#Spyculture – Vizio Pays Millions for Secretly Monitoring Customers’ Viewing Habits

Source: RTAmerica
February 19, 2017

Mike Papantonio highlights a $2.2 million settlement by television maker, Vizio, for using software to spy on the viewing habits of their customers.

Why Did Two Men Go to Jail for Rap Lyrics and Social Media Posts?

Source: RTAmerica
February 17, 2017

Mike Papantonio is joined by Mollye Barrows, legal journalist for The Trial Lawyer Magazine, to talk about a lawsuit brought against the San Diego police department by two men who spent months in jail for social media posts and rap lyrics.

Arizona & Utah Legislating For Specie…

Source: GizaDeathStar.com
Dr. Joseph P. Farrell Ph.D.
February 11, 2017

Last Thursday on my News and Views from the Nefarium I noted something of major geopolitical consequence as major Japanese banks were joining the CIPS (China International Payment System) of financial clearing, bypassing SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications) and therefore the US dollar. This, in my opinion, was a geopolitical-financial earthquake. We have yet to see the fall0ut from this, but over the next few years I suspect we will, as other nations in the BRICSA bloc join and participate. China will couple this (obviously) to its Silk Road project, so one can except individual nations to participate, particularly those involved in China’s Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank. Watch for Great Britain to do the same, thus straddling both the Western and Asian systems.

All this is to say that “something is up” in the financial world. For example, there’s the story that Germany has completed its gold repatriation, three years ahead of time. Some who sent me this article suggested that this “speed up” may be due to the pressures on Germany’s largest, and one of the world’s largest, banks, Deutsche Bank. But there are other clues that “something is up”. Recall that last year we occasionally blogged about the story that the American state of Texas had legislated the creation of a state bullion depository, and additionally, that Texas was, like Germany, seekiing to repatriate its own bullion stocks from the Fed to the state, presumably to its bullion depository.

Well, now you can add Arizona and Utah to that mix – at least, tentatively:

Utah Bill Sets Stage For State Gold Depository, Further Encourages Use Of Metals As Money

Arizona Committee Passes Bill To Support Sound Money

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/02/arizona-committee-passes-bill-support-sound-money.html/embed#?secret=6DVqHf4Sgm

If both states pass their measures, the this would be two American states with state bullion depositories, and Arizona would join several states which have passed bills reaffirming that specie money is constitutional money and legal tender; most of those states that have passed similar measures, if memory serves me correctly(!), are in the upper plains states.

In any case, the real question here is what all of this means. And here I suspect that your high octane speculation is as good as mine. Firstly, there is the view that would hold that these states, like Germany, sense “something is up” and are building hedges and fences to insure their continued financial security. Secondly, there is a view that would see these moves as more indications that the US federal “one size fits all” political and financial institutions are breaking down, and that these states are taking measure to protect themselves. There is much to commend this view, as already state and municipal retirement pension funds are under severe pressure. In California the mathematics is undeniable, notwithstanding the make-believe world that Sacramento seems to live in: the state is facing a long-term financial “Situation” that is not good. The word hasn’t been used yet, but think “Greece” and “tonsorial parlors” and you get the idea. Thirdly, closely allied with this view is that idea which holds that the union is, indeed, breaking apart under a variety of pressures, many financial, and many the much more intangible but profound cultural divisions. A glance at the county-by-county maps of past federal elections tells the story: the progressive left thrives on the coasts and in the urban centers, while the more traditional right thrives in the rest of the country, in mid-sized urban areas and rural areas. Fourthly, and now entering the world of “high octane speculation,” bullion depositories and specie strike a direct blow not only against the centralized banking and financial system of the west, but the “cashless society” plans of Mr. Globaloney, for such money protects individual privacy and sovereignty. But specie also promotes not only anonymity, but given the fact that these states are in the US southwest, they could be positioning themselves for a much bolder presence on the global stage, for like it or not, even Mr. Globaloney likes bullion. Specie enable international trade, especially in an environment when there is increasing pressure on the US dollar’s reserve currency status. Fifthly, and also in the realm of “high octane speculation,” there is also a diametrically opposite possibility: by opening depositories, the could be a covert scheme to have all the bullion in private hands deposited… and then seized in those “tonsorial parlor” maneuvers we’ve seen before in history: the banksters have a variety of euphemisms for the procedure, but in the end it amounts to mere theft.

