The Silicon Valley Circle of Corruption.

The Silicon Valley Circle of Corruption.

An endless-loop cycle of payola, quid-pro-quo, black-listing, finance collusion, sex abuse scandals and crony political payoffs that will never end until the FBI and the SEC begin arresting and indicting people! This technology culture of crime is destroying democracy in America! It is time to stop being soft on Silicon Valley racketeering and give law enforcement the orders to BRING IT!

Write Your Elected Officials and Demand The Arrests of the Silicon Valley Oligarchs!

AMERICANS FIGHT BACK AGAINST POLITICIANS WHO SOLD THEM OUT

Activist Starts a Campaign To Buy and Publish Browsing Histories of Politicians Who Passed Anti-Privacy Law (searchinternethistory.com)

submitted 2.2 hours ago by Kannibal to technology (+163|-2)

 

 

116

 

 

A list of every traitor politician that voted to have your privacy taken away.

A list of every traitor politician that voted to have your privacy taken away. (imgoat.com)

 

submitted 2.6 hours ago by http404 to technology (+119|-3)

 

New Book Discloses Silicon Valley Prostitutes At Infamous Rosewood Hotel

 

The place where women lust after spotty nerds: How Silicon Valley Cougar Nights attract revellers in their 40s hoping to bag a billionaire

 

  • The Upstarts by Brad Stone tells the story of the two founders of Airbnb
  • Venture capitalists bought a stake worth $585,000 now priced at $4.5bn
  • Valley of the Gods by Alexandra Wolfe recounts love life of Silicon Valley

 

 

THE UPSTARTS

by Brad Stone (Bantam Press £20)

VALLEY OF THE GODS

by Alexandra Wolfe Simon & Schuster £12.99)

On the day of Barack Obama’s inauguration in January 2009, two unknown entrepreneurs were in Washington DC to watch history being made: the swearing-in of America’s first black president.

What they didn’t know was that they too would become history-makers.

Brian Chesky and Joe Gebbia had just founded an obscure website called Airbedandbreakfast.com, which enabled users to stay — often on airbeds, hence the name — in the homes of strangers.

Geek charm: Dating is different in Silicon Valley

Geek charm: Dating is different in Silicon Valley

The company would evolve from that simple notion, which they dreamt up as a way of making ‘a few bucks’ from their own San Francisco apartment, into Airbnb, an online hospitality service currently valued at more than $30 billion.

But that week it was still little more than an idea and, with every hotel room in the U.S. capital snapped up, the two men, both in their 20s, used their own website to find cheap accommodation on someone’s floor.

Also at the inauguration were another two entrepreneurs, Garrett Camp and Travis Kalanick, who were both in their early 30s and already high-achievers, although no one suspected they were about to change the face of global transportation.

Camp, a Canadian with a restlessly busy mind, was trying to entice his friend Kalanick with his latest vision for a business: he wanted to enable anyone with a smartphone to summon a car at the touch of a button.

Their experience that bitterly cold day, as they looked in vain for a taxi to get to an inauguration party, helped to convince Kalanick of the need for what would become Uber.

Now, Uber is valued at $68 bn. It continues to overcome legal challenges, not to mention irate taxi drivers, and has become one of the world’s largest car services. Yet it owns hardly any cars. Similarly, Airbnb can be described as the biggest hotel company on the planet, without owning any actual hotel rooms.

THE UPSTARTS by Brad Stone (Bantam Press £20)

THE UPSTARTS by Brad Stone (Bantam Press £20)

Eight years ago, the four men who wrought this peculiarly 21st century phenomenon were anonymous faces in the Washington DC crowd. Now they are multi-billionaires, and feted by presidents.

In 2014, when Uber needed someone to run media strategy, the company had the clout to hire the very person who had managed Obama’s triumphant 2008 campaign, David Plouffe The Uber story is particularly fascinating, and in a way it began with James Bond.

In 2008, while watching a DVD of his favourite Bond film, Casino Royale, Camp sat up a little straighter during a scene where Daniel Craig, as Bond, was driving through the Bahamas, on the trail of the villain, Le Chiffre.

During the pursuit, Bond glanced down at his mobile phone, checking on a moving icon of his own car on a map.

That image stuck in Camp’s mind; what if he could adapt it for people trying to get round cities? 

He was already determined to challenge the way metropolitan taxi firms operated, and had made himself notorious among San Francisco’s yellow-cab companies by habitually calling all of them and taking the first car that arrived.

Uber grew out of his own frustration with waiting times, but to those prosaic origins he added a dash of James Bond. So now, when people summon Ubers, what they see on their phones as the vehicle approaches was inspired by one of Q’s gadgets for 007.

Of course, brilliant ideas are not enough in Silicon Valley, the 1,500 square miles of California that is home to so many hi-tech industries and internet start-ups. They also need funding.

VALLEY OF THE GODS by Alexandra Wolfe Simon & Schuster £12.99)

VALLEY OF THE GODS by Alexandra Wolfe Simon & Schuster £12.99)

Stone chronicles some jaw-dropping tales of investors who gambled on Uber and Airbnb and made fortunes, and those who haven’t stopped kicking themselves for declining the opportunity.

Ron Conway, the so-called godfather of Silicon Valley, who acquired fabulous wealth by backing the ‘holy trinity’ of Google, Facebook and Twitter, reckoned that Uber would conk out in the face of too much opposition. He said no, and advised his friends to do likewise.

Conversely, when the venture capitalists at a company called Sequoia recognised the potential of Airbnb, they backed their hunch to the tune of $585,000. The value of their stake, in December 2016, was $4.5bn.

But there is another side to Silicon Valley, and that is explored by Alexandra Wolfe, a Wall Street Journal reporter (and the daughter of celebrated novelist Tom Wolfe), in VALLEY OF THE GODS .

She follows the stories of three young entrepreneurs desperate to become the next Brian Chesky or Travis Kalanick, in the case of one young man by ‘asteroid mining’ — travelling into space to extract valuable minerals from asteroids.

As yet, it doesn’t look like too bright an idea, but maybe its day will come.

Wolfe also documents the curious lifestyle of Silicon Valley, where extreme wealth isn’t outwardly detectable and the richest person in the room ‘is often wearing flip-flops and a hoodie’.

131

The number of billionaires in Silicon Valley

The funniest manifestation of this is ‘Cougar Night’. Every Thursday evening, women in their 40s, sometimes older, gather at the Rosewood Sand Hill hotel, just a stone’s throw from Stanford University, in the hope of finding themselves a fresh-faced billionaire.

Or maybe not fresh-faced; maybe spotty. Because on Cougar Nights, all the usual predatory practices are overturned.

As Wolfe writes, back home, wherever they come from, these scrawny, bespectacled nerds ‘would be unlikely to score a mate. Here at Cougar Night, women were crawling on just this type of specimen’.

That’s Silicon Valley, where nothing is as it seems, and everyone is trying to guess who is who, and what will happen next . . . but nobody quite knows.

 

Gwyneth Paltrow pushes Anal Sex

‘If anal turns you on, you are not alone’: Gwyneth Paltrow publishes a VERY intimate guide to the sex act on Goop, insisting it is ‘practically standard in the modern bedroom repertoire’

 

  • Th 44-year-old mother-of-two published The Sex Issue on her website today
  • A whole article is devoted to anal sex and consults The Guide to Getting it On! author Paul Joannides, Psy.D.
  • Gwyneth writes that the media makes it seem like everyone is having anal sex, but less than half of heterosexual people have tried it
  • Joannides offers tips for doing it comfortably, warns of the risks, and speaks to where he thought the current obsession came from

View comments

Gwyneth Paltrow is not shy about talking about sex. On her website, the Goop founder has dishes on swingers’ parties, preferred sex toys, lube, and S&M.

In the latest issue of her newsletter — The Sex Issue — the 44-year-old tackles orgasms, more sexy toys, casual sex, and porn.

She also includes a whole article about anal sex, in which she consults an expert to compile a comprehensive guide to the taboo sexual act.

Breaking through the taboo: Gwyneth Paltrow published Goop's Sex Issue today, which includes an article about anal sex

Breaking through the taboo: Gwyneth Paltrow published Goop’s Sex Issue today, which includes an article about anal sex

The dirty: The article includes tips for making the act comfortable, like relaxing sphincter muscles 

The dirty: The article includes tips for making the act comfortable, like relaxing sphincter muscles 

‘First it was shocking, then it was having a cultural moment, now it’s practically standard in the modern bedroom repertoire — or so a quick scan of any media, from porn to HBO, will tell you,’ the mother-of-two begins her piece. ‘But the reality about anal is not, actually, that everyone’s doing it.’

Though it may not be quite as ubiquitous as the media makes it seem — she cites a CDC report stating that 30 to 40 per cent of heterosexual men and women have tried it — it certainly is becoming less taboo.

‘If anal turns you on, you are definitely not alone,’ she goes on. ‘But its prevalence doesn’t change the fact that it’s the riskiest sexual behavior in terms of HIV and other STDs.’

Speaking to research psychoanalyst and The Guide to Getting it On! author Paul Joannides, Psy.D., she offers up answers to some of the most common questions about the deed. 

Honest: Though she opens a frank discussion, the  44-year-old doesn't speak about her personal experience (pictured with boyfriend Brad Falchuk)

Honest: Though she opens a frank discussion, the  44-year-old doesn’t speak about her personal experience (pictured with boyfriend Brad Falchuk)

Joannides attitudes the rise in discussion of anal sex to the porn industry moving online.

‘I’d say that by 2005, porn had totally blurred the distinction between a woman’s anus and vagina,’ he said, attributing it to a need for shock value. 

While porn brought anal sex more out into the open for heterosexuals, he added, it doesn’t really accurately depict what the act is like. For one thing, women who want to be entered that way have to ‘teach their sphincter muscles to relax’ first.

‘The anus isn’t designed to have a penis thrust up it; nature did not spec it to handle incoming, as she did with the vagina,’ he explained. Lube is also necessary.  

Condoms are also often not present in porn, but are even more likely to be needed to prevent STDs when practicing anal — Johannides says women are 17 times more likely to get HIV from anal.

No secrets: Gwyneth (pictured with ex Chris Martin in 2014) is often open about her sex life

No secrets: Gwyneth (pictured with ex Chris Martin in 2014) is often open about her sex life

There are other risks, too: pain, fecal matter can enter the man’s urethra, and generally making a mess.

‘During anal intercourse you’re basically putting a plunger up someone’s butt. Accidents are likely to happen at one time or another,’ he said. 

Finally, Johannides offered some tips for making the experience enjoyable. First, he said, it is necessary that both partners want to participate, and neither is being pressured. Second, it’s necessary to find the right angle, so the penis doesn’t hit the rectal wall.

Third, he warns against having anal sex while drunk or stoned, or using numbing lube, all of which can dull pain.

‘Pain is an important indicator that damage can occur if you don’t make the necessary adjustments, including stopping,’ he explained. 

The new issue also includes articles on porn and orgasms, as well as a shopping guide

The new issue also includes articles on porn and orgasms, as well as a shopping guide

Comprehensive: The new issue also includes articles on porn and orgasms, as well as a shopping guide

If anal sex isn’t enjoyable but the parties are still interested in the region, he suggests using a gloved and lubed finger instead. 

In addition to the anal sex guide, the new issue also includes a round-up of sex toys, including a few tried and true favorites that have turned up on Goop gift guides in the past.

There are costumes and lingerie, an intro bondage set, rope and handcuffs, games, vibrators, and even apps.

She also links to a rentable dungeon in Los Angeles (which seems surprisingly well-lit), as well as a $1,800 photography book full of sexy photos.

Univision, owner of Gawker, Gizmodo, wants White People out of America!

Univision, owner of Gawker, Gizmodo, wants White People out of America!

 

Univision ratchets up it’s hate speech and pretty much begs for a boycott of all of Univision, and Univision advertisers, by promoting dramatic racist hate diatribe! Univision is the primary promoter of illegal immigration in order to pad voter rolls for the DNC!

 

Univision Anchor Jorge Ramos Says America Belongs To Mexican Illegal Aliens Not White People

 

| by Brian Anderson

 

 

The immigration debate managed to get a whole lot dumber. Univision anchor Jorge Ramos just said that the United States doesn’t actually belong to Americans, but rather Mexican illegal aliens. As you can see, we have no right to enforce our immigration laws because a Mexican newsman says our country doesn’t even belong to us. This is as insane of a liberal argument as there is.

 

.@jorgeramosnews: “This our country. It’s is yours. It is mine and it is ours.” #Tucker pic.twitter.com/02MiHmwv8d

 

— Fox News (@FoxNews) March 9, 2017

 

Ramos was on Tucker Carlson Wednesday and this bile spewed out of his mouth:

 

“This is our country” said Ramos in a thick Spanish accent.

 

Ramos, who was born in Mexico, may have become an American citizen in 2008, but there is some confusion over this. That doesn’t really matter because he advocates for open borders and amnesty for all illegal aliens. When he says America is his country, he’s talking as a Mexican and means that Mexicans have just as much a right to be here as actual Americans.

 

“The interesting thing is that with the Trump administration and many people who supported Donald Trump thinking it is their country, it is a white country and they are absolutely wrong,” Ramos continued.

 

So according to this illegal alien advocate, any white person who thinks the US is their country is mistaken. Get ready for a great explanation as to why:

 

“This is not a white country. This is not their country; it is ours and that is precisely what I am saying,” said Ramos.

 

Okay, maybe that wasn’t a great explanation. As far as I can tell, Ramos feels like white people who were born in the US are no more legitimately American than Mexican illegal aliens. Actually, he seems to indicate that Mexicans have more of a claim on this country than white Americans.

 

Ramos tries to qualify this nonsense by saying that eventually whites will be a minority in the US so therefore he surmises that America really belongs to Latinos. This is preposterous and it doesn’t really address the fact that he believes that foreign nationals have just as much, if not more, of a right to be here than natural born American citizens.

 

Ramos goes on to say that America has a responsibility to treat illegal aliens better. It’s unclear what he means by that statement, but going by his previous positions, it’s safe to assume that he thinks we should let them stay and give them all of the benefits that come along with citizenship. Considering that he just stated that the country belongs to illegal aliens it’s not a bad assumption to say that he wants to just open up the border and do away with any sort of immigration enforcement.

 

Despite a degree from the University of Miami and decades of living in the US, Ramos’ command of the English language is terrible. Maybe he was trying to say something else and it just came out wrong. It seems unlikely because he’s a vocal Trump-hater and illegal alien supporter, but I thought I’d give him the benefit of the doubt. If he actually meant what he said, it’s one of the worst things a person could say about the United States. This country belongs to Americans; not foreigners, not Mexicans, and certainly not illegal aliens.

 

Follow Brian Anderson on Twitter

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

F*CK YOU NICK DENTON AND GAWKER MEDIA!!! GAWKER MUST PAY $115 MILLION BUCKS!

TESLA Cars Get Another Factory Recall For Another Fire Danger

Horror at the world’s largest solar farm days after it opens and maintains horrors up to today… Daily Mail

Horror at the world’s largest solar farm days after it opens and maintains horrors up to today…
Daily Mail

Horror at the world’s largest solar farm days after it opens as it is revealed panels are SCORCHING birds that fly over them

 

  • The plants is located on five square miles of the Mojave Desert, near the California / Nevada border

  • Ivanpah attracts and kills birds looking for thermals to spiral in the air on

  • State energy officials have released photos of birds with singed feathers from flying into the hot ‘thermal flux’ around the towers, which can reach 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit

 

Environmentalists have hit out at a giant new solar farm in the Mojave Desert as mounting evidence reveals birds flying through the extremely hot ‘thermal flux’ surrounding the towers are being scorched.

 

After years of regulatory tangles around the impact on desert wildlife, the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System opened on Thursday but environmental groups say the nearly 350,000 gigantic mirrors are generating 1000 degree Fahrenheit temperatures which are killing and singeing birds.

 

According to compliance documents released by developer BrightSource Energy last year, dozens of birds were found injured at the site during the building stage.

 

State and federal regulators are currently conducting a two-year study of the Ivanpah plant’s effects on birds, with environmental groups questioning the value of cleaner power when native wildlife is being killed or injured.

 

 

 

Read/see more here

 

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk

 


 

 

 

 

California CPUC officials using taxpayer funds to prop up dying green energy company in order to protect campaign billionaires

 

 

 

By Roger Lester- Submitted to the LA Times

 

 

The State of California continues to plow huge amounts of cash and waivers (Tax waivers are losses to taxpayers) into the failed solar scandal known as Ivanpah in order to protect Silicon Valley campaign financiers Schmidt, Page, Kreman, Doerr, Lane, Musk, Jurvetson and other AngelGate devotees.

 

 

With the “anal sex slave scandal” created by Google’s top investor Michael Goguen bringing the dark and dirty lives of the Silicon Valley campaign financiers to light, one would think that letting a dead fish continue to stink would not have been in the CPUC’s best interest.

 

 

Ivanpah never worked. Plowing over $3B taxpayer dollars into a thing that only cost a few hundred million to have a few laborers with a fancy pole-pounder install is just plain evil. This is another one of Google’s criminally corrupt political campaign scams. Taxpayer’s forever marvel at how Google, the company with the most money in its bank accounts needs a handout from taxpayers. Political kick-backs and revolving doors must be very profitable ways to go to hell.

 

 

The rest of the money was obviously skimmed off for the corrupt campaign finance billionaires and to create PAC’s for political campaigns. That is a crime and it is corruption in the most obvious way.

 

 

I, and my assistants, reached out by phone and email to Arocles.Aguilar@cpuc.ca.gov; Terrie.Prosper@cpuc.ca.gov; Lynn.Sadler@cpuc.ca.gov; bsk@cpuc.ca.gov; michelle.cooke@cpuc.ca.gov; dm1@cpuc.ca.gov; paul.douglas@cpuc.ca.gov; fraudhotline@cpuc.ca.gov; and energy@cpuc.ca.gov over the past month. They all refused to respond.

 

 

The public utilities people were recently caught in a bribery sting in the PG&E Brisbane fire emails and they have been outed in other corruption stings. The feds have now stepped in. CPUC folks may love the big cash from bribes, favors and real estate discounts but the big question is: Will they love the view from San Quentin?

