authority to issue a fake certificate. When Mozilla added a Chinese company, China Internet Network Information Center, as a trusted Certificate Authority in Firefox this year, it set off a firestorm of debate[5], sparked by concerns that the Chinese government could convince the company to issue fake certificates to aid government surveillance.

In all, Mozilla’s Firefox has its own list of 144 root authorities. Other browsers rely on a list supplied by the operating system manufacturers, which comes to 264 for Microsoft and 166 for Apple. Those root authorities can also certify secondary authorities, who can certify still more — all of which are equally trusted by the browser.

The list of trusted root authorities includes the United Arab Emirates-based Etilisat, a company that was caught last summer secretly uploading spyware onto 100,000 customers’ BlackBerries[6].

Soghoian says fake certificates would be a perfect mechanism for countries hoping to steal intellectual property from visiting business travelers. The researcher published a paper on the risks[7] (.pdf) Wednesday, and promises he will soon release a Firefox add-on to notify users when a site’s certificate is issued from an authority in a different country than the last certificate the user’s browser accepted from the site.

EFF’s Schoen, along with fellow staff technologist Peter Eckersley and security expert Chris Palmer, want to take the solution further, using information from around the net so browsers can eventually tell a user with certainty when they are being attacked by someone using a fake certificate. Currently, browsers warn users when they encounter a certificate that doesn’t belong to a site, but many people simply click through the multiple warnings.

“The basic point is that in the status quo there is no double check and no accountability,” Schoen said. “So if Certificate Authorities are doing things that they shouldn’t, no one would know, no one would observe it. We think at the very least there needs to be a double check.”

EFF suggests a regime that relies on a second level of independent notaries to certify each certificate, or an automated mechanism to use anonymous Tor exit nodes to make sure the same certificate is being served from various locations on the internet — in case a user’s local ISP has been compromised, either by a criminal or a government agency using something like Packet Forensics’ appliance.

One of the most interesting questions raised by Packet Forensics’ product is how often do governments use such technology and do Certificate Authorities comply? Christine Jones, the general counsel for Go Daddy — one of the net’s largest issuers of SSL certificates — says her company has never gotten such a request from a government in her eight years at the company.

“I’ve read studies and heard speeches in academic circles that theorize that concept, but we never would issue a ‘fake’ SSL certificate,” Jones said, arguing that would violate the SSL auditing standards and put them at risk of losing their certification. “Theoretically it would work, but the thing is we get requests from law enforcement every day, and in entire time we have been doing this, we have never had a single instance where law enforcement asked us to do something inappropriate.”

VeriSign, the net’s largest Certiicate Authority, echoes GoDaddy.

“Verisign has never issued a fake SSL certificate, and to do so would be against our policies,” said vice president Tim Callan.

Matt Blaze notes that domestic law enforcement can get many records, such as a person’s Amazon purchases, with a simple subpoena, while getting a fake SSL certificate would certainly involve a much higher burden of proof and technical hassles for the same data.

Intelligence agencies would find fake certificates more useful, he adds. If the NSA got a fake certificate for Gmail — which now uses SSL as the default for e-mail sessions in their entirety (not just their logins) — they could install one of Packet Forensics’ boxes surreptitiously at an ISP in, for example, Afghanistan, in order to read all the customer’s Gmail messages. Such an attack, though, could be detected with a little digging, and the NSA would never know if they’d been found out.

Despite the vulnerabilities, experts are pushing more sites to join Gmail in wrapping their entire sessions in SSL.

“I still lock my doors even though I know how to pick the lock,” Blaze said.

Update 15:55 Pacific: The story was updated with comment from Verisign.

Image: Detail from Packet Forensics brochure.


---
1. http://www.crypto.com/blog
2. http://www.issworldtraining.com/ISS_WASH/
3. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/12/gps-data/
4. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/kaminsky/
5. http://www.freedom-to-tinker.com/blog/felten/mozilla-debates-whether-trust-chinese-ca
6. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/blackberry-spies/
7. http://files.cloudprivacy.net/ssl-mitm.pdf

My ISP used to limit my international traffic also, in my case to 2 GB a month when I started using their services, and because of that, I could barely watch any YouTube videos, given my intensive use of the Internet.

