activistpost--2020-09-29--Which Jobs Have Been Hardest Hit By The Pandemic?

Heading into Friday ’ s payrolls report , the labor market has been enjoying a strong tailing , with the unemployment rate falling to a lower-than-expected 8.4 % in August , and consensus is looking for a further decline to 8.2 % in September .
In terms of non-farm payrolls , the consensus is also looking for continued job growth of +865k , but as Jim Reid cautions , “ it ’ s worth bearing in mind that having lost over -22MM jobs in March and April , even this figure would mean that just over half of them have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over 10MM below their peak back in February.
” Still , considering the continued gridlock over a new fiscal stimulus , if the consensus forecast of 850k NFP proves correct , it will certainly be a continuation of upward momentum with more than 51 % of recent job losses recovered through September , leaving employment at 93 % of February levels .
That said , there are underlying challenges as BofA writes in report published late last week looking at who is falling behind even as the labor market recovery continues .
AS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can see the differences using the industry level data in the nonfarm payroll figures .
Leisure & hospitality remains deep in the red and is the lowest paid industry ( Chart 3 ) .
There are some higher paid industries like mining & logging and information services that remain below 90 % of pre-pandemic levels , but they account for much smaller shares of employment .
Lin then highlights that employment by education reveals an even starker gap between the high skilled and low skilled .
The level of employed with a bachelor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peak-to-trough decline of around 6 % but has basically fully recovered from those losses through August .
On the other end of the spectrum , those with less than a HS diploma have only recovered to 81 % of pre-pandemic levels .
Meanwhile , the dramatic changes to the labor composition have distorted the standard wage metrics , with average hourly earnings last running at 4.7 % year over year , a number which analysts expect to accelerate to 4.8 % in September .
The CPS micro data provide additional perspective , allowing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ month and their wages over time .
It also reveals that the median wage of those that remained employed throughout the pandemic increased , as did the median wage of those that were rehired , which may soon become a challenge to the Fed which is confident wages growth will remain subdued until at least 2023 per its latest Average Inflation Targeting regime .
At the same time , the distribution showed similar results as the 25th and 75th percentiles also increased .
This provides further evidence of low-income workers falling behind .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ wage growth is highly skewed due to a slower rebound in hours worked , the reality is that wage pressures are likely extremely subdued according to BofA which cites a recent PEW survey ( Parker et al.
, 24 Sep 2020 ) released this week which found that 32 % of adults said they or someone in their household had to take a pay cut due to reduced hours or demand from the pandemic .
This stat was also skewed more negatively by income , as 37 % of low-income households experienced pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Wages aside , with the pandemic now in its seventh month and labor market slack still elevated , many of the unemployed are transitioning into the “ long-term unemployed cohort , ” which covers those without a job for more than 26 weeks .
To wit , starting in July , the level of unemployed 15-26 weeks spiked to 6.5 million , which is nearly double the previous record high of 3.5 million .
The level of unemployed 27 weeks & over may soon follow .
Of course , the longer one @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they can find another job .
As BofA notes , using labor flows , the BLS calculates the probability of reemployment by duration of unemployment .
The probability drops from 27 % for 5-14 weeks to 20 % for 15-26 weeks It drops further to 18 % for those unemployed for 26-52 weeks , with Lin warning that “ longer spells of unemployment also lead to lower reemployment wages as skills and employee bargaining power erode.
” The bottom line is that with the lower-income cohort already falling behind , the odds clearly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The end result is , therefore , even greater income disparity , hardly optimal for an economy where the Fed ’ s constant manipulation of market has already led to a historic divergence in wealth between the top 1 % – which just hit a record 200 year of average income vs “ only ” 60 in 1978 – and the bottom 50 % , whose income has not changed one bit in over 40 years .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources @ @ @ @ @ @ @ freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Tyler Durden
Heading into Friday’s payrolls report, the labor market has been enjoying a strong tailing, with the unemployment rate falling to a lower-than-expected 8.4% in August, and consensus is looking for a further decline to 8.2 % in September. In terms of non-farm payrolls, the consensus is also looking for continued job growth of +865k, but as Jim Reid cautions, “it’s worth bearing in mind that having lost over -22MM jobs in March and April, even this figure would mean that just over half of them have been recovered, still leaving nonfarm payrolls over 10MM below their peak back in February.”
Still, considering the continued gridlock over a new fiscal stimulus, if the consensus forecast of 850k NFP proves correct, it will certainly be a continuation of upward momentum with more than 51% of recent job losses recovered through September, leaving employment at 93% of February levels.
That said, there are underlying challenges as BofA writes in report published late last week looking at who is falling behind even as the labor market recovery continues. AS BofA economist Alexander Lin writes,
the pandemic affected the economy unevenly, impacting the lower-income population more than the upper-income cohorts. This has remained true in the recovery as well.
One can see the differences using the industry level data in the nonfarm payroll figures. Leisure & hospitality remains deep in the red and is the lowest paid industry (Chart 3). There are some higher paid industries like mining & logging and information services that remain below 90% of pre-pandemic levels, but they account for much smaller shares of employment.
Lin then highlights that employment by education reveals an even starker gap between the high skilled and low skilled. The level of employed with a bachelor’s degree or more saw a peak-to-trough decline of around 6% but has basically fully recovered from those losses through August. On the other end of the spectrum, those with less than a HS diploma have only recovered to 81% of pre-pandemic levels.
Meanwhile, the dramatic changes to the labor composition have distorted the standard wage metrics, with average hourly earnings last running at 4.7% year over year, a number which analysts expect to accelerate to 4.8% in September. The CPS micro data provide additional perspective, allowing economists to track workers from month to month and their wages over time. It also reveals that the median wage of those that remained employed throughout the pandemic increased, as did the median wage of those that were rehired, which may soon become a challenge to the Fed which is confident wages growth will remain subdued until at least 2023 per its latest Average Inflation Targeting regime.
At the same time, the distribution showed similar results as the 25th and 75th percentiles also increased. This provides further evidence of low-income workers falling behind.
Unfortunately, whereas the BLS calculation of wage growth is highly skewed due to a slower rebound in hours worked, the reality is that wage pressures are likely extremely subdued according to BofA which cites a recent PEW survey (Parker et al., 24 Sep 2020) released this week which found that 32% of adults said they or someone in their household had to take a pay cut due to reduced hours or demand from the pandemic. This stat was also skewed more negatively by income, as 37% of low-income households experienced pay cuts versus 26% of upper-income households.
Long-term problems emerging
Wages aside, with the pandemic now in its seventh month and labor market slack still elevated, many of the unemployed are transitioning into the “long-term unemployed cohort,” which covers those without a job for more than 26 weeks. To wit, starting in July, the level of unemployed 15-26 weeks spiked to 6.5 million, which is nearly double the previous record high of 3.5 million. The level of unemployed 27 weeks & over may soon follow.
Of course, the longer one is unemployed, the lower the chances they can find another job. As BofA notes, using labor flows, the BLS calculates the probability of reemployment by duration of unemployment. The probability drops from 27% for 5-14 weeks to 20% for 15-26 weeks


activistpost--2020-09-29--Tell the Department of Homeland Security: Stop Collecting DNA and other Biometrics

