Sacramento, California - Yvette Felarca White Nationalist Assault

Sacramento, California UNDEMOCRATIC CRIMINAL 'ANTI-FA' ASSAULT https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uuWoQfZgW7M Hysterical 'anti-fa' (anti-European) Yvette Felarca assaulting white nationalist protester, while subverting American democracy, 26 June 2016. Meanwhile the 'Village People' of militarised police dress-ups, Sacramento Police, stand by doing nothing much, other than modelling their impressive padding.

Germany - Government Political Persecution & Suppression of pro-German Interests Opposition - Undemocratic NPD Ban Attempt

ꕤ Article SOURCE https://archive.is/9uALx Original Source http://www.npd-fraktion-mv.de/index.php?com=news&view=article&id=1917&mid=1 GOOGLE TRANSLATED {German to English} NPD National Democratic Party of Germany (Nationaldemokratische Partei Deutschlands) Website http://www.npd.de/ [access via Tor Browser, if blocked] NPD ban proceedings Created on Wednesday 09 December 2015 The opening of the main proceedings before the Federal Constitutional Court against the NPD is a blow against the true democracy. With the convening of the hearings in March 2016, the only real opposition party is led into the ban and are thus silenced. Stefan Köster, Parliamentary Secretary of the NPD Group, said: "The Karlsruhe judges are faced with a big task. On them it will be to decide the extent to which the Federal Republic has already developed into a totalitarian regime. A ban on the NPD is not a visible sign of the strong rule of law, but would be a proof of the end of basic democratic values. The sham democrats of the established parties of the CDU and SPD as well as the alleged opposition of the Greens and the Left, as it betrayed German interests on a daily basis. While indulging in a capitalism and foreign bondage, the other life internationalism, they jointly opened the end of our identity floodgates. The parliamentary groups scuffling, as the parliamentary parties in order, rather than to put the table scraps of the globalizers people and homeland to the center of their actions. This basic attitude we can daily experience in the parliament. " The first closure case was in 2003 failed. Now try the countries, without the participation of the Bundestag and the Federal Government, a second attempt. Once again, it is questionable whether the once rated as procedural obstacles undercover agents were actually withdrawn, or whether they call remains with criminal offenses or methods to organize them. "The NPD is with their goals firmly on the floor of the democratic constitutional order. Your [accusation is] a misanthropic ideology and xenophobia, belongs to the mendacious vocabulary pseudo democratic Hetzer. That's Newspeak, as Orwell wrote Georg in `1984'. Rather, the NPD has recognized people and nation as the historical and cultural dimensions, must be geared to each policy and will succeed the jurisprudence of the Federal Constitutional Court. Just because we speak out against the integration of foreigners, however, grant a right of access, we stand for the preservation of all peoples and their cultures grown a "Koster commented in conclusion. Created on Wednesday 09 December 2015 Source https://archive.is/9uALx Original Source http://www.npd-fraktion-mv.de/index.php?com=news&view=article&id=1917&mid=1 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Not sure what 'hetzer' is. Think it is related to 'Volksverhetzer', which is the typical German current-day US-aligned neo-fascist authorities charge of 'incitement' ... levelled at anyone that is in genuine opposition to these phoney German authorities and thus levelled at pro German interests. Germany must still be under foreign occupation and  control some 70 years after the end of WWII, as there is no other explanation for this kind of insanity and totalitarianism in what purports to be a 'free' and 'democratic' Germany, selling phoney US-modelled 'European values' to the indoctrinated and uninformed masses. Germany is currently a totalitarian state. The more I read about NPD, the more I like. Good luck, NPD.  ❤ Edit:   The NPD supporters in this article are a bit more radical in appearance than I imagined:  https://archive.is/PBhVw Don't know what proportion of the party followers would look like that cluster of guys at some political event.  But if they're anything like the look of guys, it might be an idea to stick to regular, conservative hairstyles and appearances ... if they actually want to further their political cause. Translated the comments.  Apparently, there's something like 6,000 supporters (not confirmed) to 80-million Germans & they're trying to shut down this political party.   Commenter re article refers to radical immigrant religion as the greater threat. Chancellor Angela Merkel DISRESPECTS Flag of the German Nation ꕤ

