The Deep State’s Total Control with Beijing as the Mother of Managers

 

A Status Review

The good news is that our Mother of Managers, RED China, continues to franchise its “One World, One Dream” surveillance and control solution based on its own Golden Shield initiative which produces “Happy Populations and Consumers” that our actuarily our LRUs for predictable profit margin percentages.

Even though Hillary missed her moment again, Diane and her driver, Nancy, the FBI, DOJ, State, NSA, and “Central” have been very helpful.

On the downside, NAFTA and the TPP were exposed, however, the drug trade, human trafficking, and organ harvesting ventures are thriving. Others should implement the “Planned Parenthood” disguise.

Also, the Village Idiots have still not figured out the pretext and goal of Arab Spring, and we really cut it close with The Thing from 1890’s, SSN # 042-68-4425, fake war on Libya and used the crisis to expand our pretext of the Global War on Terror into Europe to ultimately benefit RED China’s loan sharking and total control blueprint.

Syria was never on the Arab Spring list, but we also turned it into an opportunity for “Sustainable Development Wherever the UN Goes or Doesn’t Go When It Ideally Should” with less people as we did with Bosnia, Rwanda, Somalia etc.

Trump like Reagan has interrupted the implementation of the blueprint, but we have some plans and eventually one will work to get the implementation back on track as we are so very close. The good news is Americans are getting dumber by the minute as well as being crushed with debt while thinking their “schooling” is giving them the skill sets for financial success while we have put all the roadblocks in place to prevent that from happening thanks to all our puppets in the U.S. Congress. Eventually they will succumb to the bait of free stuff and be totally dependent on us.

Eventually, with the success of RED China’s “One World, One Dream” solution, we will be able to overcome any resistance to our plan via its built in hostage taking and extortion. RED China’s partnership with NSA and “Central” has made good use of this in America. We must continue on this path and someday very soon all will wake up from The Dream and realize it is not their Dream but our Dream and they will not be able to do anything about it when it becomes their nightmare for our benefit.

Once again, election seasons are coming up again, and we must focus on placing more Emirs into our future areas of control so that we can remove all aspects of resistance. We must make Eichmann proud!

 

 

Editors Note: Farming, Mining, and Management of The Human Kind : The pretext of altruistic endeavors that just suddenly become predatory and parasitic.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The Blueprint for RED China’s One World One Dream:

How Arab governments use cyberspace laws to shut down activism

Critical Arab voices are being silenced on Twitter, and laws across the Middle East are created to further this cause.

by Yarno Ritzen
25 Jul 2019

In this series of articles, Al Jazeera examines how Twitter in the Middle East has changed since the Arab Spring. 

Government talking points are being magnified through thousands of accounts during politically fraught times and silencing people on Twitter is only part of a large-scale effort by governments to stop human rights activists and opponents of the state from being heard. 

For human rights activists, journalists, dissidents and free speech campaigners, social media has long been a double-edged sword, representing both the positive and harmful aspects of open communication on the internet.

On the one hand, platforms such as Twitter and Facebook allow activists the opportunity to spread their message, reaching an audience they could only dream of before the internet.

But on the other, the nature of open communication raises the risk of being followed, exposed or worse, as some governments increase their digital surveillance capabilities.

As a result, governments around the world are turning social media against their citizens.

China is the country where government control of the internet is by far the most egregious, but many countries in the Middle East are not far behind when it comes to using the internet against those who fight for a more open society, the annual Freedom of the Net report by Freedom House concluded.

Mohamad Najem, executive director at Beirut-based SMEX, a digital rights organisation focusing on issues related to freedom of expression, online privacy and safety, said social media movements had taken the Middle East by surprise and governments adapted relatively quickly, using social media against protesters and civil rights activists.

Over the last decade, SMEX has tracked how the use of social media platforms like Twitter, both by activists and governments, has changed.

“In 2011, access to these tools was still kind of new and governments underestimated them,” Najem told Al Jazeera.

Meet the activists fighting the Great Chinese Firewall

Social media allowed people in the Middle East to voice their concerns and question those in power.

During the Arab Spring, protesters were able to organise on social media, a tool that connected their realities with the rest of the world.

