A presidential spokesperson said that they might have used microwaves to spy on Trump and the left and the MSM are trending that she is a fool for saying this. I am tired of having to take up for Trump and his spokesmen. I don’t like them. Why does the media have to lie about everything? About things they don’t know about? Microwaves have been used in information gathering and so have lasers so these people are mocking her and they didn’t even look it up. What is she supposed to brief you on a secret program so you can freak out on that too?
Facebook is supposed to be protecting the world from fake news but when the fake news comes from CNBC they swallow it hook line and sinker. I was in the military in electronic warfare and I can tell you it is entirely possible and has been done routinely.
Microwave eavesdropping has a long and clandestine history. And there’s an odd connection between music and microwave eavesdropping. Mention the name Leon Theremin and many people will immediately think of the musical instrument bearing his name. Born Lev Sergeyevich Termen, his contributions to the former Soviet Union spanned the history of the Soviet Union from the original Bolshevik Revolution to the collapse of the USSR.
Termen was a mathematics prodigy who was drawn into the emerging field of electronics. Termen came across the basic principle for one of the first electronic musical instruments while working on television. The theremin (Termen called it an “etherophone”) produced music with modulated static. Players used two antennae, one for pitch and one for volume, producing musical tones by waving their hands around the antennae. Skilled musicians reportedly could recreate the sounds of many existing instruments.
How come its really Anti-American to go on an Anti-Communist crusade in the 50ties when you have no proof but its totally all American legit to go on an Anti-Russian crusade in 2017? You can’t have it both ways. Either its meet, right and salutary or it’s insane but it can’t be both. What’s going on here has no basis in fact. I hear all of the time that Trump is saying things with out providing evidence. Well where is the evidence of Russian hacking? That paper the DOJ put out is fact free and full of disclaimers in more than one part of that paper. Where are the transcripts of the calls?
McCarthyism is the practice of making accusations of subversion or treason without proper regard for evidence. Dictionary.com provides the following additional definition: the practice of making unfair allegations or using unfair investigative techniques, especially in order to restrict dissent or political criticism.
This Russian freak out fake news is getting old. Until today’s research, showed that they did this in the 60ties too. They claimed Richard Nixon was soft on Russia and there was a missile gap. Billions in 1960 dollars were spent on more military and more atomic weapons. This helped Kennedy to victory and a campaign was run to shape public opinion so that Eisenhower was viewed as a silly old irrelevant man. His warnings about the military industrial complex went unheeded and that was costly in both blood and treasure.
“The Department is not considering mobilizing the National Guard,” said Gillian Christensen, the acting press secretary for DHS.A DHS official told The Daily Beast that the memo the AP cited was an early, pre-decisional draft, that Kelly never approved it, and that the department as a whole never seriously considered it.The AP reported that the draft memo suggested using National Guard troops to “to perform the functions of an immigration officer in relation to the investigation, apprehension and detention of aliens in the United States.”The AP also reported that Kelly wrote the memo, but Christensen told The Daily Beast that that is “absolutely incorrect.”Sean Spicer, the White House press secretary, denied the AP’s report on Twitter shortly after it published.“Not true. 100% false,” he tweeted.The draft memo, which the AP published in full after putting up its initial story, discusses the possibility of using the National Guard for immigration enforcement. It directs the heads of Customs and Border Protection and Immigration and Customs Enforcement to “immediately engage” with the governors of the border states and states that touch those states about using their National Guard troops for immigration enforcement. That would mean Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Colorado, Arizona, Utah, California, Oregon, and Nevada.
