Voting Netanyahu 2012?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Republican Presidential nominee Mitt Romney have a long-standing friendship that dates back to 1976, when they both worked as corporate advisers to the Boston Consulting Group.

Despite some efforts to downplay the 36-year relationship, both men have noted that they formed a lasting bond during the time they spent working together at the Boston Consulting Group. In a New York Times article from April, Romney and Netanyahu were both quoted saying they share a common worldview in many respects.

Romney told the newspaper: “We can almost speak in shorthand. We share common experiences and have a perspective and underpinning which is similar.”

And Netanyahu described their communication as follows: “[D]espite our very different backgrounds, my sense are that we employ similar methods in analyzing problems and coming up with solutions for them.”

Now with Romney in the running for President, the close relationship between candidate and Israeli Prime Minister is an unprecedented one that may pose some heavy questions about the future of American foreign policy in the Mideast and how Israel-dominated its direction will be.

One of Romney’s closest foreign policy advisers is Dan Senor, a high-profile and decidedly neocon foreign policy expert whose resume includes advocating a number of Bush-era Mideast foreign policy initiatives. But even when George W. Bush was hesitant to unleash an American or Israeli military assault on Iran because of a stretched-thin military battling in Iraq and Afghanistan, people from Senor’s school of thought were openly calling for the United States to embark on an aggressive bombing campaign against the nation. Senor has exhibited a career-spanning support for Israel and was reportedly one of the key orchestrators of Romney’s recent legally questionable campaign fundraising event in Israel where he received money from a number of unnamed donors who were alleged to have been linked with illegal diamond trading.

Indeed, Senor is not the only pro-Israel advocate tied to the Romney campaign. In a recently leaked video, Romney admitted that his campaign uses the same consultants that manipulate campaigns the world over to garner favor for the globalist-backed candidate in a given race. He said:

I have a very good team of extraordinarily experienced, highly successful consultants, a couple of people in particular who have done races around the world, I didn’t realize it. These guys in the US – the Karl Rove equivalents – they do races all over the world: in Armenia, in Africa, in Israel. I mean, they work for Bibi Netanyahu in his race. So, they do these races and they see which ads work, and which processes work best, and we have ideas about what we do over the course of the campaign. I’d tell them to you, but I’d have to shoot you.

Romney’s allusion to his international thought shapers raises questions about the true origin and purpose of events that have transpired in recent weeks throughout the Mideast and what Israeli-manipulated shenanigans may unfold over the next month leading up to the election.

Here’s another telling remark from the same Romney speech:

[I]n the Jimmy Carter election, the fact that we had hostages in Iran, I mean, that was all we talked about. And we had the two helicopters crash in the desert, I mean, that was the focus, and so him solving that made all the difference in the world. I’m afraid today that if you simply got Iran to agree to stand down on nuclear weapons, they’d go, “Now hold on. It’s really a-” I mean, if something of that nature presents itself I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.

Will a manufactured Iran crisis arise before November? Only time will tell, but it is getting pretty close to October surprise season. And given the amount of speculation that the recent round of Mideast riots are part of a psyops ploy, it isn’t implausible.

Paying attention to American/Israeli news coverage, one cannot help but notice Netanyahu’s recent push for media visibility in the United States. He has essentially inserted himself into the 2012 Presidential campaign.

Netanyahu has repeatedly made critical statements about Obama’s foreign policy stance of crippling economic sanctions and patience to stifle Iran’s nuclear ambitions, saying that the United States must essentially draw a line in the sand and dare the Iranian regime to step over it.

He had this to say on MSNBC’s “Meet the Press”:

I actually I read this in the American press. They said, well, you know, if you take action, that’s– that’s a lot worse than having Iran with nuclear weapons. Some have even said that Iran with nuclear weapons would stabilize the Middle East– stabilize the Middle East. I– I think the people who say this have set a new standard for human stupidity. We have to stop them. Don’t rely on containment. That is not the American policy. It would be wrong. It would be a grave, grave mistake. Don’t let these fanatics have nuclear weapons. It’s terrible for Israel and it’s terrible for America. It’s terrible for the world.

Whether Obama or Romney assume the office of President following the election matters not to Netanyahu, because Israeli influence in America’s military-industrial complex and legislature guarantees American backing of Israel should it launch a pre-emptive strike on Iran. But his relationship with Romney and Romney’s promise to telephone him with questions like “Would it help if I say this? What would you like me to do?” before making key American foreign-policy decisions make Netanyahu’s most-favorable option clear.

With the prospect of a virtual handover of Mideast foreign policy decision-making to the Israeli government, American voters can bet that Netanyahu, with the help of Mossad, will do everything in his power to ensure that Romney takes the White House.

Many “conservatives” reading this are likely saying to themselves, “Good, anything to get Obama out of the Oval Office.” And unfortunately, they have been brainwashed into believing that support for Israel is a biblical mandate that directly affects American prosperity through divine intervention. (That doesn’t sound all too different than the way some other cultures make policy decisions, does it?)

But the harsh and unavoidable reality for more pragmatic thinkers is that Romney’s willingness to give Israel such a powerful role in American policy goes against any true patriotic value left over from our Nation’s founding.

During his farewell address in 1796, President George Washington gave a grave warning against the very kind of relationship the United States has cultivated with Israel, a relationship that Romney seeks to further embolden with Israeli power in American decision-making.

Washington warned:

[A] passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.

… Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government.

… Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.

Of course, more prophetic was probably Washington’s understanding that money and zealotry would lead the Nation astray and into a spiraling collapse as he said later in the speech: “I dare not hope they [these counsels] will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit…”

There are thousands of reasons to support “anyone but Obama” for President and maybe even a few reasons to believe that Romney would make a good President. His slobbering love for Netanyahu and willingness to wholly entangle the United States in the battle between Muslims and Jews are not those reasons. Anyone who believes otherwise cannot be called a true conservative, and most definitely not a patriot, in the sort of Nation envisioned by America’s Founding Fathers.