They have, nonetheless, on the user account page, an applet that shows how many GBs I've used already, where I would go to check how close I was to reaching the limit I had or how many additional MBs I had used.




I guess you could demand that they provide you some sort of similar service.

"ATTENTION potential WikiLeaks users!"

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164863

I've written here before a warning[1], a few months after I registered, thinking that it would somehow reach Alex Jones, but I've seen that it may have not, at least not in due time[2]. I initially thought that posting something on this forum would be a good way for any pertinent or important information to reach Alex Jones via some initial moderator that founded the forum or such, but I now realize that there may be just too many posts being made, and too many things going on, in order for any important information to be easily channelled from here to Alex's staff or others close enough to him.

Anyway, it's too expensive for me to make a transatlantic phone call to "The Alex Jones Show", and be on hold and all that, so, if someone who agrees that there are reasons to be worried about this, that lives in Texas or close enough to Austin (in order not to spend too much money), could call "The Alex Jones Show" about this, to spread the word to a large audience, it would great, and I would be very much appreciated. Otherwise, I guess the warning will just have to be limited to anyone who reads this post.

(Sending an e-mail, I think, is out of the question, since I can easily deduce that Alex's and his staff's accounts must be daily bombarded with information. So I seriously doubt that they read everything that is sent to them...)

I'm writing to warn any person who might be thinking about one day possibly leaking anything to WikiLeaks to think very carefully about it. You might want to think twice about whom you decide to leak information you have to.

For two reasons.

The first one, (and if I'm saying anything wrong, someone who knows more about the subject please correct me) from the limited knowledge of computers I have, the security they offer is a joke.

All that WikiLeaks offers as protection is a simple "https" connection. The security of which has already been shown to be very weak[3]. Even if this type of connection was secure, which I stress again that is not, and if you're connecting to their website from your home, I'm sure the surveillance agencies can easily know who is connecting, or has connected, to the site and from there reduce by a lot the list of possible suspects for any leak. Let alone even, if you have Windows or some untrustworthy closed-source program installed on your computer, possibly, get inside[4] your computer itself and from there verify anything to confirm their suspicion. (Uploading something from an Internet caf\E9 or such, I guess, would, depending on the circumstances, increase your chances of not getting caught, but it would surely be no guarantee whatsoever...)

Second, and this is the most important reason I wanted to call your attention for, if you live in the Western World, you should notice that WikiLeaks has, what I would call, a very suspicious relationship with media outlets and foundations that are known, among any person sufficiently informed about the powers-that-be, to be controlled by the same interests responsible for all the corruption, dirty tricks and worse, you see happening, and that the information you have most likely denounces.

Or, to be more explicit, since the people who read posts made on this forum know what I'm talking about, as I called the attention for in a post[5] of mine yesterday, WikiLeaks is supported and praised by NWO-controlled media outlets and foundations, which makes everything look very suspicious, to say the least. (At least from my point-of-view, it does...)

Think very carefully about what you might want to do and, if you someday do have important information you want to leak, try to decide wisely about whom you want to leak that information to.

If this, not very open and transparent organization, that most of us only know by name, and that admits to not publish everything they are sent, is somehow controlled, you might not get a second chance to leak that information you have to anyone else...

I personally cannot think of a better way to stop, or at least control, information leaks than to come up with a site like this.

Call me paranoid, if you want to. I'm just telling people to think and decide for themselves what to do.

Check out the website for yourselves - http://wikileaks.org/ - and read the quotes from, and the thank you note to, the NWO-controlled press and institutions. If this site was a danger to the establishment, do you think that the establishment-controlled press would be promoting it and actively supporting it?



---
1. http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=60189
2. (5th comment) http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:3gAUxpzMfpIJ:www.prisonplanet.com/the-alex-jones-show-l-i-v-e-nov-12-with-nader-franchi-pratt-watt.html
3. http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=82985
4. http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=101456
5. http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=164768.msg979289#msg979289

That Pentagon paper or whatever, that was leaked, denouncing the worry the DoD has about WikiLeaks, reminds me a lot of Donald Rumsfeld's comments on Al-Jazeera during the invasion of Iraq... What a great way to promote something as your adversary...
Even if they would put something like that on paper, it would be a memorandum to be only circulated among the higher echelons of the DoD. And do you think that the people who manage to get to the top of such an organization (that, among other things, kills their own citizens through false flag operations) would be people of good character, guided by the highest standards of integrity, that would feel morally obliged to leak such a paper?
Do you think they would ever promote such kind of people all the way up to the top, making it possible for something like this to ever happen?