 

 

Ivanpah is a deal with campaign financier Google. Google staff run parts of Sacramento and The White House. There are tens of thousands of news articles about how Google has run payola schemes through those positions.

 

 

Ivanpah never could have worked, technically. It kills birds and desert animals. It blinds anything in the air and space. They had to sneak old fashioned generators into it to try to pretend that it can even make any energy. PG&E says it produces the most expensive electricity on Earth and does not even want its energy. It had numerous labor issues. It is broken on every level.

 

 

The CPUC has agreed to extend the operation of Ivanpah, at taxpayer expense, in order to protect the White House from “embarrassment”, a fact disclosed in a recently leaked report.

 

 

The CPUC should be ordering an FBI raid on Ivanpah, just like the FBI raid on Solyndra. Ivanpah and Solyndra are from the same family of scams.

 

 

The CPUC has no right extending the zombie-like days of Ivanpah as a political PR trick. It is a crime and CPUC officials need to lose their jobs, pensions and graft assets as a lesson to all.

 

READ SOME OF THE CONGRESSIONAL REVIEWS AT:
https://departmentofenergyoverwatch.wordpress.com/2016/03/18/article-is-the-ivanpah-google-solar-project-another-doe-crony-kick-back-scam/

 

 

 

 

A birds-eye view of the bird scorching Ivanpah solar …

 

cached

 

Aug 18, 2014 · At the start of the weekend, and quite by accident, I found myself aloft and looking directly into the glare of the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System.

 

bing yahoo

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/18/%5B…%5Dd-scorching-ivanpah-solar-power-plant/

 

 

 

World’s largest solar thermal plant comes on line near …

 

cached

 

NIPTON >> The world’s largest solar thermal electric plant has begun operating its three generating units, which will soon deliver enough clean energy to power more …

 

bing yahoo

 

http://www.sbsun.com/environment-and-n%5B…%5Dal-plant-comes-on-line-near-state-line

 

Barack Obama’s Culture of Corruption – A K Dart

 

cached

 

Barack Obama has built his presidential campaign on a huge pack of lies. He and his minions engage in prevarication, double-talk, deceptiveness, secrecy, chicanery …

 

bing yahoo

 

http://www.akdart.com/obama111.html

 

THE GREEN CORRUPTION FILES : Not Enough Sun Shining at …

 

cached

 

16 Nov 2014 … Yep, this is the Obama-backed Ivanpah Solar Plant that in 2011, snagged … from my political activism (exposing Green Corruption: The largest, …

 

google

 

http://greencorruption.blogspot.com/20%5B…%5Dough-sun-shining-at-ivanpah-solar.html

 

900 Documented Examples of Obama’s Lawbreaking, …

 

cached

 

Editor’s Note: Our friend, Dan from Squirrel Hill, has updated his list to 900 documented examples of Barack Obama’s lying, lawbreaking, corruption, cronyism, etc.

 

bing yahoo

 

http://sonsoflibertymedia.com/900-docu%5B…%5Dg-corruption-cronyism-hypocrisy-waste/

 

1,180 Documented Examples of Barack Obama’s Lying …

 

cached

 

Editor’s Note: Our friend, Dan from Squirrel Hill, has updated his list to 1,063 documented examples of Barack Obama’s lying, lawbreaking, corruption, …

 

bing yahoo

 

http://freedomoutpost.com/1180-documen%5B…%5Drruption-cronyism-hypocrisy-waste-etc/

 

The Green Mirage | Fusion 4 Freedom – Fuel R Future

 

cached

 

The world’s most comprehensive Nuclear Fusion Energy website for fusion & plasma science, research, project management, academic journal articles, videos, fusion …

 

bing yahoo

 

http://fusion4freedom.us/review-of-for%5B…%5Dergy-revolution-a-massive-opportunity/

 

THE GREEN CORRUPTION FILES : Underneath Senator Harry …

 

cached

 

16 Nov 2013 … When looking at the entire Green Corruption scandal, it’s important to …. BrightSource’s Ivanpah solar power project in the Mojave Desert was …

 

google

 

http://greencorruption.blogspot.com/20%5B…%5Derneath-senator-harry-reids-clean.html

 

Ivanpah | The Green Corruption Files

 

cached

 

Ivanpah … June 25, 2015: Green Corruption Files linked to at FuelRFuture … June 8, 2015: The Green Corruption Files research inside Open the Books Report.

 

google

 

http://greencorruption.com/tag/ivanpah/

 

Obama’s 1.6 Billion Dollar Ivanpah Solar Plant Can’t Pay Its Bills …

 

cached

 

8 Nov 2014 … In May 2012 Barack Obama highlighted the Ivanpah Solar Plant in his … author of a lengthy report detailing alleged cronyism and corruption in …

 

google

 

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/1%5B…%5Dlant-cant-pay-its-bills-needs-bailout/

 

More Obama Green Energy Corruption – Marita Noon – Townhall …

 

cached

 

6 Jul 2012 … More Obama Green Energy Corruption – Marita Noon – Personal Finance, Financial … Ivanpah I and III have a BB+ rating while Ivanpah II is BB.

 

google

 

http://finance.townhall.com/columnists%5B…%5Dbama_green_energy_corruption/page/full

 

World’s largest solar plant applying for federal grant …

 

cached

 

Nov 08, 2014 · Taxes World’s largest solar plant applying for federal grant to pay off federal loan

 

bing

 

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/1%5B…%5Deral-grant-to-pay-off-its-federal.html

 

The Green Corruption Files : Not Enough Sun Shining at California …

 

cached

 

17 Nov 2014 … No cost too high for a green project – The Green Corruption Files : Not Enough Sun Shining at California Ivanpah Solar Plant: $1.6 billion …

 

google

 

http://boulderisstoopid.com/2014/11/th%5B…%5Dhining-california-ivanpah-solar-plant/

 

Shady circumstances cloud huge solar energy plant bailout – cfact

 

cached

 

5 Dec 2014 … Just 2 weeks after Ivanpah became operational, NRG sought and … Green energy program corruption and cronyism, regards the Ivanpah deal …

 

google

 

http://www.cfact.org/2014/12/05/shady-%5B…%5Dcloud-huge-solar-energy-plant-bailout/

 

Weird Twist For Riverside County Solar Project | KCET

 

cached

 

If the Palen Solar Power Project was a soap opera character, the Internet would be ridiculing it for having long ago passed the point of believability.

 

bing

 

https://www.kcet.org/redefine/weird-tw%5B…%5Dist-for-riverside-county-solar-project

 

Is The Ivanpah Google Solar Project Another DOE Crony Kick-Back …

 

cached

 

3 hours ago … IVANPAH SOLAR SOLYNDRA-LIKE PROJECT IN CALIFORNIA FOUND … The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Corruption and Racketeering …

 

google

 

https://crimesquad1.wordpress.com/2016%5B…%5Dject-another-doe-crony-kick-back-scam/

 

California Solar Firm DEMANDS $539 MILLION From Taxpayers …

 

cached

 

Here is corruption of the first order. … Ivanpah, a solar plant in California, received a $1.6 billion loan guarantee backed by the taxpayers.

 

google

 

http://www.capoliticalreview.com/capol%5B…%5Drm-demands-539-million-from-taxpayers/

 

 

 

 

 

<

p class=”western” style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;orphans:0;widows:0;”> 

 

 

GAWKER’S NICK DENTON SAID TO BE “HITMAN” FOR WHITE HOUSE DIRTY TRICKS CAMPAIGNS

Hulk’s lawyers say Gawker founder was ‘playing God’ in closing court arguments

As the $100m defamation case against Gawker Media over the posting of a sex tape featuring Hogan comes to a close, the first amendment is a core issue
Hulk Hogan Gawker trial FloridaIn his court-approved black headscarf, Hulk Hogan, aka Terry Bollea, listened impassively to closing arguments in his $100m defamation case against Gawker Media over the posting of a sex tape featuring the pro-wrestler and Heather Cole, wife of his best friend, DJ Bubba “the Love Sponge” Clem.

Kenneth Turkel, a lawyer for Hogan, told jurors Gawker editors had not even had the “common decency” to call Hogan for comment before they posted the video.

Turkel walked jurors through Hogan’s case: that his right to privacy was gratuitously compromised by Gawker, that his reputation was materially compromised, and that he suffered emotional distress of “outrageous intensity and duration”.

Turkel accused Gawker founder Nick Denton of “playing God over Bollea’s right to privacy” and offered a meditation on how celebrity affects expectations of privacy.

Denton, Turkel said, had effectively argued that losing privacy is a freeing experience because “you don’t worry about anything else because someone has taken your private life and put it out there”.

The 10-day trial was full of salacious details but the core issue spoke to a serious first amendment issue: did Gawker have the right to post one minute and 41 seconds of the sex tape, approximately nine seconds of which featured actual sexual content?

Hogan’s lawyers said the gratuitous nature of Gawker’s decision exempted the media firm from constitutional protection.

Lawyers for Gawker argued that publication was a legitimate scoop because Hogan had talked openly about his sex life before, including on Howard Stern’s radio show.

The company has warned that if Hogan wins the case, the decision could not only destroy the company – a loss could cost the site up to $50m, even with an appeal – but cripple press freedom.

But Hogan’s lawyer dismissed that line, arguing that there was only one reason for posting the tape: to build traffic and sell ads after a five-month news “dry spell”.

Throughout the trial, lawyers sparred over the actual value of the post to Gawker, with Hogan’s lawyers estimating the sex tape was worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Gawker maintains the post was worth just $11,000.

Gawker obtained the tape without knowing its exact origin. The editor involved said the post was intended as a commentary on celebrity sex tapes. Hogan, 62, testified during the two-week civil trial that he still suffers from the humiliation which arose from the video’s release.

“What’s disturbing about Gawker is not what they do, but how proud they are of it,” said Turkel, who said the character of the intrusion was an accurate “reflection of its owner Nick Denton”.

Hogan’s lawyers have painted a picture of man who has inhabited the same entertainment character for 35 years.

“Nobody cares who Terry Bollea is,” Turkel told the court. “They just don’t. He’s a man who grew up in a working class area of Tampa. He’s so self-conscious about the size of his head he wears bandanna.

“He can’t trust a lot of people. He doesn’t have a lot of friends, because everybody wants Hulk Hogan. He doesn’t have much privacy but one of the places he thought he had was in a friend’s bedroom. Gawker turned his life upside down.”

Lawyers for Gawker said the tape of the professional wrestler was not a real celebrity sex tape – “it was not a Kim Kardashian” – and contained just nine grainy seconds depicting sexual activity.

The lawyers said the case revolved around context. Gawker could not be held responsible for denying Hogan his constitutional rights, they said, because “anything that people are already talking about is fair game”.

Gawker lawyer Michael Sullivan argued it was implausible for editors to separate the character of Hulk Hogan from Bollea when, as Hogan, he had frequently “chosen to put his private life out there. So to claim Gawker should treat him as Bollea makes no sense.

“He’s talked about his sex life, how big his penis is, and when he talks about his penis it’s to promote his daughter’s singing career. He’s discussed his sexual encounters. Now he tells you this was the Hulk Hogan character.”

Gawker said its intention was to show the ordinariness of celebrity sex tapes, not to get into the realms of protected speech. The legal point is that all speech is protected, irrespective of its nature.

The jury heard that failure to protect Gawker could lead to the US “becoming a nation where powerful people and celebrities use the courts to punish people for saying things they do not like”.

Earlier in the case, Gawker editor AJ Daulerio said he posted the sexual activity; the rest of the tape, he said, was “banal conversation” between Hogan and Cole. Lawyers for the media firm argued that the point Gawker wanted to make was that celebrity sex tapes are “rather ordinary”.

Gawker’s counsel, Sullivan, argued that if Hogan was as upset as he claimed to be by the posting of the tape, he would not have timed his initial complaint, 12 days later, to go out on the 5pm news.

“He didn’t see a therapist or a counsellor, but said he had lost sleep and appetite,” Sullivan said. “But he did tear up on the Kathie Lee Gifford show.

“That’s the extent of his emotional distress. He’s a man who is used to publicity. He’s used to public attention. We know he’s not upset by exposure because he exposes himself to the world. He has a different base line for privacy and that has to be taken into account.”

Gawker’s lawyer said the company had not put anything in the public domain Hogan had not already put into there himself.

“You’d be hard pressed to think of anyone except a porn star who’d make his attributes a part of his public persona,” he said. “But this is not an ordinary man with ordinary sensibilities.”

After the closing statements, Gawker issued a statement which said: “We’re disappointed the jury was unable to see key evidence and hear testimony from the most important witness. So it may be necessary for the appeals court to resolve this case.”

The company said Bubba Clem “originally told his radio listeners that Hulk Hogan knew he was being taped” and “should have been required to appear in court and explain what really happened”.

The Great Solar Epic Fail of All Time

The Great Solar Epic Fail of All Time?

PG&E wants permission from the California Public Utilities Commission to overlook the shortfall and give Ivanpah another year to sort out its problems, warning that allowing its power contracts to default could force the facility to shut down. California electric utility regulators will decide today whether the Ivanpah solar plant in northeastern San Bernardino County should get more time to increase its electricity production. The CSP park in the Mojave Desert is a partnership between NRG Energy (NYSE:NRG), Google (NASDAQ:GOOG) and BrightSource Energy Inc. “Production levels have been below the guaranteed energy” required in agreements the owners signed, according to a draft resolution filed in advance of the meeting.

A presentation revealed in 2012 that plant builder BrightSource Energy had told Energy Department officials before winning the loan guarantee that its cash position was “precarious” and said the project’s failure would be a “major embarrassment” to the White House.

PG&E described the proposal in a statement Wednesday as “reasonable and in the best interest of our customers”, adding that the plant helps further state and federal renewable policy goals. The forbearance agreements would end August 1 unless PG&E agrees to a six-month extension.

http://bilbaoya.com/2016/03/18/the-great-solar-epic-fail-of-all-time.html

Investigators Charge Google Department Of Energy Project With Fraud. Say it is not possible for it to have cost $2.2 Billion

Investigators Charge Google Department Of Energy Project With Fraud. Say it is not possible for it to have cost $2.2 Billion

 

A bunch of mass-produced curved metal reflectors and a few water towers in the desert could not possibly have cost over $400M”say investigators..Where did the other one billion dollars go!?…”

 

By Dale Winton – LA Digital News

 

 

Los Angeles – The Department of Energy Cleantech Crash funds, from the ill-fated reign of Steven Chu as Secretary of Energy, have long been rumored to have been part of an epic campaign financing payola scheme.

 

 

Google is now known to have staffed a large portion of the Obama Administration, particularly the White House. Google is the big player behind the, now under-scrutiny, Ivanpah Solar company.

 

 

Funds from the disastrous and sketchy Department of Energy programs brought the public the $523M taxpayer loss of FBI-raided Solyndra Solar Company.

 

 

The concept is simple and based on burning ants to death with a magnifying glass. Ivanpah pitched the idea of focusing the sun on a tank to make the tank hot.

 

 

While the concept is known to every elementary school child, the engineering for Ivanpah seems to have been done by elementary school engineers. A proper review of Ivanpah would have shown that it never would have worked. Very simple computer models, before Ivanpah even broke ground, proved that it had no possibility of properly generating efficient electricity, yet it was still funded and built while missing every milestone along the way. While the Department of Energy PR office has long held that “complete due diligence was conducted on the Ivanpah project”, it appears that the only “due diligence” that the Department of Energy conducted was to diligently make certain that only campaign financiers got the taxpayer payola cash.

 

 

Former workers from the Ivanpah project, turned whistle-blowers, say they are now embarrassed to have been a part of the failed scheme.

 

 

Ivanpah did not launch on time and never hit its production milestones. Outside standard generators have had to be hauled in to Ivanpah to fake up the energy output. Numerous staff have quit. The only thing that Ivanpah does well is kill birds and tortoises and blind pilots and satellites.

 

 

Investigators now believe that the missing billion dollars was forwarded to a certain political campaign for the 2016 Presidency.

Investigators believe that padded receipts, NO-BID CONTRACTS AND TRUMPED-UP COSTS WERE USED TO INFLATE THE STATED COST WHILE SKIMMING FUNDS OFF TO SPECIAL PARTIES…”

 

 

…AN “ON-PUBLIC-RECORD” COMPLETE FORENSIC AUDIT OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT IS CALLED FOR, IN ADVANCE OF THE…” November Elections.

 

 

Google’s Ivanpah Crony-Funded Project Seeks Ways To Fake Energy Output After Already Faking Output with Outside Generators

 

Obama-Backed Solar Plant Could Be Shut Down For Not Producing Enough Energy

 

 

By Michael Bastasch

 

   California regulators may force a massive solar thermal power plant in the Mojave Desert to shut down after years of under-producing electricity — not to mention the plant was blinding pilots flying over the area and incinerating birds.

 

The Ivanpah solar plant could be shut down if state regulators don’t give it more time to meet electricity production promises it made as part of its power purchase agreements with utilities, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Ivanpah, which got a $1.6 billion loan guarantee from the Obama administration, only produced a fraction of the power state regulators expected it would. The plant only generated 45 percent of expected power in 2014 and only 68 percent in 2015, according to government data.

And it does all this at a cost of $200 per megawatt hour — nearly six times the cost of electricity from natural gas-fired power plants. Interestingly enough, Ivanpah uses natural gas to supplement its solar production.

These disappointing results at high prices could be the solar plant’s undoing. California Energy Commission regulators hoped the plant would help the state get 33 percent of its electricity from green sources, but now the plant could be shut down for not meeting its production promises.

Ivanpah — which is owned by BrightSource Energy, NRG Energy and Google — uses more than 170,000 large mirrors, or heliostats, to reflect sunlight towards water boilers set atop 450-foot towers that create steam to turn giant turbines and generate electricity.

The plant was financed by $1.6 billion in loan guarantees from the Department of Energy in 2011. When the solar plant opened in 2014, it was hailed as a great achievement by Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz.

“This project speaks for itself,” Moniz said when the project went online in early 2014. “Just look at the 170,000 shining heliostat mirrors and the three towers that would dwarf the Statue of Liberty.”

“Ivanpah is the largest solar thermal energy facility in the world with 392 MW of capacity — meaning it can produce enough renewable electricity to power nearly 100,000 homes,” Moniz said.

Moniz’s optimism aside, the project faced huge problems from the beginning. NRG Energy asked the federal government for a $539 million federal grant to help pay off the $1.6 billion loan it got from the Energy Department.