Justice Report Clears Holder In Fast And Furious

A report released by the Justice Department on Wednesday says that 14 employees of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives face “disciplinary action” in regard to roles played in the fatally flawed Fast and Furious gunrunning operation, though no criminal charges have been recommended.

The report says that Fast and Furious was plagued by “misguided strategies, tactics, errors in judgment and management failures” on the part of agents, prosecutors and senior ATF officials in Washington. The Justice Department investigators also contend that Attorney General Eric Holder was not informed of the operation until after the death of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry in December 2010.

Holder said in a statement: “It is unfortunate that some were so quick to make baseless accusations before they possessed the facts about these operations accusations that turned out to be without foundation and that have caused a great deal of unnecessary harm and confusion. I hope today’s report acts as a reminder of the dangers of adopting as fact unsubstantiated conclusions before an investigation of the circumstances is completed.”

As a result of Fast and Furious roles outlined in the report, Kenneth Melson, the former director of the ATF, retired from the department and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Jason Weinstein resigned from his post. The Justice Department has not released further information about the other involved employees.

Federal Government Not Willing To Rethink NDAA

Many civil liberties activists felt that a small victory had been achieved when Federal Judge Katherine Forrest temporarily suspended the National Defense Authorization Act’s indefinite detention provision in response to a lawsuit brought forth by renowned American journalists and intellectuals earlier this year. But this week, an appeals judge reinstated the provision at request of the Administration of Barack Obama.

Forrest ruled last week that the indefinite detention provision of NDAA could implicate American journalists for providing “material support” to entities that the Federal government defines as terrorists for simply covering issues surrounding the groups. This, the judge argued, posed threats to Constitutional free speech and freedom of the press.

“First Amendment rights are guaranteed by the Constitution and cannot be legislated away,” Forrest wrote in her opinion. “This Court rejects the government’s suggestion that American citizens can be placed in military detention indefinitely, for acts they could not predict might subject them to detention.”

When he signed the bill into law last New Year’s Eve, Obama claimed that: “The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists.”

Despite his assertion, the President’s Administration, evidently alarmed by Forrest’s suspension of the indefinite detention provision until language in the bill is clarified, asked for an emergency stay on the order. Within hours of the request on Monday, U.S. Court of Appeals Second Circuit Judge Raymond Lohier agreed to intervene and place a hold on the injunction.

Indefinite detention is alive and well. Barring Forrest’s previous ruling means the President again has the power to put any American citizen who “was part of or substantially supported al-Qaeda, the Taliban or associated forces that are engaged in hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners” in a military detention center until “the end of hostilities.”

Amid Solyndra Failure, Chinese Solar Panels Were Bought For Fed Building

If you can’t beat them, let them win.

That appears to have been the attitude of American bureaucrats who deemed it acceptable to use stimulus funds acquired via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to purchase Chinese solar panels for the Senator Paul Simon Federal Building in Carbondale, Ill.

In 2010, the contractor hired to install the panels questioned the Federal government as to whether it was even legal to purchase the Chinese panels with stimulus funding, but the bureaucrats dismissed the query, according to The Washington Times.

Significance of the transgression has heightened in the years since the installation of the panels with the highly publicized failure of taxpayer funded firms like Solyndra LLC and Abound Solar. Both firms were involved in the manufacture of solar panels similar to those purchased from China for the building.

Since the companies’ bankruptcy filings, government officials have repeatedly blamed failure of the taxpayer-subsidized green-energy experiments on unfair competition from China.

Hezbollah Chief Wants U.S. Laws Against Islamic Ridicule

At behest of Hezbollah Chief Hassan Nasrallah, tens of thousands of protesters have gathered in Beirut, Lebanon in protest of the anti-Islamic film that is alleged to have sparked massive unrest throughout the Mideast.

According to RT, many of the protesters have adorned themselves with green and yellow headbands bearing the words “At Your Service God’s Prophet” to signify membership to Hezbollah.

“America, hear us – don’t insult our Prophet,” the protesters have been heard chanting.

“Prophet of God, we offer ourselves, our blood and our kin for the sake of your dignity and honor,” Reuters quoted Nasrallah during a rare address to the protest crowd.

The Hezbollah leader is reportedly calling for the government of the United States to make it a criminal offense to ridicule the Islamic prophet in the public sphere and is calling for punishment against those involved in the production of “Innocence of Muslims.”

“The US should know the film has dangerous repercussions,” Nasrallah said, according to Press-TV.

OWS Protesters Outnumbered By Cops

Occupy Wall Street protestors took to New York City’s financial district Monday to mark the one year anniversary of the movement against corporate greed in the United States; according to reports, police outnumbered protestors.

Protesters who began taking to the city’s streets over the weekend were met with heavy police presence by NYPD officers clad in military and riot gear who barricaded many streets throughout lower Manhattan.

About 100 protesters had either been detained or arrested near the New York Stock Exchange by noon Monday as police filled buses with the activists.

Smaller OWS-related events also cropped up in other cities throughout the Nation, though with less fanfare than the New York gathering.

Many observers of the OWS movement say that because of a lack of defined goals and failure to put forth a solid ideological statement, the anniversary resurgence of OWS will be short-lived.

A recent New York Times article explains:

As the Occupy movement turns 1 year old, its primary target — Wall Street — keeps churning out scandals. Major banks have been caught rigging key interest rates, laundering money and taking risky bets that lose billions of dollars.

Yet the movement cannot claim any new policy, law or regulation as its own. Unlike the Tea Party on the political right, there is no cohesive Occupy group promoting candidates in November’s national election.

Can Green Tea Kill Cancer?

Recent studies have added to the knowledge about the many health benefits of green tea, noting that chemicals found in the drink can actually help regenerate brain cells. Now, researchers studying the same chemicals have found that they can also shrink cancerous tumors.

Chemicals present in green tea, such as epigallocatechin 3-gallate or EGCG, are gaining prominent attention as new research demonstrates an impressive ability of EGCG to halt cancer growth and improve cardiovascular health.

