By Tyler Durden

The FBI plans to step up its efforts to gather information from social media – issuing a call last week for a new tool to monitor Twitter, Facebook, Instagram and other platforms “in a timely fashion.”

Citing the use of social media by terrorist groups, domestic threats, criminal organizations and foreign intelligence services, the FBI “needs near real time access to a full range of social media exchanges in order to obtain the most current information available,” according to the request for proposal.

In addition to information such as user IDs, the feds are interested in “emails, IP addresses, telephone numbers, and likely aliases” used over social media. The tool would also allow for location-based tracking, persistent keyword monitoring, and access to one’s personal social media history.

The FBI is soliciting contracts for a new social media surveillance tool: https://t.co/3AglNJuote

They’re not beating around the bush in terms of how pervasively they’re monitoring social media content: pic.twitter.com/Zo528lt8Pd

— Hugh Handeyside (@hhandeyside) July 12, 2019

The FBI has justified the tool by claiming it is in response “to an increasing number of threats to U.S. national interests that are identifiable, with ever-greater frequency, through social media platforms.”

It is an acknowledged fact that virtually every incident and subject of FBI investigative interest has a presence online. Consequently, law enforcement gaining lawful access (i.e., access that is authorized, appropriate, and consistent with applicable law and policy) to this data will result in early detection and/or containment of the magnitude of any harm caused by these threats.

To protect US citizens, a method employed by the FBI is the acquisition of subscriptions granting access to tools. These allow for the exploitation of lawfully collected/acquired from social media platforms and stored, vetted and formatted by a vendor. The missioncritical exploitation of social media enables the Bureau to proactively detect, disrupt, and investigate an ever growing diverse range of threats. More specifically, the Bureau provides real-time situational awareness of indicators and warnings of emerging social media incidents. -FBI

Can’t they just ask the NSA?

By Tyler Durden | ZeroHedge.com

This article was sourced from The Mind Unleashed.

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

By Matt Agorist

Because government is the antithesis to freedom, industrial hemp has been banned nationwide since 1937 ostensibly due to the plant’s similarities to marijuana. Many have speculated that this move was also due to the fact that cannabis is in direct competition with the pharmaceutical industry by providing far safer alternative treatments as well. However, all this changed this month after President Donald Trump signed the Agriculture Improvement act of 2018, legalizing industrial hemp on a national scale.

Industrial hemp is once again legal in all 50 states but its legalization has set off a new disturbing trend. In a move that appears to be a give away to big pharma, Facebook has begun banning hemp pages.

Just as the farm bill was passed by the House and Senate earlier this month, the page for hemp grower “Franny’s Farmacy” was banned.

“Being an ex-pharmaceutical rep, there is no way we posted anything that violates Facebook’s terms of service,” says Tacy. “We make no claims, we make no recommendations … but we do use the words hemp and CBD and those seem to be becoming trigger words as well.”

Days after being banned, Franny started a new page which began amassing new followers, but after just four days, it was taken down too. This time, Facebook accused Franny and Jeff Tacy of “encouraging drug use.” They sell no drugs whatsoever.

But Franny’s hemp page was not the only victim to Facebook’s give away to the pharmaceutical industry in the name of suppressing the legal sale of hemp. This week, the page for the Carolina Hemp Company was also unpublished. They were given the exact same reason: “promoting the sale of prescription pharmaceuticals.”

Page admin Brian Bullman noted that they have never made any claims which could be interpreted as such. What’s more is the fact that they are a hemp company — not a pharmaceutical company — and they sell no pharmaceuticals at all.

“The stated reason should be of concern,” Bullman wrote. “Our curators do an exceptional job of making sure our content is clean and void of claims. CHC also tends to sell mostly non-isolate products not only due to the superior performance, but also to avoid the possibility of infringing on a pharmaceutical model under the current unfolding conditions as stated by the FDA’S non-binding statement/interpretation.”

Highlighting the sheer insanity of Facebook’s bogus claims is the fact that pages like Pfizer — who actually do promote the use of dangerous pharmaceuticals — are still thriving. For those who may be unaware, Pfizer is the company behind the drug Chantix (prescribed to people to quit smoking) which has been shown by the FDA to have caused thousands of serious injuries and dozens of deaths. Meanwhile, no one in the history of cannabis has ever died from its use.