After reading this news, I finally decided to check out WikiLeaks, from which I never heard anything "explosive".
Something you might all want to do also, with critical eyes.
Check out the NWO-controlled press and foundations that are praising, and have supported, WikiLeaks, mentioned on it's site: http://wikileaks.org/
Am I the only one to see something wrong here?
What better way to control leaks?
I have seen all of this before...: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=107331.msg896995#msg896995

Or better saying... maybe you should ignore that. I've just read that it's not maintained anymore (http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/incognito-85/is-incognito-still-maintained-790786/).

I know that some Live USB distros allow you to save data in a second partition inside the USB stick. I haven't tried any of those yet, so I don't know if you can use that functionality as a simple way to save your bookmarks...

If it's privacy that you want, here's something you can use in the meantime: http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=incognito

The Infowars Store sells shortwave radios (http://infowars-shop.stores.yahoo.net/shra.html).

But, from your nickname, I guess that, like me, you're not in the US, so you can't buy one from there. But what you can do is to check out the models they have and look for a place where they sell them in the UK. (If it's to listen to "The Alex Jones Show" that we want, I guess we can trust Alex's or his crew's judgement on this.)

I've already started my quest for an old shortwave radio that might be around. And if I can't find a good working one, I'll look for some online or local shop that sells a model sold at the Infowars Store.

I recommend everyone to get one as well. It's a good idea to have a backup in case something does happen to the Internet.

Thank you very much for the links, matrixcutter. This is a subject I'm most interested in.

I suspect this "Superclass" members of being a mixture of sociopaths and psychopaths, and I will listen to what a well-informed person like Alan Watt, that has been researching the elite for years, has to say to, hopefully, help me clarify that.

As for the "strong genetic component" believed to be in the origin of psychopathy, here goes a reference to a study I remember reading about a couple of years ago:



http://www.dancewithshadows.com/society/dictatorship-genes.asp


THE DICTATORSHIP GENE

You may have dictatorship in your genes

The AVPR1a gene is linked to ruthlessness in people.

14 April, 2008: Yet another “behavioural disorder” has been blamed on the genes.

According to researchers at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Israel, the ruthless behaviour of Hitler, Napoleon, Mussolini, Saddam Hussein, and Robert Mugabe may be attributed partly to their genes.

The researchers claim that they have discovered that a gene called AVPR1a is linked with ruthlessness, and that it may explain “the money-grabbing tendencies of those with a Machiavellian streak.”

The findings have been published in Genes, Brain and Behavior, a scientific journal published by the International Behavioural and Neural Genetics Society in collaboration with Blackwell Publishing.

Richard Ebstein, lead researcher, wrote in Genes, Brain and Behavior that they conducted an economic exercise called the ‘Dictator Game’ with over 200 student volunteers.

The exercise, he continued, “allowed the participants to behave selflessly, or like money-grabbing dictators like former Zaire President Mobutu who filled in his pockets at the cost of its citizens. While the exact mechanism by which the gene influences behaviour was unknown, one could say that one some people just did not believe in the old adage that ‘it is better to give than to receive.”

Ebstein suggested that the “reward centres” in their brains might derive less pleasure from altruistic acts, leading money-grabbers to behave more selfishly.

In the study, the researchers exclusively focused on the called gene called AVPR1 as it is known to produce receptors in the brain that detect vasopressin, a hormone involved in altruism and “pro-social” behaviour. The researchers said they “wondered if differences in expression of this receptor in the human brain might make different people more or less likely to behave generously.”

The researchers at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, during the study, tested DNA samples from the participants before asking them to play the dictator game. The students were divided into two groups: ‘dictators’ and ‘receivers’ (called ‘A’ and ‘B’ to the participants).

