Star Wars: Lucas wrote a ‘false flag’ historical allegory about US devolution to rogue state empire. It’s true: US ‘leads’ ‘developed’ nations to war-poverty murder ~400 million in last 20 years as most evil government in world history
Star Wars’ Rogue One is a story of rebel leaders’ strategy development to stop a total-evil empire fooling many with “fake news” of bringing “safety and security” to the public after a history of false-flag terrorism (and here). In the story, insiders leak literally explosive data that unfolds to to escalating military engagement:
Our real world is a story exactly the same of a rogue state empire, but with an option for public awakening to Emperor’s New Clothes facts that could end the empire through lawful arrests of .01% criminal leaders.
Edited from what I wrote about Star Wars in 2015:
“How do democracies get turned into dictatorships? The democracies aren’t overthrown; they’re given away… Star Wars was really about the Vietnam War.” – George Lucas, creator of Star Wars
“The (Star Wars) Empire is like America ten years from now.” – George Lucas, 1973
Adjusted for inflation, Star Wars is likely the most popular film series in history. Stories are popular because they communicate themes that resonate with the public. Creator George Lucas communicates that a powerful republic is overcome by false flag deception that devolves all into the most evil dictatorial empire possible.
“Dictatorship” literally means a government from what is dictated/said whenever government “leadership” says so. The US has lost almost all Constitutional rights to the dictates of “leaders” in government. In contrast, a constitutional republic is limited government acting within its constitution.
⇒ Keep Reading for many more links and two more videos
“… “The information that current marketers can use in order to generate targeted advertising is limited to the input devices that we use: keyboard, mouse, touch screen,” says Michael Madary, a researcher at Johannes Gutenberg University who co-authored the first VR code of ethics with Thomas Metzinger earlier this year. “VR analytics offers a way to capture much more information about the interests and habits of users, information that may reveal a great deal more about what is going on in [their] minds.”
The value of collecting physiological and behavioral data is all too obvious for Silicon Valley firms like Facebook, whose data scientists in 2012 conducted an infamous study titled “Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks,” in which they secretly modified users’ news feeds to include positive or negative content and thus affected the emotional state of their posts. As one chief data scientist at an unnamed Silicon Valley company told Harvard business professor Shoshanna Zuboff: “The goal of everything we do is to change people’s actual behavior at scale. … We can capture their behaviors, identify good and bad behaviors, and develop ways to reward the good and punish the bad.”….”
Read the entire long article here:
THE MOST DANGEROUS PEOPLE ON THE INTERNET IN 2016
WRITTEN BY WIRED STAFF
DATE OF PUBLICATION: 12.22.16.
TIME OF PUBLICATION: 7:00 AM.
NOT SO LONG ago, the internet represented a force for subversion, and WIRED’s list of the most dangerous people on the internet mostly consisted of rebellious individuals using the online world’s disruptive potential to take on the world’s power structures. But as the internet has entered every facet of our lives, and governments and political figures have learned to exploit it, the most dangerous people on the internet today often are the most powerful people.
A Russian dictator has evolved his tactics from suppressing internet dissent to using online media for strategic leaks and disinformation. A media mogul who rose to prominence on a wave of hateful bile now sits at the right hand of the president. And a man who a year ago was a reality television star and Twitter troll is now the leader of the free world.
Since experts pinned the Democratic National Committee breach in July on two teams of hackers with Russian-state ties, the cybersecurity and US intelligence community’s consensus has only grown: Russia is using the internet to screw with America’s electoral politics. The Russian hack of the Democratic National Committee and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, followed by the leak of those groups’ private communications, injected chaos and distraction into the Democratic party at a crucial moment in the electoral season, and may have even helped tip the scales for Trump.
Even before those Russian hackers’ handiwork came to light, Putin’s government was already hard at work poisoning political discourse online. Its armies of paid trolls have been busy injecting false stories into online discussion forums, attacking the Kremlin’s critics on Twitter and in the comments of news sites. Taken together, that hacking and trolling makes Putin’s government one of the world’s most malevolent forces for disinformation and disruption online. And if anything, recent events have only emboldened them.
When WIRED compiled its list of the internet’s most dangerous people in 2015, we called Trump a “demagogue, more interested in inciting backward fears and playing to Americans’ worst prejudices than addressing global problems.” None of that has changed. Trump still hasn’t officially renounced his promises of a ban on Muslim immigration or apologized for calling Mexican immigrants rapists. Now, he’s weeks away from becoming President of the United States.