But Pfizer’s ability to promote deadly drugs on Facebook’s platform — while those who promote hemp are banned — should come as no surprise to those who have been paying attention. As TFTP reported in October, after we were banned, Facebook joined with the Atlantic Council which is directly funded and made up of groups tied to the pharmaceutical industry as well as the military industrial complex, and even government itself.

In fact, Pfizer’s Director for Advocacy and Professional Relations, Mia Masten, is a member.

As Facebook continues to crackdown on folks who promote peace, healthy lifestyles, and sustainable alternatives to deadly medicines, they are showing their true colors — as well as their true masters. To those who don’t know how deep the Atlantic Council’s tentacles reach into all things tyranny, war, and corporatocracy, below is an eye opening short video that explains it.



As TFTP previously reported, in May, after Americans were successfully whipped into a tizzy of Russian hacking and meddling, along with the fake news hysteria, the Americans begging for censorship craze came to a head when Facebook partnered with the Atlantic Council.

Facebook announced that it partnered with the arm of the Council, known as the Digital Forensic Research Lab that was brought on to help the social media behemoth with “real-time insights and updates on emerging threats and disinformation campaigns from around the world.”

Apparently, Free Thought Project was one of those threats and now the hemp industry is too.

Facebook partnered with the Atlantic Council, so what, right? They can do whatever they want and hire outside third parties to help them police the platform they own, right? Yes, this is correct. However, the Atlantic Council is funded by government which makes this move especially insidious.

The Atlantic Council is the group that NATO uses to whitewash wars and foster hatred toward Russia, which in turn allows them to continue to justify themselves. It’s funded by arms manufacturers like Raytheon, Lockheed Martin, and Boeing. It is also funded by billionaire oligarchs like the Ukraine’s Victor Pinchuk and Saudi billionaire Bahaa Hariri.

The list goes on. The highly unethical HSBC group — which has been caught numerous times laundering money for cartels and terrorists — is listed as one of their top donors. They are also funded by the pharmaceutical industry, Google, the United States, the US Army, and the Air Force.

The “think tank” Facebook partnered with to make decisions on who they censor is directly funded by multiple state actors — including the United States — which voids any and all claims that Facebook is a wholly “private actor.”

Is this a private entity? pic.twitter.com/5oGABYjMqz

— Daniel McAdams (@DanielLMcAdams) October 12, 2018

It gets worse.

The Atlantic Council wields massive influence over mainstream media, too, which is why when this partnership was announced, no one in the mainstream press pointed it out as the Orwellian idea that it is. Instead, headlines such as “US think tank’s tiny lab helps Facebook battle fake social media(Reuters)” and “Facebook partners with Atlantic Council to improve election security (The Hill)”were put out to spin the fact that a NATO propaganda arm is now censoring the information Americans see on Facebook.

Avoiding The Eye - Ships Free Today!

They have even been caught engaging in the creation of actual fake news, and no one in the mainstream has called them out on it.

As Bryan MacDonald so aptly noted, some of the stuff the Atlantic Council itself gets away with serves to show its power over the mainstream media. For instance, when Ben Nimmo, a one-time NATO press officer, and Atlantic Council board member, himself ludicrously insisted grammar mistakes were “proof” that social media users critical of NATO were paid Kremlin trolls, and later when he smeared a British man by labeling him a Russian bot, the popular press didn’t bother to question whether he was a fit and proper person for Facebook to engage as a censor. Even after the victim appeared on Sky News to prove he was a real person. Thus, what should have been a warning of the dangers of DFR Lab was essentially ignored.

At the time, Nimmo, instead of apologizing, wrote “interesting to see the real face of Ian56789, rather than the David Gandy one, at last (referring to his Twitter avatar). Not a troll factory account. Rather, a pro-Kremlin troll(definition based on [sic] use of someone else’s picture, systematic use of Kremlin narratives, and repetitive abusive behaviour),”

WikiLeaks was the sole voice of reason, and challenged the lobbyist. “You literally produced, with money from weapons companies and dictatorships, a fake news story that spread all over the world, defaming a very British retiree, who wants to reduce arms company profits, as a Kremlin bot,” they wrote. “So who’s the paid troll?”

You literally produced, with money from weapons companies and dictatorships, a fake news story that spread all over the world, defaming a very British retiree, who wants to reduce arms company profits, as a Kremlin bot. So who’s the paid troll?

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) April 21, 2018

This is the group Facebook is now taking direction from in regard to who is allowed to post information on their platform. The Atlantic Council has been proven to create fake news to slander people who have an antiwar stance in an effort to keep their pro-war weapons companies in the black. It is utter insanity. However, in today’s information war, it is to be expected.