We need your help .
On September 11 , 2020 , the Department of Homeland Security ( DHS ) announced its intention to significantly expand both the number of people required to submit biometrics during routine immigration applications and the types of biometrics that individuals must surrender .
This new rule will apply to immigrants and U.S. citizens alike , and to people of all ages , including , for the first time , children under the age of 14 .
It would nearly double the number of people from whom DHS would collect biometrics each year , to more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plans to collect include palm prints , voice prints , iris scans , facial imaging , and even DNA—which are far more invasive than DHS ’ s current biometric collection of fingerprints , photographs , and signatures .
( For an incisive summary of the proposed changes , click here . )
DHS has given the public until October 13 , 2020 to voice their concerns about this highly invasive and unprecedented proposal .
If you want your voice heard on this important issue , you must submit a comment through the Federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and comment submission are subject to their privacy policy which you can read here .
TAKE ACTION Fill out the form to tell the Department of Homeland Security not to expand the collection DNA and other biometrics Immigrating to the United States , or sponsoring your family member to do so , should not expose your most intimate and sensitive personal data to the U.S. government .
But that ’ s what this new rule will do , by permitting DHS to collect a range of biometrics at every stage of the “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and should not , take DNA samples of every person born on U.S. soil—so why should it do the same for immigrants coming to the United States or U.S. citizens seeking to petition a family member ?
We can not allow the government to normalize , justify , or develop its capacity for the mass collection of DNA and other sensitive biometrics .
This move by DHS brings us one step closer to mass dragnet genetic surveillance .
It also risks that people ’ s biometric information will be vulnerable to breach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of biometrics collected from each individual , storing all data together in one database , and using a unique identifier to link several biometrics to each person .
The U.S. government has shown time and time again that it can not protect our personal data .
In 2019 , DHS admitted that the images of almost 200,000 people taken for its face recognition pilot , as well as automated license plate reader data , were released onto the dark web after a cyberattack compromised a subcontractor .
In 2015 , the Office of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ million fingerprints , in addition to the SSNs and other personal information of more than 25 million Americans .
We can not run the risk of similar infiltrations happening again with people ’ s DNA , voice prints , iris scans , or facial imaging .
Click the external link and tell DHS : I oppose the proposed rulemaking , which would allow the Department of Homeland Security to vastly increase the types of biometrics it collects , as well as double the number of people from whom it collects such biometrics , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and privacy risks , put people in the United States under undue suspicion , and make immigrants and their U.S. citizen family members vulnerable to surveillance and harassment based on race , immigration status , nationality , and religion .
TAKE ACTION Fill out the form to tell the Department of Homeland Security not to expand the collection DNA and other biometrics Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Matthew Guariglia
We need your help. On September 11, 2020, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced its intention to significantly expand both the number of people required to submit biometrics during routine immigration applications and the types of biometrics that individuals must surrender. This new rule will apply to immigrants and U.S. citizens alike, and to people of all ages, including, for the first time, children under the age of 14. It would nearly double the number of people from whom DHS would collect biometrics each year, to more than six million.
The biometrics DHS plans to collect include palm prints, voice prints, iris scans, facial imaging, and even DNA—which are far more invasive than DHS’s current biometric collection of fingerprints, photographs, and signatures. (For an incisive summary of the proposed changes, click here.)
DHS has given the public until October 13, 2020 to voice their concerns about this highly invasive and unprecedented proposal. If you want your voice heard on this important issue, you must submit a comment through the Federal Register. Your visit to their website and comment submission are subject to their privacy policy which you can read here.
TAKE ACTION
Fill out the form to tell the Department of Homeland Security not to expand the collection DNA and other biometrics
Immigrating to the United States, or sponsoring your family member to do so, should not expose your most intimate and sensitive personal data to the U.S. government. But that’s what this new rule will do, by permitting DHS to collect a range of biometrics at every stage of the “immigration lifecycle.” The government does not, and should not, take DNA samples of every person born on U.S. soil—so why should it do the same for immigrants coming to the United States or U.S. citizens seeking to petition a family member?
We cannot allow the government to normalize, justify, or develop its capacity for the mass collection of DNA and other sensitive biometrics. This move by DHS brings us one step closer to mass dragnet genetic surveillance. It also risks that people’s biometric information will be vulnerable to breach or future misuse by expanding the types of biometrics collected from each individual, storing all data together in one database, and using a unique identifier to link several biometrics to each person. The U.S. government has shown time and time again that it cannot protect our personal data. In 2019, DHS admitted that the images of almost 200,000 people taken for its face recognition pilot, as well as automated license plate reader data, were released onto the dark web after a cyberattack compromised a subcontractor. In 2015, the Office of Personnel Management admitted a breach of 5.6 million fingerprints, in addition to the SSNs and other personal information of more than 25 million Americans. We cannot run the risk of similar infiltrations happening again with people’s DNA, voice prints, iris scans, or facial imaging.
Click the external link and tell DHS: I oppose the proposed rulemaking, which would allow the Department of Homeland Security to vastly increase the types of biometrics it collects, as well as double the number of people from whom it collects such biometrics, including children. These actions create security and privacy risks, put people in the United States under undue suspicion, and make immigrants and their U.S. citizen family members vulnerable to surveillance and harassment based on race, immigration status, nationality, and religion.
TAKE ACTION
Fill out the form to tell the Department of Homeland Security not to expand the collection DNA and other biometrics
Source: EFF.org
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-09-29--Health Expert Cites Cancer Cluster and Starts Petition to Remove T-Mobile Cell Tower Next to Playgro

Health Expert Cites Cancer Cluster and Starts Petition to Remove T-Mobile Cell Tower Next to Playground

Clusters of cancer and other illnesses are NOT uncommon near cell towers .
After Sprint installed a small cell tower next to a California school , cancer and other illnesses significantly increased among students and staff .
The company took no responsibility for this but finally agreed to remove it .
Perhaps they were tired of the unflattering media coverage .
Another cancer cluster has been identified in a New York neighborhood where T-Mobile has installed a small cell tower next to a playground .
Residents want it gone .
Can you blame them ?
Health Expert Calls for Removal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Citing Cancer Cluster A T-Mobile cell tower looms next to a playground at Lakeside Elementary School in Merrick , New York .
On Saturday , September 26th , health expert Sara Lobato and mother of two , began circulating a petition calling for the removal and relocation of the tower , citing a study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program and a study from Yale University that both found clear evidence of biological harm associated with exposure to wireless radiation .
The petition also discusses the emergence of a cancer cluster among @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cell tower .
Telecom companies have been warning shareholders for many years that they may eventually be held liable for harm caused by their products and infrastructure .
Most insurance companies don ’ t do business with telecoms anymore because it ’ s too risky .
For many years , firefighter unions have opposed the use of their stations for cell towers and antennas because of health risks from exposure .
In California they fought for an ordinance to ban installation at stations .
Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) guidelines and limits @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sources are 24+ years old .
Lawsuits have been filed against the agency for NOT protecting Americans from unsafe levels of radiation as well as 5G deployment on the ground ( see 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ) and in space .
There is still no “ safe ” level of wireless radiation exposure that has been determined for children or pregnant women .
Activist Post reports regularly about unsafe technology .
For more information visit our archives and the following websites .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By B.N. Frank
Clusters of cancer and other illnesses are NOT uncommon near cell towers. After Sprint installed a small cell tower next to a California school, cancer and other illnesses significantly increased among students and staff. The company took no responsibility for this but finally agreed to remove it. Perhaps they were tired of the unflattering media coverage.
Another cancer cluster has been identified in a New York neighborhood where T-Mobile has installed a small cell tower next to a playground. Residents want it gone. Can you blame them?
From 5G Crisis:
Health Expert Calls for Removal of Cell Tower Next to Playground, Citing Cancer Cluster A T-Mobile cell tower looms next to a playground at Lakeside Elementary School in Merrick, New York. On Saturday, September 26th, health expert Sara Lobato and mother of two, began circulating a petition calling for the removal and relocation of the tower, citing a study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program and a study from Yale University that both found clear evidence of biological harm associated with exposure to wireless radiation. The petition also discusses the emergence of a cancer cluster among people living in close proximity to the cell tower. View the full petition here.
Telecom companies have been warning shareholders for many years that they may eventually be held liable for harm caused by their products and infrastructure. Most insurance companies don’t do business with telecoms anymore because it’s too risky. For many years, firefighter unions have opposed the use of their stations for cell towers and antennas because of health risks from exposure. In California they fought for an ordinance to ban installation at stations.
Federal Communications Commission (FCC) guidelines and limits for cell towers and other wireless radiation sources are 24+ years old. Lawsuits have been filed against the agency for NOT protecting Americans from unsafe levels of radiation as well as 5G deployment on the ground (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) and in space.
There is still no “safe” level of wireless radiation exposure that has been determined for children or pregnant women.
Activist Post reports regularly about unsafe technology. For more information visit our archives and the following websites.
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-09-29--“Historic” $20M Settlement Awarded After Cop Put Handcuffed Man in Cruiser, Shot Him 7 Times