But governments were watching, too, and continue to closely monitor.

“Between the Arab Spring and now, we have witnessed that all the countries in the region are moving more and more towards criminalising speech,” Najem told Al Jazeera.

“The online sphere we used to go to in the Middle East to express ourselves, to talk about politics, has started to close down slowly because of all these regulations,” he added.

“People were prosecuted, thrown in jail, or they had to flee the country.”

To show what laws Middle East governments have introduced in recent years, SMEX launched Cyrilla, a website listing all proposed and passed legislation aimed at curbing free speech.

The database, which offers texts in Arabic and English and covers the entire region, shows clearly how digital liberties in the Middle East have come under attack.

Between the Arab Spring and now, we have witnessed that all the countries in the region are moving more and more towards criminalising speech.

MOHAMAD NAJEM, SMEX

It also lists several countries outside of the Middle East, including RussiaVietnam and Fiji.

“Across the Middle East, there is a large number of countries that have specifically instituted anti-terrorism and cybercrime laws that contain vague prohibitions on free speech,” Jillian York told Al Jazeera.

York is the Berlin-based director for international freedom of expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), which aims to protect civil liberties in the digital world.

Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, UAE, Qatar; all these countries have instituted cybercrime laws and in most cases, the laws are vague – quite broad,” she said.

As an example, York cited Saudi Arabia’s counterterrorism legislation from 2014, which criminalises defamation of the state and defines calling for atheist thought as a “terrorist” action.

Recently, prominent Norway-based pro-democracy activist Iyad el-Baghdadi, a Palestinian who has been outspoken in his criticism of Saudi authority figures, made a plea for his safety after US intelligence agency CIA found a credible threat to his life from authorities in the kingdom.

El-Baghdadi is behind The Arab Tyrant Manual, which focuses on global authoritarianism and the struggle for democratic liberties in the Arab region. He is also a fellow at Civita, a leading liberal think-tank in Norway, where he sought asylum after he was forced to leave his home in the United Arab Emirates in 2015.

İyad el-Baghdadi | إياد البغدادي

@iyad_elbaghdadi

Spare a thought for all the dissidents, activists, journalists, and private citizens in the Arab world who get beaten, arrested, tortured, murdered without being passed tips and without being offered protection. They are the real heroes, and they are the real victims. Not me.

54 people are talking about this

But it is not just Saudi Arabia, as documented by organisations including Amnesty International and the Gulf Centre for Human Rights show.

Governments in the Middle East have started using platforms such as Twitter as amplifiers, using both automated bot accounts and well-known social media influencers to promote state-approved messaging, Najem said.

So, while activist voices are being drowned out by government-approved messages, sometimes amplified by fake Twitter accounts, campaigners also risk being jailed or are forced to leave the country because of newly implemented cybercrime or “antiterrorism” laws.

Last April, Saudi Arabia arrested three bloggers without giving any reasons for their arrest.

Similarly, the Turkish government cracked down hard last year on Twitter users who used the platform to voice their criticism of the Turkish military operation in northern Syria, claiming they were spreading “terrorist propaganda”.

The UAE, meanwhile, made it a criminal offence to show support for Qatar in the ongoing GCC crisis, claiming people who did so violated the federal decree on Combating Information Technology Crimes, possibly facing a jail term from three to 15 years, and a fine not less than 500,000 dirhams ($136,000).

According to both Najem and York, it is not just governments that are to blame for the crackdown on activists.

Part of the responsibility falls on social media companies for failing to address the issue of automated propaganda accounts and willingly helping governments in the region.

“One of the challenges with companies like Twitter – and most tech companies – is that they are based in Dubai. This is an issue because this is a country that has no respect for human rights, which means they have no respect for digital rights either,” Najem told Al Jazeera.

“We have a problem that all these companies that are being used for free speech, such as Twitter, are based in the Gulf. These are countries that are not signatory of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, so Article 19 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights [giving everyone a right to freedom of opinion and expression] is not part of their mandate and freedom of expression is not something they care about.”

To add, York explained, the opaque deals these companies make with governments lead to more censorship, which is often hard to notice.