Unless we fight back in the form of sharing information deemed “wrong think” by the censors, this problem will only continue to get worse. We must continue to alert our fellow humans to this censorship before it becomes the norm. We must use this recent purge as our Streisand moment and turn this massive and blatant act of censorship around as a tool to expose the tyrants behind it.

Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project, where this article first appeared. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Facebook.

By Sean Walton

A suspicious package mailed to Facebook headquarters in Menlo Park was flagged by a screening machine as possibly containing sarin gas. No employees were reportedly showing signs of exposure, but multiple buildings in the Facebook complex were evacuated out of caution.

Only one building remained evacuated as of noon, according to NBC Bay Area. Early reports from the fire district that two Facebook employees might have been exposed to the deadly nerve agent, but they were not showing any symptoms.

Facebook reportedly puts all of its mail through a screening machine that detects explosives and poisons like sarin. The mail sorting facility is in an industrial park at 1195 Hamilton Court in Menlo Park, south of the company’s two adjacent main campuses, the “old” campus referred to by employees as Facebook Classic, and the newer Buildings 20 and 26, designed by Frank Gehry.

A hazmat team was on the scene investigating, as CBS SF reports, and it remains unclear whether the deadly gas was actually present. Authorities say that two tests came up positive for sarin, and one test was negative.

Sarin is deadly in liquid or vapor form and is a man-made nerve agent that is both odorless and colorless.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Sean Walton is a researcher and journalist for The Daily Sheeple. Send tips to [email protected]

Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee.

Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.

Mark Milian
CNN

Many computer engineers consider a job offer from Google as the golden ticket.

Outdoor volleyball courts, free gourmet food, on-site haircuts, massages and laundry are among the perks Google has offered its employees at its main campus in Mountain View, California.

But some of the people who do leave are challenging the company in the best way an engineer knows how: by developing programs that could detract from Google’s core business.

Brian Kennish worked at Google for seven years, managing teams of engineers on a variety of products such as the Chrome browser and the moribund Google Wave.

Near the end of his stint at Google, Kennish developed a browser extension for Chrome called Facebook Disconnect.

The software blocks websites that have Facebook widgets installed from automatically sending information about the user back to the social networking company. Facebook Disconnect has 75,000 users, Kennish said.

“No one at Google asked me to do it,” Kennish told CNN this week.

What sparked Kennish’s project, he said, was reading the recent scrutiny of online data-collection tactics chronicled by news organizations. The Wall Street Journal has been running a series called “What They Know,” and CNN had its own last week called “End of Privacy.”

While Facebook and the applications that run on its platform can be considered personal-data hoarders, Kennish eventually realized his then-employer was, itself, among the biggest collectors.

To name a few practices, Google can track search queries over time, target ads to its Gmail users based on the contents of e-mails, and use a person’s location data to determine which shops’ ads it will show. Google, like many Web advertising companies, uses small files called cookies to track internet surfing habits in order to better target ads.

“I never worked directly with user data,” Kennish said of his time at Google. “I didn’t have a good sense of what was being collected. Privacy wasn’t a passion of mine or something that I knew a lot about until basically two months ago, when I started reading about this stuff.”

Read Full Article

Twitter and Facebook don’t connect people – they isolate them from reality, say a rising number of academics

Paul Harris
Guardian

The way in which people frantically communicate online via Twitter, Facebook and instant messaging can be seen as a form of modern madness, according to a leading American sociologist.

“A behaviour that has become typical may still express the problems that once caused us to see it as pathological,” MIT professor Sherry Turkle writes in her new book, Alone Together, which is leading an attack on the information age.

Turkle’s book, published in the UK next month, has caused a sensation in America, which is usually more obsessed with the merits of social networking. She appeared last week on Stephen Colbert’s late-night comedy show, The Colbert Report. When Turkle said she had been at funerals where people checked their iPhones, Colbert quipped: “We all say goodbye in our own way.”

Turkle’s thesis is simple: technology is threatening to dominate our lives and make us less human. Under the illusion of allowing us to communicate better, it is actually isolating us from real human interactions in a cyber-reality that is a poor imitation of the real world.

But Turkle’s book is far from the only work of its kind. An intellectual backlash in America is calling for a rejection of some of the values and methods of modern communications. “It is a huge backlash. The different kinds of communication that people are using have become something that scares people,” said Professor William Kist, an education expert at Kent State University, Ohio.