Temple Hills , MD — In 2018 , Sarah Wilson allegedly grabbed a gun and shot herself in the head while handcuffed in the back of a police cruiser .
Her death was ruled a suicide .
Victor White III , 22 , was handcuffed in the back of a police cruiser in Louisiana and also allegedly grabbed a gun and shot himself in the back of a police cruiser .
Like Wilson , his death was also ruled a suicide .
Then , in January , another man was killed while handcuffed inside a police cruiser .
This time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of it being ruled a suicide as the man was shot seven times by the officer ’ s service weapon .
Due to the egregious nature of the case , the family of William Green , 43 , has just been awarded a historic settlement of $ 20 million after Cpl .
Michael Owen Jr. handcuffed Green , placed him in the patrol car , and then shot and killed him , hitting him 7 times .
“ To be clear , there is no price that you can put on the life @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an uncle , a brother — there is no appropriate price tag to accompany a loss like that , ” Prince George ’ s County Executive Angela Alsobrooks said , speaking next to Green ’ s family .
“ But we believe the actions taken that night against Mr. Green , and ultimately taken against his family , warrant this settlement.
” Billy Murphy , the attorney for the family said Monday the “ civil justice phase ” is complete , and the family now awaits justice in the criminal case against Owen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ historic ” and said it reflects the “ heinous nature , the brutal nature , the senseless nature of what happened to Mr. Green.
” After the shooting , Prince George ’ s County Police Chief Hank Stawinski announced murder , manslaughter , assault and weapons charges at a press conference .
Cpl .
Michael Owen Jr. , a 10-year force veteran , allegedly shot Green seven times .
“ I have concluded that what happened last night is a crime , ” Stawinski said at the time .
There was no “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he said .
According to police , that night , Prince George ’ s County police officers responded to reports that a driver had struck multiple vehicles .
When they arrived on the scene , they found the driver , William Green .
Temple Hills community , spokeswoman Christina Cotterman said the officers told her they believed the man was high on PCP because they could smell it .
While PCP does reportedly have an odor similar to magic markers , police claiming that a man was high on it without first conducting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and deliberately misleading at worst .
Results of a toxicology test were never publicly released confirming that Green had PCP in his system .
But there are other details to this story that paint an extremely sketchy picture .
For starters , police were able to get the driver handcuffed without incident .
We can deduce that it was without incident because officers claim they placed the Green in the front seat of the police cruiser after they handcuffed him .
Yes , you read that correctly .
Officials told the media that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s County police officers to place suspects in the front seats of their vehicles .
Based on the thousands of police stories TFTP has reported over the years , the idea that it is department policy to allow suspects allegedly high on PCP to ride in the front seat of a police cruiser — handcuffed or not — is unbelievable , as in , we don ’ t believe it .
TFTP has reported on incidents of police officers being arrested and asking to ride in the front seat to avoid embarrassment only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Originally , police claimed that once the officer hopped into the front seat with Green that a struggle ensued .
However , the investigation would later reveal that no such struggle ever happened .
This is likely the reason behind such a massive settlement .
Green could have simply suffered a medical emergency , passed out at the wheel and struck several cars .
Instead of receive the help he needed , Owen put him in his police cruiser and murdered him .
And , the public has yet to be given @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what he did .
According to CBS News , the settlement is believed to be one of the country ’ s largest one-time settlements involving someone killed by police .
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 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thought Project .
Follow @ MattAgorist on Twitter , Steemit , and now on Minds .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Matt Agorist
Temple Hills, MD — In 2018, Sarah Wilson allegedly grabbed a gun and shot herself in the head while handcuffed in the back of a police cruiser. Her death was ruled a suicide. Victor White III, 22, was handcuffed in the back of a police cruiser in Louisiana and also allegedly grabbed a gun and shot himself in the back of a police cruiser. Like Wilson, his death was also ruled a suicide. Then, in January, another man was killed while handcuffed inside a police cruiser. This time, however, there was no chance of it being ruled a suicide as the man was shot seven times by the officer’s service weapon.
Due to the egregious nature of the case, the family of William Green, 43, has just been awarded a historic settlement of $20 million after Cpl. Michael Owen Jr. handcuffed Green, placed him in the patrol car, and then shot and killed him, hitting him 7 times.
“To be clear, there is no price that you can put on the life of a son, a father, an uncle, a brother — there is no appropriate price tag to accompany a loss like that,” Prince George’s County Executive Angela Alsobrooks said, speaking next to Green’s family. “But we believe the actions taken that night against Mr. Green, and ultimately taken against his family, warrant this settlement.”
Billy Murphy, the attorney for the family said Monday the “civil justice phase” is complete, and the family now awaits justice in the criminal case against Owen. Murphy called the civil settlement “historic” and said it reflects the “heinous nature, the brutal nature, the senseless nature of what happened to Mr. Green.”
After the shooting, Prince George’s County Police Chief Hank Stawinski announced murder, manslaughter, assault and weapons charges at a press conference. Cpl. Michael Owen Jr., a 10-year force veteran, allegedly shot Green seven times.
“I have concluded that what happened last night is a crime,” Stawinski said at the time. There was no “reasonable explanation” for the events, he said.
According to police, that night, Prince George’s County police officers responded to reports that a driver had struck multiple vehicles. When they arrived on the scene, they found the driver, William Green. Temple Hills community, spokeswoman Christina Cotterman said the officers told her they believed the man was high on PCP because they could smell it.
While PCP does reportedly have an odor similar to magic markers, police claiming that a man was high on it without first conducting a toxicology exam was irresponsible at best and deliberately misleading at worst. Results of a toxicology test were never publicly released confirming that Green had PCP in his system.
But there are other details to this story that paint an extremely sketchy picture. For starters, police were able to get the driver handcuffed without incident. We can deduce that it was without incident because officers claim they placed the Green in the front seat of the police cruiser after they handcuffed him.
Yes, you read that correctly. Officials told the media that it is normal for Prince George’s County police officers to place suspects in the front seats of their vehicles. Based on the thousands of police stories TFTP has reported over the years, the idea that it is department policy to allow suspects allegedly high on PCP to ride in the front seat of a police cruiser — handcuffed or not — is unbelievable, as in, we don’t believe it. TFTP has reported on incidents of police officers being arrested and asking to ride in the front seat to avoid embarrassment only to be denied by their arresting officers.
Originally, police claimed that once the officer hopped into the front seat with Green that a struggle ensued. However, the investigation would later reveal that no such struggle ever happened.
This is likely the reason behind such a massive settlement. Green could have simply suffered a medical emergency, passed out at the wheel and struck several cars. Instead of receive the help he needed, Owen put him in his police cruiser and murdered him. And, the public has yet to be given a motive as to why he did what he did.
According to CBS News, the settlement is believed to be one of the country’s largest one-time settlements involving someone killed by police.
Source: The Free Thought Project
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. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Minds.
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-09-29--SpaceX Delayed Starlink Satellite Fleet Launch Due To Rocket “Recovery Issue” Without Further Explan

SpaceX Delayed Starlink Satellite Fleet Launch Due To Rocket “Recovery Issue” Without Further Explanation

SpaceX satellite and rocket explosions can and have happened .
Despite warnings , opposition , accidents and almost accidents , the Federal Communications Commission ( FCC ) continues to ignore all of this and approve tens of thousands of satellites and similar vehicles from SpaceX and other companies to provide internet coverage – including 5G – from space ( see 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 ) .
Some good news – earlier this month SpaceX delayed a satellite fleet launch @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and hasn ’ t issued a new launch date .
A new launch date has not yet been set .
SpaceX called off the launch of a new fleet of Starlink internet satellites on Thursday ( Sept. 17 ) due to a “ recovery issue ” related to the mission ’ s Falcon 9 rocket .
A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket was scheduled to launch 60 new Starlink satellites for the company ’ s growing megaconstellation at 2:19 p.m. EDT ( 1819 GMT ) Thursday from Pad 39A of NASA ’ s historic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 15 minutes before the planned liftoff , SpaceX scrubbed the mission .
“ Standing down from today ’ s Starlink launch due to recovery issue ; vehicle and payload remain healthy , ” SpaceX representatives announced in a Twitter update .
The White House recently issued a directive that requires manufacturers to better monitor and safeguard satellites and similar vehicles .
Only time will tell if this will do any good .
The FCC is supposed to protect the public from the telecom industry .
Their history of doing the exact opposite predates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ filed against the agency for NOT protecting Americans from unsafe levels of radiation as well as 5G deployment on the ground ( see 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ) and in space .
Activist Post reports regularly about unsafe technology .
For more information , visit our archives and the following websites : Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By B.N. Frank
SpaceX satellite and rocket explosions can and have happened. Despite warnings, opposition, accidents and almost accidents, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continues to ignore all of this and approve tens of thousands of satellites and similar vehicles from SpaceX and other companies to provide internet coverage – including 5G – from space (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13).
Some good news – earlier this month SpaceX delayed a satellite fleet launch due to rocket “recovery issue” and hasn’t issued a new launch date.
From Space.com:
SpaceX delays next Starlink satellite fleet launch due to rocket ‘recovery issue’ A new launch date has not yet been set. SpaceX called off the launch of a new fleet of Starlink internet satellites on Thursday (Sept. 17) due to a “recovery issue” related to the mission’s Falcon 9 rocket. A SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket was scheduled to launch 60 new Starlink satellites for the company’s growing megaconstellation at 2:19 p.m. EDT (1819 GMT) Thursday from Pad 39A of NASA’s historic Kennedy Space Center in Florida. But 15 minutes before the planned liftoff, SpaceX scrubbed the mission. “Standing down from today’s Starlink launch due to recovery issue; vehicle and payload remain healthy,” SpaceX representatives announced in a Twitter update. Read full article
The White House recently issued a directive that requires manufacturers to better monitor and safeguard satellites and similar vehicles. Only time will tell if this will do any good.
The FCC is supposed to protect the public from the telecom industry. Their history of doing the exact opposite predates the Trump administration. Lawsuits have been filed against the agency for NOT protecting Americans from unsafe levels of radiation as well as 5G deployment on the ground (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5) and in space.
Activist Post reports regularly about unsafe technology. For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:
Image: Pixabay
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-09-29--How The Feds Will Use Wi-Fiber To Create A National Public Surveillance Network: Part 2