Research from the University of Strathclyde in Scotland, published in Nanomedicine, says EGCG extracted from green tea could be a powerful weapon in treatments for tackling cancer with no side effects. Scientists at the university developed a method for delivering the natural compound directly to tumor cells and found that nearly two-thirds of the tumors shrank or disappeared within a month.

Dr. Christine Dufès, a senior lecturer at the Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences, said: “These are very encouraging results which we hope could pave the way for new and effective cancer treatments.

“When we used our method, the green tea extract reduced the size of many of the tumors every day, in some cases removing them altogether. By contrast, the extract had no effect at all when it was delivered by other means, as every one of these tumors continued to grow.

“This research could open doors to new treatments for what is still one of the biggest killer diseases in many countries.”

The tests are believed to be the first time that this type of treatment has made cancerous tumors shrink or vanish.

Gingrich: U.S. At War With Libya

In a scathing rebuke of President Barack Obama’s foreign policy, former House Speaker and failed Republican Presidential candidate Newt Gingrich described the events in Benghazi, Libya, and other U.S. consulates throughout the Arab world last week as acts of war.

Responding to Obama’s speech following the news of the murder of the U.S. ambassador to Libya in which he described the deadly Libya protest as a “senseless act of violence,” Gingrich writes in a recent op-ed:

These are not acts of senseless violence.

These are acts of war.

Our ambassador to Libya and three other Americans were not killed by a senseless mob. They were killed by a purposeful group of men armed with sophisticated weapons. These killers had tracked Ambassador Chris Stevens down to the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, where he was much more vulnerable to attack and had less protection. They waged a coordinated, military-style assault.

Our four dead are combat casualties as much as anyone in Iraq or Afghanistan.

While American involvement in the overthrow of the Libyan government took place without much fanfare, the United States is definitely at war with Libya. Experts agree that it is the same type of endless military conflict in which the Nation has been entangled for the past decade in Afghanistan.

Can America Survive Mideast War?

Gauging the response from the hawkish, neocon wing of the American populace along with some fence-sitters, it is apparent that the Nation’s handlers of disinformation are doing a spectacular job at steering public opinion in favor of an all-out international brawl in the Mideast.

Most recently, this has been demonstrated by the unbelievable narrative that transpired in Benghazi, Libya, and Egypt. Protesters have attacked American consulates and murdered the American ambassador to Libya and three other Americans.

American blood has been spilled in Libya, Egyptians have torn down the American flag at the embassy in their country and the anger and violent protests are spreading like wildfire across the Arab world. But, of course, there must be a reason. Could it be American freedom of speech?

The unrest is said to have been sparked by a film made in the United States that is extremely offensive to Muslim believers. There are many reasons which make the film an unlikely catalyst for the current anger in the Mideast; you can read about them in Bob Livingston’s “Freedom Watch” in today’s issue.

But to pretend that the film was what really sparked this unrest makes it much easier for America’s warmongers to validate what is about to come to a head in the Mideast region, while simultaneously covering more than 70 years of American hegemonic failure.

Less-informed Americans are led to believe some extremely nonsensical and historically contradictory things about the Nation’s ambitions in the Mideast. These ambitions were solidified with a 1944 State Department memo describing Mideast oil as “a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history.”

Over the course of the following decade, American foreign policy in the Mideast was quite simply to remove anyone who displeased the Nation’s puppet masters and to create a sense of celestial manifest destiny for Americans who might shun the idea of becoming involved in a region that had been embroiled in holy war for a large portion of recorded history.

President Harry Truman in 1946 ordered the Soviets to get out of Kurdistan and Azerbaijan in northern Iran under threat of a “super bomb.” This was an effort to ensure that Iran would remain friendly to the United States in the future, and not object to imperialist U.S. objectives in the meantime.

Two years later in 1948, the United States manufactured what is, to this day, one of the primary publically acceptable reasons for the Nation’s nearly perpetual war stance in a region worlds away even when the United States falters domestically under massive debts and economic woes.

U.S. and British interests worked with the United Nations to create the Zionist homeland of Israel by ceding 54 percent of Palestine to the Jews who made up roughly one-third of the population. This quickly prompted Egypt, Iraq, Jordan and Syria, who opposed the newly proclaimed state, to attack unsuccessfully. The war ended in the exodus of nearly 800,000 Palestinians into surrounding Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, Gaza and the West Bank. Israel promptly took control of 77 percent of historic Palestine and was vindicated by American support.

To put it into vastly oversimplified terms, what followed involved a series of upheavals and U.S. interventionist money-pumping in Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria and Egypt. Beyond proxy war with other major world powers like Russia, the United States has interest only in Mideast oil reserves and the avoidance of nations in the region throwing out brutal regimes in favor of ones that would upset the global wishes of Western monied elite.

The cycle has been a vicious one, the latest reincarnation of which was witnessed in the Arab Spring of recent years. But the result will be the same as it has for decades. The United States supported the party that would soon empower Saddam Hussein in 1963, al-Qaida boogeyman Osama bin Laden years before the 9/11 attacks (because he irked the Russians in Afghanistan), and the revolution that created the current situation in Iran. The United States also destroyed bin Laden and Saddam, and it will likely soon do quite a number on Iran.

Does the Nation simply like playing God with the Mideast and reaping the rewards of oil control and continual busywork for the military industrial complex? Surely, the best and the brightest in American foreign policy know well that Arab people will likely never accept Western culture and values and will continue to revolt against them in horrific ways.

Whether they buy into celestial reasons for blind support of Israel and its imperialist ambitions or actually think American intervention in the Mideast has ever been about peace, Democracy or nuclear weapons (none of which have been found in large quantities in the region), there is something that Americans should be very worried about right now: The situation, regardless of the Nation’s arrogance, is very quickly becoming more unmanageable than before.

Israel continues to push the United States to aid in a strike against Iran, which has the backing of Russia and China. Meanwhile, Iran is gaining favor among the populations in Nations the United States has already gone to great lengths to destabilize in recent years: Libya, Egypt, Syria and Afghanistan. War with Iran could mean another 10 years of the past decade’s wars at best and, at worst, all-out war in the Mideast that will spread across the planet, the likes of which Americans haven’t seen in a long time.