I think Twitter and all these other companies are responsible for when they say ‘yes’ whenever an authoritarian country comes to them to ask to censor certain speech.

JILLIAN YORK, EFF

“Governments sort of wisened up and, due to a number of other factors, they began instead utilising these companies to do this censorship for them,” she said.

“This is a more palatable form of censorship for the people because they don’t notice what is missing. Instead of getting an error page when you visit a website like Twitter or Facebook, the content is just missing – it has disappeared,” she added.

“That has allowed these companies to continue to engage and grow in these markets while not being blamed for the censorship.”

York believes that these companies should be incredibly limited in how they regulate speech.

Another problem, she says, is that these companies consider the Middle East as a single monolithic entity and fail to look at the nuances between different countries.

“It’s very culturally ignorant to think that Lebanese people would want the same rules as the Saudis,” she said.

“To give a concrete example of this, search engine Microsoft Bing for years censored its results in the entire Middle East based on what Saudi Arabia asked them to censor.”

As a result, York explained, Bing instituted a blanket ban for certain keywords in the whole Middle East, so, for example, because Saudi Arabia wanted all mentions of the word “breast” removed from search results, people in Lebanon were not able to use Bing to search for “chicken breast”.

Meanwhile, accessing pornographic websites directly was still possible in Lebanon.

“So, I think Twitter and all these other companies are responsible for when they say ‘yes’ whenever an authoritarian country comes to them to ask to censor certain speech.”

“These days they just do it, they don’t push back on it any more.”

Wael Abbas, an Egyptian human rights activist and blogger, used to document police brutality in Egypt.

“It’s quite clear from Abbas’s case that he was being attacked by trolls on Twitter that he alleges were government paid, but we don’t know that for sure,” York said.

“More and more we see people moving towards private platforms like WhatsApp, Signal or Telegram, which all provide more privacy.”

MOHAMAD NAJEM, SMEX

“Nevertheless, he was attacked by government supporters on Twitter, he fought back and then his account was shut down by Twitter, probably because he used language that was in their rules considered hate speech.”

His account remains suspended.

“In Wael’s example, they should not have kicked him off of the platform for using harsh language,” York said.

These sustained efforts have instilled fear among activists, many of whom have largely moved away from public platforms like Twitter and Facebook to more closed systems.

“More and more we see people moving towards private platforms like WhatsApp, Signal or Telegram, which all provide more privacy,” Najem said.

While the increased privacy of closed platforms provides some more safety for activists, reaching an audience as they did during the Arab Spring seems impossible.

Saudi women’s rights activist Souad al-Shammary looks at her Twitter account on her mobile phone. She is a liberal feminist who was jailed for her views [File: AP]

Article

GO RED China! GO RED China!

 

 

"Year of Action" – Obama's 'Success' – Regulate More

Editor’s Note – Recently we saw yet another email from the fund raising arm of the DNC touting the Presidents ‘year of action’ and that they need yet more money to help him have another success in 2015.

Looking at his previous six years of action, the country really cannot afford any more ‘action’ by this President, especially with his “uni-pen,” the “pen of unilateral action.”

Give Barack Obama credit for keeping his promise. “This is going to be a year of action,” the president pledged last January. And indeed, with a series of unilateral executive actions in the last few months of the year, he made it so.

Obama’s original promise was entirely understandable. He entered 2013 fresh from a solid re-election victory, determined to score legislative wins on gun control, immigration, spending, and other knotty issues. It all ended in disappointment. As 2014 dawned, Obama promised — to Republicans, threatened — to take a new path. (Read more here.)

In just 2014 alone, as their advertisement proclaims, Obama apparently did achieve great ends, if you ‘drink Kool-Aid’:Dec2014ObamaAdEmail.4

  1. He announced historic action on climate change;
  2. He raised the minimum wage on federal contractors;
  3. He established new rules to ensure equal pay for women;
  4. …and lastly, he took ‘executive action’ on immigration reform.