Since 9/11 , the Feds have been hard at work trying to create a national surveillance network ‘ for our safety.
’ And with Wi-Fiber Technology they might have finally succeeded .
A new study by Safety.com revealed that CCTV cameras record each and every American at least 238 every week , or more than 12,000 times every year !
Approximately 6 years ago the Drug Enforcement Agency ( DEA ) created a national license plate reader program which was allegedly cancelled after public outcry .
An important tidbit , that has been mostly ignored by the mass media , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ helping create the DEA ’ s national license plate reader program .
In 2015 I wrote an article exposing law enforcement ’ s role in funneling license plate to the Feds .
From repo companies to license plate reader companies like Rekor Systems , Vigilant Solutions and Flock Safety a vast database of more than 14 billion license plates have been recorded .
Even Homeland Security ’ s Customs and Border Protection are recording Americans ’ license plates .
At the same time , police departments have been expanding their cam-share programs throughout @ @ @ @ @ @ @ law enforcement unfettered access to public and private CCTV cameras .
Our cities have become world leaders in public surveillance as a result of the many cameras in America .
Readers should note that , since the pandemic , Americans have seen a proliferation of facial recognition/thermal imaging cameras spreading across the country .
While all of this has been going on , the Feds have been hard at work turning our cities into mini-CIA smart cities .
In 2017 , the CIA ’ s “ Signature School ” , the University of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our cities into smart cities .
Not to be outdone , the U.S. Marine Corps also has their dirty hands in smart cities .
Last year , the U.S. Marine Corps signed a memorandum of understanding to work with the city of San Diego in turning street lights and the IoT into smart city surveillance devices .
Activist Post Recommended Book : Snitch Culture : How Citizens Are Turned Into The Eyes And Ears Of The State I have written extensively about how cities like San Diego and Detroit have become mirror images @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Diego and Detroit use smart street lights equipped with an array of sensors that record pedestrians , vehicles and in some cases are equipped with microphones .
In San Diego ’ s case , smart streetlights are being used to create a public watchlisting network , which brings us to Wi-Fiber .
With Wi-Fiber , Big Brother now has the necessary tool to connect a hodgepodge of separate police surveillance networks into one cohesive public surveillance network .
In part 1 , I mentioned how Wi-Fiber allows police to secretly monitor protesters “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police presence , ” and it allows law enforcement to secretly follow vehicles as they travel throughout the city of Canton , Ohio .
Part 1 also revealed how law enforcement can use Wi-Fiber to identify and track pedestrians and any items or clothing they may be carrying or wearing , which really only touches the surface of just how invasive police surveillance has become .
Wi-Fiber gives law enforcement access to public and private CCTV cameras , cam-share cameras , public transit cameras , red-light cameras , traffic intersection cameras , highway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ cameras ( with microphones ) , smart street lights and license plate readers to track Americans without a warrant .
( To see how police turned the “ Electronic Monitoring Indigency Fund ” into a highway surveillance program , click here . )
Wi-Fiber will allow police and Fusion Centers to tie all of these surveillance devices into one network , giving them the ability to secretly track Americans and vehicles without a warrant .
It allows police to create secret red-flag or zone detection zones that record and monitor people , objects @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in real-time .
Wi-Fiber also allows law enforcement to look at historical records and track a person [ s ] or vehicle [ s ] whereabouts thus making Wi-Fiber a hugely intrusive tool used to monitor anyone , for any reason .
Thanks to products like Wi-Fiber , Americans can see how these so-called public safety devices are all designed with one commonality : to create a national public surveillance network .
What does the future hold for Wi-Fiber and freedom in America ?
Last month , newspapers from across the country posted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ citizen spying program , using TLOs to report people to Fusion Centers for doing innocent things like , taking photos of a theatre or refusing to identify themselves .
DHS ’ s “ If You See Something Say Something ” program has morphed into a vast network of 500 police snitching apps and social media platforms like “ Nextdoor ” that turn neighbors into government snitches .
For those skeptics out there , I say , all the warning signs have been there .
Time and again privacy advocates like myself have warned @ @ @ @ @ @ @ desire to record and track everyone .
It was only a matter of time before a company like Wi-Fiber came along and gave law enforcement the ability to tie all these networks into one national public surveillance network .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a @ @ @ @ @ @ @

By MassPrivateI
Since 9/11, the Feds have been hard at work trying to create a national surveillance network ‘for our safety.’ And with Wi-Fiber Technology they might have finally succeeded. A new study by Safety.com revealed that CCTV cameras record each and every American at least 238 every week, or more than 12,000 times every year!
Approximately 6 years ago the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) created a national license plate reader program which was allegedly cancelled after public outcry.
Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on Wednesday ordered the cancellation of a plan by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency to develop a national license-plate tracking system after privacy advocates raised concern about the initiative.
An important tidbit, that has been mostly ignored by the mass media, is law enforcement’s involvement in helping create the DEA’s national license plate reader program.
In 2015 I wrote an article exposing law enforcement’s role in funneling license plate to the Feds.
The DEA has gathered as many as 343 million records in the National License Plate Recognition program, which connects DEA license plate readers with those of other law enforcement agencies around the country.
From repo companies to license plate reader companies like Rekor Systems, Vigilant Solutions and Flock Safety a vast database of more than 14 billion license plates have been recorded.
Even Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection are recording Americans’ license plates.
At the same time, police departments have been expanding their cam-share programs throughout the country. Police cam-share programs give law enforcement unfettered access to public and private CCTV cameras.
Our cities have become world leaders in public surveillance as a result of the many cameras in America. Readers should note that, since the pandemic, Americans have seen a proliferation of facial recognition/thermal imaging cameras spreading across the country.
While all of this has been going on, the Feds have been hard at work turning our cities into mini-CIA smart cities.
In 2017, the CIA’s “Signature School”, the University of New Mexico, has been helping turn our cities into smart cities. Not to be outdone, the U.S. Marine Corps also has their dirty hands in smart cities.
Last year, the U.S. Marine Corps signed a memorandum of understanding to work with the city of San Diego in turning street lights and the IoT into smart city surveillance devices.
Activist Post Recommended Book: Snitch Culture: How Citizens Are Turned Into The Eyes And Ears Of The State
I have written extensively about how cities like San Diego and Detroit have become mirror images of Chinese-style surveillance networks. Both San Diego and Detroit use smart street lights equipped with an array of sensors that record pedestrians, vehicles and in some cases are equipped with microphones.
In San Diego’s case, smart streetlights are being used to create a public watchlisting network, which brings us to Wi-Fiber. With Wi-Fiber, Big Brother now has the necessary tool to connect a hodgepodge of separate police surveillance networks into one cohesive public surveillance network.
In part 1, I mentioned how Wi-Fiber allows police to secretly monitor protesters “at a distance for a less visible police presence,” and it allows law enforcement to secretly follow vehicles as they travel throughout the city of Canton, Ohio. Part 1 also revealed how law enforcement can use Wi-Fiber to identify and track pedestrians and any items or clothing they may be carrying or wearing, which really only touches the surface of just how invasive police surveillance has become.
Wi-Fiber gives law enforcement access to public and private CCTV cameras, cam-share cameras, public transit cameras, red-light cameras, traffic intersection cameras, highway surveillance cameras, E-ZPass cameras, ShotSpotter cameras (with microphones), smart street lights and license plate readers to track Americans without a warrant. (To see how police turned the “Electronic Monitoring Indigency Fund” into a highway surveillance program, click here.)
Wi-Fiber will allow police and Fusion Centers to tie all of these surveillance devices into one network, giving them the ability to secretly track Americans and vehicles without a warrant. It allows police to create secret red-flag or zone detection zones that record and monitor people, objects or vehicles entering or exiting a zone in real-time.
Wi-Fiber also allows law enforcement to look at historical records and track a person[s] or vehicle[s] whereabouts thus making Wi-Fiber a hugely intrusive tool used to monitor anyone, for any reason.
Thanks to products like Wi-Fiber, Americans can see how these so-called public safety devices are all designed with one commonality: to create a national public surveillance network.
What does the future hold for Wi-Fiber and freedom in America?
Last month, newspapers from across the country posted BlueLeak information that revealed a secret national citizen spying program, using TLOs to report people to Fusion Centers for doing innocent things like, taking photos of a theatre or refusing to identify themselves. DHS’s “If You See Something Say Something” program has morphed into a vast network of 500 police snitching apps and social media platforms like “Nextdoor” that turn neighbors into government snitches.
For those skeptics out there, I say, all the warning signs have been there. Time and again privacy advocates like myself have warned the public about Big Brother’s desire to record and track everyone. It was only a matter of time before a company like Wi-Fiber came along and gave law enforcement the ability to tie all these networks into one national public surveillance network.
Source: MassPrivateIBlog
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-09-29--“Fahrenheit 451” Predicted People Would Demand Tyranny

