Mutated Dandelions In Nova Scotia, Canada [video - Potent News Blast #7]
by Louise Koster
PotentNews.com
May 6, 2012
Potent News Blast #7
(Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
-
- Halifax (photo by Louise Koster)
Related links:
More Michigan Mutations from Fallout 4.21.2012
http://youtu.be/9AupyLDGHKk
Fukushima is falling apart: are you ready?
http://endthelie.com/2012/04/21/fukushima-is-falling-apart-are-you-ready/
Alert!! Fukushima Dandelion Mutations Ottawa, ON, Canada 4/30/2012
http://youtu.be/WSL_ACEeNow
Mutated clovers – Wyoming, MI 5/5/12
http://youtu.be/hG_TMJM05eg
Debris Field The Size Of California From Japanese Tsunami Begins To Litter West Coast
http://theintelhub.com/2011/12/28/debris-field-the-size-of-california-from-japanese-tsunami-begins-to-litter-west-coast/
Fukushima Facts > Mitigation & How To Protect Yourself
http://www.fukushimafacts.com/Default.aspx?PID=47
Fukushima: A Nuclear War without a War: The Unspoken Crisis of Worldwide Nuclear Radiation
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20120125&articleId=28870
Fukushima reactor No. 4 vulnerable to catastrophic collapse; could unleash 85 times Cesium-137 radiation of Chernobyl; human civilization on the brink
http://www.naturalnews.com/035789_Fukushima_Cesium-137_Plume-Gate.html
Fukushima reactor 4 requires urgent intervention; coalition calls for emergency UN action to halt catastrophic release of radiation
http://www.naturalnews.com/035788_Fukushima_United_Nations_radiation.html
5/5/2012 — SIGN THE WHITEHOUSE PETITION — Shut down nuclear reactors like Japan
http://sincedutch.wordpress.com/2012/05/05/552012-sign-the-whitehouse-petition-shut-down-nuclear-reactors-like-japan/
Copyright Claims Shut Down Websites With No Proof or Due Process
by Eric Blair
Activist Post
May 4, 2012
Who needs SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) or the international ACTA (Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement) when companies can have websites or YouTube channels removed simply by claiming their content has been infringed?
That is exactly what happened to the hip hop blog Dajaz1.com when the US government seized and censored it for over a year at the behest of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). RIAA claimed, while providing no evidence, that Dajaz1 was infringing on their copyrights and demanded they be shut down.
The government obliged the request before receiving any proof of the infringement. As it turns out, the RIAA couldn’t provide any evidence and the government was forced to return the website with not so much as even an apology. Fortunately, Dajaz1 had their property returned to them, but not before they lost a year of revenue plus the aggravation involved in battling false claims.
This case illustrated that the burden of proof was not needed, nor was due process, to censor and seize properties that are accused of copyright crimes.
In the past, the Department of Homeland Security has committed mass seizures of websites and domains suspected of copyright piracy, and even shut down sites for merely linking to to copyrighted material confirming that the government and judges will do the bidding for large corporations with or without the authority to do so.
Incidentally, using this draconian tactic appears to be the only way that “authorities” can seize websites accused of copyright violations. Every single case where copyright trolls like Righthaven have attempted to use proper court channels (i.e. due process), the lawsuits were either dismissed or ruled in favor “fair use rights.”
Because not one of these cases has proven to be genuine copyright infringement, one would think that they should be treated as “innocent until proven guilty” going forward. However, these preemptive seizures seem to be on the increase even without sweeping authority given in bills like SOPA, or more recently CISPA.
What’s worse, content hosting sites like YouTube have recently begun implementing automated copyright sensors which act to shut down channels of those who were flagged in the system. And these actions have not even been prompted by legislation or corporate requests.
This week, YouTube restricted the channels of one of the most-viewed publishers on their platform because of an automated copyright claim by a third-party marketing company. Radio news host Alex Jones, whose primary YouTube channel has over 200 million views, and affiliate channels combine for nearly a half-a-billion views, was put on notice by Google-owned YouTube.
What was Jones’ copyright crime? He aired his radio interviews with Joe Rogan who is under contract with a web marketing company called Bent Pixels. Bent Pixels claims sole copyright ownership of Rogan’s voice and image.
