GazeboflossUK

Government, Industry To Use Computer Microphones To Spy On 150 Million Americans Invasive surveillance and advertising obliterates even Minority Report style technology Paul Joseph Watson | September 6 2006 Private industry and eventually government is planning to use microphones in the computers of an estimated 150 million-plus Internet active Americans to spy on their lifestyle choices and build psychological profiles which will be used for surveillance and minority report style invasive advertising and data mining. Digital cable TV boxes, such as Scientific Atlantic, have had secret in-built microphones inside them since their inception in the late 1990's and these originally dormant devices were planned to be activated when the invasive advertising revolution arrived - 2006 marks that date. The advent of digital video recording devices such as TiVo (Sky Plus in the UK) introduced the creation of psychological algorithm profiles - databases on what programs you watched, how long you watched them for, which adverts you liked or didn't like. This information was retained by TiVo and sold to the highest bidders - an example being Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction during the 2003 Super Bowl half-time show - TiVo were able to compile lists of how many people had rewound the clip and how many times they had replayed it. Two way communications systems like OnStar also have the ability to tap into private conversations as Americans become increasingly conditioned, by means of the private sector, to having their every movement, web session and conversation tracked and catalogued by big brother. Each time a new flash application requests permission to run on newer computers, you will notice that a privacy setting box pops up asking if the particular website you are surfing can access your microphone and webcam. Though the webcam is external, the microphone is internal and is a standard feature of all new models. Now Google have gone a step further by announcing that they will use in-built microphones to listen in on user's background noise, be it television, music or radio - and then direct advertising at them based on their preferences. "The idea is to use the existing PC microphone to listen to whatever is heard in the background, be it music, your phone going off or the TV turned down. The PC then identifies it, using fingerprinting, and then shows you relevant content, whether that's adverts or search results, or a chat room on the subject," reports the Register. Since at least 150 million Americans are Internet-active they will all be potential targets for secret surveillance and the subsequent sell-off of all their information to unscrupulous data mining corporations and government agencies. The report cites the inevitability that the use and abuse of this technology will eventually be taken over by the state. "Pretty soon the security industry is going to find a way to hijack the Google feed and use it for full on espionage." The American public has already been brainwashed into thinking that having snooping software record their private phone conversations on behalf of the government is to protect them from terrorists and the Google program is just an entree to the expansion of these 1984 style technologies. The Bush administration has sold its warrantless NSA spying agenda as the "terrorist surveillance program," and has used its Neo-Con mouthpiece media organs to argue the insanity of "not listening in to Osama bin Laden when he calls the US," despite the fact that Al-Qaeda stopped using phones years before 9/11 when it was publicized that all bin Laden's calls were routinely intercepted anyway. NSA spying on Americans was spun as a necessary reaction to 9/11 and yet it had been taking place for at least a decade before. Firstly, the Echelon program has collected information in violation of the 4th Amendment from American citizen's phone calls since the early 90's at least. In addition, a 2001 European Parliament report stated that "within Europe all e-mail, telephone and fax communications are routinely intercepted" by the NSA. The fact that Echelon barely even merited a mention during the recent furore created by the original USA Today NSA spying piece goes to show how utterly useless our media are in recalling what has already been admitted and proven. In 1999 the Australian government admitted that they were part of an NSA led global intercept and surveillance grid in alliance with the US and Britain that could listen to "every international telephone call, fax, e-mail, or radio transmission." "As you would expect there are a large amount of radio communications floating around in the atmosphere, and agencies such as DSD collect those communications in the interests of their national security," said Bill Blick, Inspector General of Intelligence and Security and the man who oversaw the Australian government's intelligence apparatus. A large sector of Echelon is dedicated to industrial espionage. For example, in November 1999 the BBC reported that the NSA snooped on phone calls from a French firm bidding for a contract in Brazil. They passed the information on to an American competitor, which won the contract. Google's ceaseless drive to dominate Microsoft and reap untold profits has come at the expense of privacy as the company jettison's its "don't be evil" mandate and merges itself into a proxy NSA outfit, creating all the tools necessary for the state to suffocate its subjects under an inescapable high-tech panopticon control grid.

I do not! I've seen all the evidence from both sides and I think that I'm on the right side here! That's the whole reason and point behind being part of the 9/11 Truth Movement....that we think we have been lied to.