The list of attacks on social media is a long one and comes from all corners of academia and popular culture. A recent bestseller in the US, The Shallows by Nicholas Carr, suggested that use of the internet was altering the way we think to make us less capable of digesting large and complex amounts of information, such as books and magazine articles. The book was based on an essay that Carr wrote in the Atlantic magazine. It was just as emphatic and was headlined: Is Google Making Us Stupid?

Read Full Article

RELATED ARTICLE:
Google Seeks to Weaken Search Engine Results for “Content Farming” Websites

Facebook, Twitter and YouTube reflected “the power of connection technologies as an accelerant of political, social, and economic change.”

AFP Twitter

AFP

WASHINGTON (AFP) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Sunday highlighted the need for the US government to use Twitter and other social media to connect with young people amid turbulent change in the Middle East and North Africa.

Following revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt fueled by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube exchanges, the US State Department set up Twitter accounts last week in Farsi, Arabic and other languages to get its message across.

“What we expect to do is to be communicating through the new social media with literally millions of people around the world because we want them to hear directly from us what our policies are,” Clinton said.

“We want to use it to rebut some of the falsehoods and accusations that unfortunately are made against the United States,” she said in an interview with ABC’s “This Week” conducted Friday but broadcast Sunday.

“But mostly we want to be in the mix with this incredible young, energetic population that is seeking the same rights to express themselves as young people in the United States seek.”

In its first Twitter feeds in the Iranian language Farsi on February 13, the State Department accused Iran of hypocrisy by supporting the revolt in Egypt but seeking to prevent anti-government demonstrations in Iran.

International and local Iranian media were banned from freely covering the massive wave of protest sparked by the disputed re-election in June 2009 of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

But Iranians overcame the reporting ban by using social-networking and image-sharing websites such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Flickr despite efforts by local officials to cut off mobile phones and the Internet.

Clinton, making her second major speech on Internet freedom in the past year on Tuesday, announced that the State Department would also begin sending messages in Chinese, Russian and Hindi.

In her address, Clinton singled out China, Cuba, Iran, Myanmar, Syria and Vietnam as countries which practice censorship or restrict access to the Internet.

She noted that Syria had lifted a ban on Facebook and YouTube last week but convicted a teenage girl of espionage on Monday and sentenced her to five years in prison for political poetry she wrote on her blog.

Clinton described the Internet as “the public space of the 21st century — the world’s town square, classroom, marketplace, coffee house, and nightclub.”

She said protests in Egypt and Iran fueled by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube reflected “the power of connection technologies as an accelerant of political, social, and economic change.”

© AFP — Published at Activist Post with license

Does a code of ethics still exist in Intelligence firms? Does it disappear behind closed doors, dirty deeds done in the dark and used against the American people who are supposed to be free to express themselves?

Air Force Social Media Chart

Darlene Storm
PC World

It’s recently been revealed that the U.S. government contracted HBGary Federal for the development of software which could create multiple fake social media profiles to manipulate and sway public opinion on controversial issues by promoting propaganda. It could also be used as surveillance to find public opinions with points of view the powers-that-be didn’t like. It could then potentially have their “fake” people run smear campaigns against those “real” people. As disturbing as this is, it’s not really new for U.S. intelligence or private intelligence firms to do the dirty work behind closed doors.

EFF previously warned that Big Brother wants to be your friend for social media surveillance. While the FBI Intelligence Information Report Handbook (PDF) mentioned using “covert accounts” to access protected information, other government agencies endorsed using security exploits to access protected information.

It’s not a big surprise that the U.S. military also wants to use social media to its benefit. Last year, Public Intelligence published the U.S. Air Force social media guide which gave 10 tips for social media such as, “The enemy is engaged in this battlespace and you must engage there as well.” Number three was “DON’T LIE. Credibility is critical, without it, no one cares what you have to say…it’s also punishable by the UCMJ to give a false statement.” The Air Force used the chart below to show how social media influences public opinion.

Read Full Article

RELATED ARTICLE:
6 Threats to Free and Open Access to the Internet

President Barack Obama heads to Facebook’s headquarters on Wednesday © AFP/File Ryan Anson

AFP

WASHINGTON (AFP) – President Barack Obama heads to Facebook’s headquarters on Wednesday to tout his budget cuts to followers of the social media powerhouse, which he also hopes to use to help get reelected.