Paul Joseph Watson, who works for Alex Jones, writes:
Although Bent Pixels had previously used its own software to place ads on You Tube videos that contain exclusive Rogan content, You Tube began using its own automated software to determine which videos contained the image or voice of Joe Rogan, and then threatened legitimate content owners with community violations if the clips were not removed.
Not only our videos of Joe Rogan’s appearances on the Alex Jones Show but other Joe Rogan videos across You Tube were deleted on this pretext and channels were suspended.
This software has been applied across the You Tube platform, which is why hundreds of thousands of videos are now being deleted even though they clearly represent fair use or are even exclusive content which doesn’t even pertain to fair use.
YouTube appears to be prosecuting an entirely new form of copyright infringement with no regard for fair use rights. Watson refers to this disturbing new frontier of censorship as ‘Copyrighting People’.
Obviously, it’s not copyright infringement when a personality goes on an independent radio show who then publishes their own material online. Any judge would laugh this supposed violation out of court.
The oft-used metaphor for identifying copyright infringement online is “It’s like porn; you know it when you see it.”
But, it’s clear that an automated bot doesn’t have the judgement needed to prosecute potential crimes especially in light of fair use rights. Nor does a police agency like DHS have the judgement or authority in such cases.
It still remains unclear why online copyright laws need to be strengthened in the first place. There are already paths for content creators to pursue if they feel violated. They can simply request that a site remove their content or take them to court. Of course, that would require that they provide evidence that is beyond fair use rights.
At best any sweeping legislation to further police copyrights is akin to using a sledgehammer when only a scalpel is needed. Yet, it’s more likely that the sledgehammer is intended to be a tool of mass censorship to smash competition who threaten mega-corporations in the only genuine free market left – the Internet.
Read other articles by Eric Blair here.
You can support this information by voting on Reddit:
http://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/t6vr2/copyright_claims_shut_down_websites_with_no_proof/
Fahrenheit 2012: Suppressing Dissent in the 21st Century [video]
BoilingFrogsPost.com
May 1, 2012
The ease with which political and governmental bodies have been able to block the publication of books that are uncomfortable to the Washington elite, and even to destroy entire print runs of tell-all whistleblower stories, has greatly increased. Simultaneously, books that fulfill a social function of rallying the populace around the flag and supporting the dominant narratives of our time, from the war on terror to the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, are given copious attention by a fawning lapdog press.
Leaked U.S. Army Document Outlines Plan For Re-Education Camps In America
Political activists would be pacified to sympathize with the government
by Paul Joseph Watson
PrisonPlanet.com
May 3, 2012
A leaked U.S. Army document prepared for the Department of Defense contains shocking plans for “political activists” to be pacified by “PSYOP officers” into developing an “appreciation of U.S. policies” while detained in prison camps inside the United States.
The document, entitled FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations (PDF) was originally released on a restricted basis to the DoD in February 2010, but has now been leaked online.
The manual outlines policies for processing detainees into internment camps both globally and inside the United States. International agencies like the UN and the Red Cross are named as partners in addition to domestic federal agencies including the Department of Homeland Security and FEMA.
The document makes it clear that the policies apply “within U.S. territory” and involve, “DOD support to U.S. civil authorities for domestic emergencies, and for designated law enforcement and other activities,” including “man-made disasters, accidents, terrorist attacks and incidents in the U.S. and its territories.”
The manual states, “These operations may be performed as domestic civil support operations,” and adds that “The authority to approve resettlement such operations within U.S. territories,” would require a “special exception” to The Posse Comitatus Act, which can be obtained via “the President invoking his executive authority.” The document also makes reference to identifying detainees using their “social security number.”
Aside from enemy combatants and other classifications of detainees, the manual includes the designation of “civilian internees,” in other words citizens who are detained for, “security reasons, for protection, or because he or she committed an offense against the detaining power.”
Once the detainees have been processed into the internment camp, the manual explains how they will be “indoctrinated,” with a particular focus on targeting political dissidents, into expressing support for U.S. policies.