Even if it has been a while since you read Fahrenheit 451 , you might remember Ray Bradbury ’ s classic for its portrayal of a dystopian future in which an authoritarian government burns books .
Read Fahrenheit 451 again to discover why people wanted their tyrannical government to burn books .
Bradbury wrote Fahrenheit 451 in 1953 , yet the parallels to today ’ s social climate for censorship are haunting .
Bradbury ’ s protagonist is Guy Montag , who , like all firemen in Bradbury ’ s future , burns books .
In Bradbury ’ s dystopia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peace of mind , the focus of our understandable and rightful dread of being inferior ; official censors , judges , and executors.
” Today ’ s mainstream and social media are “ custodians of our peace of mind ” as they filter out “ conflicting theory and thought.
” Captain Beatty is Montag ’ s boss .
Beatty explained , “ If you don ’ t want a man unhappy politically , don ’ t give him two sides to a question to worry him ; give him one.
” If you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ such as Covid-19 policy , Beatty has the ticket : “ Cram them full of noncombustible data , chock them so damned full of ‘ facts ’ they feel stuffed , but absolutely ‘ brilliant ’ with information .
Then they ’ ll feel they ’ re thinking , they ’ ll get a sense of motion without moving.
” Today , millions listen daily to reports of case counts of Covid-19 .
Like Bradbury predicted , listeners can recite the numbers but have no context to make sense of the numbers .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and doctors have advocated alternatives to lockdowns that could save lives and abate catastrophic impacts on economies .
As in Bradbury ’ s world , many are working tirelessly to disparage and censor alternative views .
After Montag questions his role as a book burner , he recites Dover Beach by Matthew Arnold to neighbors .
His neighbors were shocked at the feelings the poem provoked .
One cries out , “ Silly words , silly words , silly awful hurting words… Why do people want to hurt people ?
Not enough hurt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ got to tease people with stuff like that !
” Incredibly , Bradbury anticipated today ’ s social climate where people claim censorship is justified because someone hurt their feelings .
Beatty explains a dominant social norm justifying censorship : Do not offend minorities .
Bradbury is clear ; “ minorities ” meant practically everyone : Pretending you can “ stay happy all the time ” was another social norm driving popular demand for censorship in Fahrenheit 451 .
Beatty explains , In Bradbury ’ s dystopia , to consider conflicting theories makes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fireman ’ s mission and justifies censorship : In Bradbury ’ s future , intellectuals came under scrutiny when ideas conflicted .
The word “ intellectual ” became a “ swear word.
” The public dreaded “ the unfamiliar ” and disdained a world where merit mattered .
Again , Bradbury has Beatty explain the mindset behind such thinking : In Bradbury ’ s dystopia , thinking was not welcome .
Even front porches were eliminated .
One of Montag ’ s young neighbors explained why : Social distancing is today embraced as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Covid-19 .
Social distancing also keeps us safe from “ conflicting theories and thoughts.
” Chairs have been removed from social gathering places .
Hallways are quiet .
Nobody stands around the water cooler .
People have few places to talk with each other .
The parallel to porches is haunting .
Perhaps you are sensing a shift in social norms undermining parental rights and the sanctity of the family .
Bradbury foresaw a push for government-funded pre-school .
Captain Beatty explains , Bradbury also anticipated today ’ s justification of looting .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ property , not people .
Before he began to see the evil he was part of , Montag eased his conscience with this similar line of thinking : Warning his readers of policies shaped by the majority , Bradbury writes , Today , politicians claim the right to destroy freedom when they get a majority vote of the people .
This dangerous reasoning is antithetical to the founding principles of this country .
We can take a lesson from Bradbury ’ s character Professor Faber , who recognized the consequences of his own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claiming they are “ woke , ” progressives clamor for tyranny and censorship .
In Bradbury ’ s world the “ woke ” saw through the lies of tyranny and censorship .
Bradbury would exhort us to avoid expediency and speak out to prevent the worst .
In his novel , Bradbury didn ’ t take a deep dive into the psychology of saying nothing .
My recent essay on mask mandates by businesses provoked a strong response .
Many were sympathetic to my point that businesses respond to consumer demand .
Yet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being shaped by a small but frightened and very vocal minority who complain loudly to managers about customers not wearing a mask .
Going against the vocal herd takes courage .
In his book The Heart Aroused , poet David Whyte , who works with businesses on organizational change issues , shares a universal story : Whyte explains the CEO made it plain he wanted to hear “ ten.
” Whyte ’ s friend thinks the plan is terrible , and rumors are that other executives feel the same .
As the CEO @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s friend hears his colleague , one by one , say “ ten.
” When it is his turn , “ against everything he believes , ( Whyte ’ s friend ) hears a mouselike , faraway voice , his own , saying ‘ ten.
’ ” According to Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann ’ s theory of the spiral of silence , “ our willingness to express an opinion is a direct result of how popular or unpopular we perceive it to be.
” When we believe our belief is popular , we will make @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part of the herd .
Like Whyte ’ s friend , we will avoid expressing our point of view when we sense it will be unpopular .
If you think the public is empowered by social media to express unpopular views , you would be mistaken .
As in Fahrenheit 451 , people censor themselves first , even before Facebook and Twitter add their own censorship .
In 2014 , the Pew Research Center surveyed the public about their willingness to freely express their views about the 2013 Edward Snowden revelations .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ willing to discuss the Snowden-NSA story on social media than they were in person.
” Social media was not an outlet for those concerned about expressing an unpopular view .
Consistent with the “ spiral of silence ” theory and compatible with Bradbury ’ s dystopian future , no matter what the setting , people are reluctant to share an unpopular view .
A 2020 Cato survey found 62 % “ of Americans say the political climate these days prevents them from saying things they believe because others might find them offensive.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their neighbors and colleagues about Covid-19 policies for fear of being accused of not valuing human lives ?
In Fahrenheit 451 , silence helped pave the way for the public ’ s embrace of tyranny .
In 2020 , Fahrenheit 451 is far more than a chilling , cautionary tale .
To reverse the spiral of silence we must make space for candid conversations by thoughtfully considering alternative viewpoints .
Barry Brownstein is professor emeritus of economics and leadership at the University of Baltimore .
He is senior contributor at Intellectual Takeout and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Barry Brownstein
Even if it has been a while since you read Fahrenheit 451, you might remember Ray Bradbury’s classic for its portrayal of a dystopian future in which an authoritarian government burns books.
Read Fahrenheit 451 again to discover why people wanted their tyrannical government to burn books. Bradbury wrote Fahrenheit 451 in 1953, yet the parallels to today’s social climate for censorship are haunting.
Bradbury’s protagonist is Guy Montag, who, like all firemen in Bradbury’s future, burns books.
In Bradbury’s dystopia, firemen became “custodians of our peace of mind, the focus of our understandable and rightful dread of being inferior; official censors, judges, and executors.”
Today’s mainstream and social media are “custodians of our peace of mind” as they filter out “conflicting theory and thought.” Captain Beatty is Montag’s boss. Beatty explained, “If you don’t want a man unhappy politically, don’t give him two sides to a question to worry him; give him one.”
If you don’t want people debating questions such as Covid-19 policy, Beatty has the ticket: “Cram them full of noncombustible data, chock them so damned full of ‘facts’ they feel stuffed, but absolutely ‘brilliant’ with information. Then they’ll feel they’re thinking, they’ll get a sense of motion without moving.”
Today, millions listen daily to reports of case counts of Covid-19. Like Bradbury predicted, listeners can recite the numbers but have no context to make sense of the numbers. Many have little idea that important scientists and doctors have advocated alternatives to lockdowns that could save lives and abate catastrophic impacts on economies. As in Bradbury’s world, many are working tirelessly to disparage and censor alternative views.
After Montag questions his role as a book burner, he recites Dover Beach by Matthew Arnold to neighbors. His neighbors were shocked at the feelings the poem provoked. One cries out, “Silly words, silly words, silly awful hurting words… Why do people want to hurt people? Not enough hurt in the world, you’ve got to tease people with stuff like that!”
Incredibly, Bradbury anticipated today’s social climate where people claim censorship is justified because someone hurt their feelings.
Beatty explains a dominant social norm justifying censorship: Do not offend minorities. Bradbury is clear; “minorities” meant practically everyone:
Don’t step on the toes of the dog-lovers, the cat-lovers, doctors, lawyers, merchants, chiefs, Mormons, Baptists, Unitarians, second-generation Chinese, Swedes, Italians, Germans, Texans, Brooklynites, Irishmen, people from Oregon or Mexico.
Pretending you can “stay happy all the time” was another social norm driving popular demand for censorship in Fahrenheit 451. Beatty explains,
[Censorship] didn’t come from the Government down. There was no dictum, no declaration, no censorship, to start with, no! Technology, mass exploitation, and minority pressure carried the trick, thank God. Today, thanks to them, you can stay happy all the time, you are allowed to read comics, the good old confessions, or trade journals.
In Bradbury’s dystopia, to consider conflicting theories makes for unhappiness, so Beatty lauds the fireman’s mission and justifies censorship:
The important thing for you to remember, Montag, is we’re the Happiness Boys, the Dixie Duo, you and I and the others. We stand against the small tide of those who want to make everyone unhappy with conflicting theory and thought. We have our fingers in the dyke. Hold steady. Don’t let the torrent of melancholy and dreary philosophy drown our world. We depend on you. I don’t think you realize how important you are, we are, to our happy world as it stands now.
In Bradbury’s future, intellectuals came under scrutiny when ideas conflicted. The word “intellectual” became a “swear word.” The public dreaded “the unfamiliar” and disdained a world where merit mattered. Again, Bradbury has Beatty explain the mindset behind such thinking:
We must all be alike. Not everyone born free and equal, as the Constitution says, but everyone made equal. Each man the image of every other; then all are happy, for there are no mountains to make them cower, to judge themselves against. So! A book is a loaded gun in the house next door. Burn it. Take the shot from the weapon. Breach man’s mind. Who knows who might be the target of the well read man?
In Bradbury’s dystopia, thinking was not welcome. Even front porches were eliminated. One of Montag’s young neighbors explained why:
People sat there sometimes at night, talking when they wanted to talk, rocking, and not talking when they didn’t want to talk. Sometimes they just sat there and thought about things, turned things over… they didn’t want people sitting like that, doing nothing, rocking, talking; that was the wrong kind of social life. People talked too much. And they had time to think.
Social distancing is today embraced as a way to keep us safe from Covid-19. Social distancing also keeps us safe from “conflicting theories and thoughts.” Chairs have been removed from social gathering places. Hallways are quiet. Nobody stands around the water cooler. People have few places to talk with each other. The parallel to porches is haunting.
Perhaps you are sensing a shift in social norms undermining parental rights and the sanctity of the family. Bradbury foresaw a push for government-funded pre-school. Captain Beatty explains,
The home environment can undo a lot you try to do at school. That’s why we’ve lowered the kindergarten age year after year until now we’re almost snatching them from the cradle.
Bradbury also anticipated today’s justification of looting. Some claim that rioters are merely damaging property, not people. Before he began to see the evil he was part of, Montag eased his conscience with this similar line of thinking:
You weren’t hurting anyone, you were hurting only things! And since things really couldn’t be hurt, since things felt nothing, and things don’t scream or whimper.
Warning his readers of policies shaped by the majority, Bradbury writes,
The most dangerous enemy of truth and freedom, the solid unmoving cattle of the majority. Oh, God, the terrible tyranny of the majority.
Today, politicians claim the right to destroy freedom when they get a majority vote of the people. This dangerous reasoning is antithetical to the founding principles of this country.
We can take a lesson from Bradbury’s character Professor Faber, who recognized the consequences of his own self-censorship:
I saw the way things were going, a long time back. I said nothing. I’m one of the innocents who could have spoken up and out when no one would listen to the ‘guilty,’ but I did not speak and thus became guilty myself.
How ironic that today, claiming they are “woke,” progressives clamor for tyranny and censorship. In Bradbury’s world the “woke” saw through the lies of tyranny and censorship. Bradbury would exhort us to avoid expediency and speak out to prevent the worst.
In his novel, Bradbury didn’t take a deep dive into the psychology of saying nothing. My recent essay on mask mandates by businesses provoked a strong response. Many were sympathetic to my point that businesses respond to consumer demand. Yet, some believe that business policy is being shaped by a small but frightened and very vocal minority who complain loudly to managers about customers not wearing a mask.
Going against the vocal herd takes courage. In his book The Heart Aroused, poet David Whyte, who works with businesses on organizational change issues, shares a universal story:
A man I know finds himself in a meeting room at the very edge of speech; he is approaching his moment of reckoning, he is looking for support from his fellow executives around the table … the CEO is pacing up and down on the slate gray carpet. He has asked, in no uncertain terms, for their opinion of the plan he wants to put through. ‘I want to know what you all think about this,’ he demands, ‘on a scale of one to ten.’
Whyte explains the CEO made it plain he wanted to hear “ten.” Whyte’s friend thinks the plan is terrible, and rumors are that other executives feel the same. As the CEO goes around the room, Whyte’s friend hears his colleague, one by one, say “ten.” When it is his turn, “against everything he believes, (Whyte’s friend) hears a mouselike, faraway voice, his own, saying ‘ten.’”
According to Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann’s theory of the spiral of silence, “our willingness to express an opinion is a direct result of how popular or unpopular we perceive it to be.” When we believe our belief is popular, we will make a point of signaling that we are part of the herd. Like Whyte’s friend, we will avoid expressing our point of view when we sense it will be unpopular.
If you think the public is empowered by social media to express unpopular views, you would be mistaken. As in Fahrenheit 451, people censor themselves first, even before Facebook and Twitter add their own censorship.
In 2014, the Pew Research Center surveyed the public about their willingness to freely express their views about the 2013 Edward Snowden revelations. The survey revealed that “people were less willing to discuss the Snowden-NSA story on social media than they were in person.” Social media was not an outlet for those concerned about expressing an unpopular view.
Consistent with the “spiral of silence” theory and compatible with Bradbury’s dystopian future, no matter what the setting, people are reluctant to share an unpopular view. A 2020 Cato survey found 62% “of Americans say the political climate these days prevents them from saying things they believe because others might find them offensive.”
Today, how many say nothing to their neighbors and colleagues about Covid-19 policies for fear of being accused of not valuing human lives? In Fahrenheit 451, silence helped pave the way for the public’s embrace of tyranny. In 2020, Fahrenheit 451 is far more than a chilling, cautionary tale. To reverse the spiral of silence we must make space for candid conversations by thoughtfully considering alternative viewpoints.
Source: AIER.org
Barry Brownstein is professor emeritus of economics and leadership at the University of Baltimore. He is senior contributor at Intellectual Takeout and the author of The Inner-Work of Leadership.
Image: Truthstream Media
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-09-29--The President Has an “Internet Kill Switch” — A Bipartisan Group of Lawmakers Wants to Change That