NRG Energy said the plant had only produced about one-quarter of its expected output in the months after it opened. The company needed an infusion of cash to help keep the project afloat.

That was only the beginning of the company’s problems. Environmentalists quickly attacked the project for killing thousands of birds since it opened. Many birds were incinerated by the intense heat being reflected off Ivanpah’s heliostats.

The Associated Press cited statistics presented by environmentalists in 2014 that “about a thousand… to 28,000” birds are incinerated by Ivanpah’s heliostats every year.

“Forensic Lab staff observed a falcon or falcon-like bird with a plume of smoke arising from the tail as it passed through the flux field,” according to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report from 2014.

“Immediately after encountering the flux, the bird exhibited a controlled loss of stability and altitude but was able to cross the perimeter fence before landing,” FWS reported.

Do You Agree The Ivanpah Solar Plant Should Be Shut Down?

  Yes         No       

 

Completing this poll entitles you to Daily Caller news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Pilots have also reported seeing a “nearly blinding” glare emanating from Ivanpah while flying over the solar plant. The Sandia National Laboratory reported in 2014 Ivanpah was “sufficient to cause significant ocular impact (potential for after-image) up to a distance of ~6 miles.”

“At distances greater than ~6 miles (10 km), a low potential for after-image exists from the heliostat glare as a result of the reduced retinal irradiance and subtended angles,” Sandia reported. “It should be noted that two of the authors who were in the helicopter qualitatively confirmed these results after observing the glare. The pilot acknowledged that the glare was very bright, but he also stated that it did not impair his flying ability since he was aware of the glare and avoided looking in that direction when flying over [Ivanpah].”

Update: California regulators announced Thursday that Ivanpah would have until the end of July to produce more power or face shut down. 

Follow Michael on Facebook and Twitter

 


Read more:
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/17/obama-backed-solar-plant-could-be-shut-down-for-not-producing-enough-energy/#ixzz43HUtVjrz

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

IVANPAH SOLAR SOLYNDRA-LIKE PROJECT IN CALIFORNIA FOUND TO BE CRONY KICK-BACK SCAM.

 

 

 

  • ENERGY DEPT. BEGS THEM NOT TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS WHILE THEIR BENEFACTOR OBAMA IS STILL IN OFFICE

  • TECHNOLOGY FAILED SO BAD THAT OUTSIDE OLD-SCHOOL GENERATORS HAD TO BE TRUCKED IN TO FAKE THE ENERGY OUTPUT

  • MISSED EVERY MILESTONE

  • THOUGHT TO BE A MATERIALS AND STOCK MARKET SKIM SCAM

  • GOOGLE, AS BOTH OBAMA FINANCIER AND PAYOLA RECIPIENT DEEP IN THE MIX

 

 

As warned by this paper and many others, years before Ivanpah broke ground or fried any birds, the technical numbers for Ivanpah make no sense and could not have passed Department of Energy “Due Diligence” unless a kick-back scheme was underway. The technical facts showed, back then, that Ivanpah could never succeed.

 

 

The “give us some more time” plea by Ivanpah is actually a plea from the Obama offices to “Please not go belly up on my watch.”

 

 


Cloudy days for solar thermal

 

 

 

by Drew Thornley

 

 

“$2.2 billion California project generates 40% of expected electricity” This past weekend’s Wall Street Journal has some unsurprising news about solar-thermal technology. Excerpts to follow, but, in short: It’s very expensive to build, it doesn’t deliver nearly the amount of projected power, and it kills birds: The $2.2 billion Ivanpah solar power project in California’s Mojave Desert is supposed to be generating more than a million megawatt-hours of electricity each year. But 15 months after starting up, the plant is producing just 40% of that, according to data from the U.S. Energy Department.

 

 

 

Built by BrightSource Energy Inc. and operated by NRG Energy Inc., Ivanpah has been advertised as more reliable than a traditional solar panel farm, in part, because it more closely resembles conventional power plants that burn coal or natural gas. NRG co-owns the plant with Google Inc. and other investors. Turns out, there is a lot more to go wrong with the new technology. Replacing broken equipment and learning better ways to operate the complex assortment of machinery has stalled Ivanpah’s ability to reach full potential, said Randy Hickok, a senior vice president at NRG. One big miscalculation was that the power plant requires far more steam to run smoothly and efficiently than originally thought, according to a document filed with the California Energy Commission. Instead of ramping up the plant each day before sunrise by burning one hour’s worth of natural gas to generate steam, Ivanpah needs more than four times that much help from fossil fuels to get the plant humming every morning. Another “unexpected” problem: not enough sun. Weather predictions for the area underestimated the amount of cloud cover that has blanketed Ivanpah since it went into service in 2013. Ivanpah isn’t the only new solar-thermal project struggling to energize the grid. A large mirror-powered plant built in Arizona almost two years ago by Abengoa SA of Spain has also had its share of hiccups. Designed to deliver a million megawatt hours of power annually, the plant is putting out roughly half that, federal data show. Solar-thermal developers including Abengoa and BrightSource continue to build new plants in South Africa, Chile and China.

 

 

 

But Lucas Davis, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, says it is unlikely more U.S. projects will gain traction as utilities opt for cheaper solar farms that use panels. “I don’t expect a lot of solar thermal to get built. It’s just too expensive,” he said. American solar farms generate nearly 16 million megawatt-hours of electricity each year. That satisfies less than 1% of U.S. electricity demand, but six times the amount of power that solar-thermal plants currently produce. And the vast arrays of solar panels that blanket the ground cost roughly half as much to build as new mirror-powered plants, according to the U.S. Energy Department. Electricity prices from new solar farms average around 5 cents a kilowatt-hour, according to GTM Research, which tracks renewable energy markets. That compares with between 12 and 25 cents a kilowatt-hour for electricity generated by the Ivanpah power plant, state and federal data show. The Ivanpah plant was delayed several months and had millions of dollars in cost overruns because of wildlife protections for the endangered Desert Tortoise. Once built, U.S. government biologists found the plant’s superheated mirrors were killing birds. In April, biologists working for the state estimated that 3,500 birds died at Ivanpah in the span of a year, many of them burned alive while flying through a part of the solar installment where air temperatures can reach 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore

 

 

 

Obama-Backed Solar Plant Could Be Shut Down … – The Daily Caller

 

cached

 

11 hours ago … The Ivanpah solar plant could be shut down if state regulators don’t give it … agreements with utilities, according to The Wall Street Journal.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/17/obam%5B…%5D-down-for-not-producing-enough-energy/

 

 

 

More Problems for CSP: Ivanpah Solar Plant Falling Short of …

 

cached

 

30 Oct 2014 … Ivanpah is the largest solar thermal energy facility in the world with 392 MW … percent of the plant’s cost (news first reported in the Wall Street Journal). …. If anti -nukes would stop crippling nuclear power, we could have a 1000 …

 

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles%5B…%5Dort-of-expected-electricity-production

 

 

 

A birds-eye view of the bird scorching Ivanpah solar …

 

cached

 

Aug 17, 2014 · At the start of the weekend, and quite by accident, I found myself aloft and looking directly into the glare of the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System.

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/18/%5B…%5Dd-scorching-ivanpah-solar-power-plant/

 

Ivanpah Solar Plant May Be Forced to Shut Down | 17.03.16 …

 

cached

 

vor 1 Tag … Ivanpah Solar Plant May Be Forced to Shut Down … Weiter zum vollständigen Artikel bei “The Wall Street Journal Deutschland”. Anzeige …

 

http://www.finanzen.at/nachrichten/akt%5B…%5Dant-May-Be-Forced-to-Shut-Down-4784350

 

FAIL: Ivanpah solar power plant not producing enough electricity …

 

cached

 

11 hours ago … Of course What could the solar plant may be forced to shut down if it ….. Another article on same (http://www.wsj.com/articles/ivanpah-solar-

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/03/17/%5B…%5Dmay-be-forced-to-close/comment-page-1/

 

Ivanpah Solar Compliance – Basin and Range Watch

 

cached

 

^Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System – tower two – solar flux, September, 2015. … June 16, 2015 – A recent Wall Street Journal article highlighted issues some ….. So the operator shuts the plant down before the cloud shadows move over.

 

http://www.basinandrangewatch.org/Ivanpah-Updates-3.html

 

 

 

<

p class=”western” style=”margin-bottom:0;orphans:0;widows:0;”>Tags: Barack Obama, Brightsource Energy, California, Department of Energy, Energy, Ernest Moniz, Google, Ivanpah, NRG Energy

 

 

Facebook is watching and tracking you more than you probably realize

Facebook is watching and tracking you more than you probably realize

Here’s how to keep advertisers from tracking your activity on Facebook.

3281 38 LINKEDIN 53 COMMENTMORE

Whenever you’re on Facebook, do you ever get the feeling that you’re being watched? An ad pops up that’s right up your alley, or three new articles show up in your feed that are similar to something you’ve just clicked on.

Sometimes it seems like Facebook knows you personally, and that’s because it does. It has algorithms that track what you like, watch and click on. That information is then passed along to Facebook advertisers.

Facebook itself isn’t the only culprit. Tons of companies use Facebook’s platform as a way to track you. In fact, right now there a probably dozens of companies that are watching your posts, storing your profile information and more, without you even realizing it. Today, I’m going to tell you how to stop it.

How did this happen in the first place?

When Facebook first started out, people rushed to the platform because of the many perks that it offered. One of those perks, and probably the most appealing, was the fact that Facebook was entirely ad-free. You could use the platform to connect with family and friends without being bothered by someone trying to sell you something.

Well, like they say, “All good things must come to an end.”  Eventually, Facebook began selling ads like everyone else. And that’s when everything changed.

People realized that Facebook provided a treasure trove of information for advertisers. By clicking “like” users were telling companies exactly what they wanted — more of this, less of that, please. This led to the big data tracking we now see.

Three sneaky ways companies are tracking you:

Most people understand that Facebook is tracking their preferences whenever they use the app. But, few realize they’re being tracked in other ways too. And, that’s what these third-party companies are banking on. If you don’t know you’re being tracked, then you won’t ask them to stop. So, here are three things to watch out for.

Facebook apps: This is when you receive a request to play a Facebook game your friends are obsessed with, and you decide to sign up. If you’ve ever done this before, then you’ve allowed that app developer track you. These third-party apps integrate with your Facebook profile and generally have permission to pull whatever information they want. And although you can edit what information they can access, very few people do.

Facebook logins: This is when you visit a site and it says “Log in with Facebook,” and you do, then you’re letting that company track you.

Friends’ apps monitoring you: Even if you didn’t download an app, Facebook’s default settings allow apps your friends have installed to also see YOU. It’s pretty scary.

How to stop it from happening:

You might be wondering why this even matters, and how it really impacts you personally. The easiest way to answer those questions is to point out all of those big data breaches you hear about almost daily. Hackers rarely waste time on individuals these days. They’ve got much bigger fish to fry. Large retailers, for example – or the databases where these third-party companies store the information they’ve gathered. That’s why everyone should take these steps to protect their private information.

Review and edit installed apps: To see what apps you’ve installed over the years, open Facebook in your browser, click the down arrow in the upper right corner and select “Settings.” Then click on the “Apps” header in the left column.

To see what information an app is accessing, click the pencil icon next to any of the apps to see and edit the settings. The first setting lets you set who can see that you use the app. It defaults to “Only Me,” so it isn’t a big deal. Below it, however, is another story.

In the case of Skype, for example, it pulls your public profile information along with your list of friends, email address, birthday and hometown.

Remember that this information is being stored on a third-party server. Not every app developer is going to have Microsoft-level security, and hackers are good at turning tiny pieces of stolen information into big gains.

If you want to keep using the app, you can deselect certain items, such as your email address. Be aware that won’t remove the information from the app developer’s servers, however. If you change your email address in the future, however, the developer won’t get the new one.

Remove apps you don’t use: If you don’t want to use the app anymore, you can click the “Remove app” link at the bottom of the page. Just remember that this won’t automatically remove your information from the app developer’s servers. For that you’ll need to contact the app developer directly. Facebook has a link for more information on this under the “Remove info collected by the app” section in the app’s settings.

Turn off apps completely: If you’ve deleted all the apps, and you’re not keen on accidentally installing more in the future, you can turn off the app platform completely. Just note you won’t be able to install apps or log in to third-party sites using Facebook until you turn this back on.

To turn off the app platform, go back to the App Settings page. Under “Apps, Websites and Plugins,” click the “Edit” button. At first, this just looks like a way to disable app notifications and invites from other people, which is a big help on its own. However, you’ll want to click the “Disable Platform” link in the bottom left corner.

Facebook gives you the standard warning about what disabling the platform does. If you’re OK with it, click the “Disable Platform” button. Again, this won’t remove information that app developers might have collected about you already.

Stop logging into sites using Facebook: In the future, when you’re adding an app or logging into a website try to avoid logging in with Facebook. But, if you must use Facebook to log in, then look for the “Log in Anonymously” or “Guest” option so it won’t share your information.

Stop friends’ apps from seeing your info: Apps can still get your information through your friends. By default as your friends install apps, those apps have permission to grab whatever info about you your friends can see.

To put a stop to this, go back to the App Settings page. Then under “Apps Others Use” click the “Edit” button.

You’ll see everything that your friends’ apps can see about you. Go through and uncheck every option listed on the page, and then click “Save.” Now companies can’t track new information about you.

Apps aren’t the only worry you’ll run into on Facebook. Recently I told you how scammers use Facebook like-farming can put your privacy at risk. Find out how like-farming works and how you can avoid it.

If you want to like something safe that will also bring you the latest news and updates to stay ahead of the game in your digital life, head over to my Facebook page at Facebook.com/KimKomando and click the like button.

On the Kim Komando Show, the nation’s largest weekend radio talk show, Kim takes calls and dispenses advice on today’s digital lifestyle, from smartphones and tablets to online privacy and data hacks. For her daily tips, free newsletters and more, visit her website at Komando.com. Email her at techcomments@usatoday.com.

Obama-Backed Solar Plant Could Be Shut Down For Not Producing Enough Energy

Google’s Ivanpah Crony-Funded Project Seeks Ways To Fake Energy Output After Already Faking Output with Outside Generators

Obama-Backed Solar Plant Could Be Shut Down For Not Producing Enough Energy

Photo of Michael Bastasch

Michael Bastasch

 

California regulators may force a massive solar thermal power plant in the Mojave Desert to shut down after years of under-producing electricity — not to mention the plant was blinding pilots flying over the area and incinerating birds.

The Ivanpah solar plant could be shut down if state regulators don’t give it more time to meet electricity production promises it made as part of its power purchase agreements with utilities, according to The Wall Street Journal.

Ivanpah, which got a $1.6 billion loan guarantee from the Obama administration, only produced a fraction of the power state regulators expected it would. The plant only generated 45 percent of expected power in 2014 and only 68 percent in 2015, according to government data.

And it does all this at a cost of $200 per megawatt hour — nearly six times the cost of electricity from natural gas-fired power plants. Interestingly enough, Ivanpah uses natural gas to supplement its solar production.

These disappointing results at high prices could be the solar plant’s undoing. California Energy Commission regulators hoped the plant would help the state get 33 percent of its electricity from green sources, but now the plant could be shut down for not meeting its production promises.

Ivanpah — which is owned by BrightSource Energy, NRG Energy and Google — uses more than 170,000 large mirrors, or heliostats, to reflect sunlight towards water boilers set atop 450-foot towers that create steam to turn giant turbines and generate electricity.

The plant was financed by $1.6 billion in loan guarantees from the Department of Energy in 2011. When the solar plant opened in 2014, it was hailed as a great achievement by Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz.

“This project speaks for itself,” Moniz said when the project went online in early 2014. “Just look at the 170,000 shining heliostat mirrors and the three towers that would dwarf the Statue of Liberty.”

“Ivanpah is the largest solar thermal energy facility in the world with 392 MW of capacity — meaning it can produce enough renewable electricity to power nearly 100,000 homes,” Moniz said.

Moniz’s optimism aside, the project faced huge problems from the beginning. NRG Energy asked the federal government for a $539 million federal grant to help pay off the $1.6 billion loan it got from the Energy Department.

NRG Energy said the plant had only produced about one-quarter of its expected output in the months after it opened. The company needed an infusion of cash to help keep the project afloat.

That was only the beginning of the company’s problems. Environmentalists quickly attacked the project for killing thousands of birds since it opened. Many birds were incinerated by the intense heat being reflected off Ivanpah’s heliostats.

The Associated Press cited statistics presented by environmentalists in 2014 that “about a thousand… to 28,000” birds are incinerated by Ivanpah’s heliostats every year.

“Forensic Lab staff observed a falcon or falcon-like bird with a plume of smoke arising from the tail as it passed through the flux field,” according to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service report from 2014.

“Immediately after encountering the flux, the bird exhibited a controlled loss of stability and altitude but was able to cross the perimeter fence before landing,” FWS reported.

Do You Agree The Ivanpah Solar Plant Should Be Shut Down?

  Yes         No       

Completing this poll entitles you to Daily Caller news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Pilots have also reported seeing a “nearly blinding” glare emanating from Ivanpah while flying over the solar plant. The Sandia National Laboratory reported in 2014 Ivanpah was “sufficient to cause significant ocular impact (potential for after-image) up to a distance of ~6 miles.”

“At distances greater than ~6 miles (10 km), a low potential for after-image exists from the heliostat glare as a result of the reduced retinal irradiance and subtended angles,” Sandia reported. “It should be noted that two of the authors who were in the helicopter qualitatively confirmed these results after observing the glare. The pilot acknowledged that the glare was very bright, but he also stated that it did not impair his flying ability since he was aware of the glare and avoided looking in that direction when flying over [Ivanpah].”

Update: California regulators announced Thursday that Ivanpah would have until the end of July to produce more power or face shut down. 

Follow Michael on Facebook and Twitter

TESLA “announces results” of fake safety review but leaves out key incriminating data

TESLA “announces results” of fake safety review but leaves out key incriminating data

By Andrew Weber – Green Car Retorts

Today Tesla announced that the latest horrific vehicle-melting fire of the Tesla Model S in Norway, which delivered a nasty surprise on New Year’s Day, was “just an accident” from faulty manufacturing.