National Sovereignty vs European Union

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1489643/Vote-for-EU-constitution-or-risk-new-Holocaust-says-Brussels.html Vote for EU constitution or risk new Holocaust, says Brussels By David Rennie in Brussels 12:05AM BST 09 May 2005   A senior European Commissioner marked VE Day yesterday by accusing Eurosceptics of risking a return to the Holocaust by clinging to "nationalistic pride". Margot Wallstrom, a Swede and the commissioner who must sell the draft constitution to voters, argued that politicians who resisted pooling national sovereignty risked a return to Nazi horrors of the 1930s and 1940s. Mrs Wallstrom, vice-president of the commission for institutional relations and communications, was speaking in the former Jewish ghetto of Terezin in the Czech Republic. She blamed the Second World War on "nationalistic pride and greed, and … international rivalry for wealth and power". The EU had replaced such rivalry with an historic agreement to share national sovereignty. Her fellow commissioners also issued a joint declaration, stating that EU citizens should pay tribute to the dead of the Second World War by voting Yes to the draft constitution for Europe. The commissioners also gave the EU sole credit for ending the Cold War, making no mention of the role of Nato and the United States. Richard Shepherd, the Tory MP for Aldridge-Brownhills, said it was "breathtaking" to link Nazism to the defence of national sovereignty. "It's a monstrous rewriting of history to promote a profoundly undemocratic project." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1489643/Vote-for-EU-constitution-or-risk-new-Holocaust-says-Brussels.html ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT Blast from the past:  2005. Check out the US puppet No. 1, Sweden and the propaganda: Pay tribute to the dead:  Vote YES! But the dead didn't die in vain, so that their nations would be usurped by supranational bodies and corporate interests. Meanwhile, the US refuse to stand by the 1998 Rome Statute (re war crimes, genocide etc) because it means avoiding prosecution for war crimes ... so the US uses the argument that to be party to the Rome Statute is an assignment of national sovereignty contrary to the US Constitution, or something like that. And here's US puppet Sweden using preposterous emotionally manipulative propaganda and alluding to promises of some non-competitive and eternally peaceful 'European' nirvana, to urge sovereign nations to "share national sovereignty." It doesn't matter who voted for this or which politicians agreed:  national sovereignty cannot be assigned and these agreements are void, in my opinion.  lol Stand up, Europe. Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe (TCE) (commonly referred to as the European Constitution or as the Constitutional Treaty) Would have replaced the existing European Union treaties with a single text establishing:  Charter of Fundamental Rights Qualified Majority Voting into policy areas which are decided by unanimity among member states  [ ** I'm not following what is ultimately in effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_establishing_a_Constitution_for_Europe ꕤ

CENSORSHIP - German Citizens Being Raped by Stasi, Merkel's Government, Co-Opted Left, & Facebook

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://swedishsurveyor.com/2015/09/16/stasi-veteran-will-assist-german-government-in-facebook-censorship/ #migpol #eupol #merkel .@HeikoMaas Censorship STASI-veteran will assist German government in Facebook censorship Anette Kahane – former Stasi agent who will assist the German government in monitoring and censoring dissenting citizens. Politically incorrect Germans who voice their skepticism can look forward to censorship – at least on Facebook. Minister of Justice, Heiko Maas, has had quiet enough of the uppity Germans who have the gall to criticize the ongoing population replacement so last week he sent an open letter to Facebook demanding that the social-media company commence systematically erasing “xenophobic” material. [ ...] “The goal is to ease identification of criminal statements” – says Heiko Maas to Bild. The task force’s members are appointed by the government and Facebook, but the left-wing organization Network against Nazis (“Netz gegen Nazis”) will also be represented. The network was founded in the year 2007 by the Antonio Amadeu Trust, led by the Jewish-German left-wing activist Anette Kahne who, during the years 1974-82, worked as a secret agent for the East German Security Service known as Stasi. SOURCE Link  |  here ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT State oppression, wearing a PC disguise. Co-opted left. Ordinary German citizens are being raped