The sad thing is, they are NOT stupid and most people are too dim. Fringe Theories Harming 9/11 Truth Movement Five Years Later Part 1: The obstacles we have overcome, the dangers we face Paul Joseph Watson | September 5 2006 The 9/11 truth movement is characterized by an increasingly credible veneer - largely thanks to the 9/11 scholars. As media attention builds to a deafening crescendo in anticipation of the fifth anniversary of the attacks, it is necessary to step back and distance ourselves from the more outlandish 9/11 theories and offset their damaging effects. Over the course of the next week we will continue to take a critical and discerning look at the 9/11 truth movement, celebrating both its obvious measured progress while also highlighting areas of concern that need to be resolved before the next rung on the ladder to bringing criminal charges against the guilty parties can be climbed. Our sole purpose in this piece is to weed out and discredit an element of 9/11 embraced by 'conspiracy theorists' as oppose to 'skeptics' of the official story. We will treat conspiracy theories that are as implausible or more so than the government version, which in itself a conspiracy theory, with the same contempt - because they are harmful to the 9/11 truth movement as a whole. It is not the intention of this article to create in-fighting or bickering nor is it advantageous to attack anyone's character and that is why we refrain from citing any individuals by name. Many speculative tenets of what happened on 9/11 have been courted - including by this author - and then dropped after the evidence evaporates and common sense kicks in. We should be loathe to jettison reason and logic even in times of unparalleled absurdity. Advocates of the 'blue screen' or 'hologram' theory hold that the planes that hit the World Trade Center, or at least Flight 175, were ghost aircraft and that sophisticated image projection technology was used to fake the illusion of them entering the towers. The evidence they present to validate this notion is the contention that Flight 175 should have "bounced off" the tower yet sliced through it like a knife through butter. The vast majority of the evidence is supported not by scientific analysis of what one would expect to happen when a large commercial airliner impacts a skyscraper at over 500 miles per hour, but with grainy Internet videos and hastily interpreted statements made by news reporters at ground zero. If we are to believe, and the evidence suggests it to be so, that western intelligence agencies are carrying out acts of terror, to go to such lengths mandates the necessity of multi-layered fallback options if the criminals are caught red-handed. This is why a large scale terror attack is always shadowed by an almost identical government drill, as was the case with 9/11 and the 7/7 bombings. If significant and damning evidence were to be presented in a court of law powerful enough to have any impact that implicated high officials in acts of gross treason - the fallback option that it was "just part of the drill," remains as a last chance saloon. If we are to consider that some form of high-tech hologram technology was utilized as part of a David Copperfield style sound and lights magic show that only made it appear as if Flight 175 had hit the south tower - then we are seriously entertaining the notion that the criminals who ran the attack did not bother to construct any fallback explanation if this massive public stunt had gone wrong. What if the bombs inside the tower had failed due to faulty wiring or had only detonated a second after the hologram had been sent into the tower? How could that one be explained away? Who in their right mind would make such a huge gamble with no fallback option? There is one video that soundly debunks the blue screen theories and should be used to put this deception to bed for good. Japanese news footage of Flight 175 striking the south tower shows the fuselage of the aircraft briefly exiting the opposite face of the building before the entire plane is engulfed in flames from the exploding jet fuel (located well behind the nosecone). Watch the clip below. [media=350,225]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpw4FZcfiqM[/media] To maintain that this was a hologram necessitates that the "ghost plane" was also somehow superimposed inside the tower so it could be seen exiting at the exact right moment. This is a ridiculous concept. Here is a close-up frame of the nose exiting the tower. Here is debris from the fuselage of Flight 175 at ground zero. I could spend hours attempting to dismiss the multitude of claims made by blue screen advocates but I don't doubt that for every point I make they could uncover another grainy video or edited piece of eyewitness testimony to counter my argument. This is why I can only try and appeal to reason and rational thinking. If the criminals who organized and carried out 9/11 could execute the operation - a) in a manner that would have more or less the same psychological impact they were trying to achieve even if the planes had missed their targets (which one of them did) and b) by using the most straightforward means available and minimizing the potential that the plot would fail (using giant holograms and attempting to hoodwink millions watching both on television and in person is not the most straightforward means) Then they would choose those options. A great deal of the hit pieces we have already encountered and several more that will undoubtedly emerge on or around the fifth anniversary on Monday excel in setting up straw man arguments, attributing minority fringe theories to the entire 9/11 truth movement and then using them to debunk the entire field. Popular Mechanics seized upon the no planes at the WTC theory and dishonestly exhaulted it as a core argument of the 9/11 truth movement. Therefore it is our remit to distance ourselves from completely unsubstantiated theories which have the effect of eclipsing proven holes in the official story. The hologram theory is severely damaging to the credibility that the 9/11 truth movement has fought so hard to obtain and should therefore be sidelined and shunned at all costs.

