Category Archives: privacy

Donald Trump Vindicated: Stormy Daniels Loses Appeal

Posted on by

Two impeachments that failed. An investigation that failed. A defamation suit that failed and now Stormy Daniels’ appeal has failed:

Adult film star Stormy Daniels has lost her appeal in her failed defamation suit against Donald Trump, leaving her owing almost $300,000 (£226,000) in legal fees to the former president.

Daniels made headlines previously for receiving $130,000 in hush money from Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, before the 2016 presidential election to stay quiet about an alleged sexual encounter she says she had with the former president.

Mr Trump has denied the encounter happened.

The former president hailed the ruling by the appeals court he often bashed as president, calling it “a total and complete victory and vindication for, and of me”.

But Daniels remained defiant, tweeting in reaction to the court judgment: “I will go to jail before I pay a penny.”

Daniels’ lawyer Michael Avenatti filed the defamation suit against Trump in 2018.

Last month Avenatti was convicted of cheating Stormy Daniels out of nearly $300,000 (then £222,000) in book proceeds.

 

Chinese Backdoor Surveillance Gets New Meaning

Posted on by

The US has lodged a complaint with China that some of its diplomats were forced to undergo “undignified” anal swabbing as a test for Covid19.

China denies the charge but it is causing much merriment on Chinese social media, which claims that American “potty mouth” syndrome makes it only too easy to confuse those two ends of the anatomy.

Is this accusation a genuine one or intelligence disinformation, perhaps some nation state form of ..er… shitposting?

Is so, by whom?

I don’t see what the US has to gain from making up a charge that humiliates its own personnel, but China might well make up the charge as a form of psychological warfare.

My own guess is it’s something floated by the globalist cabal to serve two objectives at once: humiliate the US publicly and cater to the Chinese, while enraging public opinion against China here and elsewhere.

Let’s you and him fight has always been the watchword of our overlords.

And if the accusation turns out to be true, even more reason to suspect an invisible hand at work.

 

TRUMP DECLASSIFICATION DYNAMITE

Posted on by

Update: H/t to the commenter who recovered the link from the wayback machine:

https://archive.vn/2021.01.17-235153/https://linktr.ee/kagbabe

Update: Jan 19, ’21. Unfortunately, the link below [linktr.ee/kagbab] has been removed for TOS violation, aka censorship. I have not been able to find another link going straight to all the declassified documents of Jan 15 2021, although there are links to specific items.

I’ve added the Epstein flight logs below and am adding a link to the FBI Vault so specific items could be looked up there.

https://linktr.ee/kagbab

LINK REMOVED FOR TOS VIOLATION

A whole trove of documents, some already in the public view and others not yet, ranging from the Kennedy assassination to the Russia Collusion Hoax to the election fraud

One document that is foundational to understanding how psychic control can be exerted generationally to an expanding circle of victim can be found in here:

Satanic Cult Awareness, Hurst & Marsh, 1993

And here’s something else that a lot of people have been waiting for:

Jeffrey Epstein’s Little Black Book, Unredacted

Notice who’s a frequent flyer on the Epstein flight logs.

The Senate Judiciary Committee transcripts of the Crossfire Hurricane investigation were made searchable by the Black Vault so I’ve linked them at that site.

Here is the same material from the Senate Judiciary Committee site.

Here’s the new material on the Pelosi crime family including Nancy’s father’s mob connections while mayor of Baltimore and her brother’s history of rape of minor children.

 

Debunking the debunkers of the Gates Corona “conspiracy”

Posted on by

According to Politifact (May 28), Facebook has the following post on the Covid 19 Testing, Reaching, And Contacting Everyone (TRACE) Act:

“This is what Bill Gates and George Soros want to do – secretly stick you with a chip while testing you for the coronavirus… the Dems have a bill on the House floor ready to vote on it to require this …. House Bill 6666…. no bull…. look it up and WAKE UP!!!!”

Most people would regard this as harmless venting against two of the most powerful and wealthy men on the planet, both of whom influence/dominate health policies in nearly every country in the world. But because it does not carry a book-length appendix of footnotes backing its assertions, it earned the ire of the credentialed Brahmins running the media. They went after it as conspiracy mongering and fake news.