The re-education process is the responsibility of the “Psychological Operations Officer,” whose job it is to design “PSYOP products that are designed to pacify and acclimate detainees or DCs to accept U.S. I/R facility authority and regulations,” according to the document.
The manual lists the following roles that are designated to the “PSYOP team”.
– Identifies malcontents, trained agitators, and political leaders within the facility who may try to organize resistance or create disturbances.
– Develops and executes indoctrination programs to reduce or remove antagonistic attitudes.
– Identifies political activists.
– Provides loudspeaker support (such as administrative announcements and facility instructions when necessary).
– Helps the military police commander control detainee and DC populations during emergencies.
– Plans and executes a PSYOP program that produces an understanding and appreciation of U.S. policies and actions.
Remember, this is not restricted to insurgents in Iraq who are detained in prison camps – the manual makes it clear that the policies also apply “within U.S. territory” under the auspices of the DHS and FEMA. The document adds that, “Resettlement operations may require large groups of civilians to be quartered temporarily (less than 6 months) or semipermanently (more than 6 months).”
The historical significance of states using internment camps to re-educate detainees centers around the fact that it is almost exclusively practiced by repressive and dictatorial regimes like the former Soviet Union and Stalinist regimes like modern day North Korea.
We have exhaustively documented preparations for the mass internment of citizens inside America, but this is the first time that language concerning the re-education of detainees, in particular political activists, has cropped up in our research.
In 2009, the National Guard posted a number of job opportunities looking for “Internment/Resettlement Specialists” to work in “civilian internee camps” within the United States.
In December last year it was also revealed that Halliburton subsidiary KBR is seeking sub-contractors to staff and outfit “emergency environment” camps located in five regions of the United States.
In 2006, KBR was contracted by Homeland Security to build detention centers designed to deal with “an emergency influx of immigrants into the U.S,” or the rapid development of unspecified “new programs” that would require large numbers of people to be interned.
Rex 84, short for Readiness Exercise 1984, was established under the pretext of a “mass exodus” of illegal aliens crossing the Mexican/US border, the same pretense used in the language of the KBR request for services.
During the Iran-Contra hearings in 1987, however, it was revealed that the program was a secretive “scenario and drill” developed by the federal government to suspend the Constitution, declare martial law, assign military commanders to take over state and local governments, and detain large numbers of American citizens determined by the government to be “national security threats.”
Under the indefinite detention provision of the National Defense Authorization Act, which was signed by Barack Obama on New Year’s Eve, American citizens can be kidnapped and detained indefinitely without trial.
Read a portion of the Internment and Resettlement Operations manual below.
The following portions of the document make it clear that the policies apply “within U.S. territory” (as well as abroad in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan) and that domestic federal agencies are involved.
*********************
Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com. He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.
What Really Happened at the Montréal May Day Protest?
by Andrew Gavin Marshall
TheIntelHub.com
May 3, 2012
On May 1, 2012, thousands of students and other protesters took to the streets for the Anti-Capitalist rally in downtown Montréal.
I attended the protest with a couple friends, and having read the “news” emanating from the “stenographers of power” (the mainstream media), it’s important to set the record straight about what happened here in Montréal.
The Montreal Gazette reported the events with the headline, “Police respond as May Day anti-capitalist protesters turn violent in Montreal.”
This exact story and headline were carried across the English-speaking media fresh for the morning’s papers: with the Vancouver Sun, the Province, the Calgary Herald, the Regina Leader-Post, the Edmonton Journal, and the Ottawa Citizen.
The story, as they tell is, goes like this: it started peacefully just after 5 p.m. (this part is true!), and then it “was declared illegal by police at two minutes after 6 p.m. following violent clashes.”
A police spokesperson (who apparently is the only person the media chose to interview for their article) said that, “injuries to a citizen, police officers and vandalism on cars and property were the reasons for declaring the march illegal.”
The article then blamed “black-clad youth [who] were seen hurling rocks at store windows,” after which the police began to launch flash grenades, and the riot police moved in after 6 p.m. “using batons to disperse the crowd.”
At 7:10 p.m., “a full hour after declaring the demonstration illegal, police announced that anyone who refused to leave would be arrested.”