Given the shape the Nation is in at home, one can only hope America could triumph in such a conflict. Then again, perhaps that isn’t the goal.

Fed Announces QE-Infinity

The Federal Reserve announced Thursday that the United States will definitely go into another round of quantitative easing, despite the economic failure of QE1 and QE2.

The central bank announced in a statement:

To support a stronger economic recovery and to help ensure that inflation, over time, is at the rate most consistent with its dual mandate, the Committee agreed today to increase policy accommodation by purchasing additional agency mortgage-backed securities at a pace of $40 billion per month. The Committee also will continue through the end of the year its program to extend the average maturity of its holdings of securities as announced in June, and it is maintaining its existing policy of reinvesting principal payments from its holdings of agency debt and agency mortgage-backed securities in agency mortgage-backed securities. These actions, which together will increase the Committee’s holdings of longer-term securities by about $85 billion each month through the end of the year, should put downward pressure on longer-term interest rates, support mortgage markets, and help to make broader financial conditions more accommodative.

The difference between this round of quantitative easing and previous inflationary stimulus attempts made by the Fed is that this time the central bank announced an open-ended timeframe for bond buying. Essentially, the Fed has given itself the power to buy bonds for as long as it wants without announcing any more quantitative easing.

Gold stocks, as expected, skyrocketed after the announcement.

Mideast Imperialism: The Coming Collapses Of America, Israel

Following the horrific attack of the American consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that led to the death of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens (some accounts say by lynch mob) and rioting in Egypt, some lawmakers are calling for the United States to withdraw aid from the countries.

That’s a good idea, but certainly not good enough.

The House will vote today on a resolution that would extend Federal funding through March to prevent a government shutdown before the election. Some conservatives raised concerns about the inclusion of additional foreign aid funding in the bill.

“It would show a tremendous amount of leadership from this administration, in light of the recent developments, if the president were to come back and demand that the amount of money that is in the [continuing resolution] for Libya and Egypt be stripped. That would be tremendous leadership,” Representative Jeff Landry (R-La.) said yesterday.

Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said the inclusion of continued aid to the nations should be contingent upon agreement that those responsible for the attacks be brought to justice.

For a little more than a decade, the United States has been meddling in the Mideast in the name of “democracy.” Instead of stripping some aid, perhaps it is time for the United States to strip all Mideast aid and get out of the world’s sandbox once and for all. Simultaneously, the United States could devote more resources to developing domestic energy (so that destabilization in the area does not hurt the United States economically) and focusing its entire military might on defending the homeland rather than imperialism.

Could the results be any worse than what the current Mideast foreign policy has yielded?

The Muslim Brotherhood, with the aid of the United States, has taken control of Egypt and Libya.

Afghanistan is overrun by sectarian violence, and the very Afghans the United States is attempting to train are killing American soldiers.

Iran, capitalizing on the United States’ reckless deeds throughout the Mideast, is making inroads in further radicalizing Egypt, Libya and Afghanistan.

And Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is doing his best to guilt the United States into a war that will amount to at least a decade more of the very same type of Mideast fighting that has failed already.

Check back Friday for in-depth Mideast analysis from Personal Liberty on why things are heating up in the region and what it may mean for the future.

The Internet Spy Executive Order Exists

American Internet users will most likely soon be wholly governed in their online activities by the Department of Homeland Security due to an Executive Order that has reportedly already been drafted by the White House.

According to information from The Associated Press, the order uses the fear of cyber terror to implement a system whereby a committee made up of members of the departments of defense, justice, commerce and national intelligence, under the control of the Department of Homeland Security, will monitor America’s Internet use.

The AP claims the measure will provide “digital defenses for critical infrastructure while encouraging economic prosperity and promoting privacy and civil liberties.”

Critics of the idea of government control over the Internet have myriad concerns over what the passage of an executive order like the one proposed could mean for Internet freedom.

Will The Assault Weapon Ban Return?

Tomorrow marks the eighth anniversary of the expiration of the Federal assault weapons ban put into place in 1994 by the Administration of President Bill Clinton. And even after eight years, the fight from anti-gun lobbies to reinstate the ban is still full force.

Last week, the Democratic Party included in its platform — just as it has every four years since the ban expired — a commitment to reinstating the ban that disallowed Americans the right to legally own certain semi-automatic rifles and magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has promised to introduce legislation to reinstate the ban as early as next year. The success of her efforts will be determined largely by the outcome of the Presidential election. President Barack Obama has already made it remarkably clear that he strongly supports reinstatement of the ban, which will likely become a reality under a second term. Furthermore, some pundits expect at least three Supreme Court appointments to be made during the next Presidential Administration; Obama appointments could spell disaster for gun rights.

Though Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is not often noted for his extreme devotion to the 2nd Amendment, he has been outspoken on the side of those who oppose reinstating the assault weapons ban.

Another key component of fighting legislation like what Feinstein has promised to introduce is the election of gun-friendly Senators in Senate battleground States.

Without paying attention to Senate races, making sure that Obama is not re-elected and that a Romney Administration would follow through with 2nd Amendment promises (instead of reverting to the candidate’s previous anti-gun stances), there is little hope in winning the battle against America’s gun grabbers.

Politicians Use 9/11 To Talk Defense Spending

Being sure not to let the anniversary of 9/11 go to waste, House Republicans spent Tuesday doing the bidding of the military-industrial complex and speaking out against any form of military spending cuts — even as the United States faces $16 trillion in deficits.

“The president should be called upon and asked, what is his plan?” House Majority leader Eric Cantor told reporters. “How is he going to lead and make sure that our military is not hollowed out?”

In addition to military spending cuts already under way, an additional $500 billion in military spending cuts will automatically go into effect at the end of the year as part of an agreement between President Barack Obama and Congress to avoid a debt default.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) said Tuesday of the automatic cuts: “The president didn’t want his re-election inconvenienced by another fight over a $1.2 trillion increase in the debt increase, and that’s why we have it.”

Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta also spoke out against the cuts recently. During an interview with CBS, he said: “What’s irresponsible is the fact that…they put these cuts into place and they are failing to come up with the answer as to how to prevent this from happening…They said ‘Let’s put a gun to our head and if we don’t do the right thing, we’ll blow our heads off.’ Well, now they’ve cocked the gun. This thing’s supposed to take effect in January, but the whole purpose of it was both Republicans and Democrats to do the right thing and to prevent this from happening. That’s what’s irresponsible.”

Netanyahu Wants Iran War Now

While Americans were remembering the events of 9/11 that catapulted the United States into more than a decade of war, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accused Americans of hindering Israel’s ability to defend itself on Tuesday.

Responding to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s recent statement that the United States “is not setting deadlines” relating to Iran’s alleged nuclear activities, Netanyahu said that no immediate military action against the Iranians means they will build an atomic bomb.

According to The Washington Post, Netanyahu said the following at a news conference with the visiting Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borisov:

The sanctions have hurt the Iranian economy, but they haven’t stopped the Iranian nuclear program. That’s a fact.

And the fact is that every day that passes, Iran gets closer and closer to nuclear bombs.

The world tells Israel: “Wait. There’s still time.” And I say: “Wait for what? Wait until when?” Those in the international community who refuse to put red lines before Iran don’t have a moral right to place a red light before Israel.

Many defense American and Israeli defense experts alike disagree with Netanyahu’s hawkish assertion that now is the right time for either country to become entangled in war with Iran, arguing that sanctions could still work to further weaken the nation.

Liberty, Never Forget

Eleven years have passed since the fateful day terror struck the United States and New York City’s twin towers fell. In the wake of the horrific event, many Americans burst at the seams with patriotism and adopted the mantra “We will never forget.” For the most part, we haven’t forgotten the falling towers; but, in the grand scheme of things, we have managed to forget something that will prove far more detrimental to our way of life.

When the United States of America was envisioned more than two centuries ago, it was envisioned as a Nation where fear would never allow the populace to succumb to the tyranny of the few who are motivated by greed and desperate to protect themselves from the consequence of their malice.

America was to be first and foremost “the land of the free, the home of the brave.” But, we must remember, we cannot defend freedom without bravery just as we will not be able to act on bravery if we don’t preserve freedom.

Without a doubt, no matter which account of the events on 9/11 you believe, the shock and awe of the tragedy made it much easier for the few to lull the masses into accepting tyrannical and unConstitutional rule in the United States, the likes of which were unimaginable for the Nation’s Founding Fathers.

If the goal was to deliver what have been some of the most devastating blows in history to American liberty, the enemy — whether foreign or domestic — has prevailed in the years following 9/11.

Here’s why:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Just days after Sept. 11, 2001, Congress overwhelmingly passed the USA PATRIOT Act. It has since been reauthorized under President Barack Obama, and it was extended again in May 2011.

From the Bill of Rights Defense Committee:

Section 802 of the PATRIOT Act broadly defines domestic terrorism…

This broad definition allows for inconsistencies in the application of the law. For example, radical animal rights and environmental organizations (e.g., the American Liberation Front and the Environmental Liberation Front) have been targeted and labeled as domestic terrorist groups. These groups’ political acts are destructive to property, but have not caused a single death. However, individuals and groups motivated by political ideology to kill an innocent victim by flying a plane into an IRS building, assassinate a doctor during church services, or murder dozens of schoolchildren at a summer camp are not described or treated as terrorists. By using such a vague definition for “domestic terrorism,” the PATRIOT Act chills Americans’ freedom of speech and assembly, since it is entirely unclear whether First Amendment-protected activism may be categorized as terrorism.

Furthermore, other Patriot Act provisions permit government investigators to track book purchases, library checkouts and Internet information if they believe the material could be conducive to “terror” activities.

More recently, the National Defense Authorization Act, signed into law by Obama, has exactly the provisions the government needs to make certain that domestic journalists are unable to get any other version than the official government-provided narrative regarding foreign affairs.

The next assault on free speech is very close at hand. In the name of safety, Obama will certainly implement Internet censorship by executive order in the near future.

A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

In the years since 9/11, it seems the Federal government has been in a mad rush to brand as terrorists and whackos any individual or group who believes the 2nd Amendment is vital to the preservation of all others.

Because of anti-gun fervor and talk of terror over the past decade, American leaders are ready to willingly sell out the American populace to a U.N. arms treaty to keep weapons out of the hands of “non-state actors.”

The United Nations, by the way, has never defined terrorist. But the Federal government of the United States has — and in some surprising ways. Here are some possible indicators, as described by an 18-year law enforcement veteran, that the Department of Homeland Security may think you are a terrorist:

  • Expressions of libertarian philosophies (statements, bumper stickers).
  • Second Amendment-oriented views (National Rifle Association or gun club membership, holding a concealed carry permit).
  • Survivalist literature (fictional books such as Patriots and One Second After are mentioned by name).
  • Self-sufficiency (stockpiling food, ammo, hand tools, medical supplies).
  • Fear of economic collapse (buying gold and barter items).
  • Religious views concerning the book of Revelation (apocalypse, Antichrist).
  • Expressed fears of Big Brother or Big Government.
  • Homeschooling.
  • Declarations of Constitutional rights and civil liberties.
  • Belief in a New World Order conspiracy.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

If you walk, drive or fly anywhere in the United States or have been subject to criminal investigation in recent years, no explanation of how tyranny has prevailed with regard to the 4thAmendment is needed. The obvious violations aside, a vast majority of Americans aren’t even aware their 4th Amendment rights are being violated.

But in case you’ve been living under a rock for the past decade: Besides feeling you up and looking at your naked body, the Transportation Security Administration now also reserves the right to test food and beverages that you buy in the airport — even if you buy it in areas you had to be scanned to enter.

 


 
The TSA is no longer simply an airport hassle; agents can now be found violating your rights on highways, at public events and rallies.
 


