3 Stories That Show Big Brother is Alive and Well

Via The Daily Bell

Getting Clever with Fear to Restrict the Internet.

Representatives from the seven countries (UK, USA, Germany, Italy, France, Canada, and Japan) known as the G7 which form the Council on Foreign Relations met to discuss what to do about extremist jihadi content on the internet. They want to work with tech giants to make sure anything that could recruit or train terrorists is taken down within two hours.

The United Kingdom actually proposed jailing anyone who even views extremist content online for up to 15 years! Of course, the governments will define “extremist content.” And as most things go, their definition will likely get looser over time.

For instance, when SWAT teams were introduced in America, the government claimed they would only be used in hostage situations. Today SWAT teams are used thousands of times a year, even for small-scale drug raids on non-violent suspects.


Prosecutors Pick a Target, THEN Find a Crime.

Practically anybody could be indicted for a crime if enough investigation went into their lives. There are so many laws, that we can’t go a day without breaking some statute.

Of course, most of us are not popular enough to draw the attention of U.S. prosecutors. But that is how they keep “the little guy” in line, by making examples out of the government’s enemies.

Reports indicate that Robert Mueller is on a fishing expedition to indict members of Trump’s team. If he can’t find any crimes, he will twist the law until something fits. Mueller and his team have done this in the past.

That’s the state of “justice” in America.

Fitbit and Pacemaker Info Used to Catch Criminals

Here’s the tough thing about Big Brother technology. In the beginning, it really is just used against actual criminals.

In one instance, a woman’s Fitbit, a watch monitoring her activity, cast doubt on her husband’s story. He said she was murdered by an intruder. He told the police a story about when she came home, what she did in the time before the supposed intruder showed up, and that she ran down into the basement. Based on information from the device, they could see the story was a fabrication.

In another case, prosecutors successfully subpoenaed information from a man’s heart rate monitor which proved he was awake when he claimed to be asleep before a fire started. He is going to trial for the arson, and a judge ruled that the evidence will be allowed to be presented.

The problem is the precedent it sets. Much like the SWAT raids in the example above, this information may at first be used to solve arsons and murders.

But what happens when it is used to fish for crimes instead? Or to frame someone in the wrong place at the wrong time?


logicalman Sat, 10/21/2017 - 14:17 Permalink

Problem here is who gets to decide what's not acceptable.Likely the more extreme elements of government.Thought crime writ large.1984 was not meant to be a handbook.

UselessEater totenkopf88 Sun, 10/22/2017 - 09:06 Permalink

You were saying?http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5000346/How-Germany-voted-Hitle…

As the popularity of the far-right slowly grows across Europe, these images remind us how Adolf Hitler came to power in a democratic general election, long before he became associated with genocide and World War II.Hitler and the Nazi Party carried out a traditional election campaign and convinced millions of Germans to vote for fascism under the guise of 'rebuilding the nation' in 1932.Soon after winning his desired majority, the government passed an act that gave Hitler the power to change the law without having to go through the German congress, silenced the free press and started his road towards a dictatorship, a Third Reich, and his 'final solution'.

 Of course the Final Solution was the Transfer Agreement Rottenshields preferred but why ruin the highly profitable Holy Holcaust industry and put som many out of work?Every day is Lets Hate Germans Day#JusticeForGermans

In reply to by totenkopf88

synthetically … UselessEater Mon, 10/23/2017 - 05:04 Permalink

Quoting the Daily Mail article that has been linked:

[The caption of one of the article’s photos reads:] “All heil Hitler: Nazi supporters march in celebration after hearing that Adolf Hitler has been appointed Chancellor of Germany, in Berlin, January 1933

[Nevertheless, in sharp contrast to the above-quoted caption, the article (deceptively) claims:] “Soon after winning his desired majority, the government passed an act that gave Hitler the power to change the law without having to go through the German congress, silenced the free press and started his road towards a dictatorship, a Third Reich, and his 'final solution'.”

The author of the linked article from the Daily Mail has been disingenuous at best (if not also self-contradicting). In the German presidential primary and then run-off elections of 1932, Hitler lost, and lost rather badly, to octogenarian Paul von Hindenburg. It was not until some months after von Hindenburg had won the presidential election (and after first appointing Franz von Papen as chancellor) that he appointed Hitler as chancellor. In other words, the notion that the German people voted Hitler into power is entirely false.

Moreover, it is perhaps noteworthy that the act that gave Hitler "the power to change the law" without parliament's approval was prompted by a false flag operation perpetrated by the Nazis (i.e., the burning of the Reichstag [the German parliament] that was [falsely] blamed on the Communists).

In reply to by UselessEater

GreatUncle totenkopf88 Sun, 10/22/2017 - 18:42 Permalink

But to need to stifle it through oppression reveals far more ... let it continue.In the end everybody will know a white nationlist and then know the scenario is bullshit.When it was only a small amount you did not know anybody to question the narrative.Now the more they persecute the better the false narrative thrown about by the corrupt UK government is realised. 