As President-elect, Trump has continued to act as the world’s most powerful internet troll, telling his 17.6 million Twitter followers that anyone who burns the American flag should be unconstitutionally imprisoned and have their citizenship revoked, and arguing, with no evidence, that millions of fraudulent votes were cast in an election that he won. Trump’s Twitter account telegraphs his apparent disregard for the Constitution, spreads disinformation on a massive scale, and has baselessly called America’s electoral process into question.
Before Steve Bannon joined Donald Trump’s campaign as CEO, he was already in Trump’s corner as the publisher of the righter-than-right wing news site Breitbart.com. During his tenure running that site, Breitbart published the racist, anti-semitic and overtly misogynist content that made it the paper of record for the bigoted new political fringe known as the alt-right. Now, as the chief strategist for Trump’s transition team coming presidency, he stands to bring that fascist agitprop perspective into the White House itself.
In the weeks before November’s election, FBI Director James Comey cemented his already controversial reputation by revealing that his agents would continue the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private email server, after previously setting it aside in July. He did not explain anything about what a newly found trove of emails entailed, or why they might be significant (they weren’t). That half-clue was all the Trump campaign and its surrogates needed to start a wildfire of speculation, and even to claim that Clinton would be imminently indicted (she wasn’t).
But even before Comey’s unwarranted insertion of the FBI into the most sensitive political moment of a tense election, the FBI head had led the federal government’s war on encryption to a dangerous standoff: demanding that Apple write code to help the bureau crack its own device, the locked iPhone 5c of San Bernadino killer Rizwan Farook. That six-week battle, which finally ended in the FBI finding its own method of breaking into the phone, showed Comey’s willingness to compromise Americans’ cybersecurity and privacy in the interests of surveillance, and put a lasting strain on Silicon Valley’s relationship with the FBI.
The pseudo-religious apocalyptic cult known as the Islamic State may be losing money, resources, and ground on its home turf in Iraq and Syria. But its tendrils still extend throughout the web and social media. The group showed in 2016 that it can still reach lone, disaffected, and even mentally ill people to inspire tragic acts of violence. Even as its direct power crumbles, ISIS’s propaganda this year contributed to horrific massacres from the Bastille Day truck attack in Nice to the Pulse night club shootings in Orlando. And unlike the rest of the individuals on this list, ISIS’ danger comes from what social media extremism expert Humera Khan calls “the ISIS Borg collective.” The deaths of dozens of top ISIS commanders in 2016, in other words, hasn’t dulled the group’s message.
The Breitbart columnist Milo Yiannpoulos in 2016 illustrated everything that’s wrong with Twitter. Not simply his role as an “alt-right troll”—a polite term for a race-baiting, misogynistic, immoral fame-monger. Yiannopoulos graduated from awful ideas to actual targeted abuse, gleefully turning his hordes of followers on targets like actress and comedian Leslie Jones, who thanks to Yiannopolous was drowned in so much nakedly racist, sexist abuse that she temporarily quit the site. Twitter eventually banned him, a decision Yiannopolous lauded as only increasing his fame. And there are plenty more people who still espouse his ideas on the platform. But it will at least keep his vile statements confined to the darker corners of the internet, where they belong.
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan
For a brief moment this summer, the world feared that a military coup would topple Turkey’s elected president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Then it watched in horror as Erdoğan used that failed coup to justify a internet and media crackdown rarely, if ever, seen in modern democracies. More than a hundred Turkish journalists have since been jailed, and access has been intermittently throttled or cut to Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and WhatsApp. In response to protests that have since embroiled the country, Erdoğan’s regime has at times cut off internet access entirely to millions of Turks, denying them both the means to assemble and spread dissident information, as well as basic services.
Julian Assange proved in 2016 that even from the two-room de facto prison of London’s Ecuadorean embassy, it’s possible to upend the powers-that-be. In WikiLeaks’ most influential and controversial moves since it first rose to national attention in 2010, Assange masterminded the leaks of emails from the Democratic National Committee and the email account of Hillary Clinton campaign staffer John Podesta. Never mind that those leaks appeared to come not from internal whistleblowers but from external hackers, believed by US intelligence agencies to be on Russia’s payroll. Assange has denied that his source is Russian. But it’s a curious claim: WikiLeaks is designed to guarantee sources’ anonymity, so that even he can’t identify them. He also promises those sources he’ll “maximize the impact” of their leaks. And in this election, he kept his promise.