What they left out of the list of unilateral, unconstitutional acts was a disastrous streak of foreign policy failures and other dubious events like (H/T to the National Journal):

  1. Islamic State: “The analogy we use around here sometimes, and I think is accurate, is if a JV team puts on Lakers uniforms, that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant;”
  2. “The “Taliban Five” – Obama staged a celebratory event in the Rose Garden in May with the parents of freed Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl,” only to see an unexpected negative reaction from all corners, including Democrats;
  3. NSA – “Remember that big speech Obama gave in January about reforming the National Security Agency’s surveillance practices” – only to reauthorize the very same;
  4. “Every warm weekend seemingly saw Obama hitting the links, even as the world, at times, felt like it was wobbling a bit between Iraq, Ukraine, the protests in Ferguson, Mo., the spread of Ebola, and other crises.” Worst of all was giving a speech when an American journalist was beheaded in in Syira and then five minutes later he was on the links.
  5. The border – “…the president being photographed playing pool and drinking beer in Colorado just as waves and waves of refugee children from Central America were spilling across the southwestern border:”
  6. CIA Report – Senate Democrats released a report earlier this month concluding that the Central Intelligence Agency had engaged in repeated episodes of torture and had misrepresented its effectiveness, the president pointedly refused to endorse it, or address it publicly in any way. Only Diane Feinstein looks worse here.
  7. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act continued to be ‘none-of-the-above’ and a political anchor, reaching new depths of unpopularity, and now you have bigger fines to look forward to in 2015;
  8. Ukraine and Crimea – need we say more about Putin’s laughter at Obama’s expense?
  9. Ebola – could that have been handled any worse when it came to quelling fear and panic – that’s leadership. By the way, where was that Czar, Ron Klain?
  10. Israel and Gaza – John Kerry’s epic ‘fail‘ reached stratospheric proportions;
  11. Supreme Court – Just how many cases will Obama lose concerning his unilateral actions and the fraud that was ObamaCare and its principal architect, Jonathan Gruber, the man they called  ‘Mr. Mandate’ who “sees stupid people;”
  12. The Economy – that ever so slogging ‘success‘ that no one in the real-world seems to feel as good about as Obama unless you are into the NYSE and its rarefied air;
  13. Iran – What can we say about Iran, other than being played for a complete fool? But maybe a new embassy in Tehran will soothe the savage beasts and the Mullahs blind ambitions;
  14. Cuba – Ditto on Iran, and then there is that whole Sony/North Korea thing still unsettled;
  15. Scandals – too numerous to list, and each is still unresolved, from the IRS to Benghazi – maybe 2015 ‘action’ will clear the air?

Of course this list just hits some of the “high” points of the past year but look what else he did this year – 75,000 pages of new regulations, feeling good about making that donation now?

How much “action” from Obama can this country withstand for two more years?

Obama Imposed 75,000 Pages of New Regulations in 2014

Written by Alex Newman – The New American

Just in the last few weeks, the Obama administration has proposed or imposed over 1,200 new regulations on the American people that will add even more to the already crushing $2 trillion per year cost burden of the federal regulatory machine. According to data compiled from the federal government’s Regulations.gov website by the Daily Caller, most of the new regulatory schemes involve energy and the environment — 139 during a mere two-week period in December, to be precise. In all, the Obama administration foisted more than 75,000 pages of regulations on the United States in 2014, costing over $200 billion, on the low end, if new proposed rules are taken into account.

Just one of those “rules” by the out-of-control Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the so-called “coal ash” regulation, is expected to cost as much as $20 billion, estimates suggest. Another oncoming rule, which experts and analysts say is likely to be the most expensive federal regulation in all of U.S. history, could wreak havoc across the nation and crush the economy to the point that economic growth halts completely, experts said. Even Christmas lights, though, are now in the administration’s regulatory crosshairs, along with virtually everything else.

YearofAction2014While the insatiable Obama White House “pen and phone” machine has been spewing costly and draconian regulatory edicts at a fast and furious pace since taking power six years ago, it seems that the Holiday season has featured an even larger than usual number of wild decrees. Late last month, for example, as Americans were occupied with Thanksgiving, the Obama administration emitted what has been widely decried as the most costly single regulation in American history.