The COVID-19 crisis has taken an enormous human toll , with more than 200,000 Americans having succumbed to the virus , according to government data .
So , too , the sweeping government response has wrought both unprecedented economic and public health consequences .
Thus , in addition to the obvious health consequences , one major concern posed by the COVID-19 crisis is that unprecedented government power grabs may be here to stay .
Consider that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used the coronavirus as pretext to unconstitutionally outlaw evictions nationwide in a de facto nationalization of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Gretchen Whitmer baselessly made lawn care services illegal , and it quickly becomes clear why a bipartisan group of legislators is now seeking to limit the government ’ s power to take drastic action in future emergencies .
Right now , the executive branch technically has the authority under a World War II-era amendment of the Communications Act of 1934 to seize control of , monitor , or shut down “ any wire communication ” if the president deems it necessary for “ national security ” and declares an emergency .
This power @ @ @ @ @ @ @ include the ability of a president to , amid a crisis , seize control of the internet or even shut it off in swaths of the country in the name of national security .
It even appears the president could do this all unilaterally .
Thankfully , on September 23 , Sens .
Rand Paul , Gary Peters , and Ron Wyden joined forces with Reps. Thomas Massie and Tulsi Gabbard to introduce a bill rolling back these drastic powers .
“ If you give government an inch , it takes ten miles @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the surveillance state ’ s overreaches in a time of seemingly endless war , ” Paul said .
“ No president from either party should have the sole power to shut down or take control of the internet or any other of our communication channels during an emergency.
” “ The oath that I took as a Soldier and as a Member of Congress was to support and defend our Constitution , ” Gabbard remarked .
“ No President should have the power to ignore our freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declaring a national emergency.
” “ When governments around the world turn off internet access , they do significant harm to their national economies and their citizen ’ s civil rights , ” Massie said .
“ This bipartisan bill will ensure that no future American president can unilaterally trip an ‘ internet kill switch.
’ Americans do not have to accept the premise that one person can deprive them of their 1st Amendment rights by flipping a switch.
” Why Restraining the Government ’ s ‘ Emergency Powers ’ Is Necessary Some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ roll back emergency powers over the internet .
After all , they would only ever be used in a true extreme emergency , right ?
Why wouldn ’ t we want the government to have all the available tools to address a genuine crisis ?
The problem with this stance becomes clear when you take even a cursory glance at how often the word “ crisis ” is bantered about in modern political discourse .
Politicians call student loan debt a “ crisis , ” the affordability of housing a “ crisis , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Others dub everything from the national debt to overregulation a “ crisis.
” None of this is to say these issues are not pressing , important , or even urgent .
But it ’ s apparent that just about every issue under the sun can be considered a “ crisis ” or “ emergency ” to its most ardent advocates .
So , the notion that emergency powers will only be used in extreme circumstances is deeply naïve .
Become an Activist Post Patron for $ 1 per month at Patreon .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crises alike are often used as justification for sweeping government power grabs .
As Friedrich Hayek once observed , “ ‘ Emergencies ’ have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.
” Robert Higgs concurred in his seminal work Crisis and Leviathan , in which he explains how the government obtains new powers each time a crisis emerges , but rarely if ever fully relinquishes them when the crisis passes .
“ In one form of another , great crises will surely come again , ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , governments almost certainly will gain new powers over economic and social affairs… For those who cherish individual liberty and a free society , the prospect is deeply disheartening.
” We ’ ve seen this play out time and time again in American history .
During World War II , President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used the emergency posed by the war to round up Asian Americans and Asian immigrants and throw them in internment camps without due process or even any suspicion of wrongdoing .
In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for unconstitutional warrantless spying on Americans and the detention and torture of alleged “ enemy combatants ” without any due process .
Many of these spying powers are still in effect today , nearly two decades after the attack .
And the internet “ kill switch ” is itself a remnant of emergency powers granted during World War II but never rescinded .
Imagine the havoc a power-hungry federal government , controlled by either party , could wreak during an emergency , real or perceived , by seizing control of wireless communications .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ fantasy .
If we leave the federal government ’ s sweeping power to shut down the internet on the books , it ’ s likely that it will eventually be exercised to the detriment of Americans ’ civil liberties .
And once the power is exercised , it ’ s unlikely we ’ ll ever be able to scale it back .
This is not a hypothetical .
China shut down the internet in Xinjiang for an entire year in 2009 in response to protests and riots in the region .
Iran temporarily @ @ @ @ @ @ @ down the spread of information during anti-regime protests .
Even democratic nations such as India have exercised an internet “ kill switch ” in some regions to control the populace and stifle communication .
But this dystopian fate isn ’ t inevitable for the United States .
We should be thankful for the bipartisan group of legislators working to ensure that this nightmare scenario never comes to life here .
It doesn ’ t matter whether you ’ re a Democrat or Republican , liberal or conservative .
It doesn ’ t matter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ horrified by the thought of President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez .
If the thought of your political opponents wielding unilateral control over the internet disturbs you , that ’ s a good sign it ’ s a power the government should not have .
Brad Polumbo is a libertarian-conservative journalist and the Eugene S. Thorpe Writing Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Brad Polumbo
The COVID-19 crisis has taken an enormous human toll, with more than 200,000 Americans having succumbed to the virus, according to government data. So, too, the sweeping government response has wrought both unprecedented economic and public health consequences.
Thus, in addition to the obvious health consequences, one major concern posed by the COVID-19 crisis is that unprecedented government power grabs may be here to stay. Consider that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention used the coronavirus as pretext to unconstitutionally outlaw evictions nationwide in a de facto nationalization of the rental market or that Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer baselessly made lawn care services illegal, and it quickly becomes clear why a bipartisan group of legislators is now seeking to limit the government’s power to take drastic action in future emergencies.
Right now, the executive branch technically has the authority under a World War II-era amendment of the Communications Act of 1934 to seize control of, monitor, or shut down “any wire communication” if the president deems it necessary for “national security” and declares an emergency. This power applied to the modern age would certainly include the ability of a president to, amid a crisis, seize control of the internet or even shut it off in swaths of the country in the name of national security. It even appears the president could do this all unilaterally.
Thankfully, on September 23, Sens. Rand Paul, Gary Peters, and Ron Wyden joined forces with Reps. Thomas Massie and Tulsi Gabbard to introduce a bill rolling back these drastic powers.
“If you give government an inch, it takes ten miles, and this has been vividly illustrated by the surveillance state’s overreaches in a time of seemingly endless war,” Paul said. “No president from either party should have the sole power to shut down or take control of the internet or any other of our communication channels during an emergency.”
“The oath that I took as a Soldier and as a Member of Congress was to support and defend our Constitution,” Gabbard remarked. “No President should have the power to ignore our freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution and violate our civil liberties and privacy by declaring a national emergency.”
“When governments around the world turn off internet access, they do significant harm to their national economies and their citizen’s civil rights,” Massie said. “This bipartisan bill will ensure that no future American president can unilaterally trip an ‘internet kill switch.’ Americans do not have to accept the premise that one person can deprive them of their 1st Amendment rights by flipping a switch.”
Why Restraining the Government’s ‘Emergency Powers’ Is Necessary
Some might fail to see the need to roll back emergency powers over the internet. After all, they would only ever be used in a true extreme emergency, right? Why wouldn’t we want the government to have all the available tools to address a genuine crisis?
The problem with this stance becomes clear when you take even a cursory glance at how often the word “crisis” is bantered about in modern political discourse.
Politicians call student loan debt a “crisis,” the affordability of housing a “crisis,” and healthcare a “crisis.” Others dub everything from the national debt to overregulation a “crisis.” None of this is to say these issues are not pressing, important, or even urgent. But it’s apparent that just about every issue under the sun can be considered a “crisis” or “emergency” to its most ardent advocates. So, the notion that emergency powers will only be used in extreme circumstances is deeply naïve.
Become an Activist Post Patron for $1 per month at Patreon.
And both perceived “crises” and actual crises alike are often used as justification for sweeping government power grabs. As Friedrich Hayek once observed, “‘Emergencies’ have always been the pretext on which the safeguards of individual liberty have been eroded.” Robert Higgs concurred in his seminal work Crisis and Leviathan, in which he explains how the government obtains new powers each time a crisis emerges, but rarely if ever fully relinquishes them when the crisis passes.
“In one form of another, great crises will surely come again,” Higgs wrote. “When they do, governments almost certainly will gain new powers over economic and social affairs… For those who cherish individual liberty and a free society, the prospect is deeply disheartening.”
History Shows How ‘Emergency Powers’ Lead to Disastrous Abuses
We’ve seen this play out time and time again in American history.
During World War II, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt used the emergency posed by the war to round up Asian Americans and Asian immigrants and throw them in internment camps without due process or even any suspicion of wrongdoing. In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the emergency was used as justification for unconstitutional warrantless spying on Americans and the detention and torture of alleged “enemy combatants” without any due process.
Many of these spying powers are still in effect today, nearly two decades after the attack. And the internet “kill switch” is itself a remnant of emergency powers granted during World War II but never rescinded.
Imagine the havoc a power-hungry federal government, controlled by either party, could wreak during an emergency, real or perceived, by seizing control of wireless communications. Yet this isn’t a far-fetched fantasy. If we leave the federal government’s sweeping power to shut down the internet on the books, it’s likely that it will eventually be exercised to the detriment of Americans’ civil liberties. And once the power is exercised, it’s unlikely we’ll ever be able to scale it back.
This is not a hypothetical. China shut down the internet in Xinjiang for an entire year in 2009 in response to protests and riots in the region. Iran temporarily killed the internet in 2019 to shut down the spread of information during anti-regime protests. Even democratic nations such as India have exercised an internet “kill switch” in some regions to control the populace and stifle communication.
But this dystopian fate isn’t inevitable for the United States. We should be thankful for the bipartisan group of legislators working to ensure that this nightmare scenario never comes to life here.
It doesn’t matter whether you’re a Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative. It doesn’t matter whether you despise Donald Trump or are horrified by the thought of President Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. If the thought of your political opponents wielding unilateral control over the internet disturbs you, that’s a good sign it’s a power the government should not have.
Source: FEE.org
Brad Polumbo is a libertarian-conservative journalist and the Eugene S. Thorpe Writing Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-09-29--Madrid Erupts As Citizens Clash With Police During Anti-Lockdown “Riots”