Each ‘dictator’ was given 50 shekels (about US $14), and were told that they were free to share as much or as little of this with a receiver, whom they would never have to meet. The fortunes of the ‘receiver’ thus depended totally on the generosity of the ‘dictator.”

It was noticed that nearly 18% of the ‘dictators’ kept all of the money, about one-third split the money down the middle, and a generous 6% gave it all away.

According to Richard Ebstein, “while no link was found for this tendency to be gender-specific, it was dependent on the length of the AVPR1s gene, as people having the shorter version of this gene were more likely to behave selfishly. The vasopressin receptors in the brains of people with short AVPR1a might be distributed in such a way that it makes them less likely to feel rewarded by the act of giving.”

Based on the observations, Ebstein reached the conclusion that “the dictatorial tendencies certainly had a genetic component.”

ANI quoted Nicholas Bardsley at the University of Southampton, the United Kingdom, who studied the ‘Dictator Game,’ as saying that that “researchers should be careful while using such games as a tool for arriving at results regarding human generosity.”

"I found this video. Bev Harris of BlackBoxVoting.org demonstrates to Howard Dean how EASY it is for anyone with access to the central tabulator computer to RIG the ELECTION. Diebold software is used in this demonstration and in the American voting system."

--- user "file83", 24 April 2006, YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhMUtzOxjJY

Ahahah

What a joke.

After the whole "Climategate" scandal... This Glenn Beck character is really something.

This reminds me of Colin Powell first being against the invasion of Iraq and then "changing" his opinion, shortly before it happened, becoming a supporter of it. Or Alan Greenspan for a long time (hypocritically) declaring himself to be a strong free-market advocate only to recently say that we need government control over the economy after all.

I believe the trick is to make people think that "If even this guy that was against it/didn't believe in it has changed his opinion, well, I guess there must be a very strong case in favour of it..."

"essentialdissent.net
"IBM and the Holocaust: Smoking Gun Documents
"Edwin Black    Endicott, NY    September 15, 2009"

(1 of 2) http://blip.tv/file/2714928/
(2 of 2) http://blip.tv/file/2715057/

Ah! Great.

If/when you finish it, please post a link to it here in this thread, for everyone interested to be notified.

In the meantime, for everyone not aware of it, there are some other (good) old books written about the Illuminati that I know of:

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=43340
http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=43336

Alex: "Let's go to Don, in Wisconsin. Don, you're on the air."

Don: "Hey, Alex, I wanna talk about conditioning and brainwashing in movies for a little bit and specifically, like Stanley Kubrick, I want to get your opinion, like whether he was an insider or he was trying to expose the situation..."

Alex: "He was a top insider. And he refused, this was confirmed even in Variety, he refused to cut 28(?) minutes... It was 28 minutes if memory serves... I know it was over 20 (...) Kubrick said this movie was gonna show you what's really going on. He had final cut, and he had an ironclad contract, he had final cut on the film where he couldn't be controlled, and he refused to cut it. Then the distributor threatened to not distribute it, and then he died mysteriously and they cut the 20-plus minutes. So yes, Kubrick, total hi-level insider, total Illuminist. Same thing with Arthur C. Clarke. I mean, you don't get any more hi-powered than this people. I believe they killed him deader than a hammer."


--- From the first hour of the November 17th 2009 edition of "The Alex Jones Show" (http://www.archive.org/details/AlexJonesRadioShow-November172009)

http://www.heraldmalaysia.com/news/storydetails.php/Dr-M-says-9-11-attacks-staged-to-hit-Muslim-world/3867-1-1


Dr M says 9/11 attacks staged to hit Muslim world

Published On January 20, 2010
By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani


KUALA LUMPUR: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad today claimed the 9/11 attacks in the United States, that killed nearly 3,000, was staged as an excuse to “mount attacks on the Muslim world”, saying killing as an excuse for war is not new to the US.

The former prime minister also argued that Israel was created to solve the “Jewish problem” in Europe, saying the Holocaust had failed as a final solution against the community.