Obama, whose audacious 2008 White House bid leaned heavily on social networking sites, will hype his “Shared Responsibility and Shared Prosperity” plan at Facebook’s Palo Alto, California, headquarters.

With his 2012 reelection campaign just getting into gear, Obama is moving to bring some love to the more than 19 million Facebook followers he has, up close and in person.

The US president is to take part at 2045 GMT in a scheduled question and answer session at the headquarters not far from San Francisco.

If the format is different, the content should be familiar: Obama has been hammering away since April 13 at his strategy to get the federal deficit under control and pare US debt.

Obama has taken pains to contrast his vision with Republican calls to slash government spending and roll back regulations while lowering tax rates on the richest Americans and corporations.

In public speeches and private appeals to supporters, Obama has made Republican House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s blueprint for cutting some $4.4 trillion from the deficit over 10 years into a political punching bag some 18 months before the November 2012 vote.

Obama — who says his approach will slice some $4 trillion in 12 years or less — has notably accused Ryan of looking to gut the Medicare and Medicaid programs for the elderly and the poor.

But it will not be simple to slash away at a budget with an annual deficit of 1.6 billion dollars and a total federal debt topping 14.2 trillion.

And the budget and debt issue has been catapulted into presidential campaign politics.

Ratings agency Standard & Poor’s cut the outlook on US sovereign debt to “negative” Monday, sending stocks plunging as it doubted Washington’s ability to tackle its huge debt and fiscal shortfalls.

“As S&P made clear, getting spending and our deficit under control can no longer be put off for another day,” warned Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor. “Serious reforms are needed to ensure America’s fiscal health.”

Tuesday, Obama told students in Virginia that more fortunate taxpayers, himself included, would have to make some sacrifices, while stressing he was not out to punish success. The White House repeatedly makes calls for what it calls “shared sacrifices” on the road to budget cuts and debt reduction.

Obama cited Facebook in his January State of the Union speech as an example of innovative US companies that can help the world’s richest country overcome its dreary present economic circumstances and “win the future.”

© AFP — Published at Activist Post with license

Alexander Higgins
The Intel Hub

Facebook now appears to be censoring some alternative news sites while allowing hackers to go after others. It is no wonder they lost 6 Million users in the US last month.

I recently talked to Alex Thomas from The Intel Hub who was listed as an honorable mention in the top 10 most influential people in alternative media list published by Activist Post.

I am frequently a guest contributor on the site and during our conversation he told me that Facebook is starting to ban articles from the site. At that point I figured most likely his account was flagged and left it at that.

Lo and behold, top item in Reddit’s conspiracy section right now is this.

Facebook Not Allowing Users To Share Articles From The Intel Hub

So it is not just Alex’s account that has been banned but other users are also being censored from sharing Intel Hub articles.

Read the full article and learn about how Alexander Higgins’ site was hacked

Egyptian anti-government bloggers work on their laptops from Cairo’s Tahrir square in February © AFP Patrick Baz

AFP

WASHINGTON (AFP) – The Pentagon is asking scientists to figure out how to detect and counter propaganda on social media networks in the aftermath of Arab uprisings driven by Twitter and Facebook.

The US military’s high-tech research arm, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), has put out a request for experts to look at “a new science of social networks” that would attempt to get ahead of the curve of events unfolding on new media.

The program’s goal was to track “purposeful or deceptive messaging and misinformation” in social networks and to pursue “counter messaging of detected adversary influence operations,” according to DARPA’s request for proposals issued on July 14.

The project echoes concerns among top military officers about the lightning pace of change in the Middle East, where social networks have served as an engine for protest against some longtime US allies.

Some senior officers have spoken privately of the need to better track unrest revealed in social networks and to look for ways to shape outcomes in the Arab world through Twitter, Facebook or YouTube.

“Events of strategic as well as tactical importance to our Armed Forces are increasingly taking place in social media space,” the DARPA announcement said.

“We must, therefore, be aware of these events as they are happening and be in a position to defend ourselves within that space against adverse outcomes,” it said.

DARPA predicted that social networks would have a groundbreaking effect on warfare.

“Changes to the nature of conflict resulting from the use of social media are likely to be as profound as those resulting from previous communications revolutions,” it said.

Under the proposal, researchers would be expected to unearth and classify the “formation, development and spread of ideas and concepts (memes)” in social media.

The document cited a case in which authorities employed social media to head off a potential crisis, but did not specify details of the incident.

“For example, in one case rumors about the location of a certain individual began to spread in social media space and calls for storming the rumored location reached a fever pitch,” it said.