And a final thought:

Read More At: GizaDeathStar.com
________________________________________________

About Joseph P. Farrell

Joseph P. Farrell has a doctorate in patristics from the University of Oxford, and pursues research in physics, alternative history and science, and “strange stuff”. His book The Giza DeathStar, for which the Giza Community is named, was published in the spring of 2002, and was his first venture into “alternative history and science”.

Orwellian Over-Reach: Rule 41 – New Law Would Let Government Hack Victims Of Cybercrimes

Source: RTAmerica
September 16, 2016

If you get hacked by a criminal, you could get hacked again, this time by the government tasked with your protection – that’s how an amendment to Federal Rule 41 of criminal procedure works. If Congress does nothing to stop it, it will go into effect on December 1, allowing judges to issue search warrants in other jurisdictions, compromising the security of hundreds of thousands of people both here and abroad. RT America’s Simone Del Rosario reports.

“Storm of the Century” – How the Internet of Things Could Destroy Privacy

Screen Shot 2016-09-07 at 10.14.32 AM
Source: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com
Michael Krieger
September 7, 2016

As the Guardian reported, Clapper made clear that the internet of things – the many devices like thermostats, cameras and other appliances that are increasingly connected to the internet – are providing ample opportunity for intelligence agencies to spy on targets, and possibly the masses. And it’s a danger that many consumers who buy these products may be wholly unaware of.

“In the future, intelligence services might use the [internet of things] for identification, surveillance, monitoring, location tracking, and targeting for recruitment, or to gain access to networks or user credentials,” Clapper told a Senate panel as part of his annual “assessment of threats” against the US. 

– From February’s post: Top U.S. Official Admits – Government Will Use “Internet of Things” to Spy on the Public

Serving as an important followup to the post above, Cory Doctorow has just penned an extremely important warning at Locust titled, The Privacy Wars Are About to Get A Whole Lot Worse. Below are the relevant passages. Please read and share with everyone you know.

As more and more companies twigged to the power of ‘‘surveillance capitalism,’’ these agreements proliferated, as did the need for them, because before long, everything was gathering data. As the Internet everted into the physical world and colonized our phones, we started to get a taste of what this would look like in the coming years. Apps that did innocuous things like turning your phone into a flashlight, or recording voice memos, or letting your kids join the dots on public domain clip-art, would come with ‘‘permissions’’ screens that required you to let them raid your phone for all the salient facts of your life: your phone number, e-mail address, SMSes and other messages, e-mail, location – everything that could be sensed or inferred about you by a device that you carried at all times and made privy to all your most sensitive moments.

When a backlash began, the app vendors and smartphone companies had a rebuttal ready: ‘‘You agreed to let us do this. We gave you notice of our privacy practices, and you consented.’’

This ‘‘notice and consent’’ model is absurd on its face, and yet it is surprisingly legally robust. As I write this in July of 2016, US federal appellate courts have just ruled on two cases that asked whether End User Licenses that no one read and no one understands and no one takes seriously are enforceable. The cases differed a little in their answer, but in both cases, the judges said that they were enforceable at least some of the time (and that violating them can be a felony!). These rulings come down as the entirety of America has been consumed with Pokémon Go fever, only to have a few killjoys like me point out that merely by installing the game, all those millions of players have ‘‘agreed’’ to forfeit their right to sue any of Pokémon’s corporate masters should the com­panies breach all that private player data. You do, however, have 30 days to opt out of this forfeiture; if Pokémon Go still exists in your timeline and you signed up for it in the past 30 days, send an e-mail to termsofservice@nianticlabs.com with the subject ‘‘Arbitra­tion Opt-out Notice’’ and include in the body ‘‘a clear declaration that you are opting out of the arbitration clause in the Pokémon Go terms of service.’’

Notice and consent is an absurd legal fiction. Jonathan A. Obar and Anne Oeldorf-Hirsch, a pair of communications professors from York University and the University of Connecticut, published a working paper in 2016 called ‘‘The Biggest Lie on the Internet: Ignoring the Privacy Policies and Terms of Service Policies of Social Net­working Services.’’ The paper details how the profs gave their students, who are studying license agreements and privacy, a chance to beta-test a new social network (this service was fictitious, but the students didn’t know that). To test the network, the students had to create accounts, and were given a chance to review the service’s terms of service and privacy policy, which prominently promised to give all the users’ personal data to the NSA, and demanded the students’ first-born children in return for access to the service. As you may have gathered from the paper’s title, none of the students noticed either fact, and almost none of them even glanced at the terms of service for more than a few seconds.