It's definitely the case that people who are somehow on side with the government on this are the ones who are really are scrambling about with bogus information. Everytime there's an mainstream neocon article written about 9/11, it just repeats the "official" version of events and only wants to make us look like "crack pots" when we are deadly serious - asking serious questions. These questions are never answered. (well, some of them WE KNOW for sure)

have you read the Time article? The so-called "debunking" is like that of a 12 year old. It's aimed at the dim-witted out there. Seriously..

Well, I don't know much about that and there isn't a lot of info on it. I know Moussaoui 'says' he was to fly the 5th plane..... But we don't even need that information to show that there are serious questions that need to be addressed.

Haha, I was wondering how long it would take for someone to post this. Debunks???? How does it.....through rhetoric?? My god. It's all in the build up to 9/11/2006.........they are running scared. They can see the progress we are making and they never anticipated it.... I mean what sort of crap is this....?? and it's says... "People who believe the second explanation live in a very different world from those who believe the first. In world No. 2, al-Qaeda is not responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center. The U.S. government is. The Pentagon was not hit by a commercial jet; it was hit by a cruise missile. United Flight 93 did not crash after its occupants rushed the cockpit; it was deliberately taken down by a U.S. Air Force fighter. The entire catastrophe was planned and executed by federal officials in order to provide the U.S. with a pretext for going to war in the Middle East and, by extension, as a means of consolidating and extending the power of the Bush Administration." Yeah, put us in another "world" - that answers it.....idiots. And they always mention the cruise missile, when this is the area which there is least evidence, and most of us 9/11 truthers don't try and get involved with that because there isn't a case to prove that....but there is lots of other evidence in the other aspects of that day. Yes, Loose Change has it's problems in parts but that's something which they are working hard to correct in their final cut. And of course "Time" chooses to have a go at the Pentagon crash......how predictable.....they choose the area which is most uncertain and has always been the main discussion point by the mass media......I think that the lack of info on the pentagon is something which has been done a purpose - not releasing all the 70+ tapes showing what actually DID hit the pentagon in the name of 'national security' thus making it an easy target for outlandish theories which most of us don't truely believe in. It's such a lame article. Seriously.....if I didn't care about this I would say the same....it's worthless and only a carbon copy of similar so called "Debunking", haha, debunks nothing. It barely scratches the surface.... What does it achieve other than trying to make us out to be nutty.......nothing.....it's a HIT PIECE.....that's what it's meant to do!

No, no, no... Another false sentence trying to discredit my character. People like me are not involved in the crazy and outlandish theories that get branded around in the mainstream media propaganda "hit pieces". We have factual information, we have witness accounts, we have proof on video, we have scientific experts, we have professors and even government officials going public on 9/11 saying it's an inside job - yet none of these vaild questions get answered. More academics claim 9/11 was an inside job everyday which puts their jobs on the line. "conspiracy nut" this, "conspiracy nut" that. This sort of rubbish you people shout out ain't going to fly much longer. People want answers, not avoidance of the subject with "conspiracy nut" sort of comments. You know you both sound stupid, right? Propagandise the children It's sick.

No it isn't. Stop lying about what I think. What you are writing is very typical, I expect it.

No it doesn't. And others do lie. I'm not just saying this for fun - I have found that other sources lie, that's it.

It's the people who believe the government who are really running around clutching at straws. Repeating the same hollow arguments, put forward by the government, that caused so many people to spot their lies and show it as a fraud. If the amount of evidence we have to show that the government are lying was ignored in any other crime then it would be re-opened and all the questions would be addressed. But try and take the government to court over this and, well, it just gets blocked.