But Politifact’s so-called ‘rebuttal’ is nothing of the sort.

It uses technicalities and minor errors to gloss over the fact that the substance of the Facebook post is quite accurate.

Analysis of just one paragraph of the “rebuttal” will be enough to demonstrate how amiss it is:

“The resolution isn’t on the “House floor” as the Facebook post claims. No action has been taken on the so-called TRACE Act since Rep. Bobby Rush,D.-Ill., introduced it nearly a month ago. Bill Gates also was not involved in crafting the act (and USA Today has more on that in its fact-check).”

Only the first line of this rebuttal is really true:

Yes, this particular resolution isn’t on the House floor.

But another one exactly like it is.

So the claim that no action has been taken on  the bill is technically true but deeply misleading.

This particular bill has not reached the floor, but its substance – contact tracing legislation –  was snuck covertly  into the fine print of  a lengthy piece of legislation, Nancy Pelosi’s $3 trillion Covid relief package..

Dubbed the Heroes Act, the massive stimulus bill passed the House on June 1 and is now before the Senate. And it provides $75 billion for Coronavirus testing and contact tracing.

. “The bill would provide a total of $75 billion for the CONTACT Initiative. [Subtitle D—COVID-19 National Testing and Contact Tracing (CONTACT) Initiative].”

That’s just $25 billion less than what the TRACE Act proposed.

From “trace” to “contact,” the Democrats have nailed the PR value of  a catchy acronym to get legislation they want.

As for Bill Gates not being involved in crafting the TRACE Act, that too is disingenuous. While Gates may not have sat down and dictated the terms (and that isn’t how it usually works, is it?), there is ample evidence of his signature all over contact tracing legislation in the US and elsewhere.

Corey’s Digs has demonstrated that Gates subsidizes major players involved in contact tracing legislation everywhere.

As usual, USA Today, Politifact, Poynter’s, and the rest of the major media are engaging in misleading journalism in decrying criticism of Bill Gates’ domination of global health policy as conspiratorial:

“Bobby Rush has a long history of pay to play and disregarding paying taxes of any kind. Just last August, he traveled to Africa for an Aspen Institute congressional conference of approximately 45 individuals and spent time with Obama and Clinton award winners, Dr. Paul Farmer from Partners in Health who is currently running the contact tracing program in Massachusetts while his partner Jim Yong Kim is rounding up other states, Dr. Jonathan Epstein from EcoHealth Alliance who just had their NIH funding cut due to connections with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and two representatives from the Gates Foundation, while the Gates, Rockefellers, Democracy Fund, and others paid toward the $19,000 dollar expense Rush incurred for this sponsored event. Nine months later, he introduced a bill to dispense $100 billion dollars to NGOs and other organizations to carry out home-to-home contact tracing throughout the country.”

 

CovidSafe App: Do-It-Yourself Surveillance For the Masses

Posted on by

From the Financial Times–:

“The Australian government asked the public on Sunday to download a controversial Covid-19 contact tracing mobile phone app, which it says will enable it to begin lifting strict social distancing restrictions and reopen the economy. The app, which is based on technology developed by the Singapore government, has provoked privacy concerns among civil-liberties groups and some backbench parliamentarians, who have said they won’t download the technology…..

…The COVIDSafe app uses wireless Bluetooth technology to log the details of people using the app who come within 1.5 metres of another user’s mobile phone. If the user later tests positive for Covid-19, health authorities would be able to access the details of other users who have come into contact with the infected person. Authorities say at least 40 per cent of the public needs to download the app for it to become an effective tool.”

In short, never mind that you or your family and friends do not want this app, have no Covid19, and do not fear getting it.

If even one of your neighbors decides to download the CovidSafe App, your privacy is gone.

Bitcoins – Coins For the Cryptocracy

Posted on by

People all over the political spectrum are pushing bitcoins again.

I explained earlier why I felt you should avoid them. When I did, I withheld any reasoning except the most logical and self-evident.

Short version:

You can accomplish everything that bitcoins can achieve with good old cash. And you don’t need electricity, internet, computers, devices, and security software when you use cash.

Second, if governments hate cash for its secrecy, why are they ignoring or pushing cryptocurrencies, which are supposedly even more secretive?

Makes no sense, does it?