by the state, and by the co-opted left that acts in favour of foreign interests rather than the interests of ordinary, working Germans. The Germany people are being denied a voice and they're being denied information by a suppressive government and by these co-opted left-wing political-correctness Nazis. It's an outrage. The government is acting in the service of imperialist foreign policy, aligned with US and other corporate agenda, and the social consequences are catastrophic for European peoples. The consequences of US foreign policy alignment (ie mass displacement abroad) are being dumped on the ordinary working Germans. Ordinary Germans, and disadvantaged Germans, are being even further disadvantaged, both socially and economically, by the influx of the consequences of: (a) foreign policy; (b) Merkel's obliging open-door to Germany policy; (c) draw-card German welfare policy in relation to newcomers that are teaming in -- from everywhere. All of the above is encouraged by various brainwashed leftist NGO airheads, who are aligned with the political pseudo-left. The co-opted pseudo-left complements imperialist policy (instead of fighting it) -- they're the enforcers upon the working-class who are without a voice or representation. The NGO airheads and the left airheads put foreign and imperialist interests ahead of interests of ordinary Germans. The NGO brainwashed and their  pseudo-left partners wish to dispense with gender, social, national and territorial borders. The pseudo-left (that's aligned with the brainwashed NGO whackos) aim to promote Germany's inclusion in the European Union -- instead of protecting the interests of ordinary Germans, as one would expect of the left of politics. Now ordinary Germans cannot even complain on social media about what they are being subjected to, and the oppressive German government appoints pseudo left-wing social media Nazis to enforce silence. This is absolute bullsh*t. Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ

Legal Advice on Extra-Judicial Assassination Drone Strikes & How the British Establishment Works - Syria

ꕤ Article SOURCE http://www.globalresearch.ca/i-can-reveal-the-legal-advice-on-drone-strikes-and-how-the-establishment-works/5475352 I Can Reveal the Legal Advice on Drone Strikes, and How the British Establishment Works By Craig Murray Global Research, September 11, 2015 Craig Murray 9 September 2015 Region: Europe, Middle East & North Africa Theme: Law and Justice, Militarization and WMD In-depth Report: PALESTINE This may be the most important article I ever post, because it reveals perfectly how the Establishment works and how the Red Tories and Blue Tories contrive to give a false impression of democracy. It is information I can only give you because of my experience as an insider. It is a definitive proof of the validity of the Chomskian propaganda model. It needs a fair bit of detail to do this, but please try and read through it because it really is very, very important. After you have finished, if you agree with me about the significance, please repost, (you are free to copy), retweet, add to news aggregators (Reddit etc) and do anything you can to get other people to pay attention. The government based its decision to execute by drone two British men in Syria on “Legal Opinion” from the Attorney-General for England and Wales, Jeremy Wright, a politician, MP and Cabinet Minister. But Wright’s legal knowledge comes from an undistinguished first degree from Exeter and a short career as a criminal defence barrister in Birmingham. His knowledge of public international law is virtually nil. I pause briefly to note that there is no pretence of consulting the Scottish legal system. The only legal opinion is from the Attorney General for England and Wales who is also Honorary Advocate General for Northern Ireland. So Jeremy Wright’s role is as a cypher. He performs a charade. The government employs in the FCO a dozen of the most distinguished public international lawyers in the world. When the Attorney-General’s office needs an Opinion on public international law, they ask the FCO to provide it for him to sign. The only known occasion when this did not happen was the Iraq War. Then the FCO Legal Advisers – unanimously – advised the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith, that to invade Iraq was illegal. Jack Straw asked the Attorney General to dismiss the FCO chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood (Goldsmith refused). Blair sent Goldsmith to Washington where the Opinion was written for him to sign by George Bush’s lawyers. [I know this sounds incredible, but it is absolutely true]. Sir Michael Wood’s deputy, Elizabeth Wilmshurst, resigned in protest. In consequence Blair and Straw decided that, again for the first time ever, the FCO’s chief