 

If you believe staying home is a safe way to avoid 4th Amendment violations, consider that nearly everything you do online is capable of being tracked without your knowledge.

Also, you are not permitted to possess certain “dangerous” things in your home, such as raw milk. Doing so could lead to a government raid.

The partial or complete abrogation of the 5th, 6th, 7th and 8th amendments (those dealing with the rights of the accused) has been facilitated by illegal wiretapping and spy measures implemented by the Patriot Act and completed in January when Obama signed into law NDAA and its indefinite-detention provision.

The 11 years following 9/11 isn’t the first period of American history during which fear, shock and awe or paranoia have been used by the Federal government to quash the liberties of the citizenry.

In 1798, during an undeclared naval war with France, President John Adams authorized agents of the government to target foreigners and dissidents. The Sedition Act, which forbade “any false, scandalous and malicious writing,” led to the arrest of 25 men — most of them editors of newspapers whose publications were then shut down. Fortunately, an enraged American populace drove the Federalists out of power and elected Thomas Jefferson to the Presidency. Jefferson pardoned those who had been arrested under the unConstitutional laws.

During the Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus and made it a crime to speak ill of the government.

Later, World War I brought forth a dark moment for Constitutional rights when Woodrow Wilson used the Espionage Act and the Sedition Act of 1918 to target political dissidents.

During World War II, the 1940 Smith Act made it criminal to speak of overthrowing the government and was applied to simply being a member of any organization affiliated with fascism or communism. The 1798 Alien Enemies was brought back to life and used to suppress Japanese, Italian and German Americans. They could not own guns, shortwave radios or cameras. The same law was used to imprison nearly 100,000 ethnic Japanese American citizens.

While many of these cases sound more extreme in hindsight than the gradual displacement of power from people to government we see today, they are not. You see, the aforementioned wars ended, and the laws were shelved until the next conflict. We’re now 11 years in to the post-9/11 world; but instead of seeing the Federal government lessen its stranglehold on liberty, the assault on the Constitution is becoming ever more rapid and its consequences more irreversible than ever before.

We should not forget what happened on Sept. 11, 2001, but we must not let those events undo the triumph of the event that occurred Dec. 15, 1791. If we do, tyranny has forever prevailed.

Maybe We Aren’t All Extremists After All

A new study indicates that one of the reasons many Americans consider extreme leftism or extreme right wing views the only options for political ideology is sensationalized news media.

It is noted often by American political commentators and scholars that politics in the United States have become more polarized than ever before, but a new study in Journalism & Mass Communications indicates that this may not be true.

The study concedes that, because of shock value, groups espousing far-left or far-right ideas receive much more airtime in American news media than political moderates or those with values that breach the political divide.

“Extremes are more intuitively novel, entertaining, and colorful, representing another common news value,” write the authors of the study, Michael McCluskey and Young Mie Kim. “Moderate voices may be more difficult to portray as exciting than extreme voices.”

The authors examined 208 political advocacy groups representing a range of political ideologies as they were described in 118 newspapers. They found that groups with more leftist or rightist extreme opinions on political issues got more mentions in larger newspapers, appeared closer to the top of articles and were mentioned more often.

The authors contend, “More people had the opportunity to note those groups, fueling perceptions of those groups as important or legitimate.”

The Silent Tax Obama Will Use To Win The Election

Dismal employment numbers released on Friday by the U.S. Department of Labor can mean only one thing for America’s Keynesian money managers: Future consequences be damned, it’s time for another round of inflationary quantitative easing (inflationary fiat money making).

On Friday, the Labor Department released a jobs report that showed nearly 40 percent of the Nation’s population is jobless. The percentage of the population as a whole that makes up the U.S. workforce was charted at only 63.5 percent, the lowest it has been since September 1981.

Despite mainstream economists’ collective assumption that the U.S. economy would show around 130,000 new jobs added for August, the actual figure was only about 96,000.

The report, released on the back end of President Barack Obama’s speech Thursday night at the Democratic National Convention, has given fuel to both his and challenger Mitt Romney’s campaigns.

“If last night was the party, this morning is the hangover,” Romney said in a written statement Friday morning. “For every net new job created, nearly four Americans gave up looking for work entirely. This is more of the same for middle-class families who are suffering through the worst economic recovery since the Great Depression. After 43 straight months of unemployment above 8%, it is clear that President Obama just hasn’t lived up to his promises and his policies haven’t worked.”

Obama claimed in his DNC address that despite the dismal current outlook he has “a real, achievable plan that will lead to new jobs, more opportunity and rebuild this economy on a stronger foundation” if Americans re-elect him.

Pundits have for the past couple of months been speculating that the Federal Reserve would implement another round of quantitative easing that would likely create a short-lived economic boon just before the Presidential election in November. Taking into consideration the latest job numbers, it appears that the Fed will most likely seize the opportunity to act this week at a previously scheduled Federal Open Markets Committee meeting.

The assumption is backed up by a statement released last week by top banksters at Goldman Sachs:

With today’s August employment report showing a nonfarm payroll gain of 96,000 and an unemployment rate of 8.1% because of a drop in the participation rate, we expect a return to unsterilized and probably open-ended asset purchases at the September 12-13 FOMC meeting.

We now anticipate that the FOMC will announce a return to unsterilized asset purchases (QE3), mainly agency mortgage-backed securities but potentially including Treasury securities, at its September 12-13 FOMC meeting. We previously forecasted QE3 in December or early 2013. We continue to expect a lengthening of the FOMC’s forward guidance for the first hike in the funds rate from “late 2014” to mid-2015 or beyond.

In other words: Fire up the presses, Ben Bernanke, we’ve got an election to win.

Another indicator of the high likelihood of Fed action that could lead to inflation was delivered via market data last week following the jobs report. Frenzied investors sent gold prices back to a six-month high at $1,740 an ounce.

OWS Doesn’t Like Obama

If the Democratic Party intended to co-opt the Occupy Wall Street crowd to pad the outcome of the upcoming Presidential election, as some pundits suggest, the OWS turnout at the Democratic National Convention appears to show that the party has failed.