“By chance, responsible authorities were monitoring the social media, detected the crisis building, sent out effective messaging to dispel the rumors and averted a physical attack on the rumored location.”

DARPA planned to spend $42 million on the Social Media in Strategic Communication (SMISC) program, with prospective contractors asked to test algorithms through “experiments” with social media, it said.

One possible experiment could involve a “closed social media network” of two to five thousand volunteers or an online role playing game with tens of thousands of players.

© AFP — Published at Activist Post with license

Eva Galperin
EFF

After several days of destructive riots throughout the UK, British Prime Minister David Cameron is practically tripping over himself in his eagerness to sacrifice liberty for security. In a speech before an emergency session of Parliament today, Cameron highlighted concern over rioters’ use of social media tools such as Facebook and Twitter:

…when people are using social media for violence we need to stop them. So we are working with the Police, the intelligence services and industry to look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality. I have also asked the police if they need any other new powers.

Exactly what kind of government censorship of social media Cameron has in mind is unclear, but he went on to urge Twitter, Facebook, and Blackberry to remove messages that might incite further unrest across the country. British Home Secretary Theresa May is reportedly meeting with all three companies to discuss their “responsibilities” in light of the UK riots. Twitter has steadfastly refused to bow to government pressure to shut down the rioters’ accounts or delete their Tweets, referring to a blog post written by Twitter co-founder Biz Stone and General Counsel Alex McGillivray earlier this year, near the start of the Arab Spring:

Some Tweets may facilitate positive change in a repressed country, some make us laugh, some make us think, some downright anger a vast majority of users. We don’t always agree with the things people choose to tweet, but we keep the information flowing irrespective of any view we may have about the content.

It was a sentiment shared by Cameron as recently as this February, when he gave a speech in Kuwait in which he asserted that freedom of expression should be respected “in Tahrir Square as much as Trafalgar Square.” The Prime Minister’s 180-degree shift on freedom of expression unfortunately places him one step closer to the growing, worldwide cohort of politicians and despots seeking solace in censorship.

EFF urges Facebook, Blackberry, and Twitter to fight for the rights of their users. In large part, this means refusing to censor speech, protecting users’ data unless compelled to do so by law, and informing users if their data is sought by the government. But the companies’ hands may be tied if Cameron takes advantage of hysteria over the riots to pass shortsighted legislation meant to protect Britons from the so-called “misuse” of social media.

Visit and support the Electronic Frontier Foundation to fight for Internet freedom.

Madison Ruppert, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

As I covered in my recent article, the British police state is officially here as Prime Minister David Cameron made very clear, and it is becoming more evident by the day.

As I also covered a few days ago, the crackdown on social media in England has begun in full force, starting with the sentencing of two young men, 20 and 22 years old, to four years in jail for making comments on Facebook that did not result in any riot-related activity.

It began with a call coming from Cameron and others to give the government the power to shut down social media outlets whenever they deemed necessary due to a real or perceived emergency.

Then it transformed into Cameron blaming a moral collapse and diverting any attention from the socio-economic problems wracking the UK.

Now Cameron’s rhetoric is rearing its ugly head in the sentencing of 20-year-old Jordan Blackshaw and 22-year-old Perry Sutcliffe-Keenan for a failed attempt to rile people up and organize riots in their respective towns.

If this couldn’t get any more absurd, the BBC reported that the idea began as nothing more than a misguided joke between Blackshaw and Sutcliffe-Keenan.

Unsurprisingly, Cameron defended this ludicrous sentencing approach by saying, “I think it’s right that we should allow the courts to make decisions about sentencing. They decided in that court … to send a tough message and I think it’s very good that the courts are able to do that.”

The message is clear: encouraging people to fight back against a criminal and oppressive government through social media will not be accepted.

Even if your words didn’t actually organize or incite a riot, you will get disproportionate sentencing for simply writing something on a website.

This gets even worse as the Guardian reported:

The revelation that magistrates were advised by justices’ clerks to disregard normal sentencing guidelines when dealing with riot-related cases has alarmed some lawyers, who warn it will trigger a spate of appeals.

A spate of appeals is the least they should be worrying about. In the eyes of the civilized world, it is hard to see a case like this (even when it actually is not “riot-related” since they caused no riots) as an expression of a just and free society.