legal adviser had to be appointed not from within the FCO legal advisers, who had all declared the war on Iraq to be illegal, but from outside. They had to find a distinguished public international lawyer who was prepared to argue that the war on Iraq had been legal. That was a very small field. Blair and Straw thus turned to Benjamin Netanyahu’s favourite lawyer, Daniel Bethlehem. Daniel Bethlehem had represented Israel before the Mitchell Inquiry into violence against the people of Gaza, arguing that it was all legitimate self-defence. He had also supplied the Government of Israel with a Legal Opinion that the vast Wall they were building in illegally occupied land, surrounding and isolating all the major Palestinian communities and turning them into large prisons, was also legal. Daniel Bethlehem is an extreme Zionist militarist of the most aggressive kind, and close to Mark Regev, Israel’s new Ambassador to the UK. Daniel Bethlehem had developed, in his work for Israel, an extremist doctrine of the right of States to use pre-emptive self-defence – a doctrine which would not be accepted by the vast majority of public international lawyers. He clinched his appointment by Blair as the FCO chief legal adviser by presenting a memorandum to the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee in 2004 outlining this doctrine, and thus de facto defending the attack on Iraq and the Bush/Blair doctrine. A key sentence of Daniel Bethlehem’s memorandum is this     It must be right that states are able to act in self-defence in circumstances where there is evidence of further imminent attacks by terrorist groups, even if there is no specific evidence of where such an attack will take place or of the precise nature of the attack. There is a fundamental flaw in this argument. How can you be certain that an attack in “imminent”, if you are not certain where or what it is? Even if we can wildly imagine a scenario where the government know of an “imminent” attack, but not where or what it is, how could killing someone in Syria stop the attack in the UK? If a team were active, armed and in course of operation in the UK – which is needed for “imminent” – how would killing an individual in Syria prevent them from going through with it? It simply does not add up as a practical scenario. Interestingly, Daniel Bethlehem does not pretend this is accepted international law, but specifically states that     The concept of what constitutes an “imminent” armed attack will develop to meet new circumstances and new threats  [EDIT:  ie ARBITRARY] Bethlehem is attempting to develop the concept of “imminent” beyond any natural interpretation of the word “imminent”. Daniel Bethlehem left the FCO in 2011. But he had firmly set the British government doctrine on this issue, while all FCO legal advisers know not to follow it gets you sacked. I can guarantee you that Wright’s Legal Opinion states precisely the same argument that David Bethlehem stated in his 2004 memorandum. Knowing how these things work, I am prepared to wager every penny I own that much of the language is identical. It was New Labour, the Red Tories, who appointed Daniel Bethlehem, and they appointed him precisely in order to establish this doctrine. It is therefore a stunning illustration of how the system works, that the only response of the official “opposition” to these extrajudicial executions is to demand to see the Legal Opinion, when it comes from the man they themselves appointed. The Red Tories appointed him precisely because they knew what Legal Opinion would be given on this specific subject. They can read it in Hansard. So it is all a charade. Jeremy Wright pretends to give a Legal Opinion, actually from FCO legal advisers based on the “Bethlehem Doctrine”. The Labour Party pretends, very unconvincingly, to be an opposition. The Guardian, apparently the leading “opposition” intellectual paper, publishes articles by its staff neo-con propagandists Joshua Rozenberg (married to Melanie Phillips) and Rafael Behr strongly supporting the government’s new powers of extrajudicial execution. In summer 2012 Joshua Rozenberg presented a programme on BBC Radio 4 entitled “Secret courts, drones and international law” which consisted mostly of a fawning interview with … Daniel Bethlehem. The BBC and Sky News give us wall to wall justification of the killings. So the state, with its neo-con “opposition” and media closely in step with its neo-con government, seamlessly adopts a new power to kill its own subjects based on secret intelligence and secret legal advice, and a very weird definition of “imminent” that even its author admits to be outside current legal understanding. That is how the state works. I do hope you find that helpful. This article has been updated to reflect the fact the Daniel Bethlehem