Facebook & Google are CIA Fronts

Sandeep Parwaga, HenryMakow.com
February 17, 2011

There used to be a saying: ”No one makes a name for himself without giving something up”

As a youngster, I was awed by people who ”made it to the top” by creating and innovating corporations, technologies, or simply establishing themselves through sports, music, entertainment, etc. thus becoming millionaires.

Now as I have grown older, I realize how illusory this paradigm really is. I came to the conclusion that if you want to reach the ”top’,’ you have to give up your soul.

Take Mark Zuckerberg for example. He is one of the most ”successful entrepreneurs” in the last decade. Having made a fortune through his Facebook empire, he reaches more than 500 million people worldwide. It seems like a fairytale. A student creates a new interface to connect the people throughout the world. Well, it sounds great doesn’t it? It would, if we were true.

Here is a good video that demonstrates that Facebook was indirectly funded by the CIA with the goal of learning and storing everything there is to know about you. Why? To monitor and ultimately control.

Again, the people have been totally duped by the Facebook-mania and can only see what they are told to see. As my friends say: ”It is to connect people and share information”. In the wake of the recent crisis in Egypt, we might add that Facebook has become not just a data-mining operation, but also a soft power proxy for crisis-creation.

Let’s look at headlines that should cast no doubt about the true character of CIAbook:

Facebook’s Zuckerberg Says The Age of Privacy is Over -

Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg says privacy is no longer a ‘social norm’

Facebook – the CIA conspiracy

The Face of Facebook - (Pay particular notice to the IMs that got leaked and confirmed to be true by the New Yorker)

Facebook & Social Media: A Convenient Cover For Spying -

US spies invest in internet monitoring technology – Quoted from this article: ”In an attempt to sift through the blizzard of information, the investment arm of the CIA, In-Q-Tel, has invested in a software firm that monitors social media.”

Nihilists of The World Unite: Wikileaks Is The “Cognitive Infiltration” Operation Demanded by Cass Sunstein -

TIME Mag Person of the Year 2010 - This link is just a mere reminder of past history and the perversion of ”honoring”those who don’t deserve it. Would you like to share this front cover with Hitler, Stalin, Kissinger, etc.? I sure wouldn’t. Obviously Zuckerberg has done something ”great”. Just my 2 cents about this garbage.

GOOGLE

Google has come under scrutiny over its attempt to eliminate competing search engines and block ”controversial” sites and people, but the biggest controversy came over its alleged ties to the CIA and NSA.

Google founders Sergey M. Brin and Lawrence E. Page are portrayed as average folks, Stanford University students, who teamed up to create a ”superior search engine”. Their attempt to do just that turned out to be so successful that they started to get funding from big players, for example Sun Microsystems. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sergey_Brin#Search_engine_development)

It can be assumed that the CIA and NSA funded them as well. As in the above example of Facebook, don’t forget the Google scandal connected to China last year, where Google simply evaded censorship laws by moving to Hong Kong.

The CIA might have used Google as a soft power proxy in China as well for destabilization operations. Here are a few issues that made the news regarding Google:

Tarpley: US Gov uses Google proxy to attack China – (Vid)

Google-NSA collaboration draws alarm -

YouTube’s Parent Google is a Corporate Member of the Council on Foreign Relations -

Ex-Agent: CIA Seed Money Helped Launch Google -

The Google-NSA Alliance: Questions and Answers -

CONCLUSION

I admit I have Facebook. I am not particularly happy about it, but it does facilitate being connected with friends from other places. I try to keep a low profile. Don’t reveal anything or don’t click on trivial buttons, for example the ”Likes”.

Use alternatives to make contact if you can, e.g. email or other messengers. If you have Facebook, you have probably realized how people have literally sold their lives over to it.

Every time I see people revealing things to the finest detail, they don’t think about any consequences, or let’s say, they are not smart enough to care. The scientific dictatorship has done a ”good” job in brainwashing and manipulating the masses. Don’t be fooled by the deceit. The mainstream media has been very reluctant to cover the disturbing Google/Facebook ties as it would expose important assets for the Big Brother machine and its secret use to destabilize.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

Zuckerberg or the Google founders would never have gotten the publicity, wealth and success without a CIA or NSA connection. To elaborate on the opening quote, I assume they have been initiated into the Illuminati Order and sold their soul.