In reply to by totenkopf88

Endgame Napoleon logicalman Sun, 10/22/2017 - 09:13 Permalink

Things like this offer proof that the lawyers won’t morph completely into bots. There will not be an omniscient LawBot, absorbing the role of criminal lawyers. like the Equabot that took over equities trading. Because governments (and humans, in general) are corrupt, the legal profession will not be overtaken by automation. At least, the ideals of freedom in U.S. Constitution have not been thwarted to the extent that freedom has been overrun in Malta, where a journalist pursuing a serious story was blown into bits when driving down the road.

In reply to by logicalman

PT Sat, 10/21/2017 - 14:19 Permalink

But how will I know it was "extremist" content if I haven't read it?Coming to think of it, how will I know "Extremist" content even if I have read it???

OverTheHedge PT Sat, 10/21/2017 - 17:13 Permalink

If you don't report it, having read it, you will be guilty. Even if you DO report it, you may still be guilty. Having the link available, suggests you might have read it, if you were so inclined, and  is sufficient to prove your guilt. Connecting to the internet is liable to prove you guilty.

In reply to by PT

Pernicious Gol… Sat, 10/21/2017 - 22:23 Permalink

Use a VPN (Virtual Private Network) in another country for all Internet activity. ProtonMail in Switzerland offers this. They say they don't log traffic, so there's nothing to turn over. Opera browser has a built-in VPN that's free. They do log traffic. They are based in Norway so Norwegian privacy applies. But note Opera was bought by a Chinese Internet security firm.

Reaper Sat, 10/21/2017 - 23:32 Permalink

Drop off, e-mail or snail mail porn or extremist content to all supporters of such laws.   Use a ficitious return address.  

OverTheHedge Reaper Sun, 10/22/2017 - 01:02 Permalink

Have you ever, for a bit of revenge, signed someone up to an extensive list of gay trannie porn websites? Even better if you can get them to deliver by post, especially if your victim is married. Spread their name and address liberally across the more unpleasant parts of the direct mail world? Top fun. I strongly recommend it. It would seem to be especially apt for the idiots who want to create this legislation.

In reply to by Reaper

VWAndy Sun, 10/22/2017 - 03:23 Permalink

Weaponized to shit. Thats kinda what happens when there aint any integrity around. Now if there was some real accountability? That one little thing changes everything.  PS  does that really need to be 800 words?

Darth Rayne Sun, 10/22/2017 - 06:30 Permalink

All our governments are far too big. This feat accomplished by stealing vast amounts of wealth from the masses, almost unnoticed.

This loss of wealth, is creating intense anger. The government will direct this anger wherever they please. At some point this fails but we we know that. Timing is a bitch.

Please don't read this, it is spam and / or not the way to promote stuff / or evil amazon propaganda / whatever you like.


tangent Sun, 10/22/2017 - 11:31 Permalink

Taking people's property without permission has moral consquences... those who have been gullible enough to accept taxation as a normal part of life sit there mystified as to why society is in decay. To the rest of us the world is a relatively simple place that makes much more sense. Public school is the most fundmental staple of corruption.None of these thugs in fancy dress from the government have shown literacy rates improving a single percentage point with their public schools, and none of the gullible parents have bothered to so much as ask the question! And these are the most "important roles" for government. And so now they have hundreds more "less important roles" or as I would call them... less expensive extortion scams. These people have nothing but speculation to offer as their foundation of existence.No facts on their side. None. Never has a single government program been proven more beneficial to society than the alternative. The reason being that by definition  1) we care about our neighbors and family more than people further away 2) we spend our money more carefully than governnent does because its our money 3) we know our wants and needs more than people further away from us, and 4) human nature involves us owning our things. So no, involuntary government programs (all of them) have never accomplished more than not having them could ever accomplish. The government will never care more than you do about your own family and neighbors. The government will never spend your own money better than you do. The government will never know you better than you know your self. And the government will never stop you from attempting to own your own property. Therefore, involuntary coersive government fails on every point.Only government based upon consent and cooperation can work. Thats it. Nothing else. We do not have that.

BlussMann Sun, 10/22/2017 - 13:09 Permalink

UK is a Judaeo Marxist police state, too bad Hitler was so smitten with these cockroaches  that he couldn't bring himself to squash them like they deserved to be - he preferred to let them firebomb his own people instead !!

BlussMann freedom1798 Sun, 10/22/2017 - 15:16 Permalink

I just think he was a crappy General Wannabe. “Leadership” on all sides was pretty mediocre –  Churchill was drunken lout , Stalin and Zhukov  had a simple tactic – human waves. Germany had the superior Generals but know it all Hitler wouldn’t let them do their job. That’s one thing I will give Lincoln, as much as I despise him, he turned the military battles over to the military men. Politicians make even worse Generals than the usually incompetent Generals.

In reply to by freedom1798

freedom1798 Sun, 10/22/2017 - 13:29 Permalink

The UK has cameras on every corner in every town in the country.  London's mayor is a Moslem.  The whole country is overrun with niggers, pakis, and sandniggers.  The UK is a nightmare.  It is starting to happen here.

GreatUncle koan Sun, 10/22/2017 - 18:49 Permalink

Try to avoid using tech at any time.Or at least understand that what you are doing they know.Then it depends on if you consider being a martyr for freedom more important :-)They can do all they wish, not saying they can't but the catch is ... their actions to oppress speaks larger volumes about them that it no longer needs and explantion on their criminality than any objection ever can.

In reply to by koan