“In September 2001, the World Trade Centre was attacked allegedly by terrorists. I am not sure now that Muslim terrorists carried out these attacks. There is strong evidence that the attacks were staged. If they can make Avatar, they can make anything,” said Dr Mahathir during his speech at the General Conference for the Support of Al-Quds here. Al-Quds is the Arabic name for Jerusalem.

“Killing innocent people to provide an excuse for war is not new to the US. But whether the real or staged 9/11 attacks have served the United States and Western countries well. They have an excuse to mount attacks on the Muslim world,” he added.

Dr Mahathir also argued the creation of the Jewish state was decided after Europeans failed to massacre the community.

“The Jews had always been a problem in European countries. They had to be confined to ghettoes and periodically massacred. But still they remained, they thrived and they held whole governments to ransom.

“Even after their massacre by the Nazis of Germany, they survived to continue to be a source of even greater problems for the world. The Holocaust failed as a final solution,” said the outspoken Malaysian leader who was noted for his anti-Western and anti-Zionist stand while in power for 22 years, until October 2003.

Dr Mahathir added that it was easier for the European powers to set up a Jewish state in Palestine.

“Creating a state for them was thought to be a better solution. It could be if some European territory had been allocated to make a permanent ghetto for the Jews. But of course if this was done then the affected European state would rise in arms and kill all the Jews the way they had been doing before. So the debate was about creating an Israeli state in Uganda, Africa, or somewhere in Latin America or Palestine of course.

“It was so easy to decide on Palestine, a British mandated territory. Restrictions on the disposal of mandated land could be ignored. This is nothing new — reneging on solemnly given undertaking is endemic with Europeans,” he said.

Dr Mahathir also accused democratic countries for being “hypocritical” and pointed out that the world is “partially civilised.”

“We live in a world that is only partially civilised. I say this because we still believe that the way to resolve conflicts between nations is to kill people in what is called war. The winner is the side which succeeds in killing the most number of people. Yet we vehemently declare that killing people is murder, a terrible crime worthy of the most severe punishment.

“We are being openly hypocritical. Mass killing is glorious but killing one man is a heinous crime,” he said in his speech.

Dr Mahathir also expressed his disappointment in Barack Obama and said that the US president has failed. Obama celebrated his first year in office today.

“Well, I am a bit disappointed because so far none of his promises have been kept. He promised to get out from Afghanistan but he ended up sending more troops there instead. He promised to close down Guantanamo but he has not closed down Guantanamo. Even other things he has not been able to do.

“It is quite easy to promise during election time but you know there are forces in the United States which prevents the president from doing some things. One of the forces is the Jewish lobby, IPAC,” he said.

Dr Mahathir had previously blamed the Jews for causing the Asian financial crisis.

Courtesy: TheMalaysianInsider

I had never seen an admission, made in a mainstream news channel, of the existence of the supposedly extinct Illuminati. (And never thought I would.)
I have repeatedly seen analysts and politicians openly talking about a "New World Order" being built, even here in Portugal, but this one goes even deeper than that. The guy openly states who's really pulling the strings of the economy!
And not only does he mention a secret society, he also gives people a peek of the whole network by linking it with other known institutions and an individual.
Incredible how much "in-your-face" this people can be...

Here's the exact quote of what he says:


"The Bavarian Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, Goldman Sachs, and the Queen of England, are not all bad."

--- Jim Cramer, on CNBC, January 27th 2010 (http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=1397295660)

That's also what the above-posted links and books that I call the attention for are all about.

If you want to know more about how the left-wing media is controlled, I've also posted some links about it in another place in this forum:

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=107184

From what I googled, it seems to be a log file created by this software for Mac OS:

http://lowendmac.com/wares/cia.html

(Do you have this software installed?)


And if you're worried about the government snooping inside your computer... whenever you install a closed-source code program or operating system... it's very difficult to ever know what it actually does.

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=101456

Concerning netbooks and Ubuntu, coincidently, I'm just about to reinstall "Ubuntu Eee 8.04.1" and just thought of another tip I can give:

One thing you can install in your netbooks running a Debian-derived GNU/Linux distribution is a tool called "voice-command", that you can download from ASUS' website - http://update.eeepc.asus.com/ - that enables you to dictate some voice commands instead of having to type all the time or search for menu entries in the small screen.