London wasn ’ t the only European city where frustrated denizens took to the streets in anger to protest another round of COVID-19-inspired lockdowns .
Madrid saw anti-lockdown protests blossom into full-on riots – as they were described in the Spanish press – as clashes between citizens and police grew increasingly violent .
Last week , the city council imposed new restrictions on more than 1 million inhabitants of Madrid , as they expanded the number of COVID-19 hot spots to 45 .
Localized restrictions on movement were similar to those imposed during the lockdown in the spring , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , thousands of Spaniards streamed into the streets of Madrid .
Dozens of residents were involved in violent clashes with the police .
Demonstrating that American cops don ’ t have a monopoly on police brutality , one Spanish cop was filmed headbutting a detained man .
Protests weren ’ t confined to Madrid .
They were widespread over the weekend across areas such as Usera , Puente de Vallecas , Villa de Vallecas , Villaverde , Ciudad Lineal , Vicálvaro , San Blas and Carabanchel .
Over one million people are subject @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may only leave their homes for work , medical or educational purposes and only if they carry supporting documents .
Poorer and migrant workers who rely on public transit to get to jobs in the construction industry say these measures discriminate against them .
Local businesses must operate at 50 % capacity and must close before 10pm .
Gatherings are limited to no more than six people .
The new measures will be reviewed every 2 weeks .
Madrid is presently one of the worst-hit cities in all of Europe , with an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 100,000 residents .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE !
Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Tyler Durden
London wasn’t the only European city where frustrated denizens took to the streets in anger to protest another round of COVID-19-inspired lockdowns. Madrid saw anti-lockdown protests blossom into full-on riots – as they were described in the Spanish press – as clashes between citizens and police grew increasingly violent.
Last week, the city council imposed new restrictions on more than 1 million inhabitants of Madrid, as they expanded the number of COVID-19 hot spots to 45. Localized restrictions on movement were similar to those imposed during the lockdown in the spring, though not as harsh.
Over the weekend, thousands of Spaniards streamed into the streets of Madrid. Dozens of residents were involved in violent clashes with the police.
Madrid hoy Caravanchel pic.twitter.com/GzCnzoF3mn — Angela Comanchera (@AComanchera) September 27, 2020
Demonstrating that American cops don’t have a monopoly on police brutality, one Spanish cop was filmed headbutting a detained man.
Policía sin número de identificación dando un cabezazo con el casco a un detenido esposado e inmovilizado.
Es intolerable.
El delegado del Gobierno debe ser cesado inmediatamente.@conJoseMFranco
Lo llaman democracia y NO LO ES. pic.twitter.com/fhgTyr79bL — Matsi♀✊ (@Vicky_Taibo) September 25, 2020
Protests weren’t confined to Madrid. They were widespread over the weekend across areas such as Usera, Puente de Vallecas, Villa de Vallecas, Villaverde, Ciudad Lineal, Vicálvaro, San Blas and Carabanchel.
Over one million people are subject to the new localized lockdown restrictions and may only leave their homes for work, medical or educational purposes and only if they carry supporting documents. Poorer and migrant workers who rely on public transit to get to jobs in the construction industry say these measures discriminate against them.
¡Sánchez culpable, Gobierno culpable, Ayuso culpable! Luego vendréis al barrio a haceros foto en campaña. ¡Esto no lo hacéis en el barrio de Salamanca! pic.twitter.com/0OO3SvzaJc — Vallekas se Defiende (@VKseDefiende) September 24, 2020
Local businesses must operate at 50% capacity and must close before 10pm. Gatherings are limited to no more than six people. The new measures will be reviewed every 2 weeks.
Madrid is presently one of the worst-hit cities in all of Europe, with an infection rate of roughly 1,000 cases per 100,000 residents.
Source: Zerohedge
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-09-29--Google Tries to Burn LBRY … But LBRY Fights Back