Father Of 9/11 Victim Says Government Ran Attack As Media Hit Pieces Continue Emotional shell game accusation of 'disgracing victim's memories' doesn't jive anymore P. J. Watson | September 4 2006 Another 9/11 family member has gone public to rubbish the conspiracy theory that the attacks were planned and executed by nineteen incompetent Arabs with box cutters who were getting drunk in a strip club the night before and barely even made it to the airport on time. Meanwhile, hit pieces against the 9/11 truth movement continue in the lead up to the fifth anniversary of the event. A familiar emotional shell game on the part of the debunkers is to proclaim that questioning any aspect of 9/11 disgraces the memory of the victims. This tactic is clearly not working anymore especially in light of the fact that Bill Doyle, representative of the largest group of 9/11 family members - says that half now completely distrust the official version of events. Bob McIlvaine's son Bobby was working for Merrill Lynch in the 103rd floor of the south tower when Flight 175 struck. He was likely one of the unfortunate individuals who obeyed the Port Authority's ridiculous order for workers to stay in the building and not evacuate even after Flight 11 had ploughed into the north tower. McIlvaine is convinced that the attacks were an inside job orchestrated by elements within the US government. "Today, there are no ifs or buts in my mind that this was an inside job. The US government orchestrated it with the help of MI6 and Pakistan and Mossad. What they are telling us is bullshit. The hijackers were patsies and Osama bin Laden was set up," McIlvaine told the London Independent. McIlvaine has since devoted his life to educating others on what really happened on 9/11. Despite the best efforts of Jewish American Adam Yehiye Gadahn to propagandize the reality of the Al-Qaeda myth, Americans are becoming increasingly skeptical of 9/11 and if the recent rash of hit pieces against the 9/11 truth movement are anything to go by, the establishment is stricken with concern. There were another two major 9/11 semi-debunking pieces over the weekend, one in the San Francisco Chronicle and one in Reuters. Expect a deluge of them for the next two weeks as the five year anniversary comes to pass. The most incongruous sentence from the Chronicle piece is where CIA involvement in 9/11 is characterized as "the epitome of preposterous beliefs that start with a conclusion and work backward to find evidence." Wasn't it media talking heads and government officials in the hours after the attacks who were reading off the same script and ascribing blame to Bin Laden with no substantiating evidence? Did they then not present alleged "evidence" to work backward to the already pre-determined conclusion? So-called evidence that is insufficient to federally indict Bin Laden for involvement in 9/11 five years after the attack - despite the fact that it took less than three months to indict him for the 1998 embassy bombings

Might as well. A heart attack. ;) (this isn't for real, just for a film)

Of course I don't like political figures like Bush, Blair, Chaney, Clinton, Bush Senior, Olmert, Kim Jong Ill....the list goes on.... They are all a bunch of corrupt, lying criminals and have been proven so on many occasions. I hate them and all that they stand for. Why woud I feel anything for sub-human scum like that? The Clinton and Bush Senior thing is just plain madness. How anyone could come to such a conclusion is mind boggling. They were both on opposite sides of the political spectrum yet they now are the best of friends and all the things they fought against eachother so hard on are all forgotten. Neither side can be blamed anymore.....there is no "other" side because "Democrat" and "Republican" candidates are always big fakes.....they put a great "show" on, debating on TV and calling eachother names.....yet they both work for the same corporate big wigs.....it's a false opposition (at the top level anyway). Everybody should be aware of that.

I have to strongly disagree with you on that. Strongly. Sure George W is a puppet on a string but Clinton and Bush Senior, now those guys would have sold us to slavery by now. They already pull on Bush's strings to make him dance. But it's your opinion, your entitled to it.

BUSH SENIOR!!!!! What!! He and Clinton Co-presidents!!! They are already best pals and Hilary calls George W one of her sons. There's only one choice in America!! "Neo-Demolicans"! Vote for either side and you will have the same outcomes, war, police state, more war, martial law.... SHIT! WE WOULD BE COMPLETELY AND OFFICIALLY FUCKED IF THAT EVER HAPPENED

I want all these criminals in government to go to prison....that's a start.