While the West loves to criticize every single Muslim country along with any nation that doesn’t fully comply with the international banking cartels for “human rights violations” the Western countries are sentencing people to four years in prison for using Facebook and allowing a municipal transportation bureaucracy to illegally shut down cellphone traffic.

The hypocrisy is almost hard to stomach at this point.

However, the lawyer who warned of a spate of appeals elucidates the real danger behind the disproportionate sentencing by saying, “by the time [the appeals] have been heard, those sentences may already have been served.”

According to the Crown Prosecution Service, Blackshaw created a Facebook event entitled, “Smash d[o]wn in Northwich Town” according to the BBC, “intended for the receipt of the ‘Mob Hill Massive Northwich Lootin’’”

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

The only people to show up for the “Smash d[o]wn” were the police.

Blackshaw and Sutcliffe-Keenan were reportedly were, according to Martin McRobb of the Merseyside and Cheshire Crown Prosecution Service, “previously of good character” but “they admitted committing very serious offences that carry a maximum sentence of 10 years.”

Phil Thompson, Assistant Chief Constable of Cheshire Police also told the BBC, “From the offset Cheshire Constabulary adopted a robust policing approach using the information coming into the organization to move quickly and effectively against any person whose behavior was likely to encourage criminality. Officers took swift action against people who had been using Facebook and other social media sites to incite disorder.”

He then lauded the sentencing as recognition of “how technology can be abused to incite criminal activity”, even though they incited absolute no criminal activity whatsoever.

Free speech is under fire in the UK like never before and this is just proof positive that the police and government are happy to support this.

Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at admin@EndtheLie.com

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Wiki Commons image

Kevin Begos
Associated Press

PITTSBURGH (AP) — Facebook has sent notes of apology and is changing automated systems that blocked environmental activists and other people from posting on like-minded Facebook pages.

image source

Deutche-Welle

Data protection authorities in northern Germany have decried the social networking website Facebook and threatened to slap heavy fines on any third-party website that uses a Facebook “like” button.

YouTube – TED

WFMY

YouTube — EndtheLie

http://EndtheLie.com Support us: http://EndtheLie.com/store — and don’t forget to check out the radio show: http://bitly.com/etlradio

Madison Ruppert, Contributor
Activist Post

Perhaps it’s no surprise that Facebook has purchased the facial recognition startup Face.com, since Facebook has come under fire from European regulators for revealing a massive facial recognition database and been busted for spying on the text messages of smartphone users, showing a complete disregard for privacy.

If you continue to use Facebook in a state of ignorant bliss, hopefully this will help you wake up to the reality of what this internet giant is really up to.

As a Facebook spokesperson put it, this acquisition seems purely logical and perfectly in line with their business model.

“People who use Facebook enjoy sharing photos and memories with their friends, and Face.com’s technology has helped to provide the best photo experience,” said the Facebook spokesperson to VentureBeat. “This transaction simply brings a world-class team and a long-time technology vendor in house.”

It also greatly enhances their facial recognition capabilities which Facebook will also most likely be applying to all photos captured by the other company recently purchased by Facebook: Instagram.

The privacy issues inherent in Faceboook’s move to snatch up Face.com are so blatant and impossible to ignore that even InformationWeek has raised the issue in an article entitled, “Facebook Buys Face.com: At What Privacy Cost?”

The actual terms of the deal between Facebook and Face.com have yet to be disclosed to the public but the previous reports released on the subject have placed the purchase price somewhere in the neighborhood of $80-100 million.

The pending deal is expected to come to be closed at some point in the next few weeks.

Face.com, which is a relatively new company founded in and based out of Israel, boasts some of the most cutting-edge consumer facial recognition technology which can not only identify people but also guess the age of a person in the photo.

One of their products is a camera application for iOS (which runs on iPhones and iPads) called KLIK which uses Face.com’s facial recognition technology to automatically tag their Facebook friends in photographs.

Reuters reports that a third-party Facebook application tracking service called AppData has reported that KLIK boasts 40,000 monthly active Facebook users.

“We love building products, and like our friends at Facebook, we think that mobile is a critical part of people’s lives as they both create and consume content, and share content with their social graph,” said Face.com CEO Gil Hirsch.

“By working with Facebook directly, and joining their team, we’ll have more opportunities to build amazing products that will be employed by consumers — that’s all we’ve ever wanted to do,” he added.

Reuters also reports that Facebook has quickly acted in an attempt to improve their image after the somewhat failed public launch by making some well thought out purchases and hires.