This appears to be the latest in the constant Tesla smoke-screens designed to cover-up a litany of defects with Tesla and with Elon Musk’s entire corrupt operation.

Tesla’s battery pack is constantly looking for any excuse to blow up and release toxic fumes. That is the plain fact of the matter.

The Deadly Lithium Ion Battery

Lithium ion batteries are blowing up, starting fires and, generally, destroying people’s homes, cars, electronics and physical health. Boeing was ordered to stop flying the 787 Dreamliner because it’s Lithium ion batteries are catching fire spontaneously.

A group of silicon valley venture capitalists forced/leveraged the government to buy and pay for these specific batteries ( Silicon Valley billionaires own the lithium ion Cartel), in order to benefit their profit margins. Other batteries don’t have these problems. Silicon Valley knew about this from day one, but those snarky billionaires put greed ahead of safety. There are thousands and thousands of reports of spontaneous lithium ion fires, but the Silicon Valley campaign billionaires, who back lithium ion, pay to keep this information hushed up.

Millions of these batteries have been recalled for fire risk. The VC’s tried to dump as many of them as they could (into hoverboards and Musk’s “home energy pack”) before they got caught. Now they are caught. These VC’s own stock in lithium mining companies in Afghanistan and really like the Afghan war.

These links show vast sets of Fisker electric cars that burst into flames just because they GOT WET:

http://updates.jalopnik.com/post/34669789863/more-than-a-dozen-fisker-karma-hybrids-caught-fire-
and
http://green.autoblog.com/2012/08/12/fisker-flambe-second-karma-spontaneously-combusts-w-video/

http://www.autoblog.com/2012/11/05/how-sandy-may-have-set-17-plug-in-hybrids-on-fire/

Fisker Karma spontaneously combusts

http://cbdakota.wordpress.com/2012/11/07/fisker-karmas-catch-fire-following-inundation-by-sandy/

http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/12/fisker-karma-hyrbid-ev-second-fire/

http://www.techfever.net/2012/08/fisker-karma-hybrid-ev-ignites-while-parked/

http://evmc2.wordpress.com/2012/11/04/fisker-karma-fire-report/

http://fellowshipofminds.wordpress.com/2012/05/12/karma-burns-owners-mansion/

http://www.carbuzz.com/news/2012/11/1/Karmas-Ignite-After-Hurricane-Floods-Newark-Port-7711437/

There are hundreds of other links proving the point., ie: http://lithium-ion.weebly.com

Tesla Motors has filed a patent which states the following, THESE ARE TESLA MOTORS WORDS warning about a crisis, the level of which they never disclosed to the consumer:

“Thermal runaway is of major concern since a single incident can lead to significant property damage and, in some circumstances, bodily harm or loss of life. When a battery undergoes thermal runaway, it typically emits a large quantity of smoke, jets of flaming liquid electrolyte, and sufficient heat to lead to the combustion and destruction of materials in close proximity to the cell. If the cell undergoing thermal runaway is surrounded by one or more additional cells as is typical in a battery pack, then a single thermal runaway event can quickly lead to the thermal runaway of multiple cells which, in turn, can lead to much more extensive collateral damage. Regardless of whether a single cell or multiple cells are undergoing this phenomenon, if the initial fire is not extinguished immediately, subsequent fires may be caused that dramatically expand the degree of property damage. For example, the thermal runaway of a battery within an unattended laptop will likely result in not only the destruction of the laptop, but also at least partial destruction of its surroundings, e.g., home, office, car, laboratory, etc. If the laptop is on-board an aircraft, for example within the cargo hold or a luggage compartment, the ensuing smoke and fire may lead to an emergency landing or, under more dire conditions, a crash landing. Similarly, the thermal runaway of one or more batteries within the battery pack of a hybrid or electric vehicle may destroy not only the car, but may lead to a car wreck if the car is being driven or the destruction of its surroundings if the car is parked. “  WTF!!! THESE ARE TESLA MOTORS OWN WORDS

Tesla’s own staff have now admitted that once a lithium ion fire gets started in one of their cars, it is almost impossible to extinguish burning lithium ion material.

In Fact, in the Malibu, California Tesla Fire the Tesla Driver was burned alive and his body rendered “unrecognizable” according to fire officials who found him melted into a ball of molten plastic, alloy and battery debris.

Telsa’s own words in THEIR patent filing say that the risk is monumental.  Tesla has 6800 lithium ion batteries, any one of which can explode and start a chain reaction! If you look at all of the lithium ion danger movies you will see how easy it is to set these things into failure mode. They even get more flammable as they age.

Imagine a car crash with a Tesla where these 6800 batteries get slammed all over and then exposed to rain, fire hose water, water on the roads, cooling system liquid.. OMG!!

Musk has no morals. This is clear from the following article:

IS ELON MUSK A MOBSTER AND POLITICAL CORRUPTION RACKETEER?

Numerous parties would like this answered, in public, in front of a Grand Jury, A DOJ Special Prosecutor and a public federal court trial, but Elon Musk has spent vast amounts of money in order to delay the justice system from bring him to such a hearing.
The Following inquiries, though, should serve to resolve the issue.
All of the following questions have now been FAXED, EMAILED, U.S. POSTAL SERVICED MAILED to Elon Musk at his homes and offices and to the corporate offices of the companies and U.S. Senators that he owns. He is now fully aware that answers for each of the following questions is required from him. It is no longer possible for him to not have immediate answers to these questions should you encounter him in-person, at a conference or in a broadcast news interview.
If you see him, ask him: “Elon…
Why was Tesla located on the same geological land, next door to, FBI-raided Solyndra?
1. Did Senator Dianne Feinstein ever have a personal meeting with you?
2. Did you or your staff ever promise, or deliver, any favors or items of value to Senator Dianne Feinstein
3. Did you or your staff ever promise, or deliver, any favors or items of value to Senator Harry Reid?
4. Have you, or any family members or friends ever placed money in a family trust fund that originally came from the U.S. Treasury?
5. Had you ever met Steven Chu, Steve Spinner, Alison Spinner, Matt Rogers or Jonathan Silver before they were appointed to run the U.S. Department of Energy?
6. Did you ever say, in a recorded conversation, that the NUMMI factory made no sense for Tesla to occupy?
7. What is your relationship with Richard Blum, the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein and his real estate company CBRE?
8. When your Tesla and Powerwall batteries explode, do they release any toxic fumes? How many different kinds of toxic fumes do they release? In what year were you aware of these toxic fumes. Did your employee: Bernard Tse, ever warn you about these toxic fumes?
9. Did you, or your associates ever benefit from lithium mining in the Afghanistan War?
10. Did three of your employees suddenly die in a plane crash? What engineering information did they have about Tesla Motors?
11. Did your patent filings include any language which specifically and intimately disclosed the deadly danger of your batteries? Please quote those paragraphs from your very own patent filings that you were forced to give away for free because they were rendered value-less by those disclosures?
12. The news stories said that, even though you were a billionaire, you got over thirty billion dollars in taxpayer-funded handouts from California and Federal government officials in hard cash, tax waivers, free NASA buildings, government jet fuel, credits, stock market pumps and other things; Did you get all of this free cash in exchange for conduit-ing campaign funding for Obama, Reid and Feinstein?
13. Were you involved in the death of your competitor: Gary D. Conley?
14. Does Google rig search engine results about you because they covertly co-own some of your assets? Do Twitter and Google hype up PR aggrandizement about you and hide negative news stories about you?
15. Have you hidden money from state and federal tax collection in off-shore tax evasion schemes?
16. Do you hire troll-farms, click-farms and meat-puppet fake bloggers to write self-glory statements about you on reddit, twitter, facebook and other social media?
17. Have Tesla’s killed anybody? How many people have died in, or near a Tesla, ever? Do you run cover-ups about the deaths?

IVANPAH SOLAR SOLYNDRA-LIKE PROJECT IN CALIFORNIA FOUND TO BE CRONY KICK-BACK SCAM.

IVANPAH SOLAR SOLYNDRA-LIKE PROJECT IN CALIFORNIA FOUND TO BE CRONY KICK-BACK SCAM.

 

 

  • ENERGY DEPT. BEGS THEM NOT TO GO OUT OF BUSINESS WHILE THEIR BENEFACTOR OBAMA IS STILL IN OFFICE

  • TECHNOLOGY FAILED SO BAD THAT OUTSIDE OLD-SCHOOL GENERATORS HAD TO BE TRUCKED IN TO FAKE THE ENERGY OUTPUT

  • MISSED EVERY MILESTONE

  • THOUGHT TO BE A MATERIALS AND STOCK MARKET SKIM SCAM

  • GOOGLE, AS BOTH OBAMA FINANCIER AND PAYOLA RECIPIENT, DEEP IN THE MIX

 

 

As warned by this paper and many others, years before Ivanpah broke ground or fried any birds, the technical numbers for Ivanpah make no sense and could not have passed Department of Energy “Due Diligence” unless a kick-back scheme was underway. The technical facts showed, back then, that Ivanpah could never succeed.

 

 

The “give us some more time” plea by Ivanpah is actually a plea from the Obama offices to “Please not go belly up on my watch.”

 

 

 

Cloudy days for solar thermal

 

 

by Drew Thornley

 

 

“$2.2 billion California project generates 40% of expected electricity” This past weekend’s Wall Street Journal has some unsurprising news about solar-thermal technology. Excerpts to follow, but, in short: It’s very expensive to build, it doesn’t deliver nearly the amount of projected power, and it kills birds: The $2.2 billion Ivanpah solar power project in California’s Mojave Desert is supposed to be generating more than a million megawatt-hours of electricity each year. But 15 months after starting up, the plant is producing just 40% of that, according to data from the U.S. Energy Department.

 

 

Built by BrightSource Energy Inc. and operated by NRG Energy Inc., Ivanpah has been advertised as more reliable than a traditional solar panel farm, in part, because it more closely resembles conventional power plants that burn coal or natural gas. NRG co-owns the plant with Google Inc. and other investors. Turns out, there is a lot more to go wrong with the new technology. Replacing broken equipment and learning better ways to operate the complex assortment of machinery has stalled Ivanpah’s ability to reach full potential, said Randy Hickok, a senior vice president at NRG. One big miscalculation was that the power plant requires far more steam to run smoothly and efficiently than originally thought, according to a document filed with the California Energy Commission. Instead of ramping up the plant each day before sunrise by burning one hour’s worth of natural gas to generate steam, Ivanpah needs more than four times that much help from fossil fuels to get the plant humming every morning. Another “unexpected” problem: not enough sun. Weather predictions for the area underestimated the amount of cloud cover that has blanketed Ivanpah since it went into service in 2013. Ivanpah isn’t the only new solar-thermal project struggling to energize the grid. A large mirror-powered plant built in Arizona almost two years ago by Abengoa SA of Spain has also had its share of hiccups. Designed to deliver a million megawatt hours of power annually, the plant is putting out roughly half that, federal data show. Solar-thermal developers including Abengoa and BrightSource continue to build new plants in South Africa, Chile and China.

 

 

But Lucas Davis, an economics professor at the University of California, Berkeley, says it is unlikely more U.S. projects will gain traction as utilities opt for cheaper solar farms that use panels. “I don’t expect a lot of solar thermal to get built. It’s just too expensive,” he said. American solar farms generate nearly 16 million megawatt-hours of electricity each year. That satisfies less than 1% of U.S. electricity demand, but six times the amount of power that solar-thermal plants currently produce. And the vast arrays of solar panels that blanket the ground cost roughly half as much to build as new mirror-powered plants, according to the U.S. Energy Department. Electricity prices from new solar farms average around 5 cents a kilowatt-hour, according to GTM Research, which tracks renewable energy markets. That compares with between 12 and 25 cents a kilowatt-hour for electricity generated by the Ivanpah power plant, state and federal data show. The Ivanpah plant was delayed several months and had millions of dollars in cost overruns because of wildlife protections for the endangered Desert Tortoise. Once built, U.S. government biologists found the plant’s superheated mirrors were killing birds. In April, biologists working for the state estimated that 3,500 birds died at Ivanpah in the span of a year, many of them burned alive while flying through a part of the solar installment where air temperatures can reach 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/planet-gore

 

 

Obama-Backed Solar Plant Could Be Shut Down … – The Daily Caller

 

cached

 

11 hours ago … The Ivanpah solar plant could be shut down if state regulators don’t give it … agreements with utilities, according to The Wall Street Journal.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/17/obam%5B…%5D-down-for-not-producing-enough-energy/

 

 

 

More Problems for CSP: Ivanpah Solar Plant Falling Short of …

 

cached

 

30 Oct 2014 … Ivanpah is the largest solar thermal energy facility in the world with 392 MW … percent of the plant’s cost (news first reported in the Wall Street Journal). …. If anti -nukes would stop crippling nuclear power, we could have a 1000 …

 

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles%5B…%5Dort-of-expected-electricity-production

 

 

 

A birds-eye view of the bird scorching Ivanpah solar …

 

cached

 

Aug 17, 2014 · At the start of the weekend, and quite by accident, I found myself aloft and looking directly into the glare of the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System.

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/08/18/%5B…%5Dd-scorching-ivanpah-solar-power-plant/

 

Ivanpah Solar Plant May Be Forced to Shut Down | 17.03.16 …

 

cached

 

vor 1 Tag … Ivanpah Solar Plant May Be Forced to Shut Down … Weiter zum vollständigen Artikel bei “The Wall Street Journal Deutschland”. Anzeige …

 

http://www.finanzen.at/nachrichten/akt%5B…%5Dant-May-Be-Forced-to-Shut-Down-4784350

 

FAIL: Ivanpah solar power plant not producing enough electricity …

 

cached

 

11 hours ago … Of course What could the solar plant may be forced to shut down if it ….. Another article on same (http://www.wsj.com/articles/ivanpah-solar-

 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/03/17/%5B…%5Dmay-be-forced-to-close/comment-page-1/

 

Ivanpah Solar Compliance – Basin and Range Watch

 

cached

 

^Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System – tower two – solar flux, September, 2015. … June 16, 2015 – A recent Wall Street Journal article highlighted issues some ….. So the operator shuts the plant down before the cloud shadows move over.

 

http://www.basinandrangewatch.org/Ivanpah-Updates-3.html

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

 

Inside the Secret Life of Google’s Tech VC and His $10 Million Anal Sex Slave Infidelity

 

Michael Goguen has departed Sequoia Capital after facing sex abuse allegations.

 

Lizette Chapman @lizette_chapman

 

 

 

 

Michael Goguen in 2012.

 

Photographer: Lido Vizzutti/Flathead Beacon

 

 

 

Michael Goguen liked his privacy.

 

In the world of startups, full of bombast and self-promotion, the soft-spoken venture partner at Sequoia Capital specialized in quieter, more technical areas: He vetted networking, infrastructure, and security technologies for the firm before he departed abruptly last week. He spent millions of dollars to build a secluded, 32,000-square-foot getaway in Whitefish, Mont., complete with a racquetball court, underground shooting range, karate room, and 12-sided swimming pool. He kept a low social media profile, too: a bare bones LinkedIn profile, no blog, no Twitter account, and no Snapchat profile.

 

He also had a secret. But it turns out privacy had a price, and Goguen was not willing to pay the full amount. On March 8, Amber Laurel Baptiste sued Goguen for breach of contract, saying he owes her $30 million in addition to the $10 million he gave her in 2014. She also alleges that over the past 13 years, he sexually abused her and made her his sex slave after promising to rescue her from the human traffickers that brought her to the U.S.

 

Goguen, 52, says the relationship was consensual. In a graphic countersuit filed March 14, he provides what he says is e-mail and text message evidence showing she was a willing participant who became increasingly vengeful when he wouldn’t make a greater commitment to her. The $40 million contract, both agree, was to stop Baptiste, 36, from going forward with a personal injury lawsuit that would have alleged he caused her bodily harm during sex. Goguen calls it extortion.

 

Sequoia Capital, where he had been a partner for 20 years, quickly severed all ties with Goguen and scrubbed him from their firm’s site. (Goguen’s lawyer, Diane Doolittle, says that it was a mutual decision to part ways.) It’s now seeking replacements for him on the boards of 11 companies, including Cumulus Networks and R2 Semiconductor. In a statement, the firm said, “We didn’t learn about these claims until March 10th, after they were filed in court. We understand that these allegations of serious improprieties are unproven and unrelated to Sequoia. Nevertheless, we decided that Mike’s departure was the appropriate course of action.”

 

Goguen did not respond to a request to comment for this article, but in a post on LinkedIn on Saturday, he wrote: “My departure allows me to focus with full force on clearing my name and vigorously pursuing justice.”

 

 

 

Growing up in Bedford, Mass., Goguen loved going on hunting trips with his dad in the mountains of Maine despite temperatures that sometimes dropped to minus 10 degrees, according to an interview he gave to the Whitefish Pilot in 2012. The lanky teenager with a winning smile was attracted to highly technical engineering challenges and opted to pursue a degree in electrical engineering from Cornell University in 1986 before going on to earn his master’s in the same field from Stanford University. He didn’t go to business school or specialize in the high-octane networking that many other venture capitalist have perfected to build careers.

 

After Stanford, Goguen worked for a string of companies, including minicomputer maker Digital Equipment Corporation, which was acquired by Compaq and later merged with Hewlett-Packard. He also held positions at networking equipment company SynOptics Networking and Bay Networks—both also now defunct.

 

In 1996, when Goguen was 32, he joined Sequoia. One of the most respected venture firms in the world, Sequoia made a name for itself by backing Cisco, Apple, Google, and PayPal. The firm, which employs no female investing partners in the U.S., faced outrage on Twitter when, in December, Chairman Mike Moritz told Bloomberg TV that the firm wouldn’t lower its standards to hire a woman partner (he later amended his statement).

 

The partners are tight. They meet every Monday for sometimes as long as 12 hours, and they decide all matters as a group, unlike many firms where more senior partners have the final say. Although each partner has a focus, they are slow to take credit for delivering the outsize returns that make venture capital famous.

 

“Fame relates to a different personal need which I don’t think is very dominant around here,” Goguen told the Daily Deal in 2000. “Sequoia operates as a tightly integrated team as opposed to a loose collection of stars.” In his time at Sequoia, Goguen was a part of several major deals, including FireEye’s initial public offering and the acquisition of Virident Systems for $685 million.