is now retired from the FCO. SOURCE http://www.globalresearch.ca/i-can-reveal-the-legal-advice-on-drone-strikes-and-how-the-establishment-works/5475352 ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- SUMMARY 'Red Tories' = British Labour Party - aka 'New Labour' 'Blue Tories' = British Conservatives - ie the Tories Subject = extra-judicial drone killings / extra-judicial assassinations region = Syria legal opinion = bollocks state =  law unto itself / making it up as it goes / arbitrary definition etc dissenters - ie legal dissenters =  threat of being fired Jeremy Wright 'Legal Opinion' = charade FCO = Foreign & Commonwealth Office | Link | here FCO *UNANIMOUSLY* Advised:  ILLEGAL to INVADE IRAQ advised:  British Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith Lord Goldsmith = Peter Goldsmith (Baron Goldsmith) = barrister & attorney-general = announced resignation same day as Tony BLAIR stepped down = currently works in private capacity Link | here Jack STRAW Sought Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith dismissal of FCO chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood Jack STRAW Anglican Labour Cabinet - Gordon govt Cabinet - Blair govt Cabinet = 1997-2010 *Home Secretary - internal affairs; immigration *Foreign Secretary - foreign relations & intelligence Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith = refused to fire:  FCO chief Legal Adviser, Sir Michael Wood Tony Blair = Sent Goldsmith Washington George Bush lawyers = write 'legal opinion' = for Lord Goldsmith, British Attorney-General to SIGN Elizabeth Wilmshurst Deputy of Sir Michael Wood (ie the FCO chief Legal Adviser) = RESIGNS in protest As result: Jack STRAW + Tony BLAIR decide to break with tradition for first time EVER FCO chief adviser to be appointed from OUTSIDE the FCO (not from the FCO legal advisers, who had ALL declared war on IRAQ to be illegal) Jack STRAW + Tony BLAIR turn to: DANIEL BETHLEHEM =  Benjamin Netanyahu 'favourite lawyer' DANIEL BETHLEHEM = extreme Zionist militarist = extremist pre-emptive 'self-defence' doctrine = such pre-emptive doctrine: not accepted by vast majority of international lawyers DANIEL BETHLEHEM = legal opinion that legal to build Wall built = on ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED LAND (surrounding& isolating all major Palestinian communities & turning them into large prisons) DANIEL BETHLEHEM = close to:  MARK REGEV Israel new Ambassador to UK DOCTRINE Daniel Bethlehem developed in work for Israel = right of STATES to use PRE-EMPTIVE 'self-defence' DANIEL BETHLEHEM = de facto defended attack on IRAQ & the BUSH-BLAIR DOCTRINE (previously written by BUSH admin lawyers for  Peter Goldsmith, Attorney-General, Britain) KEY to DANIEL BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE - STATES - 'self-defence' - 'further imminent attacks' - 'IMMINENT'  [arbitrary & accepted on the go to fit whatever circumstances develop as 'new'] - no specific EVIDENCE - no precise NATURE of attack RESULT no EVIDENCE required arbitrary: make up definitions, as you will Stretch definition of 'imminent' threat legalise state extra-judiciary assassinations DANIEL BETHLEHEM = was appointed to FCO = by Jack STRAW & John BLAIR DANIEL BETHLEHEM =  leaves FCO, 2011 Britain's BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE = firmly set British government doctrine = all FCO legal advisers know to follow it or get sacked JEREMY WRIGHT = legal opinion PRECISELY SAME as DANIEL BETHLEHEM legal opinion BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE = not even accepted under international law = what constitutes 'imminent armed attack' is arbitrary *BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE attempts to "develop the concept of 'imminent' beyond natural interpretation of word" DANIEL BETHLEHEM = was appointed by New Labour (Red Tories) - ie Labour Party, UK = appointed PRECISELY because they knew WHAT legal opinion would be given JEREMY WRIGHT = pretends to give legal opinion = ACTUALLY from FCO legal advisers,  BASED on BETHLEHEM DOCTRINE Labour Party UK ...  PRETENDS to be in 'opposition' Meanwhile: PRESS | MEDIA IN DEMOCRACY 'OPPOSITION' PRESS THE GUARDIAN = 'opposition' intellectual press outlet = publishes articles by "its staff neo-con propagandists"  [see propagandists] = strongly SUPPORT govt NEW POWERS OF EXTRA-JUDICIAL EXECUTION OTHER PRESS BBC =  wall-to-wall justification broadcast, for extra-judicial killings Sky News =  wall-to-wall justification broadcast, for extra-judicial killings MURRAY’S CONCLUSION MEDIA  >   closely in step with its neo-con government =   seamlessly adopts new power kill state subjects =   based on secret intel & secret legal advice Assange Transnational Security Elite, Carving Up the World Using Your Tax Money London  OCT8 Antiwar Mass Assembly (2011) Link  |  here ꕤ