—

Sandeep Parwaga is a 22 yr old Indian student who currently lives in the UK.

Jury Says Blogger Has To Pay For His Words Even Though He Did Not Lie

David Makarewicz, Contributing Writer
Activist Post

Blogger Johnny Northside

On Friday, a Minnesota jury found that a blogger must pay $60,000 in damages because of statements he published in his blog about a public figure who was subsequently fired from his job. Internet publishers and free speech advocates should pay close attention to this case if it is appealed because the blogger was found liable even though the jury did not find that the blogger's statements were false.

This decision is the latest example of the law's apparent struggle to apply basic constitutional protections to internet publishers. If the Minnesota ruling holds up, it will mean that bloggers will have to worry they will be forced to pay for true statements that they publish that cause a person damages.

In June 2009, Jerry Moore was fired from the University of Minnesota after blogger John Hoff a/k/a Johnny Northside wrote a blog post criticizing the college for hiring Moore. In the post, Hoff criticized Moore's previous work as Executive Director of a community organization and linked Moore to a real estate scandal. In the post, Hoff stated, "Repeated and specific evidence in Hennepin County District Court shows Jerry Moore was involved with a high-profile fraudulent mortgage at 1564 Hillside Ave N."

Following his firing, Moore brought a lawsuit in Minnesota state court (copy of complaint), claiming Hoff was liable for defamation and intentional interference with his contract with the school. The case went to trial last week and on Friday, the jury returned its verdict in favor of Hoff on the defamation claim but against him on the intentional interference with contract count.

The jury found Hoff was not liable for defamation because they were not convinced that the blogger's statements about Moore were false. The jury returned the following interrogatory (answer in bold):

1. Was the statement “Repeated and specific evidence in Hennepin County District Court shows that Jerry Moore was involved with a high-profile fraudulent mortgage at 1564 Hillside Ave. N.” false? No

Although it has been reported elsewhere that the jury found that Hoff's statement was true, that is not precisely correct. The jury found that Moore did not prove that Hoff's statement was false, not that the statement was true.

Since the publishing of a false statement is a basic element of a defamation claim, that finding was enough to defeat the defamation count. Although the judge had previously ruled that Moore was a limited public figure, which would have also required the jury to find actual malice in order to prove defamation, the jury stopped at the first question and did not make a finding on actual malice.

Moore's failure to prove a false statement seemingly should have been the end of the entire case against Hoff, but it was not. Even without a false statement, the court allowed the jury to find against the blogger on the intentional interference with contract claim and awarded Moore $35,000 in damages for lost wages and $25,000 for emotional distress.

Generally, intentional interference with contract occurs when someone knows about a contractual relationship and intentionally induces one of the parties to breach the contract. If the other party to the contract suffers damages, he can sometimes sue to recover his losses.

In the absence of First Amendment protections, this case might be a reasonable example of an intentional interference with contract. Hoff's blog posts give the impression that he knew about Moore's contract with the college and that his posts were at least partially intended to convince the college to fire Moore, which they did. However, Constitutional free speech protections should not permit a plaintiff such as Moore to fail to make a defamation case against a publisher, but still be able to backdoor his damages through another claim.

The Minnesota case reminds me of the famous 1988 Hustler Magazine v. Falwell case, in which a jury found that Hustler publisher Larry Flynt was not liable for defamation, but found him liable for intentionally inflicting emotional distress on Reverend Falwell. Unlike the Minnesota case, the Falwell case specifically focused on a publisher's right to publish satire of a public figure rather than the right to publish direct factual claims, but in both cases, a jury found against a publisher even though they found the publisher was not liable for defamation.