 

The firm parted ways swiftly and completely, says a person familiar with the matter, because Goguen showed “poor judgment” in signing the contract and then keeping it a secret from the others. Secrecy from other partners is a decidedly un-Sequoia value.

 

 

 

In 1999, Goguen divorced his first wife Lynne Izicki, with whom he had two children. Goguen met Baptiste at Baby Dolls Saloon, a Dallas strip club where she was working, in 2002. They began spending time together, according to both Baptiste’s suit and Goguen’s countersuit.

 

Goguen married again. That marriage, to Melinda Rose, lasted a few years, and after it was over, Goguen remarried again. His third wife, Jordana Crisel Woodland, is an actress and entrepreneur who is the chief executive officer of lingerie company Naked Princess Worldwide. The pair, who have since divorced, have three children together.  

 

While juggling three wives, five kids, and at least a dozen board seats over 13 years, Goguen maintained a relationship with Baptiste. In his countersuit, Goguen says they got together only a few times a year, mostly at the behest of Baptiste; she says he begged to see her.

 

Goguen struggled to remain private. In her lawsuit, Baptiste alleges that during their relationship, Goguen used the name “Mark Smith” to conceal his identity. She also claims that in 2010 he requested Baptiste form two companies—Je Ne Se Que Enterprises LLC and charitable organization Every Girl Counts—so he could wire money directly to her without his wife knowing.

 

According to Baptiste’s civil suit and his countersuit, Goguen agreed to pay Baptiste to keep quiet and go away. Both agree that after a $10 million installment, Goguen didn’t want to hand over any more money. “Enough is enough,” Goguen said in his countersuit.

 

 

 

About a decade ago, Goguen built a private retreat on a hill in rural Montana overlooking Whitefish Lake and the Flathead Valley some 20 minutes from Glacier National Park. He named the place Two Bear Ranch and constructed a New England-style covered bridge over the railroad running along the lake to link his house with the beach. “It’s like a castle,” one worker on the house, Paul Krause, told the Missoula Independent in 2004, as locals traded rumors about who the mystery owner was.

 

Whitefish is a small mountain town, and it didn’t take residents long to get to know Goguen. Even among such celebrities as NFL quarterback Drew Bledsoe, actor Jim Nabors (aka Gomer Pyle), and singer Justin Bieber, who are frequent visitors, Goguen stood out. Over the years, he gave tens of millions to local charities, supporting public trails, a fitness center, a music school, skateboard park, food bank, and a saloon in the heart of downtown.  

 

“He’s a great asset for the Whitefish community,” then-governor Brian Schweitzer told the Flathead Beacon, a Montana newspaper, in 2012, after Goguen donated more than $10 million to a state land trust and spent about the same amount to create a high-end helicopter search-and-rescue program for the community. “I’m proud that I know him as a friend, and I’m proud that I know him as a neighbor.” Schweitzer did not respond to a request to comment for this article.

 

Jordan White, a longtime backcountry coroner who now runs Two Bear Air, said on Tuesday that the helicopter donation was unprecedented. “It changed the course of our community and our state,” he said.

 

Goguen has also been a big political donor, giving more than $250,000 into the super-PAC backing John Kasich’s presidential bid and another $90,000 to other Republican campaigns. On Tuesday, the super-PAC, New Day for America, told Yahoo News the money would be donated to charity.

 

Goguen, White said, is just a “normal guy” who “dresses the same and drives the same car” as anyone else in town. In Whitefish, Goguen said in 2012, “It’s easy to forget the external stresses or problems you’re wrestling with in day-to-day life.”

 

(A previous version of this story was corrected in the ninth paragraph to show that Sequoia Capital has no female investment partners in the U.S.)

 

Horrific Google Anal Sex Slave Case Uncovers Twisted Perversions Of Google Executives

 

 

 

By Samantha Conners – APT

 

 

 

Michael Goguen, Google’s married senior investor, “sexually and physically” abused Amber Laurel Baptiste with constant anal sex over more than 13 years after picking her up at a Texas strip club. His company: Sequoia Capital, has had other run-ins with cheating married executives, escorts and tax evasion schemes, per legal filings.

 

Eric Schmidt, the head of Google, proclaimed that he would have a “open marriage” where he could have sex any time, with anybody, and is documented in a ream of news articles and video regarding his fifteen million dollar “sex penthouse” in New York.

 

Sergey Brin, another head of Google, is featured in numerous news articles for his “three way sex romp” with multiple Google employees forcing one employee to move to China to escape him.

 

A married Google senior executive named Hayes, who helped rig Google’s searches for political clients, was murdered on his “sex yacht” by his prostitute, which other Google executives had used.

 

Ravi Kumar, another VC associated with Google Executives, was also murdered by a pack of hookers and pimps that frequented his Silicon Valley home.

 

Valley Girls was a private escort service that used Stanford Co-eds to service the sexual kinks of Google executives.

 

Ellen Pao famously sued Google founding investor John Doerr, and his company Kleiner Perkins, for sexual abuse.

 

Google employee divorce filings hold the Silicon Valley record for use of the word “abuse” as one of the reasons given in the legal papers filed to initiate the divorce.

 

The list of kinky, twisted, bizarre sexual antics of Google executives, and their investors, goes on for pages and pages…

 

Google seems to attract the most twisted, perverted, morally decrepit men in the world.

 

One has to wonder why, of all the large companies on Earth, only Google got to place the majority of it’s people in the White House? That’s right, Nike doesn’t have it’s people in the White House. Macy’s doesn’t either. Neither does Chevron, or John Deere tractor or any other company on Earth.

 

Only Google, exclusively and uniquely, had all of their people placed in the White House and top federal agency lead positions. What’s up with that? Were they selected because of their technical skills or their ability to make people bend over?

 

An addiction to dirty sexual perversions are not the only illicit trends that Google folks display. The Google investors are members of a financing cartel called the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA). This group of frat boy elitists got busted for running the “Angelgate” scandal in which they were documented rigging, colluding, black-listing and contriving the whole Silicon Valley start-up industry.

 

Then they were caught again when Eric Schmidt, Mr. “Sex Penthouse” and the head of Google, wrote emails ordering a conspiracy against Silicon Valley engineers. This “No Poaching” conspiracy got the Silicon Valley VC’s sued in a class-action lawsuit, which the VC’s lost. The Google founder’s best friend: Jacques Littlefield, kept the world’s largest private fully functional military tank squadron, in fully operational status, hidden in vast warehouses in his Silicon Valley estate in Woodside, California. He said he had this arsenal: “just in case”. Does Google make white frat house men insane or does it draw the crazy ones to it?

 

The FBI is finally crunching down on these people. After so many years of the White House ordering the FBI to leave the Google VC’s and Silicon Valley perverts alone, it was just getting plain embarrassing for the FBI. The audacious impunity with which Google, and it’s friends, engaged in tax evasion, importing hookers, bribery, stock market rigging, anti-trust schemes and other crimes has become so overt, in the media, that it was created a spotlight on federal law enforcements avoidance of prosecution of the shenanigans of the Google crowd.

 

 

 

 

<

p style=”margin-bottom:0;line-height:100%;”> 

 

Are Elon Musk’s Crimes Being Covered-Up On Orders From The White House?

Are Elon Musk’s Crimes Being Covered-Up On Orders From The White House?

IS ELON MUSK A MOBSTER AND POLITICAL CORRUPTION RACKETEER?

Numerous parties would like this answered, in public, in front of a Grand Jury, A DOJ Special Prosecutor and a public federal court trial, but Elon Musk has spent vast amounts of money in order to delay the justice system from bring him to such a hearing.

The Following inquiries, though, should serve to resolve the issue.

All of the following questions have now been FAXED, EMAILED, U.S. POSTAL SERVICED MAILED to Elon Musk at his homes and offices and to the corporate offices of the companies and U.S. Senators that he owns. He is now fully aware that answers for each of the following questions is required from him. It is no longer possible for him to not have immediate answers to these questions should you encounter him in-person, at a conference or in a broadcast news interview.

If you see him, ask him: “Elon…

  1. Did Senator Dianne Feinstein ever have a personal meeting with you?
  2. Did you or your staff ever promise, or deliver, any favors or items of value to Senator Dianne Feinstein
  3. Did you or your staff ever promise, or deliver, any favors or items of value to Senator Harry Reid?
  4. Have you, or any family members or friends ever placed money in a family trust fund that originally came from the U.S. Treasury?
  5. Had you ever met Steven Chu, Steve Spinner, Alison Spinner, Matt Rogers or Jonathan Silver before they were appointed to run the U.S. Department of Energy?
  6. Did you ever say, in a recorded conversation, that the NUMMI factory made no sense for Tesla to occupy?
  7. What is your relationship with Richard Blum, the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein and his real estate company CBRE?
  8. When your Tesla and Powerwall batteries explode, do they release any toxic fumes? How many different kinds of toxic fumes do they release? In what year were you aware of these toxic fumes. Did your employee: Bernard Tse, ever warn you about these toxic fumes?
  9. Did you, or your associates ever benefit from lithium mining in the Afghanistan War?
  10. Did three of your employees suddenly die in a plane crash? What engineering information did they have about Tesla Motors?
  11. Did your patent filings include any language which specifically and intimately disclosed the deadly danger of your batteries? Please quote those paragraphs from your very own patent filings that you were forced to give away for free because they were rendered value-less by those disclosures?
  12. The news stories said that, even though you were a billionaire, you got over thirty billion dollars in taxpayer-funded handouts from California and Federal government officials in hard cash, tax waivers, free NASA buildings, government jet fuel, credits, stock market pumps and other things; Did you get all of this free cash in exchange for conduit-ing campaign funding for Obama, Reid and Feinstein?
  13. Were you involved in the death of your competitor: Gary D. Conley?
  14. Does Google rig search engine results about you because they covertly co-own some of your assets? Do Twitter and Google hype up PR aggrandizement about you and hide negative news stories about you?
  15. Have you hidden money from state and federal tax collection in off-shore tax evasion schemes?
  16. Do you hire troll-farms, click-farms and meat-puppet fake bloggers to write self-glory statements about you on reddit, twitter, facebook and other social media?
  17. Have Tesla’s killed anybody? How many people have died in, or near a Tesla, ever? Do you run cover-ups about the deaths?
  18. Why was Tesla located on the same geological land, next door to, FBI-raided Solyndra?
     
    ….(More questions to be added, as submitted, and hot-linked to back-ground details, as they come in…)

APPLE Tells DOJ/White House to Put it Where the Sun Don’t Shine

Apple’s Response To DOJ: Your Filing Is Full Of Blatantly Misleading Claims And Outright Falsehoods

from the no-love-lost dept – TECH DIRT

As expected, Apple has now responded to the DOJ in the case about whether or not it can be forced to write code to break its own security features to help the FBI access the encrypted work iPhone of Syed Farook, one of the San Bernardino attackers. As we noted, the DOJ’s filing was chock-full of blatantly misleading claims, and Apple was flabbergasted by just how ridiculous that filing was. That comes through in this response.

The government attempts to rewrite history by portraying the Act as an all-powerful magic wand rather than the limited procedural tool it is. As theorized by the government, the Act can authorize any and all relief except in two situations: (1) where Congress enacts a specific statute prohibiting the precise action (i.e., says a court may not “order a smartphone manufacturer to remove barriers to accessing stored data on a particular smartphone,” … or (2) where the government seeks to “arbitrarily dragoon[]” or “forcibly deputize[]” “random citizens” off the street…. Thus, according to the government, short of kidnapping or breaking an express law, the courts can order private parties to do virtually anything the Justice Department and FBI can dream up. The Founders would be appalled.

The Founders would be appalled. That’s quite a statement.

Apple also slams the DOJ for insisting that this really is all about the one iPhone and that the court should ignore the wider precedent, citing FBI Director James Comey’s own statements:

It has become crystal clear that this case is not about a “modest” order and a “single iPhone,” Opp. 1, as the FBI Director himself admitted when testifying before Congress two weeks ago. Ex. EE at 35 [FBI Director James Comey, Encryption Hr’g] (“[T]he broader question we’re talking about here goes far beyond phones or far beyond any case. This collision between public safety and privacy—the courts cannot resolve that.”). Instead, this case hinges on a contentious policy issue about how society should weigh what law enforcement officials want against the widespread repercussions and serious risks their demands would create. “Democracies resolve such tensions through robust debate” among the people and their elected representatives, Dkt. 16-8 [Comey, Going Dark], not through an unprecedented All Writs Act proceeding.

Apple then, repeatedly, points out where the DOJ selectively quoted, misquoted or misleadingly quoted arguments in its favor. For example:

The government misquotes Bank of the United States v. Halstead,…, for the proposition that “‘[t]he operation of [the Act]’” should not be limited “‘to that which it would have had in the year 1789.’” … (misquoting Halstead, 23 U.S. (10 Wheat.) at 62) (alterations are the government’s). But what the Court actually said was that the “operation of an execution”—the ancient common law writ of “venditioni exponas”—is not limited to that “which it would have had in the year 1789.” … see also… (“That executions are among the writs hereby authorized to be issued, cannot admit of a doubt . . . .”). The narrow holding of Halstead was that the Act (and the Process Act of 1792) allowed courts “to alter the form of the process of execution.” … (courts are not limited to the form of the writ of execution “in use in the Supreme Courts of the several States in the year 1789”). The limited “power given to the Courts over their process is no more than authorizing them to regulate and direct the conduct of the Marshal, in the execution of the process.”

The authority to alter the process by which courts issue traditional common law writs is not authority to invent entirely new writs with no common law analog. But that is precisely what the government is asking this Court to do: The Order requiring Apple to create software so that the FBI can hack into the iPhone has no common law analog.

The filing then goes step by step in pointing out how the government is wrong about almost everything. The DOJ, for example, kept insisting that CALEA doesn’t apply at all to Apple, but Apple points out that the DOJ just seems to be totally misreading the law:

Contrary to the government’s assertion that its request merely “brush[es] up against similar issues” to CALEA…, CALEA, in fact, has three critical limitations—two of which the government ignores entirely—that preclude the relief the government seeks…. First, CALEA prohibits law enforcement agencies from requiring “electronic communication service” providers to adopt “any specific design of equipment, facilities, services, features, or system configurations . . . .” The term “electronic communication service” provider is broadly defined to encompass Apple. … (“any service which provides to users thereof the ability to send or receive wire or electronic communications”). Apple is an “electronic communication services” provider for purposes of the very services at issue here because Apple’s software allows users to “send or receive . . . communications” between iPhones through features such as iMessage and Mail….

The government acknowledges that FaceTime and iMessage are electronic communication services, but asserts that this fact is irrelevant because “the Court’s order does not bear at all upon the operation of those programs.” … Not so. The passcode Apple is being asked to circumvent is a feature of the same Apple iOS that runs FaceTime, iMessage, and Mail, because an integral part of providing those services is enabling the phone’s owner to password-protect the private information contained within those communications. More importantly, the very communications to which law enforcement seeks access are the iMessage communications stored on the phone…. And, only a few pages after asserting that “the Court’s order does not bear at all upon the operation of” FaceTime and iMessage for purposes of the CALEA analysis…, the government spends several pages seeking to justify the Court’s order based on those very same programs, arguing that they render Apple “intimately close” to the crime for purposes of the New York Telephone analysis.

Second, the government does not dispute, or even discuss, that CALEA excludes “information services” providers from the scope of its mandatory assistance provisions…. Apple is indisputably an information services provider given the features of iOS, including Facetime, iMessage, and Mail….

Finally, CALEA makes clear that even telecommunications carriers (a category of providers subject to more intrusive requirements under CALEA, but which Apple is not) cannot be required to “ensure the government’s ability” to decrypt or to create decryption programs the company does not already “possess.”… If companies subject to CALEA’s obligations cannot be required to bear this burden, Congress surely did not intend to allow parties specifically exempted by CALEA (such as Apple) to be subjected to it. The government fails to address this truism.

Next, Apple rebuts the DOJ saying that since CALEA doesn’t address this specific situation, that means Congress is just leaving it up to the courts to use the All Writs Act. As Apple points out, in some cases, Congress not doing something doesn’t mean it rejected certain positions, but in this case, the legislative history is quite clear that Congress did not intend for companies to be forced to help in this manner.

Here, Congress chose to require limited third-party assistance in certain statutes designed to aid law enforcement in gathering electronic evidence (although none as expansive as what the government seeks here), but it has declined to include similar provisions in other statutes, despite vigorous lobbying by law enforcement and notwithstanding its “prolonged and acute awareness of so important an issue” as the one presented here…. Accordingly, the lack of statutory authorization in CALEA or any of the complementary statutes in the “comprehensive federal scheme” of surveillance and telecommunications law speaks volumes…. To that end, Congress chose to “greatly narrow[]” the “scope of [CALEA],” which ran contrary to the FBI’s interests but was “important from a privacy standpoint.” … Indeed, CALEA’s provisions were drafted to “limit[] the scope of [industry’s] assistance requirements in several important ways.”….

That the Executive Branch recently abandoned plans to seek legislation expanding CALEA’s reach… provides renewed confirmation that Congress has not acceded to the FBI’s wishes, and belies the government’s view that it has possessed such authority under the All Writs Act since 1789.

In fact, in a footnote, Apple goes even further in not just blasting the DOJ’s suggestion that Congress didn’t really consider a legislative proposal to update CALEA to suck in requirements for internet communications companies, but also highlighting the infamous quote from top intelligence community lawyer Robert Litt about how they’d just wait for the next terrorist attack and get the law passed in their favor at that point.

The government’s attempts to minimize CALEA II, saying its plans consisted of “mere[] vague discussions” that never developed into a formal legislative submission …, but federal officials familiar with that failed lobbying effort confirmed that the FBI had in fact developed a “draft proposal” containing a web of detailed provisions, including specific fines and compliance timelines, and had floated that proposal with the White House….. As The Washington Post reported, advocates of the proposal within the government dropped the effort, because they determined they could not get what they wanted from Congress at that time: “Although ‘the legislative environment is very hostile today,’ the intelligence community’s top lawyer, Robert S. Litt, said to colleagues in an August [2015] e-mail, which was obtained by The Post, ‘it could turn in the event of a terrorist attack or criminal event where strong encryption can be shown to have hindered law enforcement.’ There is value, he said, in ‘keeping our options open for such a situation.’”