Jeremy Kauffman joins us to discuss LBRY , an open-source , decentralized protocol that is helping creators share video content @ @ @ @ @ and LBRY.tv .
Today we talk about the newly-launched LBRY web portal , Odysee.com , @ @ @ @ @ was ( briefly ) banned from the Google Play store in the latest attempt to @ @ @ @ @ .
• Episode 384 – The Library of Alexandria is on Fire • How does @ @ @ @ @ Can I earn money using LBRY ?
Become an Activist Post Patron for $ 1 @ @ @ @ @ Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4 @ @ @ @ @ truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of @ @ @ @ @ Follow us on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter @ @ @ @ @ Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today @

By The Corbett Report
Jeremy Kauffman joins us to discuss LBRY, an open-source, decentralized protocol that is helping creators share video content peer-to-peer through the LBRY app and LBRY.tv.
Today we talk about the newly-launched LBRY web portal, Odysee.com, and how the LBRY app was (briefly) banned from the Google Play store in the latest attempt to burn the LBRY of Alexandria.
SHOW NOTES:
Become an Activist Post Patron for $1 per month at Patreon.
Direct video link: https://lbry.tv/@corbettreport:0/lbryodysee:5
?
Podcast: Play in new window | Download | Embed
Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2020-10-01--London Court Hears Details Of CIA Plot To Poison Julian Assange, Steal DNA From Family Members

Now in its second week , Julian Assange ’ s extradition hearing at the Old Bailey in London just heard explosive testimony based on previously reported revelations that the CIA had actively plotted to assassinate him , by either poisoning or via a kidnapping plot .
The testimony is part of the defense team ’ s attempt to frame the US extradition case as entirely political in nature , and not based on breaking US law , but also toward convincing the judge that the WikiLeaks founder would certainly face extreme and excessive punishment , which would be cause for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mainstream media has by and large ignored much of the bombshell testimony from the hearing since last week , this latest cloak-and-dagger type information detailing just how far US intelligence was willing to go is impossible to ignore .
Even The Guardian is now belatedly reporting on it : Plans to poison or kidnap Julian Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy were discussed between sources in US intelligence and a private security firm that spied extensively on the WikiLeaks co-founder , a court has been told .
Details of the alleged spying operation against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the embassy were laid out on Wednesday at his extradition case , in evidence by a former employee of a Spanish security company , UC Global .
Outrageously , the US used the Spanish front company to plant “ intrusive and sophisticated ” secret surveillance devices in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where Assange had been living under asylum for seven years .
While officially the firm was in charge of protecting the Ecuadorian embassy , it was simultaneously acting on behalf of the US authorities , which was engaged in eavesdropping on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diplomatic building to meet privately with him .
Plotting by US intelligence even involved scenarios wherein a “ kidnapping ” or killing could be made to look like an “ accident ” .
And even more shocking and outrageous , biometric information was taken or sought even centered on family members and close acquaintances of Assange as they visited the embassy .
This even involved plans to lift a DNA sample from his baby ’ s dirty diaper , as The Guardian details further of Wednesday ’ s testimony : The testimony was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ previously worked for UC Global were allowed to issue their statements under anonymity .
This legal protection was granted because they believe the private security firm ’ s director , David Morales , or even US intelligence officials he works with could seek to harm or kill them .
The Guardian continues with the following : The founder and director of UC Global , David Morales , had said that “ the Americans ” had wanted to establish paternity but the plan was foiled when the then employee alerted the child ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the former employee and another person who had been involved with UC Global , after the hearing was told they feared that Morales , or others connected to him in the US , could seek to harm them .
Details of their written evidence were read out at the Old Bailey in London on Wednesday by Mark Summers QC , one of the lawyers for Assange , who is fighting extradition to the US on charges relating to leaks of classified documents allegedly exposing US war crimes and abuse .
The below @ @ @ @ @ @ @ País : “ Julian Assange ’ s friend Stephen Hoo walking into the Ecuadorian embassy in London with one of the cyberactivist ’ s babies in 2017.
” Again , the defense is hoping the testimony is a damning enough indictment of the CIA and its partners ’ massive intrusion on Assange ’ s basic legal rights and protections as to prevent the US requested extradition .
Indeed , considering two star eyewitnesses for the defense ( who themselves essentially were involved in the prior invasive surveillance of Assange ) are fearful enough @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to essentially seek a form of temporary ‘ witness protection ’ by the London court , this should make it glaringly obvious that the whole thing is a political witch hunt of a whistleblower who exposed American war crimes abroad .
Should the UK deem that Assange is at risk of cruel punishment or even death if extradited to US custody , it must strike down the request based on existing laws .
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth , peace , and freedom news .
Send resources to the front lines of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on SoMee , HIVE , Parler , Flote , Minds , and Twitter .
Provide , Protect and Profit from what ’ s coming !
Get a free issue of Counter Markets today .

By Tyler Durden
Now in its second week, Julian Assange’s extradition hearing at the Old Bailey in London just heard explosive testimony based on previously reported revelations that the CIA had actively plotted to assassinate him, by either poisoning or via a kidnapping plot.
The testimony is part of the defense team’s attempt to frame the US extradition case as entirely political in nature, and not based on breaking US law, but also toward convincing the judge that the WikiLeaks founder would certainly face extreme and excessive punishment, which would be cause for Britain to block the extradition.
Though mainstream media has by and large ignored much of the bombshell testimony from the hearing since last week, this latest cloak-and-dagger type information detailing just how far US intelligence was willing to go is impossible to ignore.
Even The Guardian is now belatedly reporting on it:
Plans to poison or kidnap Julian Assange from the Ecuadorian embassy were discussed between sources in US intelligence and a private security firm that spied extensively on the WikiLeaks co-founder, a court has been told. Details of the alleged spying operation against Assange and anyone who visited him at the embassy were laid out on Wednesday at his extradition case, in evidence by a former employee of a Spanish security company, UC Global.
Outrageously, the US used the Spanish front company to plant “intrusive and sophisticated” secret surveillance devices in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where Assange had been living under asylum for seven years.
While officially the firm was in charge of protecting the Ecuadorian embassy, it was simultaneously acting on behalf of the US authorities, which was engaged in eavesdropping on Assange and his visitors who entered the diplomatic building to meet privately with him. Plotting by US intelligence even involved scenarios wherein a “kidnapping” or killing could be made to look like an “accident”.
And even more shocking and outrageous, biometric information was taken or sought even centered on family members and close acquaintances of Assange as they visited the embassy.
This even involved plans to lift a DNA sample from his baby’s dirty diaper, as The Guardian details further of Wednesday’s testimony:
Microphones were concealed to monitor Assange’s meetings with lawyers, his fingerprint was obtained from a glass and there was even a plot to obtain a nappy from a baby who had been brought on regular visits to the embassy, according to the witness, whose evidence took the form of a written statement.
The testimony was so explosive that two key eyewitnesses who previously worked for UC Global were allowed to issue their statements under anonymity.
This legal protection was granted because they believe the private security firm’s director, David Morales, or even US intelligence officials he works with could seek to harm or kill them. The Guardian continues with the following:
The founder and director of UC Global, David Morales, had said that “the Americans” had wanted to establish paternity but the plan was foiled when the then employee alerted the child’s mother. Anonymity was granted on Tuesday to the former employee and another person who had been involved with UC Global, after the hearing was told they feared that Morales, or others connected to him in the US, could seek to harm them. Details of their written evidence were read out at the Old Bailey in London on Wednesday by Mark Summers QC, one of the lawyers for Assange, who is fighting extradition to the US on charges relating to leaks of classified documents allegedly exposing US war crimes and abuse.
The below leaked image was previously described by El País: “Julian Assange’s friend Stephen Hoo walking into the Ecuadorian embassy in London with one of the cyberactivist’s babies in 2017.”
#8: As part of espionage operation against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, the owner of Spanish security company obsessed over whether Assange was father of child who was brought into Ecuador embassy. He ordered diaper to be stolen for DNA testing. https://t.co/iHcI2pNdhL — Kevin Gosztola (@kgosztola) April 18, 2020
Again, the defense is hoping the testimony is a damning enough indictment of the CIA and its partners’ massive intrusion on Assange’s basic legal rights and protections as to prevent the US requested extradition.
US wanted to kill WikiLeaks founder and make it look like accident:https://t.co/HsR7DebDxx — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) February 25, 2020
Indeed, considering two star eyewitnesses for the defense (who themselves essentially were involved in the prior invasive surveillance of Assange) are fearful enough about what they have to offer as to essentially seek a form of temporary ‘witness protection’ by the London court, this should make it glaringly obvious that the whole thing is a political witch hunt of a whistleblower who exposed American war crimes abroad.
Should the UK deem that Assange is at risk of cruel punishment or even death if extradited to US custody, it must strike down the request based on existing laws.
Source: Zerohedge
Become a Patron!
Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Send resources to the front lines of peace and freedom HERE! Follow us on SoMee, HIVE, Parler, Flote, Minds, and Twitter.
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.