Hustler Falwell Parody

Flynt appealed the case to the United States Supreme Court, who overturned the jury finding in favor of Falwell because the First Amendment demands that the proper action against a public figure is a defamation suit, not a suit for intentional infliction of emotional distress. The Court reasoned that criticism of public figures, such as Falwell or Moore, is sometimes going to cause unfortunate damages, but this important form of speech must be protected by "a constitutional rule that allows public figures to recover for libel or defamation only when they can prove both that the statement was false and that the statement was made with the requisite level of culpability."

This does not mean that a publisher is free to say anything about a public figure, whether true or false, without repercussions. The Court explained that the First Amendment does not allow unfettered speech without any limits and culpability because of the particularly insidious nature of false statements. The Court stated that a defamation claim, which requires a showing of a false statement, is the appropriate action to bring against a publisher because:

False statements of fact are particularly valueless; they interfere with the truthseeking function of the marketplace of ideas, and they cause damage to an individual's reputation that cannot easily be repaired by counterspeech, however persuasive or effective.

The same analysis should be applied to the Minnesota case. Even if Hoff's statements damaged Moore, who was deemed a public figure, if those statements were not false and did not reach the level of defamation, the First Amendment should protect Hoff from having to pay damages. Allowing Moore to recover for intentional interference with contract is not very different from allowing Jerry Falwell to recover damages for intentional infliction of emotional distress. In both cases, a jury has ruled that the publisher's speech was not defamatory, yet the plaintiff is awarded the damages caused by that speech.

Legal commentator Eugene Volokh believes that the ruling against Hoff will be ruled unconstitutional if the case is appealed. He also astutely adds that most states have a rule of intentional interference with contract that states that “One who intentionally causes a third person not to perform a contract or not to enter into a prospective contractual relation with another does not interfere improperly with the other’s contractual relation, by giving the third person … truthful information.”

Hoff's attorneys have stated they plan to appeal the decision and they should. If a decision like this is allowed to stand, it could have a chilling effect on bloggers' ability to do the important work of making true factual accusations against politicians and other public figures.

Bloggers and other publishers must be free to expose these true facts, even if those facts bring a public figure down without fear that they will have to compensate the public figure for the fall. Otherwise, would we find ourselves in a country where Woodward and Bernstein would have to had to pay Richard Nixon for the losses caused by his impeachment and loss of job as President even if they were telling the truth about Watergate?

David Makarewicz is an attorney practicing internet law concerning privacy rights and copyright defense for websites and blogs. Visit Dave at Sites and Blogs to keep up with breaking Internet news.

Woman Predicted 03/11 Earthquake on 03/08 (video)

The following video was posted on YouTube on March 8th, three days before the Earthquakes and Tsunami hit the coast of Japan.

One signature that was particularly of interest to me was the date 3/11. It was the first thing that I noticed when I heard about the news of earthquake and tsunami in Japan, a few hours after it struck. Disasters continue to hit on days associated with the number 11. In a previous post on this blog titled "The Numerology of Disasters or Coincidences?", I mentioned how some of the man-made disasters were associated with certain numbers, particularly the number 11.



I do not know if the Japan Earthquakes and Tsunami were man-made but what I know is that it's very much possible to create 'natural disasters' using weather modification technologies available to some highly advanced nations of the world. Zbigniew Brzezinski, former director of the National Security Council under Jimmy Carter and one of the chief architect of the Trilateral Commission along with David Rockefeller, in his book Between Two Ages wrote:

"Not only have new weapons been developed, but some of the basic concepts of geography and strategy have been fundamentally altered; space and weather control have replaced Suez or Gibraltar as key elements of strategy."

He further states that:

"Technology will make available to the leaders of major nations a variety of techniques for conducting secret warfare, of which only a bare minimum of security forces need be appraised... One nation may attack a competitor covertly...techniques of weather modification could be employed to produce periods of drought or storm, thereby weakening a nation's capacity and forcing it to accept the demands of the competitor."

The above statements from a highly influential and very powerful globalist, who is hell-bent on creating a New World Order, should not be taken in a light sense. Scalar Weapons technology and technologies such as HAARP could very well be used to create earthquakes in targeted regions of the earth by beaming electro-magnetic waves reflected off from the ozone layer. If such an earthquake is set-off under the ocean, the result would be a tsunami. As mentioned in the above quotes, these technologies could be used to attack nations covertly and the people and leaders of the nation would never even realize it. Such engineered disasters could wreck havoc in targeted nations and drain their whole economy. Is there any better way to bring a nation to their knees and to the bidding of the golbalist. Think about it..