In calling out President Barack Obama for lies and failed promises regarding “hope” and “change,” Occupy protestors appear to be taking on the Democrats with regard to everything from crony capitalism to veterans’ affairs.

Earlier this week an OWS group protesting the Charlotte, N.C., convention turned out in force to demand that the President (of the “most transparent administration in history”) release Pfc. Bradley Manning, the soldier accused of providing classified information about dishonorable military behavior to WikiLeaks.

Unfortunately for the protestors, the DNC organizers set up the convention with an abundance of heavily militarized police and security checkpoints in order to keep the disaffected potential voters away from media in town for the convention.

“Four more years? No more years!” Occupy protesters have been heard chanting, even in some cases alongside anti-abortion and conservative activists in town to protest the event.

Green Tea Can Build Brain Cells

The health benefits of drinking green tea daily include everything from aiding in the detoxification of the body to weight-loss. Research has now proven that the beverage can actually help you produce more brain cells.

The research, published in Molecular Nutrition & Food Research, shows that chemical properties of green tea speed up the generation of brain cells, providing benefits for memory and spatial learning.

“Green tea is a popular beverage across the world,” said Professor Yun Bai from the Third Military Medical University, Chongqing, China. “There has been plenty of scientific attention on its use in helping prevent cardiovascular diseases, but now there is emerging evidence that its chemical properties may impact cellular mechanisms in the brain.”

Bai and his research team examined the organic chemical EGCG, (epigallocatechin-3 gallate) which is a powerful antioxidant found in green tea.

“We proposed that EGCG can improve cognitive function by impacting the generation of neuron cells, a process known as neurogenesis,” said Bai. “We focused our research on the hippocampus, the part of the brain which processes information from short-term to long-term memory.”

In experiments with lab mice, the researchers discovered that those given EGCG were better able to complete puzzles and cognitive tasks.

Federal Judge Provides Taxpayer-Funded Sex Change For Murderer

In 1990, Robert Kosilek garroted his wife, Cheryl, to death with a piece of wire before tearing her clothes from her body and stuffing her into the trunk of her car, which he then abandoned in a Massachusetts mall parking lot.

Kosilek was arrested and convicted of the murder, which he allegedly committed in a bid to start a new life as a woman. He was reportedly dressed as a woman when arrested and stood trial dressed as such. The man — now Michelle Kosilek (who, despite now having a feminine first name, presumably still has a penis) — has been living in a male penitentiary serving time for his gruesome crime ever since.

Thanks to a ruling by U.S. District Court Chief Judge Mark Wolf, Kosilek could now be slated to receive a taxpayer-funded sex change operation.

Kosilek sued the Department of Corrections in 2000, arguing that refusal to pay for a sex-change violates his 8th Amendment right against cruel and unusual punishment. The department previously opposed the request.

But Wolf, in his ruling, believes it is time that Americans become more sensitive to the sexual peculiarities of our prison population, stating: “This fact that sex reassignment surgery is for some people medically necessary has recently become more widely recognized.”

Wolf continues: “Denying adequate medical care because of a fear of controversy or criticism from politicians, the press, and the public serves no legitimate penological purpose. It is precisely the type of conduct the Eighth Amendment prohibits.”

Removing Kosilek’s man bits (which he has reportedly attempted to do himself while incarcerated) will cost taxpayers about $20,000 in addition to fees related to litigation and the cost of relocating or offering special protections for the newly “female” inmate.

Obama Supporters: What Are You Smoking?

Are you better off than you were four years ago?

This, pundits say, is the question that will make or break the second-term ambitions of President Barack Obama. Chances are, however, if you happen to be of the “hope” and “change” crowd that in 2008 got President Obama the keys to the White House, the answer is a resounding “No!”.

If you are a libertarian-minded, Constitutional-loving American, this dispatch will be of little value to you. You already understand that within the confines of the plutocratic two-party political system there is no hope for achieving smaller, more liberty-oriented American governance in the upcoming Presidential election. You have already likely decided to stand by, hoping for some politically miraculous event that puts a worthy candidate before you. You’ve probably already resigned yourself to writing in the name of a candidate with little or no chance of winning, marking a third-party section of the ballot or simply not voting.

This correspondence is aimed at anyone who openly declares support for Obama. If the hopey, changey warm fuzzies have yet to wear off, here are a few things to consider about how Obama has fooled his base:

He thinks that his supporters are all either high or suffer the effects of short-term memory loss.

Obama has gone to great lengths to try to make voters believe that he wants to rethink how America deals with drugs. The Nation’s “War on Drugs” is ridiculously flawed and functions only as a profit maker for the prison-industrial complex and a profit protector for the Big Pharma drug cartel.

For the casual marijuana user, Obama offered this in his book Dreams of My Father:

Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though.

I had discovered that it didn’t make any difference whether you smoked reefer in the white classmate’s sparkling new van, or in the dorm room of some brother you’d met down at the gym, or on the beach with a couple of Hawaiian kids who had dropped out of school and now spent most of their time looking for an excuse to brawl. You might just be bored, or alone. Everybody was welcome into the club of disaffection. And if the high didn’t solve whatever it was that was getting you down, it could at least help you laugh at the world’s ongoing folly and see through all the hypocrisy and bullshit and cheap moralism.

Unfortunately for Obama, no matter the amount of pot casual recreational drug users and medical marijuana patients fire up, his own “hypocrisy and bullshit and cheap moralism” is no laughing matter.

Obama, promising to end the raids that had begun under President George W. Bush, said on the campaign trail in 2008, “I’m not going to be using Justice Department resources to try to circumvent state laws on this issue.”

Despite laws in some States that made legal the use of medical marijuana, Obama’s Department of Justice has widely used Federal resources to conduct raids on medical marijuana producers in places like Colorado and California.

So, he backtracked.

“What I specifically said was that we were not going to prioritize prosecutions of persons who are using medical marijuana,” Obama said in a recent explanation of his policy. “I never made a commitment that somehow we were going to give carte blanche to large-scale producers and operators of marijuana — and the reason is, because it’s against federal law.”