Next Apple goes through the arguments for saying that, even if the All Writs Act does apply, and even if the court accepts the DOJ’s made up three factor test, Apple should still prevail. It notes, again, that it is “far removed” from the issue and reminds the court that the order sought here is very different from past cases where Apple has cooperated:

The government argues that “courts have already issued AWA orders” requiring manufacturers to “unlock” phones … but those cases involved orders requiring “unlocking” assistance to provide access through existing means, not the extraordinary remedy sought here, i.e., an order that requires creating new software to undermine the phones’ (or in the Blake case, the iPad’s) security safeguards.

It also mocks that weird argument from the DOJ that said because Apple “licenses” rather than “sells” its software, that means Apple is more closely tied to the case:

The government discusses Apple’s software licensing and data policies at length, equating Apple to a feudal lord demanding fealty from its customers (“suzerainty”). … But the government does not cite any authority, and none exists, suggesting that the design features and software that exist on every iPhone somehow link Apple to the subject phone and the crime. Likewise, the government has cited no case holding that a license to use a product constituted a sufficient connection under New York Telephone. Indeed, under the government’s theory, any ongoing postpurchase connection between a manufacturer or service provider and a consumer suffices to connect the two in perpetuity—even where, as here, the data on the iPhone is inaccessible to Apple.

From there, Apple dives in on the question of how much of a “burden” this would be. This is the issue that Judge Pym has indicated she’s most interested in, and Apple goes deep here — again and again focusing on how the DOJ was blatantly misleading in its motion:

Forcing Apple to create new software that degrades its security features is unprecedented and unlike any burden ever imposed under the All Writs Act. The government’s assertion that the phone companies in Mountain Bell and In re Application of the U.S. for an Order Authorizing the Installation of a Pen Register or Touch-Tone Decoder and a Terminating Trap …, were conscripted to “write” code, akin to the request here… mischaracterizes the actual assistance required in those cases. The government seizes on the word “programmed” in those cases and superficially equates it to the process of creating new software….. But the “programming” in those cases—back in 1979 and 1980—consisted of a “technician” using a “teletypewriter” in Mountain Bell …, and “t[ook] less than one minute” in Penn Bell… Indeed, in Mountain Bell, the government itself stated that the only burden imposed “was a large number of print-outs on the teletype machine”—not creating new code….. More importantly, the phone companies already had and themselves used the tracing capabilities the government wanted to access…. And although relying heavily on Mountain Bell, the government neglects to point out the court’s explicit warning that “[t]his holding is a narrow one, and our decision today should not be read to authorize the wholesale imposition upon private, third parties of duties pursuant to search warrants.” …This case stands light years from Mountain Bell. The government seeks to commandeer Apple to design, create, test, and validate a new operating system that does not exist, and that Apple believes—with overwhelming support from the technology community and security experts—is too dangerous to create.

Seeking to belittle this widely accepted policy position, the government grossly mischaracterizes Apple’s objection to the requested Order as a concern that “compliance will tarnish its brand”…, a mischaracterization that both the FBI Director and the courts have flatly rejected. [See Comey] (“I don’t question [Apple’s] motive”);… (disagreeing “with the government’s contention that Apple’s objection [to being compelled to decrypt an iPhone] is not ‘conscientious’ but merely a matter of ‘its concern with public relations’”). As Apple explained in its Motion, Apple prioritizes the security and privacy of its users, and that priority is reflected in Apple’s increasingly secure operating systems, in which Apple has chosen not to create a back door.

Apple also calls out the DOJ’s technical ignorance.

The government’s assertion that “there is no reason to think that the code Apple writes in compliance with the Order will ever leave Apple’s possession” … simply shows the government misunderstands the technology and the nature of the cyber-threat landscape. As Apple engineer Erik Neuenschwander states:

I believe that Apple’s iOS platform is the most-attacked software platform in existence. Each time Apple closes one vulnerability, attackers work to find another. This is a constant and never-ending battle. Mr. Perino’s description of third-party efforts to circumvent Apple’s security demonstrates this point. And the protections that the government now asks Apple to compromise are the most security-critical software component of the iPhone—any vulnerability or back door, whether introduced intentionally or unintentionally, can represent a risk to all users of Apple devices simultaneously.

… The government is also mistaken in claiming that the crippled iOS it wants Apple to build can only be used on one iPhone:

Mr. Perino’s characterization of Apple’s process . . . is inaccurate. Apple does not create hundreds of millions of operating systems each tailored to an individual device. Each time Apple releases a new operating system, that operating system is the same for every device of a given model. The operating system then gets a personalized signature specific to each device. This personalization occurs as part of the installation process after the iOS is created.

Once GovtOS is created, personalizing it to a new device becomes a simple process. If Apple were forced to create GovtOS for installation on the device at issue in this case, it would likely take only minutes for Apple, or a malicious actor with sufficient access, to perform the necessary engineering work to install it on another device of the same model.

. . . [T]he initial creation of GovtOS itself creates serious ongoing burdens and risks. This includes the risk that if the ability to install GovtOS got into the wrong hands, it would open a significant new avenue of attack, undermining the security protections that Apple has spent years developing to protect its customers.

And, not surprisingly, Apple angrily attacks the DOJ’s bogus misleading use of Apple’s transparency report statements about responding to lawaful requests for government information in China, by pointing out how that’s quite different than this situation:

Finally, the government attempts to disclaim the obvious international implications of its demand, asserting that any pressure to hand over the same software to foreign agents “flows from [Apple’s] decision to do business in foreign countries . . . .”. Contrary to the government’s misleading statistics …, which had to do with lawful process and did not compel the creation of software that undermines the security of its users, Apple has never built a back door of any kind into iOS, or otherwise made data stored on the iPhone or in iCloud more technically accessible to any country’s government…. The government is wrong in asserting that Apple made “special accommodations” for China, as Apple uses the same security protocols everywhere in the world and follows the same standards for responding to law enforcement requests.

Apple also points out that the FBI appears to be contradicting itself as well:

Moreover, while they now argue that the FBI’s changing of the iCloud passcode—which ended any hope of backing up the phone’s data and accessing it via iCloud—“was the reasoned decision of experienced FBI agents”, the FBI Director himself admitted to Congress under oath that the decision was a “mistake”…. The Justice Department’s shifting, contradictory positions on this issue—first blaming the passcode change on the County, then admitting that the FBI told the County to change the passcode after the County objected to being blamed for doing so, and now trying to justify the decision in the face of Director Comey’s admission that it was a mistake—discredits any notion that the government properly exhausted all viable investigative alternatives before seeking this extraordinary order from this Court.

On the Constitutional questions, again Apple points out that the DOJ doesn’t appear to understand what it’s talking about:

The government begins its First Amendment analysis by suggesting that “[t]here is reason to doubt that functional programming is even entitled to traditional speech protections” … , evincing its confusion over the technology it demands Apple create. Even assuming there is such a thing as purely functional code, creating the type of software demanded here, an operating system that has never existed before, would necessarily involve precisely the kind of expression of ideas and concepts protected by the First Amendment. Because writing code requires a choice of (1) language, (2) audience, and (3) syntax and vocabulary, as well as the creation of (4) data structures, (5) algorithms to manipulate and transform data, (6) detailed textual descriptions explaining what code is doing, and (7) methods of communicating information to the user, “[t]here are a number of ways to write code to accomplish a given task.”… As such, code falls squarely within the First Amendment’s protection, as even the cases cited by the government acknowledge…

Later it points out that the DOJ’s claim that since Apple can write such code however it wants it’s not compelled speech, Apple points out that their argument says the exact opposite:

The government attempts to evade this unavoidable conclusion by insisting that, “[t]o the extent [that] Apple’s software includes expressive elements . . . the Order permits Apple to express whatever it wants, so long as the software functions” by allowing it to hack into iPhones…. This serves only to illuminate the broader speech implications of the government’s request. The code that the government is asking the Court to force Apple to write contains an extra layer of expression unique to this case. When Apple designed iOS 8, it consciously took a position on an issue of public importance…. The government disagrees with Apple’s position and asks this Court to compel Apple to write new code that reflects its own viewpoint—a viewpoint that is deeply offensive to Apple.

The filing is basically Apple, over and over again, saying, “uh, what the DOJ said was wrong, clueless, technically ignorant, or purposely misleading.” Hell, they even attack the DOJ’s claim that the All Writs Act was used back in 1807 to force Aaron Burr’s secretary to decrypt one of Burr’s cipher-protected letters. Apple points out that the DOJ is lying.

The government contends that Chief Justice Marshall once ordered a third party to “provide decryption services” to the government…. He did nothing of the sort, and the All Writs Act was not even at issue in Burr. In that case, Aaron Burr’s secretary declined to state whether he “understood” the contents of a certain letter written in cipher, on the ground that he might incriminate himself…. The Court held that the clerk’s answer as to whether he understood the cipher could not incriminate him, and the Court thus held that “the witness may answer the question now propounded”—i.e., whether he understood the letter…. The Court did not require the clerk to decipher the letter.

If anything, to be honest, I’m surprised that Apple didn’t go even harder on the DOJ for misrepresenting things. Either way, Apple is pretty clearly highlighting just how desperate the DOJ seems in this case.

Document
Pages
Text
Zoom
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

Featured

IS ELON MUSK A MOBSTER AND POLITICAL CORRUPTION RACKETEER?

Numerous parties would like this answered, in public, in front of a Grand Jury, A DOJ Special Prosecutor and a public federal court trial, but Elon Musk has spent vast amounts of money in order to delay the justice system from bring him to such a hearing.

The Following inquiries, though, should serve to resolve the issue.

All of the following questions have now been FAXED, EMAILED, U.S. POSTAL SERVICED MAILED to Elon Musk at his homes and offices and to the corporate offices of the companies and U.S. Senators that he owns. He is now fully aware that answers for each of the following questions is required from him. It is no longer possible for him to not have immediate answers to these questions should you encounter him in-person, at a conference or in a broadcast news interview.

If you see him, ask him: “Elon…
  1. Why was Tesla located on the same geological land, next door to, FBI-raided Solyndra?
  2. Did Senator Dianne Feinstein ever have a personal meeting with you?
  3. Did you or your staff ever promise, or deliver, any favors or items of value to Senator Dianne Feinstein
  4. Did you or your staff ever promise, or deliver, any favors or items of value to Senator Harry Reid?
  5. Have you, or any family members or friends ever placed money in a family trust fund that originally came from the U.S. Treasury?
  6. Had you ever met Steven Chu, Steve Spinner, Alison Spinner, Matt Rogers or Jonathan Silver before they were appointed to run the U.S. Department of Energy?
  7. Did you ever say, in a recorded conversation, that the NUMMI factory made no sense for Tesla to occupy?
  8. What is your relationship with Richard Blum, the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein and his real estate company CBRE?
  9. When your Tesla and Powerwall batteries explode, do they release any toxic fumes? How many different kinds of toxic fumes do they release? In what year were you aware of these toxic fumes. Did your employee: Bernard Tse, ever warn you about these toxic fumes?
  10. Did you, or your associates ever benefit from lithium mining in the Afghanistan War?
  11. Did three of your employees suddenly die in a plane crash? What engineering information did they have about Tesla Motors?
  12. Did your patent filings include any language which specifically and intimately disclosed the deadly danger of your batteries? Please quote those paragraphs from your very own patent filings that you were forced to give away for free because they were rendered value-less by those disclosures?
  13. The news stories said that, even though you were a billionaire, you got over thirty billion dollars in taxpayer-funded handouts from California and Federal government officials in hard cash, tax waivers, free NASA buildings, government jet fuel, credits, stock market pumps and other things; Did you get all of this free cash in exchange for conduit-ing campaign funding for Obama, Reid and Feinstein?
  14. Were you involved in the death of your competitor: Gary D. Conley?
  15. Does Google rig search engine results about you because they covertly co-own some of your assets? Do Twitter and Google hype up PR aggrandizement about you and hide negative news stories about you?
  16. Have you hidden money from state and federal tax collection in off-shore tax evasion schemes?
  17. Do you hire troll-farms, click-farms and meat-puppet fake bloggers to write self-glory statements about you on reddit, twitter, facebook and other social media?
  18. Have Tesla’s killed anybody? How many people have died in, or near a Tesla, ever? Do you run cover-ups about the deaths?

 

….(More questions to be added, as submitted, and hot-linked to back-ground details, as they come in…)

 

DOES GOOGLE BRIBE POLITICIANS TO GIVE IT FREE GOVERNMENT HAND OUTS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE?

ERIC-SCHMIDT-CONNECTIONS

DOES GOOGLE BRIBE POLITICIANS TO GIVE IT FREE GOVERNMENT HAND OUTS AT TAXPAYER EXPENSE?

Google is now the world’s largest private government and it has more power than the U.S. Government

Google’s worldwide web of tax loopholes: Osborne under fire as Google is set to pay THREE times as much tax in France – even though it employs thousands more people and does more business in Britain

  • Government accused of agreeing ‘derisory’ £130m tax deal with Google
  • Google set to pay £380m in France despite UK being its largest base
  • French officials refusing to allow sales to be funneled via Dublin not Paris
  • But HMRC’s ‘sweetheart deal’ backs Google’s claim it has no fixed UK base
  • George Osborne had hailed £130m deal as a ‘victory for the taxpayer’
  • But Downing Street and MPs have distanced themselves from his claims

By Martin Robinson, Uk Chief Reporter and Lucy Crossley for MailOnline and Jason Groves – Deputy Political Editor, Daily Mail

 

 

+18

Google is set to pay three times more back tax to France than the UK, despite making three times as much money and employing four times more staff in its British outpost (pictured)

The Government was today accused of gross incompetence after agreeing Google could pay £130milllion in tax even though the web giant is about to hand over three times more in France.

Aggressive French officials are close to getting £380million from Google even though Britain is its biggest market outside the US and employs thousands more people than in France.

Paris tax bosses have refused to accept Google’s ploy of funnelling its international sales via Dublin to benefit from Ireland’s lower tax rate.

George Osborne hailed the £130million deal as a ‘victory’ for the taxpayer but critics branded it ‘derisory’ because Google has made around £6billion in profit in the UK in the past decade.

Yesterday even Downing Street distanced itself from the Chancellor’s claims and the agreement is now going to be subject to three inquiries.

Both Google and HM Revenue and Customs are now set to be hauled in front of MPs to explain the deal, after the Commons public accounts committee and the Treasury committee last night launched separate inquiries.

Sources at the National Audit Office revealed they are also poised to investigate the deal.

HMRC officials have taken six years to get the the internet giant to pay back just £130million to cover a decade of back-taxes.

This means they have been taxed at a rate that may be as low as 3 per cent – although the Government is still refusing to disclose what they charged them for ‘confidentiality’ reasons, minister David Gauke said yesterday.

Experts have claimed the bill should be closer to £200million a year.

Meg Hillier, who chairs the Commons public accounts committee, said it was just a ‘cosy deal’, adding: ‘It beggars belief that they didn’t challenge that basic question (of no fixed base). It underlines my real concerns about HMRC not keeping up with the big guys.’

But the French authorities have been aggressively chasing Google for more than 500million euros, furious at the tax avoidance ploy used by the firm, which registered all European sales in Dublin and benefitted from the lower tax rate in Ireland.

‘We have a hard time believing that some 150 well-paid salespeople with advanced degrees employed by one particular company in France are nothing more than busboys for Ireland,’  a French official said last year, according to The Times. Italy is also reportedly demanding £1billion from Google.

Google uses a complicated web of businesses across the globe to reduce its tax bill and still claims it has no ‘fixed base’ in the UK despite its plans for a £1billion central London office housing up to 5,000 staff. Currently its thousands of UK employees are split between two offices.

 

+18

HQ: This is Google’s UK reception at one of its central London offices, where thousands are employed, but it insists that it has no ‘fixed base’ in Britain

 

+18

French authorities have been aggressively chasing Google for more than 500 Euros, furious at the tax avoidance ploy used by the firm, which registered all European sales in Dublin and benefitted from the lower tax rate in Ireland. Pictured is Google’s office in Paris

HOW GOOGLE FUNNELS ITS MONEY VIA A WEB OF COMPANIES TO SHRINK ITS TAX BILL

 

+18

Web: This is Google’s complicated web of holding companies that allows the web giant to reduce its international tax bill. Google US has set up two Irish companies, one of which is based in Bermuda, with a middle company in the Netherlands. The network allows revenue from around the world to be sent back to Bermuda via Ireland and Holland, with their generous tax rates, allowing Google to reduce its tax bill

Google manages to reduce its tax bill by using a set of subsidiary companies across the globe.

The network – nicknamed the ‘Double Irish and Dutch Sandwich’ – is hugely controversial but totally legal.

Google moved its headquarters for Europe, the Middle East and Africa to Ireland in 2008 to benefit from the country’s lower tax rate on profits.

In Britain, its biggest market outside the US, Google is classified as having no ‘fixed base’ so none of its sales are technically made in the UK.

It means when a British company buys a Google advert for the UK, for example, the money goes straight to Dublin, meaning it pays little tax to the UK Treasury.

After paying Ireland’s lower corporation tax rate of 12.5%, international profits are then funnelled via Google Netherlands Holdings, taking advantage of generous tax laws there.

The profits are then sent to Google’s main overseas company, another Irish business domiciled in Bermuda – where the corporation tax rate is zero.

This complicated arrangement is explained by experts as the Double Irish and Dutch Sandwich – with the Irish businesses being the bread and the Dutch subsidiary being its filling.

It means that Google’s overseas tax rate on all its profits falls to around five per cent when in the UK it would have to pay 20 per cent.

Though this process has been branded ‘immoral’ by MPs, it is not illegal and Google says it has abided by international tax rules.

The company also says its Bermuda operation does not impact the tax it pays in the UK.

Executives say the reported UK profit margins are far below the group average because most of its algorithms and codes, which drive the company’s profits, are developed outside the country.

Google still pays the majority of its taxes in America, but on its American profits only.

 

Google’s sales were valued at £3.8 billion in Britain during 2013 but it paid just £20.4 million in UK taxes that year. Between 2006 and 2011 the company’s revenue in the UK hit around £12.6 billion but its corporation tax payments for the period totalled £11.2 million

Its tax set-up allows the business to send UK sales revenue through an Irish subsidiary and legally avoid corporation tax in Britain.