The so-called “ozone rule,” which estimates suggest could cost as much as $270 billion per year and put millions of American jobs at risk under the guise of further regulating emissions of the natural gas, was formally put forward the day before Thanksgiving. Lawmakers decried the timing of the massive regulation, suggesting the scheme was released during the holidays so “stupid voters” — as ObamaCare’s architect infamously described the American people — would be distracted with other matters.

Experts also pointed out that the EPA’s own 2007 studies showed no adverse health effects from exposure to even high levels of ozone. Even people suffering from asthma experienced no adverse effects from high levels of ozone, the EPA itself found. More than a few experts have disputed the notion that ozone causes any harm at all — but that has not stopped the EPA from imposing the regulation under the guise of “protecting health.”

“Bringing ozone pollution standards in line with the latest science will clean up our air, improve access to crucial air quality information, and protect those most at-risk,” claimed scandal-plagued EPA boss Gina McCarthy in a statement celebrating the latest proposed decree. “It empowers the American people with updated air quality information to protect our loved ones — because whether we work or play outdoors — we deserve to know the air we breathe is safe.”

Air concentration of ozone gas, which largely occurs naturally, has been plummeting across the United States in recent decades even without the EPA’s “most expensive” regulation in history. According to the American Action Forum, which analyzes the impact of regulations, the ozone standards are so extreme that 100 state and national parks could be in danger of violating them — despite the fact that they have virtually no traffic or manufacturing bases. Ironically, the EPA claims an array of other recent EPA regulations could “help” states satisfy the new federal ozone decrees.BreakThroughYear2014

American industries, meanwhile, warned that the consequences of the “ozone” regulation on the fragile U.S. economy could be devastating. “This new ozone regulation threatens to be the most expensive ever imposed on industry in America and could jeopardize recent progress in manufacturing by placing massive new costs on manufacturers and closing off counties and states to new business by blocking projects at the permitting stage,” explained Jay Timmons, president of the National Association of Manufacturers.

In an analysis posted on the NAM website, the association included a map showing that, depending on how extreme the final ozone standard was, virtually all of the United States could be out of compliance with the EPA mandates. “With nearly all of the country in nonattainment, U.S. manufacturing growth would come to a standstill; our domestic energy boom could go bust; and existing plants would be required to install additional expensive equipment,” the organization said, citing EPA data.

According to a study released by NAM earlier this year, federal regulations imposed on the United States were costing the American people more than $2 trillion every year by 2012, the most recent year for which data is available. And the cost is growing quickly. In 2014 alone thus far, the Obama administration has imposed regulations that will cost the American people over $200 billion in addition to the pre-existing $2 trillion burden, according to low-end estimates by the American Action Forum. That does not include the cost of numerous “executive” decrees and assumes, contrary to findings presented in the NAM-commissioned study, that the cost of the “ozone” rule will be relatively small.

HR-Jan29-Action-Figure_600Another major regulation imposed by the Obama administration in recent weeks surrounds the so-called “coal ash” rule regulating waste produced by electricity generation. The new scheme, finalized shortly before Christmas, could cost over $20 billion. Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), presumably the next chairman of the Senate Environment Committee, blasted the plot as “a continuation of the president’s war on fossil fuels.” Among other concerns, he said the new regulations would “make states and utility companies vulnerable to new regulatory costs and expensive litigation.”

Other costly regulations in the pipeline include the Obama EPA’s radical bid to severely curtail emissions of CO2. The natural gas, which makes up a fraction of one percent of all the “greenhouse” gases present naturally in the atmosphere, is exhaled by humans and is described by scientists as the “gas of life.” Still, the White House and the United Nations continue their outlandish campaign to demonize the essential molecule as “pollution,” even threating to shackle humanity to a draconian global CO2 regime under the guise of stopping “global warming.”

Next year, meanwhile, the Obama administration is plotting to unleash yet another deluge of federal regulations targeting everything from fracking to power plants. State governments, lawmakers, and citizens have been fighting back, but so far, the White House shows no signs of backing off or even slowing down the pace when it comes to devastating decrees to pummel the economy and the American taxpayer. More “climate” decrees are coming, too, with the White House even threatening to impose a UN carbon regime on America without obtaining Senate ratification.