I found it to be quite useful when accessing the web in rather dark places where I can barely see my tiny keyboard.

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9141105/NSA_helped_with_Windows_7_development


NSA helped with Windows 7 development


Privacy expert voices 'backdoor' concerns, security researchers dismiss idea

By Gregg Keizer
November 18, 2009 04:09 PM ET


Computerworld -  The National Security Agency (NSA) worked with Microsoft on the development of Windows 7, an agency official acknowledged yesterday during testimony before Congress.

"Working in partnership with Microsoft and elements of the Department of Defense, NSA leveraged our unique expertise and operational knowledge of system threats and vulnerabilities to enhance Microsoft's operating system security guide without constraining the user to perform their everyday tasks, whether those tasks are being performed in the public or private sector," Richard Schaeffer, the NSA's information assurance director, told the Senate's Subcommittee on Terrorism and Homeland Security yesterday as part of a prepared statement.

"All this was done in coordination with the product release, not months or years later during the product lifecycle," Schaeffer added. "This will improve the adoption of security advice, as it can be implemented during installation and then later managed through the emerging SCAP standards."

Security Content Automation Protocol, or SCAP, is a set of standards for automating chores such as managing vulnerabilities and measuring security compliance. The National Institute of Standards and Technologies (NIST) oversees the SCAP standards.

This is not the first time that the NSA has partnered with Microsoft during Windows development. In 2007, the agency confirmed that it had a hand in Windows Vista[1] as part of an initiative to ensure that the operating system was secure from attack and would work with other government software. Before that, the NSA provided guidance[2] on how best to secure Windows XP and Windows 2000.

According to Marc Rotenberg, the executive director of the Electronics Privacy Information Center (EPIC), the NSA's involvement with operating system development goes back even farther. "This battle goes back to at least the crypto wars of the early '90s," said Rotenberg, who remembered testifying about the agency's role in private sector computer security standards in 1989.

But when the NSA puts hands on Windows, that raises a red flag for Rotenberg, who heads the Washington, D.C.-based public interest research center. "When NSA offers to help the private sector on computer security, the obvious concern is that it will also build in backdoors that enables tracking users and intercepting user communications," Rotenberg said in an e-mail. "And private sector firms are reluctant to oppose these 'suggestions' since the US government is also their biggest customer and opposition to the NSA could mean to loss of sales."

Rotenberg's worries stem from the NSA's reputation as the intelligence agency best known for its eavesdropping of electronic messaging, including cell phone calls and e-mail.

Andrew Storms, the director of security operations at nCircle Security, didn't put much credence in the idea that Microsoft would allow the NSA to build a hidden entrance to Windows 7. "Would it be surprising to most people that there was a backdoor? No, not with the political agenda of prior administrations," said Storms. "My gut, though, tells me that Microsoft, as a business, would not want to do that, at least not in a secretive way."

Roger Thompson, chief research officer at AVG Technologies, agreed. "I can't imagine NSA and Microsoft would do anything deliberate because the repercussions would be enormous if they got caught," he said in an interview via instant messaging.

"Having said that, I think we should understand that there is every likelihood that certain foreign governments are constantly looking for vulnerabilities that they can use for targeted attacks," Thompson continued. "So if they're poking at us, I think it's reasonable to assume that we're doing something similar. But I seriously doubt an official NSA-Microsoft alliance."

The NSA's Schaeffer added that his agency is also working on engaging other major software makers, including Apple, Sun and Red Hat, on security standards for their products.

"More and more, we find that protecting national security systems demands teaming with public and private institutions to raise the information assurance level of products and services more broadly," Schaeffer said.

Microsoft was not immediately available for comment on the NSA's participation in Windows 7's development.


1. http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9007719/NSA_helped_Microsoft_make_Vista_secure
2. http://support.microsoft.com/kb/885409

When oil runs out. Which, probably for us westerners, will gradually happen in the next couple of decades.
That's what "Peak Oil" means. We are now at a moment in History in which the consumption of oil is the biggest ever, but because it's a finite resource, it will soon begin to run out. And the problem is not only when it begins to run out. It has started already because the increasing demand for oil has already surpassed supply. That's why the economy is collapsing and why from now on it will only continue to collapse.
Check the posts I've mentioned.
I'm not forecasting based on what Alex Jones said, but upon research I did years ago. In fact, Alex, Paul Watson, and others, even deny this, and, with some reason to it, think that the data being presented concerning the amount of oil left is being manipulated as part of the NWO conspiracy of deindustrializing the world.