The problem with bitcoins is they provide a solution for what isn’t a problem.

Secrecy isn’t a problem.

Secrecy can be achieved as is, if you set your mind on it.

The real problem is that every increase in secrecy augments the power of the cryptocracy – the unholy alliance of the spy agencies, criminals, and criminal financial cartels.

These are the forces that actually control our lives.

The criminal ruling class loves bitcoin because they know they have the power to exploit it fully. The ordinary chump just thinks he does.

As for Satoshi Nakamto, there’s no such person. It’s a made-up name, even though it has a meaning. A sinister one that gives the game away.

Don’t let clever people fool you into thinking it’s a real person.

They are probably being compensated for saying so.

Remember, practically every political site of any size on the web is in bed with intelligence. When they are not, they get pruned regularly.

Just see what happened to me here.

Bitcoin comes out of Israeli cryptographic research. The details I don’t know, but that’s generally accurate.

It’s not about saving anyone. It’s about enacting the kabbalist’s vision on earth.

That vision demands that the Anglo-Judaic Western powers rule the world through decentralized systems.

Those who are pushing bitcoin are on board that agenda.

I am too busy recovering from the latest body-blow from the cryptocracy to spell it out better just now.

But I will get to it.

If you want to gamble, go ahead.

But if you adopt bitcoins because you think your life will become opaque to the powers-that-be, you might want to rethink that.

The only way to hide anything done on your computer is to turn it off, smash the hard drive into metal dust, and throw it into a nuclear waste site.

But even then, there are still the servers and the other fellows’ computers.

Not to mention advances in technology or mathematics that will turn bitcoins invulnerability into mush.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alleged Trump Sex Video: From 9-11, Grosvenor Gardens

Posted on by

An interesting factoid:

The infamous alleged fetish video involving Donald Trump and a Russian hotel bed in which the Obamas slept (details delicately withheld on our chaste blog) turns out to have been given to US intelligence officials by none other than Senator John McCain, whose own record is so dodgy it muddies the story even more.

We think the much bigger question than Obama’s bed is Trump’s. Who’s in it? How much in hock is he to Russia?

McCain, an alleged war-hero but documented fink,  was once a POW in Vietnam and, since I just watched “The Manchurian Candidate,” that raises all sorts of questions for me about his own motivations and agenda.

Second, the file on Trump was compiled by a 20 year veteran of MI6 (the British foreign intelligence service), Christopher Steele, who from 1990 until 2009 was also a spy in Russia.

2009 was the year a lot of intel operations, including that of Wikileaks, began operating.

So what did Mr. Steele do in 2009? He opened Orbis Business Intelligence, which compiled the video. Apparently, he was funded by Republican anti-Trump operatives.

Where is Orbis located?

At the commercial site of 9-11 Grosvenor Gardens in London.

Is this another Rothschild/NWO wink or merely coincidence?

If the former,  into which realm of reality, falsity, or some mixture of both, do we consign the video?

And who is  behind it?

Insane McCain, Trump himself, his handlers, the Russians, the financial cabal, the CIA, Mossad, the FSB? Or some combination of these?

And if this is an X-rated rerun of the Manchurian Candidate, with McCain as the brain-washed trigger-man, is it Mike Pence or Hillary Clinton, who is the intended beneficiary?

My bet is the latter.

 

State Surveillance Enters The Bedroom

Posted on by

UPDATE(Picture: George Lawler/metro.co.uk)

I just saw this picture of George Lawlor in a “V for Vendetta” mask.

Something clicked. This is an intelligence created story to sell that “consent app” ( see below).

It’s intelligence, just like the fracas over Halloween costumes at Yale. That’s why I made those posts private.

ORIGINAL POST

Read this and weep.

At the University of Warwick in the UK, George Lawlor, a nineteen-year-old male student with the aggressive demeanor of a ba-lamb,  is in trouble with feminists.

For not wanting to attend a “consent” work-shop intended to deter coercive sexual encounters, he has been harassed to the point that he wants to drop out of university.

Contemporary feminists of a certain sort believe that all men are potential rapists in need of training on how to comport themselves with women, hence the fury.

There does need to be discussion about sex on campus, but lecturing the men alone misses the point. Women also need some advice on how they should carry themselves in public….on why uncontrolled drinking has different impacts on men and women…. and on where they can go alone… and with whom.