And what’s more, remember the horrific tactics used by the Justice Department in its White House-linked Fast and Furious debacle, whereby it essentially put illegal weapons in the hands of Mexican drug cartels, resulting in numerous murders? Well, as the conspiracy unraveled to put on full display the dangerous incompetence of both White House policy experts and appointed Department of Justice officials, Federal crackdowns on State-sanctioned medical marijuana producers were ramped up.

In the name of damage control, after being exposed as a Presidential administration hell-bent on shaping public perception of firearm ownership by putting guns in the hands of murders, the Choom Gang President unleashed the dogs on the medical marijuana industry in California to distract Americans and appease the anti-medical marijuana, anti-alternative medicine, pro-prison and pro-Big Pharma lobbies.

The move not only destroyed jobs, but it destroyed lives.

Of course, Obama wants you to forget all of that. And convenient pre-election leaks from White House “insiders” indicate that a second term for Obama means a new look at American drug policy. Oh, yeah, and he commissioned the Generation Y equivalent of Cheech and Chong to do a commercial for the Democratic National Convention:


Of course, Cheech and Chong were likely unavailable because in old age they’ve wised up; and, tired of worrying about the Feds, they’re now pushing magic brownies that lack illegal substances but are chock full of fiber:

If you’re high enough to believe the President, you may want to check into a local rehabilitation program.

President Obama thinks that if you aren’t high, you’re at least very, very stupid.

This is the Nobel Peace Prize-winning President whose record on foreign policy is no better from a peace or human rights perspective than that of President George W. Bush or any other warmongering neocon.

Obama had this to say to supporters in a recent campaign speech at the University of Colorado at Boulder, “This November you get to decide the future of the Afghanistan war. Governor Romney had nothing to say about Afghanistan last week. We are bringing our troops home from Afghanistan. I set a timetable and we will have them all out by 2014. Governor Romney doesn’t have a timetable.”

Barely a year into his Presidency, Obama ordered a troop surge in Afghanistan, with the idea that America would get the job done by brute force and begin bringing troops home by the middle of last year.

At the Republican National Convention, actor Clint Eastwood asked an imaginary Obama why he didn’t just cut the losses and bring them home before the surge. Eastwood suggested that America should have consulted the Russians with regard to advice concerning military success in the country. And in his ramblings, this is the most valuable point the actor made during that speech. Obama, after all, did run in 2008 on the notion that he would end Bush’s wars.

Just less than two months before the Presidential election, Americans are witnessing gross American failures in Afghanistan, despite Obama’s increase in troops.

The country cannot stand on its own, despite ongoing American efforts.

The efforts are getting American soldiers shot by the very people they are trying to train.

Later this year, the long-overdue troop drawdown is slated to take place. The country is expected to revert to total Taliban control.

The Obama Administration continually pretends that it has achieved great success in ending the Iraq war. What goes unmentioned, however, is far more telling than the President’s continual self-promotion as a war ending leader.

Obama doesn’t remind voters that he actually ran more than two years behind schedule on his plan to end the Iraq war.

And he doesn’t mention that he actually scrapped his own plan for troop withdrawal and followed the plan put in place by the Bush Administration.

How’s that for change?

The real change made in foreign policy by Obama is this: increased deadly drone strikes, illegal wars — albeit quieter ones— and using the excuse of “protecting the world from human rights abuses” to put the United States at risk of involvement in worldwide war with military superpowers like China and Russia. It is not change, but a continuance “forward” of Bush foreign policy that will continue no matter which major party candidate is elected.

But, at least he single-handedly killed Osama bin Laden.


To list all of Obama’s lies and transgressions would take far more room than this article will allow, but a simple reflection on the reasons why you may have supported Obama in the first place should give ample opportunity to understand why he has failed his base.

Many of us who are conservatives have continually expressed disdain for the Republican Party’s nomination of a candidate with so many Obama-like qualities and its subsequent blackout of the one candidate who could have unified people who favor small government, end to war and a focus on individual liberty. And pointing that out seems to bring many Republican diehards to a boil as they angrily accuse anyone who refuses to walk a party line of being an Obama supporter. But I can assure you we are not. We just believe that Romney is the lesser of two liars, rather than the lesser of two evils as they would suggest.

No one wants to vote for a liar, but those of you who elected Obama the first time must realize you already have once. Do you really want to do that again?

Anonymous Leaks Aimed At Angering Public To Action

In order to raise the question of why an FBI operative would have millions of individuals’ identifying online information, a contingent of Anonymous has released a massive Apple data leak.

In a message posted along with the data leak, an unidentified Anonymous member writes:

why exposing this personal data?

well we have learnt it seems quite clear nobody pays attention if you just come and say ‘hey, FBI is using your device details and info and who the f*ck knows what the hell are they experimenting with that’, well sorry, but nobody will care. FBI will, as usual, deny or ignore this uncomfortable thingie and everybody will forget the whole thing at amazing speed. so next option, we could have released mail and a very small extract of the data. some people would eventually pick up the issue but well, lets be honest, that will be ephemeral too.

So without even being sure if the current choice will guarantee that people will pay attention to this f*cking shouted ‘F*CKING FBI IS USING YOUR DEVICE INFO FOR A TRACKING PEOPLE PROJECT OR SOME SHIT’ well at least it seems our best bet, and even in this case we will probably see their damage control teams going hard lobbying media with bullshits to discredit this, but well, whatever, at least we tried and eventually, looking at the massive number of devices concerned, someone should care about it.

Apple unique device identification numbers (UDIDs) establish a single device’s identity in the Apple network, so that the company can track purchases and information on iTunes. According to the Anonymous hackers, 12.4 million UDIDs were found on an FBI agent’s Dell notebook. Each UDID was associated with user names, device info, phone numbers, names and addresses. The FBI has not disclosed why it would have such information on hand. So far, the hacktivists have leaked 1,000,001 of those UDIDs to bring light to the government’s data-collecting effort.