But still, concerning the documentary I've mentioned, I've just learned there's a sequel to it, that talks about how people can prepare for a post-petroleum society, and that seems to be interesting: http://escapefromsuburbia.com/trailer2.html

I recommend moving to the countryside, close to where the food is produced.
The main reason being because big cities are going to be largely depopulated in the near future and the farthest away you are from where the food is produced the more expensive your life will be, not to mention that is going to be practically impossible to live in the suburbs and in a lot of places that were not inhabited before the Industrial Revolution.
I know a lot of people in here don't believe in Peak Oil, but I've posted some key information about it here, to try to wake people up: http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=63630.msg899883#msg899883
And here goes the trailer of a documentary, that you can easily find online, and that you maybe will want to see: http://www.imdb.com/video/screenplay/vi3639673113/

(Wikipedia no longer has the poster I had linked to, so here goes again the picture that speaks a thousand words.)

Oh, and another thing Scootle says, concerning the ad: "In the promo, she says she believes 9/11 was an inside job. Interestingly, that was cut out of the actual episode."...

I can't watch the ad because the site won't let people outside of the US see it, but I'm assuming it's this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zRTPppBtOPA


There's an even better one, revealing how well informed she is about the NWO conspiracy:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqLzw9mf5Lo


And concerning how far she got, Scootle says in the second video's description "Not surprisingly, she didn't make the final 13. She didn't even make the final 21."

George Washington Hunt's website, where you can buy the DVD, in it's religious or non-religious version:

http://www[dot]thebigbadbank[dot]com/

Alex: "Let's go to Don, in Wisconsin. Don, you're on the air."

Don: "Hey, Alex, I wanna talk about conditioning and brainwashing in movies for a little bit and specifically, like Stanley Kubrick, I want to get your opinion, like whether he was an insider or he was trying to expose the situation..."

Alex: "He was a top insider. And he refused, this was confirmed even in Variety, he refused to cut 28(?) minutes... It was 28 minutes if memory serves... I know it was over 20 (...) Kubrick said this movie was gonna show you what's really going on. He had final cut, and he had an ironclad contract, he had final cut on the film where he couldn't be controlled, and he refused to cut it. Then the distributor threatened to not distribute it, and then he died mysteriously and they cut the 20-plus minutes. So yes, Kubrick, total hi-level insider, total Illuminist. Same thing with Arthur C. Clarke. I mean, you don't get any more hi-powered than this people. I believe they killed him deader than a hammer."

(...)

Don: "I heard you one time say that the director, that Mexican director of Children of Men was, he was not part of that, in that movie he was trying to wake people up or something..."

Alex: "I know several producers and directors that know him and they say that's the case..."


--- From the first hour of "The Alex Jones Show" November 17th 2009 edition

More about the Venetian Black Nobility:

http://tarpley.net/online-books/against-oligarchy/
http://american_almanac[dot]tripod[dot]com/contents.htm#venice

Interesting to note, is how, in contrast, the local Trotskyists (the modern-day followers of NWO-puppet Leon Trotsky) have completely whitewashed this Climategate scandal, never talk about 9/11, make very light critics to outrageous police state measures while presenting some proposals of their own, occasionally support mainstream controlled-"left-wing" candidates, have always been given a lot of attention by the controlled media, in which they openly brag to have a lot of people, and with the help of which they probably managed to reach an almost 3rd party status, are members of an International and are all pro-European, have an elitist lifestyle not very congruent with people who defend the interests of the working class (who they only appear to defend in rhetoric and not in effective practical terms), and openly discuss the Hegelian Dialectic process, presenting the modern-day Welfare State as a result of the clash between Capitalism and Communist ideals.
Interesting indeed...

A few more, concerning the true origin, story and final goals of Communism according to Marx/Engels:

http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=43336

Thank you so much, Harconen.

These posts are great!