The CBC went with the headline, “More than 100 arrests in Montreal May Day riot.” CTV reported that of the 100+ arrests that took place, “75 were for unlawful assembly, while the remaining 34 were for criminal acts.”
So, arrested for “unlawful assembly”: what does that mean? It means that when the police unilaterally declare a protest to be “illegal,” everyone who is there is “unlawfully assembling,” and thus, mass and indiscriminate arrests can be made.
In Part 1, Section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, it is stated that “[e]veryone has the following fundamental freedoms”: conscience, religion, thought, belief, expression, media, communication, association, and “freedom of peaceful assembly.”
Having been at the protest from its beginning, I can say that it was a peaceful march. While there were individual acts of vandalism (the worst I saw was drawing on a bank’s window with a black marker), if police action were to be taken, it should be to arrest the specific vandal. Instead, they implemented collective punishment for exercising our “fundamental freedoms.”
The protest began in the Old Port of the city of Montréal, and made it’s way down rue Notre-Dame, up St-Laurent, and down to the financial district. The mood was good, people were in high spirits, with music, drums, the occasional fire cracker, young and old alike.
The march had been successfully split, and the small factions were then being isolated and surrounded. Suddenly, riot police were everywhere, marching up the street like storm troopers, police cars, vans, horses, motorcycles, and trucks were flying by.
As one faction of the protest continued down another street, the riot police followed behind, while another massive onslaught of riot police went around to block off the protesters from the other side.
When the police first charged, I had lost one of my friends simply by looking away for a moment. After having found each other up the street, we watched as the protest which descended down the street was surrounded by police from nearly every side. It was then that we saw flash grenades and tear gas being launched at the crowd of people. There was a notable smell that filled the air.
As we stood, shocked and disturbed by what had just happened, we made our way toward McGill to see where other protesters were headed when we saw a group of riot police “escort” three young protesters whom they had arrested behind a police barricade at the HSBC (protecting the banks, of course!).
Up the street, and across from McGill, one protester who had run to get on the bus was chased down by several riot police who then threw him face-first onto the pavement, and as a crowd quickly gathered around (of both protesters and pedestrian onlookers), the police formed a circle around the man and told everyone to “get back!” and then they began marching toward us, forcing the crowd of onlookers to scatter as well.
The police then took the young man over to where the other protesters were being “collected” at the HSBC.
There was one young girl, with the notable red square patch on her jacket (the symbol of the Québec student movement) who had to be taken away on a stretcher into an ambulance. We don’t know what happened to her.
As more and more police gathered, we decided it was time to leave, walking down the street through which the police had chased the protesters, remnants of signs, red patches, and other debris spilled across the streets; the remains of a peaceful protest ended with police violence.
This has become all too common in Montréal and across Québec, as the student protest enters its twelfth week, having had over 160 protests, an average of 2-3 per day.
As the demonstrations take place, the police have used obscure and unconstitutional city by-laws in both Montréal and Québec City which are so vague in their descriptions that any peaceful assembly or march can be declared illegal. Those who are indiscriminately arrested are fined $500, and if arrested again, are charged between $3,500 and $10,500.
It is clear that the State has decided – unilaterally – that freedom of speech and freedom of assembly do not confirm to their specific “by-laws,” and are clamping down on students and protesters in order to quiet and crush the student strike and the emerging social movement which is being referred to as the ‘Maple Spring’.
The national media, for its part, has decided to demonize the students, the protesters, and the people; taking the word of a “police spokesperson” over everyone else. Having been at the protest, however, I must question whether these so-called “journalists” were at the same event, because we witnessed two entirely different scenarios.
We entered the march in good spirits, and the police ended it in violence and repression, leaving us standing still, scattered, and disturbed; but our spirits are not crushed, our resolve is only growing stronger, and for each act of violence the police and State impose upon the people, we begin to see them for what they truly are, and thus, what is truly at stake: our very freedom, itself!
Andrew Gavin Marshall is an independent researcher and writer based in Montreal, Canada, writing on a number of social, political, economic, and historical issues. He is also Project Manager of The People’s Book Project. He also hosts a weekly podcast show, “Empire, Power, and People,” onBoilingFrogsPost.com.