Suppressive Police State - USA

SOURCE http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2015-09-04/apd-tracks-social-media/ APD Tracks Social Media Local social media monitoring software company met with shady digital spying group By John Anderson, Fri., Sept. 4, 2015 Snaptrends software can assign a geographical digital boundary which allows the user "to see conversation clusters and activity heat maps" within the defined area, according to Snap Trends' Matthew Hammer. As the world increasingly becomes glued to social media, it comes as little surprise that law enforcement would join in. But what some Facebook users or Twitter followers may not be aware of is how local law enforcement is using software to monitor their posts and tweets. Founded in 2012 as a private company and located just off Capital of Texas High­way, Snap Trends develops software that aggregates public information collected from social media. The company's website claims their software "builds a clear view of social conversations when and where they occur, the influencers driving them, and why." A Feb. 13 letter from Snap Trends Director of Sales Ken Ross to APD Sgt. Jeff Greenwalt, discovered in a Chron­icle open records request to APD and DPS, asserts that Snap Trends "developed its software intelligence system to serve public safety organization [sic] and national intelligence agencies in the United States." Ross further explained the "system uses advance [sic] algorithms and processes to procure this high density social data footprint." Other documents reveal that both APD and DPS have current subscriptions to Snaptrends software, spending $6,370 and $24,200 respectively in the past year. APD Public Information Specialist Jenni­fer Herber informed the Chronicle that APD began using Snaptrends software on March 1, 2013. DPS began using it one month later, according to DPS Public Information Officer Tom Vinger. DPS currently has 13 employees licensed to use the software, while APD has 25 officers with access. Emails obtained from APD demonstrate the Snaptrends software "makes it easy to share profiles, groups and persons-of-interests" and "can even integrate custom Facebook accounts." But its main feature is using geolocation to narrow a search using a "Poly Tool" which, according to a Snap Trends email, allows law enforcement "to gather pertinent information from social media platforms over specific areas without drawing in irrelevant content from unwanted areas .... This allows you to monitor precise locations such as parade routes, major highways or areas where protests are occurring." When asked if APD purchased the software for such events, Herber explained: "Real­-time analysis of open sources such as social media has been used to predict crimes and to help law enforcement respond more quickly as needed including, for example, stopping active shooters, tracking gang activity, and anticipating public protests that could escalate into violence." Additionally, she said the mission of the Austin Regional Intelligence Center (ARIC), where the software is used, "is to maximize the region's ability to detect, prevent, apprehend, and respond to criminal/terrorist activity." Other documents show Snap Trends partnered with a private company called Esri, which develops mapping software called ArcGIS and has also been used by APD in the past. According to internal emails obtained via open records request, APD Senior Crime Analyst Tess Sherman used the Esri software to monitor Occupy Austin's first demonstration at City Hall in October 2011. Sherman pointed out the mapping function "would be neat-o to try. Although it may just end up as a bunch of dots downtown since a lot of it is real-time comments from the scene." Despite receiving tech support from the company, APD Police Planner Nora Evans replied to Sherman, "I don't know a lot about Twitter so maybe you can figure it out." But Snap Trends' emails indicate the company offered to provide tech support for its own software to at least 16 APD employees. What were the police looking for? In one email, Snap Trends Account Manager Mark Klasson sent APD a document titled "Keywords." Assist­ant City Attorney Cary Grace has asked the Texas Attorney General's office to exempt that document and others from public disclosure. As of press time, the AG's office has not made a decision regarding the exemption. Expanded surveillance remains a possibility, and a hack in July of the Italian surveillance software company Hacking Team gave hints of what could be on the horizon. The hack shed light on some of the darker sides of digital spying, including conversations between Hacking Team and Snap Trends that revolved around a potential partnership. Instead of monitoring public information, Hacking Team's