Indeed, you can’t examine the terms of service you interact with in any depth – it would take more than 24 hours a day just to figure out what rights you’ve given away that day. But as terrible as notice-and-consent is, at least it pretends that people should have some say in the destiny of the data that evanescences off of their lives as they move through time, space, and information.

Continue Reading At: LibertyBlitzkrieg.com

Big Government Police State: Florida residents being fined for growing vegetables on their own property

Vegetable gardens
Source: NaturalNews.com
Samantha Debbie
August 4, 2016

Florida may be known for its tropical climate and spicy Latin-American culture, but what it’s not known for is the freedom to garden. The southeastern state continues to make headlines over the state government’s contempt for front yard gardens.

Tom Carroll and Hermine Ricketts had been cultivating their garden for 17 years when their hometown, Miami Shores, passed a new ordinance restricting vegetable growing to the backyard. The couple begrudgingly dug up their lush garden in August 2013, after local officials threatened them with a daily fine of $50, according to reporting by Fox News.

Miami Shores fights longtime residents over front yard vegetable garden

The ordinance was a component of a new zoning plan adopted by the town, which has a population of about 10,500 people, and is located just north of Miami.

The South Florida couple sued over the garden ban, arguing that it was a violation of the state’s Constitution, because it included “improper limits on their private property rights and violation of the equal protection clause by singling out vegetables over other plants.”

The couple’s attorney argued at a hearing in June 2016 that barring them from growing vegetables anywhere on their property violated their Constitutional rights.

“We’re not saying you can do anything you want on your property,” attorney Ari Bargil told Miami-Dade Circuit Judge Monica Gordo. “We are simply saying you can grow vegetables on your property and that is protected by the Constitution.”

Growing vegetables is not a fundamental right, says community lawyer

Richard Sarafan, the attorney for Miami Shores, countered that the new zoning rule was not “irrational and treated all homeowners the same: their front yards should be covered with grass, sod or a ‘living ground cover’ not further defined. It’s no problem, he said, to have a vegetable garden in the backyard,” according to reports.

“There certainly is not fundamental right to grow vegetables in your front yard,” Sarafan said. “Aesthetics and uniformity are legitimate government purposes. Not every property can lawfully be used for every purpose.”

On Thursday, August 25, a Miami-Dade judge upheld the ruling, indefinitely banning front yard gardens. Circuit Judge Monica Gordo ruled that while she doesn’t understand the argument that front yard gardens destroy aesthetics in neighborhoods, the city nonetheless has the right to ban them, according to the Miami Herald.

Judge: City has ‘every right to decide front-yard veggies make a neighborhood ugly’

“Given the high degree of deference that must be given to a democratically elected governmental body … Miami Shores’ ban on vegetable gardens outside of the backyard passes constitutional scrutiny,” wrote Gordo.

The ruling is a big disappointment for the South Florida couple, who love to grow a variety of organic vegetables including okra, kale, lettuce, onions, spinach and several varieties of cabbage.

“I am disappointed by today’s ruling,” said Ricketts, whose legal battle with the city lasted three long years.

“My garden not only provided us with food, but it was also beautiful and added character to the community. I look forward to continuing this fight and ultimately winning so I can once again use my property productively instead of being forced to have a useless lawn.”

Meanwhile, the upscale community maintains its right to regulate the area’s aesthetic. Vegetables are fine as long as they’re out of sight, said the community’s attorney at a hearing in June.

A ‘blow to property rights’

The only recourse the couple has is to ask that the ordinance be revised or vote in new council members, said the judge.

“They can petition the Village Council to change the ordinance. They can also support candidates for the Council who agree with their view that the ordinance should be repealed,” wrote Gordo.

“If Hermine and Tom wanted to grow fruit or flowers or display pink flamingos, Miami Shores would have been completely fine with it,” said the couple’s lawyer, Ari Bargil, a representative from the Institute for Justice, a libertarian law firm.

“They should be equally free to grow food for their own consumption, which they did for 17 years before the village forced them to uproot the very source of their sustenance.”

The firm called the ruling a “blow to property rights.”

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

MiamiHerald.com

OffTheGridNews.com

FoxNews.com

NaturalNews.com