After supporting Donald Trump’s campaign financially and vocally, Peter Thiel ended this year as arguably the most influential person in Silicon Valley, literally sitting at the left hand of the president-elect in the tech industry’s meeting with him earlier this month. The intelligence contractor Palantir, which he co-founded, will no doubt rise with him, and its powers for privacy-piercing analysis could become more broadly applied within America’s intelligence and law enforcement agencies than ever before.
But we’ll leave all that for next year’s “most dangerous” list. Thiel’s real demonstration of his power in 2016 came in the form of Hulk Hogan’s lawsuit against Gawker, which the tech billionaire was revealed to have funded. The suit effectively wiped one of his personal enemies off the internet—which, as Thiel has calmly explained, was his goal. Given that win for censorship, his role on the Trump transition team, and Trump’s promise to “open up” libel laws, Gawker may just be the canary in the First Amendment coal mine.
Updated 12/22/16 2:30pm EST to include Peter Thiel.
(in: WMR GENERAL ARCHIVES December 2016)
Dec 22, 2016
Snopes called WMR a “disreputable web site” while it employed a porn actress and aberrant sex blogger.
December 23-26, 2016 — “Fake News” and “Fake Intelligence” are the neocon stock-in-trade (in: GENERAL ARCHIVES December 2016)
Dec 23, 2016
Neocons continue to lie about Russia as they did about the Soviet Union in 1981.
somewhere around the turn of the solstice
A cybersecurity firm has uncovered strong proof of the tie between the group that hacked the Democratic National Committee and Russia’s military intelligence arm – the primary agency behind the Kremlin’s interference in the 2016 election.
First, pizza…; now fried chicken
[Ed.: Does the future of covert communication lie in fast food?]
“The US government is planning to quiz foreign travelers entering the country about their social media status.
Anyone entering the US from another country will face questioning about their Twitter and Facebook updates, in the hope that it will help to spot and curb security-related threats. Under the Visa Waiver Program (VWP) the US ask foreign travelers to provide their social media information. The VWP is for citizens of nearly 38 countries that do not require a visa for tourism, business or while in transit for up to 90 days when entering the US. However, they do need an Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) as a valid travel document, during which time their social media information will also be requested….
However the proposal made by US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in June had faced months of criticism from many tech giants and privacy campaigners, who believe this to be an invasion of people’s lives and privacy. Nonetheless, it was recently given the go-ahead by the Department of Homeland Security. ….”
How an Evidence-Free CIA Finding Alleging Russian Interference in the US Election was Turned into an Indisputable ‘Truth’
Global Research, December 19, 2016
What’s Left 17 December 2016
“… The US newspaper of record reported that “two Russian hacking groups” were “found at work inside the D.N.C. network,” “Cozy Bear and “Fancy Bear.” Cozy Bear, according to the newspaper, “may or may not be associated with the F.S.B., the main successor to the Soviet-era K.G.B”
(emphasis added.) Fancy Bear, it turns out, also may or may not be associated with the Russian government, in this case, “the G.R.U., Russia’s military intelligence agency.” Nevertheless, the New York Times revealed that both groups are “believed” by Washington to be Russian government operations (though they may or may not be.) 
How was this belief arrived at? Through a process the New York Times describes as attribution, “the skill of identifying a cyberattacker.” This is a fancy way of describing conjecture. Attribution is “more art than science,” the newspaper concedes, while acknowledging that it “is often impossible to name an attacker with absolute certainty.”  Finding water with a divining rod, and predicting the future with a Ouija board, are also more art than science, and both involve the process of attribution, the skill of identifying hidden water and hidden events, though it is often impossible to find water, and foretell the future, with absolute certainty. Divination and CIA analyses apparently have much in common. ….”
Read the entirety here:
“Newspeak” and the Duplicity of Mainstream Journalism
By Julian Rose
Global Research, December 22, 2016
“… Real journalism can now only be found on discerning alternative media sites. Please note that I said ‘discerning’. Main stream journalists who knowingly distort the truth, especially in life and death situations, should be considered as directly complicit in crimes against humanity…..”
Seven Times [with video] The MSM Got Destroyed In A Debate In 2016
Original article “Snowden did not state whether he believed the claims that ‘fake news’ had swung the election in any way but rather pointed out the dangers of companies using terms like ‘fake news’ to censor content with which they disagreed. Snowden stated that rather than waiting for gatekeepers to define what is and isn’t ‘fake news,’ people should have an open dialogue with each other and point out proven facts.”
Ideas are welcome.