Remote Control Sys­tem software infects remote computers and mobile phones, allowing control over them. Reporters Without Borders has called Hacking Team "digital mercenaries" and "corporate enemies of the Internet." According to the hacked emails, available on the Wikileaks website, in March, Snap Trends CEO Eric Klasson met in Dubai for the "first exploratory meeting" with members of Hacking Team. Emails show the Dubai meeting was also attended by Snap Trends' partner Chenega, which resells Snap Trends' software internationally. After the meeting, Hacking Team's Philippe Vinci summarized: "The combination of each parties [sic] capabilities, Massive Social Media monitoring and Tactical Targets' Device interception, could bring a lot of value to customers and prospective customers of each party." Replying to that email, Klasson wrote, "I agree that a joint effort to sort this is something the market will respond to favorably (and quickly)." The three companies kept up their contact through at least early June, including a meeting in Prague, but the emails lack specific details about the collaboration. Asked by the Chronicle to describe Snap Trends' relationship with Hacking Team, however, Snap­ Trends Marketing Director Matthew Ham­mer wrote via email that "Snap Trends knows of the Hacking Team, but has no relationship with them, and we don't plan on doing any business with them in the future." Open records requests did not yield documents indicating that APD or DPS have purchased Hacking Team's software; nor is there is any evidence that Snaptrends software currently operates as malware. A LexisNexis 2014 "Social Media Use in Law Enforcement" report (available on the Snap Trends' website) which surveyed "federal, state and local law enforcement professionals" found that 81% "actively use social media as a tool in investigations," and 78% of current users plan "to use it even more in the coming year." Snap Trends' Hammer claims "hundreds" of U.S. law enforcement departments or agencies have bought their software. But raising questions about the effectiveness and accountability of this type of monitoring, the LexisNexis study also concluded that "52% of agencies still don't have a formal process for using social media for investigations." SOURCE http://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2015-09-04/apd-tracks-social-media/ ---------------------- ꕤ ---------------------- COMMENT APD = Austin Police Dept DPS = Dept of Public Safety (I'm guessing) Check out the policing techniques at work in totalitarian, surveillance & militarised police-state, USA:  straight out of the Czarist-Russia style suppression tools manual -- with a modern, digital technology, mapping & harnessing social media data, twist. The power to grossly violate the civil liberties of ordinary Americans is at the disposal of Texas police (and has been exercised since 2013).  But it is not limited to Texas:  many other US law enforcement agencies have adopted these same practices.  It's primarily for maintenance of plutocratic power, although law enforcement representatives will, of course, argue otherwise ... while they make application, seeking to hide their violations of freedom and democracy. Note, particularly, the intention to keep this secret police monitoring from public knowledge. So much for what is supposed to be accountability and democratic government transparency -- which is intended to also extend to government agencies, such as the police.  Abuses of civil liberties such as this go a long way towards explaining why resistant activists, hacktivists, whistleblowers, and whistleblower journalists and publishers, such as WikiLeaks, are so vital. I Imagine that this information would be relevant to protesters, activists, unionists, political groups, students, and all and any other persons exercising rightful political freedoms, in what is supposed to be democratic society. PS In case you think this is limited to USA and doesn't apply to you, think again ... and maybe do some Freedom of Information applications.  lol ꕤ

Undemocratic: EU Commission Breaks Promise for Greater Transparency - Secret TTIP US Trade Agreement