That cash is then funneled via Holland, which offers a tax break too, and on to a holding company in Bermuda, which has a zero rate of corporation tax.

Money from all of Google’s international businesses is sent to Bermuda in the same way.

MPs on all sides demanded further action to extract tax from Google and other giant corporations like Apple, Starbucks, Amazon and Facebook that make huge sums in the UK but pay little or no tax.

The Times has also reported that HMRC officials failed to question Google’s claim that it had no ‘permanent establishment’ in the UK.

This enabled the company to avoid paying millions in UK corporation tax, by booking sales through Ireland, with the profits then diverted to Bermuda – one of the world’s biggest tax havens.

Britain is Google’s biggest foreign market, and the UK wing has four times as many staff as Google France.

Tax expert Steve Lewis, who featured in the BBC Two show The Town That Took on the Taxman where locals took their businesses offshire, branded the situation ‘ridiculous’.

He said: ‘Google must have been over the moon with how lightly it got off. They probably thought all their Christmases and New Years had come at once.

‘If you look at their turnover for the UK it is eight figures – the money they should pay back should have been around £1 billion, not £130 million.

 

+18

George Osborne, pictured, is facing three inquiries over his deal with Google that will see the internet giant pay £130m to cover a decade of back-taxes

‘If a small firm makes an error with its tax return there’s no tolerance whatsoever. You’re not in any position to negotiate – you have to pay the fine plus interest.’

Mr Osborne has faced a barrage of criticism over the deal with HMRC, which covers money owed since 2005.

And even Downing Street yesterday distanced itself from Mr Osborne’s claim that the agreement was a ‘victory’ for the taxpayer, as Tory MPs queued up to demand further action to extract tax from Google and other giant corporations that contribute little or nothing in the UK.

Treasury committee chairman Andrew Tyrie said tax law had become a ‘piece of elastic’ that allowed corporations to get away with paying almost nothing.

He said: ‘The complexity of tax law is turning what should be a straightforward principle – that everybody should pay the correct amount of tax – into a piece of elastic. For corporation tax the problem is exacerbated by the globalisation of economic activity and any liability to tax that accompanies it.’

Labour said the deal set a dangerous precedent, and asked why ministers were settling for so little, when Italy was demanding £1billion from Google.

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell said analysis by experts suggested ‘the effective rate of tax faced by Google is around 3 per cent’ – against the current corporation tax rate of 20 per cent.

Treasury minister David Gauke dismissed the figure, saying Google was paying a higher rate of tax on its profits in the UK. But he flatly refused to tell MPs what the real rate was, or how it had been calculated.

Labour MP Rachel Reeves, a member of the Treasury committee, said the deal was an insult to taxpayers. She added: ‘A lot of people are struggling to fill out their tax returns right now – they can’t go and have a word with HMRC and say, ‘I think I’ll just pay £1,000 this year.’ They have to pay their fair share.’

The deal with Google announced on Friday covers a period dating back to 2005. Mr Osborne hailed it as ‘a victory for the action we’ve taken’.

+18

Google has agreed to pay just £130million in taxes dating back to 2005. The amount was branded ‘derisory’ in light of the fact that the firm racked up sales of £4.5billion in Britain in 2014 alone

Downing Street today played down reports that it was distancing itself from the Chancellor, who had described the deal as a ‘victory’ and a ‘major success’.

‘The Prime Minister and the Chancellor are of the same mind on this,’ a Downing Street spokesman said. ‘This was a good deal. There is no difference in the position – the Prime Minister and Chancellor’s view on this is the same.’

OTHER GIANTS IN THE DOCK: MAJOR FIRMS AND CORPORATION TAX 

Facebook: The social media titan paid just £4,327 in corporation tax in 2014, despite reporting UK revenues of £105million.

Apple: The US-based technology firm behind the iPad and the iPhone made £34billion in profit during the year to September 2014.

Experts estimate that the UK accounted for £1.9billion of that profit, but the firm only paid £11.8million in British corporation tax.

Amazon: The online shopping giant took £5.3billion in sales from British shoppers in 2014 but paid just £11.9million in tax after announcing profits of £34.4million.

Starbucks: The coffee chain paid just £8.6million of tax over 14 years between 1998 and 2012 when sales totalled £3billion.

But latest company filings show it paid £8.1million in corporation tax for last year on profits of £34.2million.

The spokesman said the tax settlement was agreed with Google by HMRC, adding: ‘No ministers were involved in agreeing this deal. It is done by HMRC on an operational basis.’

He added: ‘The key point on this is that HMRC is satisfied with the tax due and what it has collected.’

The spokesman said he was aware of ‘speculation’ that France is seeking more than 500 million euros from Google, but added: ‘Clearly at this stage, there’s no outcome, so it does remain to be seen how much they get.’

London Mayor Boris Johnson also hit out at the ‘derisory’ tax settlement, and called for reform of the tax system.

Mr Osborne dodged scrutiny of the deal in the Commons yesterday, preferring to press ahead with a pre-arranged trip to Liverpool with Microsoft billionaire Bill Gates. Instead, it was left to Mr Gauke to deal with the criticism from MPs on all sides.

Tory Anne Main asked why HMRC had allowed Google to avoid paying its taxes for so many years and fellow Conservative Mark Garnier questioned whether the internet giant had broken the law. Mr Gauke flatly refused to disclose details, citing taxpayer confidentiality. He insisted the deal was good for Britain, and said it provided ‘solid evidence’ that firms were responding to strengthened rules.

Google’s sales were valued at £3.8billion in Britain during 2013 but it paid just £20.4million in UK taxes that year. Between 2006 and 2011 the company’s revenue in the UK hit around £12.6billion but its corporation tax payments for the period totalled £11.2million.

It said: ‘After a six-year audit by the tax authority we are paying the amount of tax that HMRC agrees we should pay. Governments make tax law, the tax authorities enforce the law and Google complies with the law.’

Revealed: The incredibly close links between Google and Downing Street

David Cameron and the Tories have links to the very top of Google going back decades.

The Prime Minister has enjoyed a special relationship with former Google CEO Eric Schmidt, who made billions making the business into a global powerhouse.

For years Mr Schmidt was on Mr Cameron’s business advisory board, which is used as a ‘sounding board’ on business matters, but the Google executive left in July.

The billionaire has reportedly also offered Mr Cameron on economic policy.

 

+18

Former Google CEO and now executive chairman Eric Schmidt chats to Prime Minister David Cameron at a drinks reception – and has in the past advised Cameron on economic matters

 

+18

+18

Links: Steve Hilton was David Cameron’s policy guru and his wife Rachel Whetstone (together left) was a Google PR executive who worked for the Tories (right with Boris Johnson)

The links do not end there because Steve Hilton, once the Prime Minister’s closest political adviser, is married to Rachel Whetstone, who was vice-president of global communications at Google until last year before she moved to Uber.

Rachel Whetstone is a former No 10 aide and was Michael Howard’s director of communications when he was Tory leader and Mr Cameron is godfather to her younger son.

Mr Hilton was godfather to Ivan Cameron, the late eldest child of David and Samantha.

Hilton and Whetstone have been called the ‘most powerful couple in Britain’ while she and Mr Cameron have known each other since starting at Conservative Central Office in their early 20s.

Hilton and Whetstone later bought a Oxfordshire holiday home close to the Camerons.

Last year Mr Hilton, who quit as Mr Cameron’s former chief strategist, admitted too many of those at the heart of government go to the same dinner parties and send their children to the same schools.

Mr Hilton warned: ‘Regardless of who’s in office, the same people are in power. It is a democracy in name only, operating on behalf of a tiny elite no matter the electoral outcome.’

In 2013 David Cameron, accompanied by his wife Samantha and their daughter Florence, went to the wedding of a Naomi Gummer, a senior Google executive with the brief of ‘public policy’.

She was previously a political adviser to Jeremy Hunt when he was Culture Secretary in charge of internet regulation – so he was in attendance too.

 

+18

+18

Guests: David Cameron and his wife Samantha attended the wedding of Naomi Gummer, right with husband Henry,  a senior Google executive with the brief of ‘public policy’.

The Hilton/Whetstone axis is not the only relationship between Google and Government.

Eric Schmidt, the former CEO of Google, has long been close to Downing Street and has in the past advised Cameron on economic matters.

In 2006, Mr Cameron travelled from visiting Google in Silicon Valley to Bournemouth to address the Conservative Party conference.

Then in 2010 when Cameron announced a review of Britain’s intellectual property laws as the founders of Google have said they could never have started their company in Britain’.

In 2012 it emerged that Tory ministers held meetings with Google an average of once a month.

Official records show that David Cameron met Google executives three times and Chancellor George Osborne four times.

Google has held five meetings with the UK government over the past two years to discuss launching driverless cars in Britain.

It is not just a case of former government policy staff exiting through Westminster’s ‘revolving door’ to Google – it works the other way too.

Tim Chatwin was Mr Cameron’s head of strategic communications and had worked closely with Mr Hilton since the start of the Cameron modernisation project. He joined Google after the 2012 Tory conference.

Amy Fisher was once Google’s PR chief for European affairs and later bagged a job advising then Justice Secretary Chris Grayling.

 

+18

Tim Chatwin was Mr Cameron’s head of strategic communications and joined Google after the 2012 Tory conference

LABOUR WRITES TO CHANCELLOR AND TELLS HIM: THESE ARE THE 8 QUESTIONS YOU MUST ANSWER ON THE £130M GOOGLE TAX DEAL

Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell today wrote to George Osborne demanding more information on Google’s tax bill.

In his letter he said that there are eight questions he must answer:

  • Firstly, please can you clarify exactly when you were first made aware of the details of the deal with Google? Did you (or any other Treasury Minister) personally sign it off, and were other Ministers involved in the settlement?
  • What discussions, if any, did you or members of your private office have with HMRC and with Google representatives about the deal?
  • Did HM Treasury and HMRC discuss details of the deal with Number 10 before the announcement was made?
  • What is HMRC’s understanding of the effective tax rate faced by Google over the past 10 years as a result of this settlement?
  • Are you confident that this deal will not undermine international co-operation on tax avoidance, such as the OECD base erosion and profit shifting scheme?
  • Can you clarify whether Google is changing the company structures that enabled this avoidance to take place over the past decade?
  • What concerns, if any, do you have that this agreement creates a precedent for future deals with other large technology corporations?
  • To help ensure HMRC is best placed to address complex issues like this will you now halt the programme of HMRC staffing cuts?

Is the Google sweetheart deal another blunder by HMRC boss Dame Disaster?

Google’s £130million ‘sweetheart deal’ with the taxman could be another blunder by HM Revenue and Customs boss nicknamed Dame Disaster.

HMRC has refused to say who signed off on the Google agreement but Treasury sources have said that the deal is likely to have been signed off by Lin Homer.

It is not the first ‘sweetheart deal’ agreed with HMRC as her predecessor Dave Hartnett also signed off agreements which saved Starbucks and Vodafone millions or even billions in tax payments.

 

+18

High life: Dame Lin Homer is pictured here sipping champagne on a plane after an HMRC crisis and as boss it is likely she has signed off the Google deal

An inquiry into Google’s tax arrangements started in 2009 when Mr Hartnett was in charge before he left in 2012 and Mrs Homer took over.

Her tenure has been tarnished by a string of blunders and she will stand down two years early in April with a pension worth £2.2million.

Her 35-year career in the public sector has been dogged by a string of scandals and failures.

 

+18

Previous HMRC boss Dave Hartnett, pictured, also signed off agreements which saved Starbucks and Vodafone millions or even billions in tax payments.

In 2005, as chief executive of Birmingham City Council, she was caught up in a postal votes scandal, which a judge said would have ‘disgraced a banana republic’.

Election judge Richard Mawrey said Mrs Homer, acting as the city’s returning officer, had ‘thrown the rule book out of the window’.

She went on to become the £200,000-a-year boss of the immigration system, at the time it was branded ‘not fit for purpose’ by the then Home Secretary John Reid.

During her time in charge it emerged that 1,000 foreign criminals had been mistakenly released, and 450,000 asylum case files were discovered dumped in boxes at the Home Office.

She later became head of the now defunct UK Border Agency, where she was criticised by MPs for a ‘catastrophic leadership failure’.

Despite the criticism, she was rewarded with a new post as head of HMRC.

At the time of her appointment, in 2012, the Home Affairs Committee said it was ‘astounded’ that she was being promoted to become the chief executive at Revenue & Customs adding: ‘The status quo, in which catastrophic leadership failure is no obstacle to promotion, is totally unacceptable.’

Recently pictures emerged of her as she raised a glass of champagne in first class, this is the head as she jetted off to America as her department floundered.

Days before her summer holiday last July she announced that 18million of the 60million annual calls to the HMRC helpline were never answered by staff.

Dame Lin was forced to set aside an extra £45million to improve customer service because so many calls were never picked up or were met with a busy tone.

She said at the time: ‘Despite our best efforts, our call performance hasn’t been up to scratch and we apologise to all those customers who have struggled to get through to us’.

But instead of staying in the UK, photographs from her husband Ian’s Facebook account reveal they still went to America for a summer break.

THE BILLIONAIRE GOOGLE BOSSES WHO CLAIM TO BE PAID AS LITTLE AS $1

+18

Larry Page, 42, Google co-founder and chief executive at Alphabet – Google’s parent company

Salary: $1

Worth: £36.8bn

Computer scientist and entrepreneur Page (right) co-founded Google Inc with Sergey Brin – his friend at Stanford University – in 1998, when they developed a search engine that listed results according to the popularity of the pages as part of a research project.

Both men became billionaires in August 2004 when Google held its initial public offering.

Page stepped aside as CEO in August 2001 in favour of Eric Schmidt, but re-assumed the role in April 2011. Last July he announced his intention to step aside a second time, in order to to become CEO of Alphabet.

Documents filed with regulators in April last year also disclosed that Page and the company’s other founder, Sergey Brin, limited their 2014 pay to $1 each, as has been their practice for years.

In 2011, he splashed out $45m on his own super yacht – but unlike many moguls, he bought his yacht second-hand.

Last year, a survey by review site Glassdoor named him as the highest-rated chief executive in America.

 

+18

Sergey Brin, 42, Google co-founder, Alphabet President and head of Google X

Salary: $1

Worth: £36bn

Born in the Soviet Union, Brin (right) and his family moved to the US when he was six years old. He met Google co-founder Page in 1995 after he went to Stanford University to study computer science, and the pair set up what was initially called BackRub would become the internet giant as part of a project.

Like Page, Brin takes a salary of just $1, but his wealth is estimated at £36bn.

Brin is also an investor in Airship Ventures and a private space travel company, Space Adventures. He became a benefactor for research into Parkinson’s disease, after his mother, Eugenia was diagnosed with the disease. He also learned he has a genetic mutation increasing the odds that he he too will get it, and in February 2014, Brin and his now ex-wife Anne Wojcicki donated $53 million to Michael J Fox Foundation.

After the couple’s separation in 2013, Wojcicki remained in the couple’s $7million Los Altos home with their two children.

 

+18

Eric Schmidt, 60, Executive chairman at Alphabet

Pay/bonuses: $109m

Worth: $9billion

Schmidt (right) was brought in as Google’s CEO in 2001 by creators Sergey Brin and Larry Page, who relied on his expertise to turn their modest internet search engine into a global media powerhouse.

Also known for his colourful private life, Schmidt is among the world’s richest people with an estimated fortune of $9 billion, according to Forbes.

He reportedly owns a $72.3million superyacht, a $15 million penthouse in Manhatten, a home near Google’s Silicon Valley HQ, and a $38 million estate in Montecito, California

In April last year it was revealed he had earned nearly $109 million in that financial year while the company’s stock slumped. Most of this consisted of stock valued at $100 million – the largest stock package that Schmidt had received since 2011 when Google Inc. awarded him a bundle valued at $94 million at the time he relinquished the CEO’s job to company co-founder Larry Page.

Schmidt also pocketed a $1.25 million salary, a $6 million bonus and perks valued at nearly $1 million. His total pay last year soared by more than five-fold from 2013 when his Google compensation was valued at $19.3 million.

 

+18

Sundar Pinchai, 43, Google chief executive

Pay/Bonuses: $50m

Worth: $150m

Long-hailed as a rising star in the company, Pinchai (right) was promoted to Google’s chief executive last August as part of the firm’s radical shake-up and Alphabet rebrand.

Twitter tried to poach him in 2011, and he was slated to become Microsoft CEO in 2013, but stuck with Google – where he has ascended to the top in just over six years.

The 43-year-old married father-of-two (one son, one daughter) was born in Chennai, India, and reportedly did not own a telephone until he was 12.

Pichai moved to America after his bachelor’s degree in engineering from the Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur.

He went to Stanford for his MSc, the University of Pennsylvania for his MBA, then worked in business management and engineering before joining Google in 2004.

At Google he was one of the driving forces behind Gmail and Google Maps, and has headed up the development side of Chrome and Chrome OS.

He is widely described as ‘nice’, ‘mild-mannered’ and warm’.


Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3416939/Government-fire-Google-pay-THREE-times-tax-France-employs-thousands-people-does-business-Britain.html#ixzz3yMzS5mAH
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

How Google Steals Ideas and Technologies From Entrepreneurs – Part 1

How Google Steals Ideas From Entrepreneurs

By Sarah Dunn and Anthony Harvard

A recent article in The New York Times called: “How Larry Page’s Obsessions Became Google’s Business” describes how Google Boss Larry Page covertly attends technology conferences in order to get ideas from entrepreneurs. He does not seem to ever pay those entrepreneurs, for the technology he takes from them, and makes billions of dollars off of at Google.

Google Boss Eric Schmidt just spent over $1 Billion to try to lobby Congress to change the patent laws in order to make patents for entrepreneurs nearly illegal, and to try to make patents almost entirely unenforceable, so that Google would not have to pay for the technology it steals. Google seems to love killing the American dream.

Google spent millions of dollars to nominate, lobby for, influence and place it’s top lawyer in charge of the U.S. Patent Office. Now Google’s “inside-man” makes sure that patents, that Google is infringing, are either turned down or, in some cases, have their approvals reversed.

Google’s motto seems to be: “Why Compete When You Can Cheat”. This is a far more relevant motto than ‘Don’t be evil”.