Just maybe, the whole idea of mixed dorms needs to be revisited too... and how about limiting access to drugs, alcohol, and porn on campus?

Just lecturing the men seems to be a rather bigoted way of tackling the issue.

But, if that wasn’t bad enough, the article about Lawlor also cites a new “app” (software application) for sexual consent.

It lets potential sex partners  video record their consent before getting together.

That students seem to think this is a good idea tells you everything you need to know about campus today.

Everyone else knows that phone and computer technology is almost completely under government control, unless you consistently encrypt at a very high level. Even so, the equipment and operating systems themselves have enough entry-points for the government.

A “consent app” that records two people agreeing to have sex is as good as sending the agreement in the mail to the police.

As a matter of fact, that is the intended purpose of such agreements in the event of post-coital problems.

All these years, the left has been blaming those near-mythical ” Christian fundies” for dragging the government into the bedroom.

Now,  feminists have sent the police and courts a gold-embossed invitation to participate in people’s sex lives..… and people are cheering.

 

 

UK, France, On Verge Of Kafkaesque Police State

Posted on by

The Guardian sounds a warning about the acceleration of surveillance in the UK and France:

Two British MPs, Tom Watson and David Davis, crossed the party divide and with campaigning organisation Liberty, won a legal challenge against the rushed, undemocratic Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (Dripa), passed in July 2014.

The High Court found that Dripa was unlawful because it did not adequately ensure that access to, and use of, communications data (though not its collection) was limited to what was necessary, appropriate and proportionate for preventing and detecting serious crime.

The decision has been welcomed for, finally, recognising in the UK what a number of other countries and a slew of independent examiners have demanded: proper judicial oversight of a “general retention regime on a potentially massive scale”. Where it falls down, as do many of those reports, is in accepting, implicitly or explicitly, the euphemistic re-characterisation of mass surveillance as “bulk interception” or “bulk collection”, thus endorsing an incursion into our private lives, papers, thoughts and communications that has no precedent in the law of the land.
Advertisement

Disappointingly, however, the Dripa victory is likely short-lived. Immediately, the Home Office declared its disagreement with the High Court’s decision, pledging to appeal. And of course, the Conservative government has already made abundantly clear its intention to enact a single, comprehensive law – the so-called “snooper’s charter” – which many fear would unleash a tidal wave of surveillance at political and executive discretion.

This is where the other side of the channel comes in. Late on Thursday 23 July, in France’s highest constitutional body, the last safeguard of the rule of law fell, approving what is, by all measures, an intrusive, comprehensive, virtually-unchecked surveillance law.

A pipe-dream for two years, the French law gathered momentum in March this year in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attack, and was put together in the French parliament under emergency procedures, drastically reducing discussion time and preventing any meaningful debate. The law was overwhelmingly approved by parliament in June and immediately referred to the constitutional council by nearly everyone who could do so, including François Hollande – the first time the president has deferred a law voted by parliament in the Fifth Republic.
France approves ‘Big Brother’ surveillance powers despite UN concern

The case also attracted an unheard of number of amicus briefs, many of which were made public, and most of which involved an impassioned cry about the unprecedented incursion on civil liberties that the law mandates.

And yet, despite this, the French council approved, with very few exceptions, a law that allows intelligence agencies to monitor phone calls and emails without prior judicial authorisation; to require internet service providers to install “black boxes” that filter all internet traffic, combing everyone’s metadata in order to identify deviant behaviours based on unknown parameters and provide access to the agencies; and to bug cars, homes and keyboards for images, sound and data.

All of this, of course, is discussed as being targeted at “suspected terrorists”. But all of it, equally and more significantly, touches us all; anyone and everyone who traverses the internet. The law’s goal is to improve the agencies’ tools for a large variety of vaguely stated purposes: terrorism, but also political surveillance, competitive intelligence for France’s major economic, industrial and scientific interests, the fight against organised crime, and goodness knows what else to come.”

Privacy Expert Questions Europe’s Migrant Crisis

Posted on by

Privacy Surgeon.com:

I’m starting to believe the so-called “migration crisis” facing Europe is little more than a tragic confidence trick. Worryingly, however, it involves dangerous consequences for the rights of every EU resident.