Dirty Bombs, Toxic Clouds, Martial Law and Extermination Squads Right At Your Door Steve Watson / Infowars | September 1 2006 Due to be released here in the UK 3 days before the 5 year anniversary of 9/11 is a film that depicts massive terror attacks in downtown LA involving multiple dirty bombs that engulf the city in toxic clouds. Right At Your Door, written and directed by Chris Gorak and starring Rory Cochrane, is a relatively low budget Independent thriller that was snapped up by UK company Lionsgate and will be mass distributed this September. The film will be released in the US sometime in 2007. According to the film's official website the synopsis is thus: After multiple dirty bombs are detonated, spreading deadly toxic ash across Los Angeles, Brad (Rory Cochrane) inadvertently quarantines his wife, Lexi (Mary McCormack) outside their new home by safely sealing himself inside. With the city under siege and Martial Law in affect, Brad and Lexi struggle to survive with little supply, limited time and no information—all the while separated by thin doors and thinner sheets of plastic. When "help" finally does arrive, it appears to be anything but. From what we can gather the "help" referred to consists of squads of toxic suit wearing troops and cops that cuff and take away contaminated survivors in unmarked black vans. Cochrane's character even suggests that he has seen cops on the streets exterminating survivors by shooting them in the head. The radio and media reports in the aftermath of the attacks are unhelpful, speculative and misleading and help to engender a climate of mass panic and fear throughout the city. A martial law situation is implemented in the wake of this. See below for the trailers: [media=400,400,false]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFnw1qOCvbo[/media] [media=400,400,false]http://infowars.net/video/RightAtYourDoor.wmv[/media] In reality it has been suggested on numerous occasions by different officials within the government and the military that in the immediate aftermath of a major terror attack on a US city, martial law would replace the US Constitution. In 2003, UK police levelheaded that they may have to shoot any victims of a chemical, biological, nuclear or radiological strike. The preparation for such a dirty bomb attack has already been subconsciously planted in the minds of the American and British public and it is not too far a stretch to suggest that a martial law coup d'état of the civilian control mechanisms of our countries could be played out using a staged biological or chemical event as an excuse. In January of 2003 FBI and CIA whistleblowers told Capitol Hill Blue that the White House was scripting phony terror alerts to maintain hysteria, upkeep President Bush’s approval ratings and milk extra defense funding. The report that five Pakistani men had entered the States via Canada and were planning on carrying out a dirty bomb or biological attack was completely conjured up by the Bush administration’s black propaganda office. New York Harbor was shut down to visibly pump up the fear. One of the named suspects, Mohammed Asghar, was tracked down to Pakistan by the Associated Press. He was a fat guy running a jewelers shop and had never even been to America. In June of this year it was revealed that a plot involving chemical weapons and targets in Toronto was totally fabricated and that the chemical weapons "never existed". In the last fortnight charges were dropped against US citizen Jose Padilla, the "enemy combatant" who was reportedly about to set off dirty bombs in the US when he was detained. the judge cited a total lack of evidence. And of course the latest highly dubious plot, which has been roundly criticized as grossly exaggerated at best, involved chemical liquid bombs on planes. These are jut a few of the hundreds of phony reports of Chemical or "dirty" Bomb attacks being "right at our doors". In reality, the actual fallout of a dirty bomb attack has been totally distorted and blown out of all proportion by the government and the media. According to research, the potential effects of a dirty bomb are known to be very limited in scope. A dirty bomb is not a nuclear weapon that creates a large blast. Rather, it is a combination of an explosive and radioactive material designed to spread radioactive material and contaminate a small area. In fact, according to the Nuclear Energy institute, being near the site where a dirty bomb is exploded would not even guarantee that people would be exposed to the radioactive material. "At the radiation levels created by most probable sources of radiation, there would not be enough radiation in the bomb to cause severe illness from exposure to radiation." The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission echoes these facts: At the levels created by most probable sources, not enough radiation would be present in a dirty bomb to kill people or cause severe illness. For example, most radioactive material employed in hospitals for diagnosis or treatment of cancer is sufficiently benign that about 100,000 patients a day are released with this material in their bodies. Furthermore the dispersal of the materials would only spread a few blocks before becoming too weak to have any effect. Certainly huge toxic cloud raining death ash over the entirety of LA is pure fantasy. The effects would only be more significant should the most rare, deadly and highly radioactive material be employed in such an attack. This kind of material is highly regulated by government agencies, which impose strict safety and security requirements. Therefore should such a deadly attack occur the prime suspects would be rogue elements of said government agencies. So why are the authorities talking about shooting on the spot survivors of a dirty bomb attack? Of the forthcoming movie, Rich Cline of the Shadows on the Wall review site states: There's a double-edged timeliness here that sends chills down the spine. The atrocity itself is reminiscent of events in Bali, Madrid and London, while the poor official response echoes the situation in New Orleans (although this film was made before Hurricane Katrina struck). In the end, Gorak indulges in a couple of ironic plot points that seem unnecessarily morbid. He's extremely critical of both the authorities and the media. And it progresses, the film feels somewhat repetitive. But the dialog and acting are so honest that it's impossible to look away. It remains to be seen whether or not the film is another attempt to mass market fear and terror without focusing on the facts or whether Gorak's approach is more of a critique of the "post 9-11 mindset" and recent movies such as United 93. We will carry a review of the film upon its release in the UK next week.

Hey man, how did you get the video's to play in the thread?

thanks man, that's cool.

He is showing his bling in that pic.

Well, I was just using it as an example comparison of the techinique to persuade people to change their ways and accept a new more intrusive system. However, they do say that the details of travel aren't stored in a database but I really think that this type of information is far too valuable to govenrment and private companys to through away.

A scene from the More4 drama Death Of A President, which portrays the assassination of President George W Bush at a Chicago rally in 2007. The White House has refused to comment on the programme, saying "it does not justify a response".

Your point?