Facebook recently purchased Karma, a mobile “gifting” application, as well as iOSdevelopers Pieceable Software and there have also been reports of Facebook investigating acquiring Opera for their mobile browser.

Secret $1.8 Million Cryptocurrency Script

While all of this might sound fine and dandy, I would encourage my readers to consider the privacy implications as well.

Did I forget anything or miss any errors? Would you like to make me aware of a story or subject to cover? Or perhaps you want to bring your writing to a wider audience? Feel free to contact me at admin@EndtheLie.com with your concerns, tips, questions, original writings, insults or just about anything that may strike your fancy.

Please support our work and help us start to pay contributors by doing your shopping through our Amazon link or check out some must-have products at our store.

This article first appeared at End the Lie.

Madison Ruppert is the Editor and Owner-Operator of the alternative news and analysis database End The Lie and has no affiliation with any NGO, political party, economic school, or other organization/cause. He is available for podcast and radio interviews. Madison also now has his own radio show on Orion Talk Radio from 8 pm — 10 pm Pacific, which you can find HERE.  If you have questions, comments, or corrections feel free to contact him at admin@EndtheLie.com

var linkwithin_site_id = 557381;

linkwithin_text=’Related Articles:’

Facebook Corrects Error and Affirms its Goal of Providing a Politically-Neutral Platform for Election Issues, Including Marijuana Reform

Rainey Reitman
EFF

Last week, news outlets reported that Facebook was rejecting ads by advocacy groups working on marijuana policy reform. The ads in question showed marijuana leaves, sometimes with photos of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, and urged viewers to join campaigns to make marijuana reform an election issue. Several versions of similar Facebook ads were submitted by Students for Sensible Drug Policy and Just Say Now, but both groups were initially rejected. After EFF and the ACLU of Northern California reached out to Facebook about the issue, Facebook did the right thing and restored the ads.

Facebook has publicly established guidelines that state that a Facebook advertisement “may not promote tobacco or tobacco-related products, including cigarettes, cigars, chewing tobacco, tobacco pipes, hookahs, hookah lounges, rolling papers, vaporized tobacco delivery devices and electronic cigarettes.” But the language from the banned ads said simply things like: “Registered to vote? Make your voice heard on historic marijuana ballot measures this November” Another read “Marijuana Reform in 2012 | Obama and Romney are mum on marijuana reform. Learn how to make them start talking.” Rather than advocate for marijuana usage, the banned ads urged users to get involved with fighting for reform.

EFF and the ACLU of Northern California reached out to Facebook to draw more internal attention to the fact that the company was censoring speech that was clearly political in nature. Facebook confirmed that the ads were erroneously rejected, that they do not violate Facebook’s policies, and that they would be quickly reinstated.1 EFF is pleased by Facebook’s prompt action to correct this error and we applaud its ongoing commitment to providing a politically neutral platform for political discussion in the approaching election season. However, given this error, and the need for our intervention, we also urge Facebook to carefully audit its ad review program to ensure that similar legitimate speech is not censored from its network.

For instance, those who have advertisements rejected by Facebook can submit an appeal here. This will result in a review by additional members of Facebook, and give Facebook an opportunity to correct any human errors in its policy enforcement. Unfortunately, this form is difficult to find in the help section of the Facebook website. Individuals who have ads rejected are informed via email and provided a link to Facebook’s Prohibited Content – neither the email nor the webpage provide any information about the appeals process. To ensure that individuals whose ad campaigns are erroneously removed can quickly appeal the decision, we urge Facebook to clearly link to the appeal page on its Prohibited Content page. In addition, they should clearly describe the appeals process in the emails rejecting the advertisements, so that similar issues can get resolved more quickly.

      

Facebook has over 900 million users, including elected officials and even EFF using the platform for political advocacy. It has a legal right to decide whether to permit or censor speech on its own domain, but Facebook also has an opportunity to create an online space where political discussions can flourish. As more of our speech—political and otherwise—moves into online forums like reddit, Facebook, and Twitter, these companies will be faced with the responsibility of arbitrating what type of speech will and won’t be permitted. Valuable political speech such as these policy advertisements, which unequivocally benefit the public discourse, could be subject to the vicissitudes of arbitrary company policies. While we’re glad to see free speech prevailing in this case, we hope that Facebook and other Internet companies continue to rise to the challenge of providing neutral, speech-protecting platforms as political and social engagement moves from town squares to comment threads.

Please visit and support the Electronic Frontier Foundation.


You can support this information by voting on Reddit HERE