I’m not being heartless. Yes, thousands of refugees have lost their lives in the struggle to reach EU borders. Many more are living in a desperate plight, often at the mercy of human traffickers. That’s not my point.

Relatively few of us have genuinely got to grips with the realities of this situation. It’s a massively complex issue that goes to the heart of geopolitics and national dynamics, but intelligent people should not be sucked into the orchestrated rhetoric that is being peddled. This isn’t the first time we’ve faced such circumstances – and it certainly won’t be the last.

The migration issue is trending across the political landscape of nearly all EU countries. Emerging from the hysteria over rising numbers of asylum seekers is a mix of innovative and humane solutions. Sadly, the “crisis” is also spotlighting the very worst of Europe, spewing out a raft of reactions that defy the very basis of the values that Europe is supposed to uphold.

Instead of making an effort to find a rational way through the difficult issues, some governments have cheered on a contagion mentality which has genuinely terrified entire populations that the barbarians are at the gate. It feels like Donald Trump’s shadow has fallen across Europe.

At one level (though certainly not for the migrants themselves) the situation is nowhere near as dramatic as some media outlets are portraying. At another level, the crisis is far worse for Europe than anyone could imagine. This situation could trigger a backlash for civil liberties across the EU.

Let’s deal first with the raw figures.

At the risk of simplification, here is the top level statistic. The EU’s external border force, Frontex, which monitors the flow of people arriving at Europe’s borders, says some 340,000 migrants have been detected at EU borders since the beginning of 2015. That compares with 123,500 in the same period last year.

My response is “what’s the big deal?”

[Lila: Exactly my reaction. Anyone who has actually been in populous, poor, or war-torn countries, would find the numbers nothing so extraordinary.]

…….

During World War II, refugees flooded from Germany to Switzerland, as any Sound of Music fan will remember. Between 1933 and 1939, about 200,000 Jews fleeing Nazism were able to find refuge in France. At around that time several hundred thousand Spanish Republicans fled to France after their loss to the Nationalists in the Spanish Civil War. Unlike the EU of today, nations coped with such circumstances.

It’s true that the current headline figures can look dramatic. More than 300,000 migrants have risked their lives trying to cross the Mediterranean to Europe so far this year, according to the UN. This compares with 219,000 for the whole of 2014.

Nearly 200,000 people have landed in Greece since January this year, while another 110,000 made it to Italy.

To put the current situation into a statistical perspective, imagine a town of 10,000 people calling emergency meetings and getting into a froth of paranoia because ten migrants show up at the town hall office. 

Having said that, the total population of the EU member states is just over half a billion. Is anyone seriously arguing on any basis of rationality that a region of five hundred million people can’t find a way to absorb a peak of an extra half million migrants? In the view of many observers, this isn’t so much a migrant crisis as it is a crisis of political fragility over Europe’s teetering economy and employment.

To put the current situation into a statistical perspective, imagine a town of 10,000 people calling emergency meetings and getting into a froth of paranoia because ten migrants show up at the town hall office. Most of us would condemn such a response.

In line with this reasoning, let’s try to put the situation is a historical context.

Some people might like to forget that the decade leading up to 2001 saw the one of the bloodiest conflicts of modern times – and right on Europe’s doorstep. The Bosnian and Yugoslav wars saw genocide that murdered between 100,000 and 200,000 people (depending on whose figures you accept). States that are now happily part of the European family of nations were obliterating entire communities at the time your fifteen year old child was born. Now, all is forgiven – and almost forgotten.

But at the time, there was misery and human displacement at a scale that people these days can barely understand. Vast waves of refugees poured out of the carnage and tried for a new life in Europe and elsewhere.

Europe whines about a “crisis” of having to deal with an overflow that’s equivalent to less than one tenth of one percent of its population. Compare this to what Croatia agreed to burden at the time of the conflict.

The U.S. Ambassador to Croatia, Peter Galbraith, tried to put the number of refugees in Croatia into perspective during an interview in 1993. He said the situation would be the equivalent of the United States taking in 30,000,000 refugees. The number of Bosnian refugees in Croatia stood at 588,000. Serbia took in 252,130 refugees from Bosnia, while other former Yugoslav republics received a total of 148,657 people.”