While the above discussions are just speculations and possiblities, I don't know the truth as yet. However, the date 3-11-11 stands out as a prominent signature. Since this year is 2011, the year denoted by the number 11, be prepared and expect to hear more such news this year. We already started off this year with news about the mysterious death of thousands of birds and millions of fish, then it moved to the crisis in middle-east and now disaster in Japan. What's coming next?

FOX NEWS Makes it Appear as a Big Surprise: Was the Underwear Bomber an Insider Job?

"The easiest way to gain control of a population is to carry out acts of terror. [The public] will clamor for such laws if their personal security is threatened" ~ Joseph Stalin

The following is a clipping from Fox News reporting from the Federal Court in Detroit where the underwear bomber Umar Abdul Mutallab, who is accused of trying to blow up the passanger plane on Christmas day 2009, was taken for trial recently. Fox News makes it appear as a big surprise when a couple of passengers who were in the same flight turned up at the court to testify their eyewitness account of that event. Note that the reporter says, "they have an interesting theory about what really happened".

The couple whom the reporter is referring to were Mr. Kurt Haskell and his wife Lori Haskell who travelled in the same flight (North West Airlines Flight 253) on Christmas day 2009 from Amsterdam to Detroit. They were key eyewitnesses to some strange happenings at the Amsterdam airport while waiting to board the flight. Prior to boarding the flight, Kurt Haskell and his wife, {testified live on CNN (see Link [1])}, witnessed a "smartly dressed Indian man" who spoke "in an American accent" escort Abdul Muttalab to the ticket agent at the gate helping him get on the plane. Haskell says, only the 'Indian man' spoke and he told the ticket agent that "this man needs to board the plane and he doesn't have a passport". The ticket agent refused to allow Abdul Mutallab on the plane because he did not have his passport. In response, the wealthy looking 'Indian man' said: "he is from Sudan, we do this all the time". Who is this mystery 'Indian man' who played a key role in getting Abdul Muttalab on the plane? Why no media talks about him and why would any investigating agency refuse to track him down?

The authorities, however, seems to have completely ignored this key eyewitness account so that an year later, Fox News makes it appear as a total surprise. Kurt Haskell is a lawyer by profession and hence qualifies as a really good witness who is trained to be able to carefully document things. Therefore, his words cannot be simply discarded. What's bizarre about the incident is that nobody cares to trace or talk about the sharp dressed 'Indian looking man' who seemed to have escorted Abdul Mutallab to the gate at Amsterdam airport. Yet, it's based on this dubious event that TSA appeared on the scene demanding all airports to have body scanners.

The FBI interrogated Haskell at his office few days after the incident. Shortly after this FBI interrogation, Kurt Haskell appeared on the Alex Jones show and posted below are the links to his interview with Alex Jones. It is interesting to note that the FBI brought some photos of suspected terrorists but never really cared to bring the video footages from Amsterdam airport. Any investigating officer should have first obtained the video from Amsterdam airport to trace the well-dressed Indian looking man. This would have been the key thread to unravelling the whole episode of the underwear bomber. Once again we see a blatant disregard for truth from the side of the investigating agencies.

Kurt Haskell's interview with Alex Jones after FBI Interrogation - 1


Kurt Haskell's interview with Alex Jones after FBI Interrogation - 2


Kurt Haskell's interview with Alex Jones after FBI Interrogation - 3


Although, Fox News makes it appear as a surprise, the fact is that this couple has already come on air, even on mainstream media, just after the incident, an year ago. Unfortunetely, no security officials have taken their testimony seriously or they have simply turned a deaf year to the couple's plea. Perhaphs, this is why they were present at the Federal Court in Detroit where Abdul Muttalab was brought for trial.