Red Ice Radio – Jay Weidner – Hr 1 – Kubrick’s Odyssey: How Stanley Faked the Moon Landings [audio]
Red Ice Radio
April 27, 2012
Jay Weidner is an author, filmmaker and hermetic scholar, considered to be a “modern-day Indiana Jones” for his ongoing worldwide quests to find clues to mankind’s spiritual destiny. He returns to Red Ice to talk about his film, Kubrick’s Odyssey. Jay presents compelling evidence of how Stanley Kubrick directed the Apollo moon landings. He reveals that the film, 2001: A Space Odyssey was not only a retelling of Arthur C. Clarke and Kubrick’s novel, but also a research and development project that assisted Kubrick in the creation of the Apollo moon footage. Weidner also tells how Kubrick’s film, The Shining is the story of Kubrick’s personal travails as he secretly worked on the Apollo footage for NASA.
Firefox creators Mozilla attack Congress; denounce CISPA
Russia Today
May 2, 2012
Silicon Valley’s Mozilla Corporation has tasked themselves with extinguishing a fire, and no, it’s not what you have in mind.
Mozilla, the Mountain View, California-based developers responsible for creating the hugely successful Firefox Web browser, has issued a statement publically condemning the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act, or CISPA. In a memo sent to Forbes’ data security department on late Tuesday, Mozilla’s privacy and public policy official explains that its newly-publicized stance is not one that encourages online cyber attacks, but merely establishes that the company is in favor of protecting the rights of its users.
“While we wholeheartedly support a more secure Internet, CISPA has a broad and alarming reach that goes far beyond Internet security,” reads the statement. “The bill infringes on our privacy, includes vague definitions of cybersecurity, and grants immunities to companies and government that are too broad around information misuse. We hope the Senate takes the time to fully and openly consider these issues with stakeholder input before moving forward with this legislation.”
Mozilla’s issues with CISPA mirror opposition that was voiced last week on Capitol Hill during debates over the legislation. Rep Jan Schakowsky (D Illinois) said the cybersecurity bill “still fails to adequately safeguard the privacy of Americans” and that the government needs to be able to “combat the serious threat of cyber attacks and still insure that we are protecting our computer systems and the civil liberties of Americans.”
Jared Polis, a Democratic rep for Colorado, issued similar concerns, stating, “CISPA represents a massive government overreach in the name of security” and that “Any America that values his or her privacy should be concerned.”
At this point, however, the US Senate is now the only Washington entity that stands between CISPA and the desk of President Barack Obama. In a hurried vote last Thursday, the US House of Representatives passed the bill in its current form much to the chagrin of lawmakers like Schakowsky and Polis, essentially leaving approval from the other side of Congress the only thing that the bill needs to be brought to the White House.
Advisers for President Obama have issued a statement on their own part insisting that the administration will recommend that the commander-in-chief vetoes the bill if it is brought to the Oval Office, although critics have already come out to call the move another example of election year pandering. The White House issued a similar statement last year regarding the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012, or the NDAA. Originally the Obama administration said that the president had issues over the bill’s provisions regarding the indefinite detention of American citizens, although Obama eventually inked his name to the paper on New Year’s Eve.
This time around, condemnation is indeed present in regards to CISPA’s future, but Mozilla’s just-released memorandum could be a catalyst in bringing more critics out of the woodwork. Although opponents of CISPA have certainly come out against the bill for weeks now, Mozilla’s statement is among one of the first released by a major Internet entity. Other Silicon Valley giants such as IBM, Facebook and Microsoft still stand in favor of the bill. In recent days, it was reported that Microsoft switched stances and would formally oppose CISPA. This week, however, Digital Journal reports that a spokesperson for the company now confirms that the official Microsoft stance on CISPA is “unchanged,” returning Bill Gates’ billion-dollar corporation to the supportive side of CISPA.
That isn’t to say, of course, that widespread opposition of CISPA is far from rampant. In the recent days since CISPA’s passing, critics have continued to speak up against the act. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, presidential hopeful Ron Paul and the American Civil Liberties Union have all taken an anti-CISPA stance, as well as the popular web forum Reddit.
[hat tip: EndtheLie.com]
PN 