Separately, as The New American reported this month, the Obama administration’s increasingly dangerous and anti-constitutional usurpations of power have been accelerating. Despite White House attempts to dupe the American people by claiming it has imposed fewer “executive orders” than previous presidents, the administration was recently exposed by USA Today concealing most of its unilateral decrees by calling them “presidential memoranda” instead of orders. Obama has issued more than any president in history, doing everything from purporting to change federal law to even attacking the American people’s God-given rights using illegitimate executive edicts.

With the sprawling regulatory leviathan growing perpetually more costly and oppressive, critics say the American people’s elected representatives and the courts must both take action. “Congress should examine how executive agencies are exceeding key authorities granted to them and both narrow the substantive grants that are most subject to abuse and improve administrative procedures on multi-billion dollar regulations,” wrote attorneys Todd Gaziano and Mark Miller with the pro-liberty Pacific Legal Foundation in a recent Forbes column about the need to regulate what constitutes a regulation. “Until then, the courts must police these two areas, particularly in the rulemaking context.”

While Republican lawmakers have become adept at loudly complaining about the administration’s non-stop executive power grabs and regulations on the campaign trail, so far, they have done virtually nothing to stop it. In fact, despite all of the promises to rein in the Obama administration’s “imperial” presidency if elected to Congress, victorious Republicans, who already dominated the House of Representatives, recently passed a massive spending bill fully funding virtually every decree the White House has spewed since coming to power through next September.

In other words, GOP lawmakers, sent to Washington by outraged voters in November to stop Obama, gave up their most powerful tool to restrain the administration for almost a full year — before the new members could be seated, and for no good reason. The solution to the growing regulatory lawlessness, though, remains simple: Congress can and should defund the decrees and the unconstitutional agencies behind them before Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of America is complete.


 

Related articles:


Alex Newman is a correspondent for The New American, covering economics, education, politics, and more. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at: anewman@thenewamerican.com

Ham-fisted DNC adds God and Jerusalem back into Platform

Editor’s Note – Any parliamentarian worth his or her salt must have choked as we did watching the DNC reinsert “God” and reaffirm that “Jerusalem is the capitol of Israel” into their platform. When LA Mayor Villaraigosa called the voice vote “in the opinion of the chair” as a two-third win for the “yeas”, it was plain to see two things. One, the DNC did not want the change, and two, the DNC leadership saw just how bad it was that they removed them in the first place.

It is also clear, Democrats at the convention do not support Israel or religion – period! No amount of explanation could remove that; not from Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, or even the President. What a sham, what a shame!

Watch for yourself, and then ask if the chair hears the two-thirds votes called in favor of the “yeas” and “nays”:

LA Mayor Villaraigosa - the look on his face in this picture speaks volumes at the DNC vote on reinserting God and Jerusalem on their platform.

Why has the Democratic National Convention been such a disaster?

By Daily Caller

When asked about the Democratic convention in Charlotte, NC, Mitt Romney called it a “celebration of failure.” Granted, he may be a little biased. Yet the spectacle coming out of the DNC this week is hard to ignore or even gloss over with well-intentioned words.

Frankly, it’s been a disaster.

Exhibit A is the Democrats’ embarrassing ham-fisted reversal on their party platform. The platform the party released on Tuesday omitted any reference to “God” and did not recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Cue outcry.

On Wednesday, Democrats decided to add the references to God and Jerusalem back in amid screams of protest and utter chaos. But did they really? Who knows? Convention chairman and Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa seemed to have a hard time discerning if two-thirds of the audience were booing or cheering the changes. In what was probably a wise decision, Villaraigosa decided to call it a day and declare the majority in the affirmative.

David Axelrod, for his part, defended the president on the platform, and blamed “others” for the mishap. Now that’s leadership!

Next up is DNC chair Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Never far from controversy, Wasserman Schultz this week told Jewish Democrats that Israel’s ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, said that “what the Republicans are doing is dangerous for Israel.”

When an enterprising reporter at the Washington Examiner reported the comment, Oren denied ever saying such a thing. And then Wasserman Schultz denied ever saying Oren said such a thing, telling Fox News that the “comment was reported by a conservative newspaper. It’s not surprising that they would deliberately misquote me.”