We all know that it was after this incident that TSA's body scanners appeared at the airports. In fact, just hours after this incident, we began hearing the news channels hype it and officials talking about beefing up the security apparatus in airports by possibly bringing in body scanners. How could they have come to such a solution so quickly in matter of hours unless they already had this solution in mind well in advance.

There are few other dots that needs to be connected in order to see the bigger picture.

Abdul Mutallab comes from an affluent family and had a decent educational background. Abdul Mutallab is the youngest of the 16 children of his father who is one of the richest men in Africa and the former Chairman of First Bank of Nigeria and former Nigerian Federal Commissioner for Economic Development. According to Wikipeida, Abdul Mutallab did his schooling at the British International School in Lomé, the capital of Togo and later proceeded to earn his Mechanical Engineering degree from the University College London in June 2008.

Apparently, Mutallab's background also seems to show him having connections with some extremist groups in Yemen. It's reported that Abdul Mutallab's father himself alarmed the U.S. Embassy in Abuja, Nigeria, on November 19 regarding his son's "extreme religious views" and his involvement with Al Qaeda. Further, Mutallab's name was also in the 'no-fly' list. So, here we are talking about an young man with a decent educational background but having connections with some terror networks, get on a plane without even a passport and then do something stupid altogether. A few questions come to my mind though:

1) How could a man who is known for his suspecious background and in the 'no-fly' list manage to get on a plane even without a passport?

2) Why did he do something so stupid sitting in his own seat surrounded by passengers that even a grade school student would not think of donig?

3) Eyewitnesses/passengers from the flight, including Kurt Haskell, also confirms that 2 people were arrested by the FBI at the Detroit Airport on that eventful day but we hear only about Abdul Mutallab in the media and in the official version of the story? Who was the other person arrested by the FBI and why don't we hear about him?

Given his rich family background and the credentials he hold, Abdul Mutallab should be considered as a reasonably intelligent man. What's strange about the whole scenario is the sheer stupidity in the act of such a reasonably intelligent man. How could a person with reasonable intelligence and commonsense sit in his seat and try to light up his underwear while being surrounded by passangers. Sounds so silly! If he was really serious about what he was doing, he could have gone to the toilet/washroom, locked the door and then tried lighting the explosives. The case sounds more like a fabricated one and even more it insults the intelligence of the American public.

Further, here we see a person with suspecious background and in the 'no-fly' list being escorted to the flight by smart-dressed, wealthy looking individuals, when that person doesn't even have a passport. How many of us have had that rare opportunity of passing through the security checks and getting to the boarding gate without a passport, let alone get into the airport itself? Some things doesn't really add up here.

Last time when I was passing through the London Heathrew Airport, I found those officials at the security check asking mothers with infants to taste the baby food, milk, water and other food items they were carrying for thier children. I was laughing in my mind. Despite all these stringent measures, the shoe bombers, the underwear bombers and the likes continue to walk in to the planes with ease, as and when they wish; some without passport; some even escorted by officials. On the other hand, because of these bogus events, the ordinary people have to shamelessly subject themselves to the harrasment of those newly appointed Crotch Watchers with their Porno-Scanners and even worse to the sexual assault procedure of groping or pat-down, which by the way might quench the pleasures of some sodomites and pedophiles. As a result, pornography, pedophilia and sodomites can now operate in public by Government's approval because I wonder what other kind of people can consciously susbcribe to such 'sexual assualt' procedures like groping and crotch watching. I even heard on a radio talk show, that passengers who refuse to go through the porno-scanners for fear of ionizing radiations, which takes detailed graphics of their naked bodies, but opt for the physical or sexual assault procedure of groping or pat-down, now run the risk of contracting diseases like herpes, crabs etc., because the officials don't change their gloves.

It all looks like the government was hand-in-glove with some business conglomerates looking for a new avenue to expand their markets. Now that airports across the United States are required to install these new porn-machines, they have opened up an avenue for a whole new business venture and perhaphs employment opportunities for potential sodomites and pedophiles. And all these things are pushed down our throats in the name of security because of that one phony underwear bomber.

How long are the people of this world going to take all this nonsense?

*****************************
Links

[1] Testimoy Aired in CNN on the day of Event