Source: Homeland Security on AP’s National Guard: ‘Absolutely Incorrect’ – The Daily Beast
News media should illuminate conflicts of interest, not embody them. But the owner of the Washington Post is now doing big business with the Central Intelligence Agency, while readers of the newspaper’s CIA coverage are left in the dark.The Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, is the founder and CEO of Amazon — which recently landed a $600 million contract with the CIA. But the Post’s articles about the CIA are not disclosing that the newspaper’s sole owner is the main owner of CIA business partner Amazon.Even for a multi-billionaire like Bezos, a $600 million contract is a big deal. That’s more than twice as much as Bezos paid to buy the Post four months ago.And there’s likely to be plenty more where that CIA largesse came from. Amazon’s offer wasn’t the low bid, but it won the CIA contract anyway by offering advanced high-tech “cloud” infrastructure.Bezos personally and publicly touts Amazon Web Services, and it’s evident that Amazon will be seeking more CIA contracts. Last month, Amazon issued a statement saying, “We look forward to a successful relationship with the CIA.”As Amazon’s majority owner and the Post’s only owner, Bezos stands to gain a lot more if his newspaper does less ruffling and more soothing of CIA feathers.Amazon has a bad history of currying favor with the U.S. government’s “national security” establishment. The media watch group FAIR pointed out what happened after WikiLeaks published State Department cables: “WikiLeaks was booted from Amazon’s webhosting service AWS. So at the height of public interest in what WikiLeaks was publishing, readers were unable to access the WikiLeaks website.”
How’s that for a commitment to the public’s right to know?
Source: Jeff Bezos Is Doing Huge Business with the CIA, While Keeping His Washington Post Readers in the Dark | Alternet
Debate still surrounds Hutton’s conclusion that Kelly committed suicide. The inquiry found that Kelly died after cutting an artery, had taken an overdose of painkillers and had heart disease which left his arteries “significantly narrowed”. Thus, said experts, less blood loss may have killed the scientist than that needed to kill a healthy man.
Among those who have called for an inquest or have doubts it was a suicide are former Tory leader Michael Howard, and Liberal Democrat minister Norman Baker, who wrote a book saying Kelly was most likely murdered.
A group of doctors say Hutton’s findings should be discarded and a new inquest held. Dr Stephen Frost said: “We have lots of evidence … No coroner in the land would reach a verdict of suicide as Lord Hutton did.”
Experts in forensic pathology point out the skeptics may be expert in their own fields, but not in the science of establishing the cause of death.
Hutton has kept silent since his report, breaking it only to write a letter denouncing the conspiracy theorists. Hutton’s conclusion is supported by the available facts and experts: “At no time … was there any suggestion from any counsel for the interested parties or in any of the extensive media coverage that any of the police officers engaged in investigating Dr Kelly’s death or any of the medical or scientific witnesses was involved in any sort of cover-up or plot to make a murder appear like a suicide.”
Dyke claimed that: “Some of Dr Kelly’s wider family don’t believe it’s suicide.”
But the Conservative-led government has said the evidence for suicide is so compelling there is no need for a fresh hearing.
Source: Dr David Kelly: 10 years on, death of scientist remains unresolved for some | Politics | The Guardian
In the usual process, the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Services then completes another security review of the applicant — and any of the applicant’s derivatives, meaning spouses and children. After September 11, 2001, the identification process for any visitor became much more technical, advancing from fingerprinting to more robust biometric identification. Once applying for asylum, the government dives deep into background: previous criminal convictions, any hint of involvement with terrorism.Applicants don’t necessarily know if they’ve failed a security check. According to Leopold, the immigration lawyer, they’ll often be told that their application is being held for “administrative processing.” While the application is held, the applicant is allowed to stay in the country, if they’re already here.At the time that the Tsarnaevs applied for asylum, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar were very young. There was almost certainly nothing in their background that would have raised any red flags; apparently, there was nothing in the father’s either. Here, Leopold made a key point: “You can’t predict future behavior.” For any democratic country that wants to participate in international society, Leopold pointed out, you have to assume some level of risk. Despite that, “the systems they have in place,” meaning those security screenings, are “doing the job.”It’s not guaranteed that we’ll learn significantly more about the family given the robust dossier the government has on them. According to Leopold, those records are very hard to have made public.
Source: How the Boston Bombing Suspect Became a U.S. Citizen – The Atlantic