GOOGLE TRANSLATE / GERMAN ORIGINAL TTIP EU tightens secret Pose for TTIP documents German Economic News | Published: 19:08:15 18:14 clock The European Commission breaks its promise for greater transparency when TTIP. Because time and again documents were made public, the access to the documents of the national parliaments will be more difficult in the future. Cecilia Malmstrom now limited access to TTIP documents even more. (Photo: AP) "The European Commission is organizing the negotiations on the transatlantic FTA TTIP as transparent and as responsibly as possible," it says on the part of the EU Commission. Although some NGOs this greatly doubt. However, the Commission believes that it is probably handled too freely with the documents and information about TTIP. "After a few releases of confidential documents, the Commission had to make the decision to design the confidential report on the tenth round of negotiations in a secure reading room," said the Commission. Access to this confidential report will therefore now be even more difficult to see, even for the members of national parliaments. The reason: "This report also includes tactical considerations and our internal assessment of US positions," said Richard Kühnel, representatives of the European Commission in Germany on Friday in Berlin. "Such leaks weaken our negotiating position and make it harder to achieve the best result in the interest of Europe and its citizens. Despite all efforts to maximize transparency, we must try to prevent that. " According to the EU Commission "hitherto most transparent bilateral trade negotiations at all" are the TTIP negotiations. Periodically, the Commission consult with the governments of the 28 Member States and representatives of the European Parliament on the progress of negotiations. "The governments of the EU Member States have access to EU negotiating documents." However, informing the national parliaments was then a matter for the Member States - since, however, apparently confidential documents are made public, governments, the documents no longer simply to their parliamentarians hand off. The Commission generally so if Member States continue to be no problem even confidential documents to their respective parliaments in a secure way. "We support the easiest possible access to documents, provided that confidentiality is maintained," said Kühnel. Just not more in the document to the 10th round of negotiations, such as the decision of the EU Trade Commissioner Malmström shows. t the beginning of the week WikiLeaks had launched a fundraising campaign. Up to 100,000 euros are to be collected in order to move potential whistleblowers to publish from TTIP documents. "The secrecy of TTIP casts a shadow on the future of European democracy," said WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. SOURCE | German http://deutsche-wirtschafts-nachrichten.de/2015/08/20/eu-verschaerft-geheim-haltung-fuer-ttip-unterlagen/ Compare the EU Commission's representations in the above article to the reality effective denial of access to EU member governments [ CLICK on image to enlarge ] COMMENT "governments of the EU Member States have access to EU negotiating documents" European Commission representative, Richard Kuhnel Yeah, they have 'access' - with excessive and unreasonable restrictions placed on that access. The reality is that this is yet another secret US trade deal, drawn in favour of corporations, at the expense of the public. This one's been kept from European governments and the public (to prevent the public mounting opposition), while generous access and influence has been granted to:  corporations. The European Commission promises of greater transparency amount to nothing because that's just what they were:  empty, nothing, PR / propaganda promises to pacify critics. Instead of addressing the fact that maintenance of secrecy concerning such an important agreement, amounts to undemocratic denial of information and opportunity for debate to the public, the EU Commission mouthpiece shifts the attention to the earlier leak of TTIP information and implies that this is the justification for the secrecy. But it is this very secrecy - this denial of transparency and denial of democracy - that would have originally led to what is therefore justifiable leak of information.  Facepalm. The reason these US trade agreements are being kept under wraps is that they're bad news. Information which should rightfully be in the public domain, is denied the public.  This denial of information is a denial of informed public consent to terms which are irreversible: Matt Kennard Centre for Investigative Journalism What is so scary about this is that corporations want to lock in their power. So they not only want increased power, they want to make impossible for sovereign governments to reverse the changes which are going to give them power. So, for example, with TTIP, if it passes with ISDS in it, the privatisation of the National Health Service (NHS) which is happening in the UK can never be reversed. More on US trade agreements:   VIDEO https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABDiHspTJww&t=1m34s ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- TRANSCRIPT ---------------------- ꕤ  ---------------------- Please Support journalist-publisher Julian Assange Under Siege Ecuador embassy London (3 Years) Detained 5 Years No Charge POLITICAL PERSECUTION FAQ & Support https://justice4assange.com/ ꕤ