The New York Times article, and hundreds of stories from entrepreneurs, describes how Mr. Page cuddles up to technologists in ordinary street wear, does not identify himself, and Hoover’s up their innovations for his company. The article, details the following:

Three years ago, Charles Chase, an engineer who manages Lockheed Martin’s nuclear fusion program, was sitting on a white leather couch at Google’s Solve for X conference when a man he had never met knelt down to talk to him.

They spent 20 minutes discussing how much time, money and technology separated humanity from a sustainable fusion reaction — that is, how to produce clean energy by mimicking the sun’s power — before Mr. Chase thought to ask the man his name.

I’m Larry Page,” the man said. He realized he had been talking to Google’s billionaire co-founder and chief executive.

He didn’t have any sort of pretension like he shouldn’t be talking to me or ‘Don’t you know who you’re talking to?’” Mr. Chase said. “We just talked.”

The article also reveals the show-boating of how Mr. Page likes to “ ignore the main stage and follow the scrum of fans and autograph seekers who mob him in the moments he steps outside closed doors.”

The article goes on to show that.. “ He is a regular at robotics conferences and intellectual gatherings like TED. Scientists say he is a good bet to attend Google’s various academic gatherings, like Solve for X and Sci Foo Camp, where he can be found having casual conversations about technology or giving advice to entrepreneurs. Mr. Page is hardly the first Silicon Valley chief with a case of intellectual wanderlust, but unlike most of his peers, he has invested far beyond his company’s core business and in many ways has made it a reflection of his personal fascinations.”

Further Page has “… said on several occasions that he spends a good deal of time researching new technologies, focusing on what kind of financial or logistic hurdles stand in the way of them being invented or carried out. His presence at technology events, while just a sliver of his time, is indicative of a giant idea-scouting mission that has in some sense been going on for years but is now Mr. Page’s main job.”

Photo

Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, wearing Google Glass. Credit Carlo Allegri/Reuters

Then the article grows dark, it says: “Many former Google employees who have worked directly with Mr. Page said his managerial modus operandi was to TAKE new technologies or product ideas and generalize them to as many areas as possible. Why can’t Google Now, Google’s predictive search tool, be used to predict everything about a person’s life? Why create a portal to shop for insurance when you can create a portal to shop for every product in the world?

But corporate success means corporate sprawl, and recently Google has seen a number of engineers and others leave for younger rivals like Facebook and start-ups like Uber. Mr. Page has made personal appeals to some of them, and, at least in a few recent cases, has said he is worried that the company has become a difficult place for entrepreneurs, according to people who have met with him.”

People who have worked with Mr. Page say that he tries to guard his calendar, avoiding back-to-back meetings and leaving time to read, research and see new technologies that interest him.”

The articles details Page’s under-cover intelligence gathering: “ People who work with Mr. Page or have spoken with him at conferences say he tries his best to blend in, ..” “ The scope of his curiosity was apparent at Sci Foo Camp, an annual invitation-only conference that is sponsored by Google, O’Reilly Media and Digital Science.

The article goes on to reveal that Google was forced to engage in a break-up, into a front operation called “Alphabet” in order to try to create overt shell companies to build buffers from the Tsunami of legal actions that are coming after it.:

Of course, for every statement Mr. Page makes about Alphabet’s technocorporate benevolence, you can find many competitors and privacy advocates holding their noses in disgust. Technology companies like Yelp have accused the company of acting like a brutal monopolist that is using the dominance of its search engine to steer consumers toward Google services, even if that means giving the customers inferior information.

In fact, the company’s main business issue seems to be that it is doing too well. Google is facing antitrust charges in Europe, along with investigations in Europe and the United States. Those issues are now mostly Mr. Pichai’s to worry about, as Mr. Page is out looking for the next big thing.”

It is hard to imagine how even the most ambitious person could hope to revolutionize so many industries. And Mr. Page, no matter how smart, cannot possibly be an expert in every area Alphabet wants to touch.

His method is not overly technical. Instead, he tends to focus on how to make a sizable business out of whatever problem this or that technology might solve. Leslie Dewan, a nuclear engineer who founded a company that is trying to generate cheap electricity from nuclear waste, also had a brief conversation with Mr. Page at the Solve For X conference.

She said he questioned her on things like modular manufacturing and how to find the right employees.

He doesn’t have a nuclear background, but he knew the right questions to ask,” said Dr. Dewan, chief executive of Transatomic Power. “‘Have you thought about approaching the manufacturing in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about the vertical integration of the company in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about training the work force this way?’ They weren’t nuclear physics questions, but they were extremely thoughtful ways to think about how we could structure the business.”

Dr. Dewan said Mr. Page even gave her an idea for a new market opportunity that she had not thought of. Asked to be more specific, she refused. The idea was too good to share.”

Yet, Dr. Dewan did share, seduced by the understated encouragement of a top intelligence gathering officer: Larry Page.

Below, you will find a small sample of tens of thousands of blog articles and news articles discussing the overt experience of Google’s intellectual property theft. When you have a zillion billion dollars and own your own Senators, ethics do not seem to fall within range of your moral compass.

Entrepreneurs have charged that Google has overtly, stolen its video broadcasting technology, virtual reality systems, Internet balloons, search engine system, wireless technology and many other items. We spoke with technologists who showed us United States Government issued patents and communications that showed that they had designed, engineered, built, patent filed and launched a number of the technologies that Google now has filled their bank accounts from. Google’s financiers at Kleiner Perkins, Google Ventures and other groups had come to them, looked at the technologies confidentially, under the guise of “maybe we’ll invest”, and then sent the technologies over to Google to build 100% clones of.

How hard is it to sue Google for patent infringement? With Google controlling the patent office and 80% of the technology law firms, the hapless entrepreneur is out-gunned.

Google even tried the lamest shell game in history by posting ads on technology blogs asking inventors to just send Google their patents and Google would look at them and offer a low-ball check if Google thought they might get in trouble. That ploy was universally mocked on the web.

Google remains a big, dumb, reckless billionaire’s toy with no regard for the individual. As a creator, your idea is Google’s to plunder. As a citizen, your privacy is Google’s to plunder. As the buyer of elected officials and federal agencies, the law is now Google’s bitch.

American FTC investigators wrote, in their report, that “Google is a threat to domestic innovation”. The European Union investigators have found “…Google to be a private out of control corporate government that has more power than the U.S. Government.”

It is time the FBI came in and shut that train down. Google is nothing but bad news for modern society and innovation.

GOOGLE Executives Just Steal Ideas They Want

Is Elon Musk Google’s bitch or Vice Versa?

Google and Elon Musk both bribe the same politicians.

Each owns part of the companies of the other.

The bag men and money people, for both, are the same people.

They both exploit Afghan war profiteering mining deals.

They both have “driver-less” car projects which solicit federal cash to exploit lithium mined from Afghanistan, that their partner: Goldman Sachs commodity rigged.

They both own Cartel-like monopolies.

They both got funding from, and hired the staff of, the CIA’s IN-Q-TEL.

They both are run by media-called: “meglomaniacs” and “narcissists”

They both use the same “Flash-boy” providers.

They work together to manipulate press coverage to hide negative stories about themselves.

They both attack their mutual competitors with moles, defamation, internet search engine rigging, massive meat puppet and troll campaigns and covert control of Twitter.

Neither would exist today without White House support.

They both use Dirty Tricks and Political Espionage.

They both hire the same lobbyists, political hit-job operators and shill reporters.

They both dictate policy decisions to elected officials.

They both got billions of dollars of taxpayer cash from the same people.

How Larry Page’s Obsessions Became Google’s Business

Photo

Credit Minh Uong/The New York Times

Three years ago, Charles Chase, an engineer who manages Lockheed Martin’s nuclear fusion program, was sitting on a white leather couch at Google’s Solve for X conference when a man he had never met knelt down to talk to him.

They spent 20 minutes discussing how much time, money and technology separated humanity from a sustainable fusion reaction — that is, how to produce clean energy by mimicking the sun’s power — before Mr. Chase thought to ask the man his name.

“I’m Larry Page,” the man said. He realized he had been talking to Google’s billionaire co-founder and chief executive.

“He didn’t have any sort of pretension like he shouldn’t be talking to me or ‘Don’t you know who you’re talking to?’” Mr. Chase said. “We just talked.”

Related Coverage

Google Announces Stock Buyback as Earnings Rise

European Publishers Play Lobbying Role Against Google

Google Goal in Restructuring as Alphabet: Autonomy

Google to Reorganize as Alphabet to Keep Its Lead as an Innovator

Larry Page is not a typical chief executive, and in many of the most visible ways, he is not a C.E.O. at all. Corporate leaders tend to spend a good deal of time talking at investor conferences or introducing new products on auditorium stages. Mr. Page, who is 42, has not been on an earnings call since 2013, and the best way to find him at Google I/O — an annual gathering where the company unveils new products — is to ignore the main stage and follow the scrum of fans and autograph seekers who mob him in the moments he steps outside closed doors.

Photo

A prototype for a car Google is developing. Credit Google

But just because he has faded from public view does not mean he is a recluse. He is a regular at robotics conferences and intellectual gatherings like TED. Scientists say he is a good bet to attend Google’s various academic gatherings, like Solve for X and Sci Foo Camp, where he can be found having casual conversations about technology or giving advice to entrepreneurs.

Mr. Page is hardly the first Silicon Valley chief with a case of intellectual wanderlust, but unlike most of his peers, he has invested far beyond his company’s core business and in many ways has made it a reflection of his personal fascinations.

He intends to push even further with Alphabet, a holding company that separates Google’s various cash-rich advertising businesses from the list of speculative projects like self-driving cars that capture the imagination but do not make much money. Alphabet companies and investments span disciplines from biotechnology to energy generation to space travel to artificial intelligence to urban planning.

Investors will get a good look at the scope of those ambitions on Feb. 1, when the company, in its fourth-quarter earnings report, will disclose for the first time the costs and income of the collection of projects outside of Google’s core business.

As chief executive of Alphabet, Mr. Page is tasked with figuring how to spin Google’s billions in advertising profits into new companies and industries. When he announced the reorganization last summer, he said that he and Sergey Brin, Google’s other founder, would do this by finding new people and technologies to invest in, while at the same time slimming down Google — now called Google Inc., a subsidiary of Alphabet — so their leaders would have more autonomy.

Photo

Sundar Pichai, chief of Google Inc. Credit Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

“In general, our model is to have a strong C.E.O. who runs each business, with Sergey and me in service to them as needed,” Mr. Page wrote in a letter to investors. He said that he and Mr. Brin would be responsible for picking those chief executives, monitoring their progress and determining their pay.

Google’s day-to-day management was left to Sundar Pichai, the company’s new chief executive. His job will not be about preventing cancer or launching rocket ships, but to keep Google’s advertising machine humming, to keep innovating in emerging areas like machine learning and virtual reality — all while steering the company through a thicket of regulatory troubles that could drag on for years.

Mr. Page’s new role is part talent scout and part technology visionary. He still has to find the chief executives of many of the other Alphabet businesses.

And he has said on several occasions that he spends a good deal of time researching new technologies, focusing on what kind of financial or logistic hurdles stand in the way of them being invented or carried out.

His presence at technology events, while just a sliver of his time, is indicative of a giant idea-scouting mission that has in some sense been going on for years but is now Mr. Page’s main job.

Photo

Sergey Brin, co-founder of Google, wearing Google Glass. Credit Carlo Allegri/Reuters

In the investor letter, he put it this way: “Sergey and I are seriously in the business of starting new things.”

An Interest in Cool Things

Mr. Page has always had a wide range of interests. As an undergraduate at the University of Michigan, he worked on solar cars, music synthesizers and once proposed that the school build a tram through campus. He arrived at Stanford’s computer science doctorate program in 1995, and had a list of initial research ideas, including self-driving cars and using the web’s many hyperlinks to improve Internet search. His thesis adviser, Terry Winograd, steered him toward search.

“Even before he came to Stanford he was interested in cool technical things that could be done,” Mr. Winograd said. “What makes something interesting for him is a big technical challenge. It’s not so much where it’s headed but what the ride is like.”

Inside Google, Mr. Page is known for asking a lot of questions about how people do their jobs and challenging their assumptions about why things are as they are. In an interview at the Fortune Global Forum last year, Mr. Page said he enjoyed talking to people who ran the company’s data centers.

Photo

LinkNYC Wi-Fi consoles, a product of Sidewalk Labs, a company owned by Google. Credit Cole Wilson for The New York Times

“I ask them, like, ‘How does the transformer work?’ ‘How does the power come in?’ ‘What do we pay for that?’” he said. “And I’m thinking about it kind of both as an entrepreneur and as a business person. And I’m thinking ‘What are those opportunities?’”

Another question he likes to ask: “Why can’t this be bigger?”

Mr. Page declined multiple requests for comment, and many of the people who spoke about him requested anonymity because they were not supposed to talk about internal company matters.

Many former Google employees who have worked directly with Mr. Page said his managerial modus operandi was to take new technologies or product ideas and generalize them to as many areas as possible. Why can’t Google Now, Google’s predictive search tool, be used to predict everything about a person’s life? Why create a portal to shop for insurance when you can create a portal to shop for every product in the world?

But corporate success means corporate sprawl, and recently Google has seen a number of engineers and others leave for younger rivals like Facebook and start-ups like Uber. Mr. Page has made personal appeals to some of them, and, at least in a few recent cases, has said he is worried that the company has become a difficult place for entrepreneurs, according to people who have met with him.

What Is Separated Under Alphabet?
  • Google: search, advertising, maps, YouTube and Android.

  • Calico, an anti-aging biotech company

  • Sidewalk, a company focused on smart cities

  • Nest, a maker of Internet-connected devices for the home

  • Fiber, high-speed Internet service in a number of American cities

  • Investment arms, such as Google Ventures and Google Capital

  • Incubator projects, such as Google X, which is developing self-driving cars and delivery drones

Part of Mr. Page’s pitch included emphasizing how dedicated he was to “moonshots” like interplanetary travel, or offering employees time and money to pursue new projects of their own. By breaking Google into Alphabet, Mr. Page is hoping to make it a more welcoming home for employees to build new businesses, as well as for potential acquisition targets.

It will also rid his office of the kind of dull-but-necessary annoyances of running a major corporation. Several recently departed Google staff members said that as chief executive of Google, Mr. Page had found himself in the middle of various turf wars, like how to integrate Google Plus, the company’s struggling social media effort, with other products like YouTube, or where to put Google Now, which resided in the Android team but was moved to the search group.

Such disputes are a big reason Mr. Page had been shedding managerial duties and delegating the bulk of his product oversight to Mr. Pichai, these people said. In a 2014 memo to the company announcing Mr. Pichai’s promotion to product chief, Mr. Page said the move would allow him to “focus on the bigger picture” at Google and have more time to get the company’s next generation of big bets off the ground.

People who have worked with Mr. Page say that he tries to guard his calendar, avoiding back-to-back meetings and leaving time to read, research and see new technologies that interest him.

Given that he is worth in the neighborhood of $40 billion and created the world’s most famous website, Mr. Page has the tendency to attract a crowd when he attends technology events. At last year’s Darpa Robotics Challenge, he was trailed closely by a handler who at times acted as a buffer between Mr. Page and would-be cellphone photographers. That commotion could annoy anyone, but it is particularly troubling for Mr. Page, who, because of damaged vocal cords, speaks just above a whisper and sometimes uses a microphone in small meetings.

Photo

A Project Loon balloon. Credit Google

At home in Palo Alto, Mr. Page tries to have the most normal life possible, driving his children to school or taking his family to local street fairs, according to people who know him or have seen him at such events.

And at Google, even events that are decidedly not normal aspire to a kind of casualness. Take the Camp, an exclusive and secretive event that Google holds at a resort in Sicily and where invitees have included Elon Musk, the chief executive of Tesla Motors and SpaceX, Lloyd C. Blankfein, the chief executive of Goldman Sachs, and Tory Burch, the fashion designer.

One attendee, who asked to remain anonymous because guests were not supposed to discuss the gathering, recalls being surprised by how much time Mr. Page spent with his children.

In public remarks, Mr. Page has said how important his father, Carl V. Page, a computer science professor at Michigan State University who died in 1996, was to his choice of career.

“My dad was really interested in technology,” Mr. Page said at Google I/O in 2013, the last time he took the stage at the event. “He actually drove me and my family all the way across the country to go to a robotics conference. And then we got there and he thought it was so important that his young son go to the conference, one of the few times I’ve seen him really argue with someone to get in someone underage successfully into the conference, and that was me.”

Photo

A Nest thermostat.

People who work with Mr. Page or have spoken with him at conferences say he tries his best to blend in, and, for the most part, the smaller groups of handpicked attendees at Google’s academic and science gatherings, tend to treat him like a peer.

The scope of his curiosity was apparent at Sci Foo Camp, an annual invitation-only conference that is sponsored by Google, O’Reilly Media and Digital Science.

The largely unstructured “unconference” begins when each of its attendees — an eclectic batch of astronomers, psychologists, physicists and others — write something that interests them on a small card and then paste it to a communal wall. Those notes become the basis for breakout talks on topics like scientific ethics or artificial intelligence.

The last conference was held during a weekend in June on Google’s Mountain View, Calif., campus, and Mr. Page was there for most of it. He did not host or give a speech, but mingled and went to talks, just like everyone else. That impressed investors and computer scientists who did not expect to see so much of him, but researchers who had come from outside Silicon Valley barely noticed.

“I have a vague memory that some founder type person was walking through the crowd,” said Josh Peek, an assistant astronomer at the Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore.

Photo

A contact lens with a wireless chip. Credit Google

Another benefit of these gatherings for the reserved Mr. Page is that they are mostly closed to the news media.

A Forward Thinker

When Mr. Page does talk in public, he tends to focus on optimistic pronouncements about the future and Google’s desire to help humanity. Asked about current issues, like how mobile apps are challenging the web or how ad blockers are affecting Google’s business, he tends to dismiss it with something like, “People have been talking about that for a long time.”

Lately, he has talked more about his belief that for-profit companies can be a force for social good and change. During a 2014 interview with Charlie Rose, Mr. Page said that instead of a nonprofit or philanthropic organization, he would rather leave his money to an entrepreneur like Mr. Musk.

Larry Page: Where’s Google going next? Video by TED

Of course, for every statement Mr. Page makes about Alphabet’s technocorporate benevolence, you can find many competitors and privacy advocates holding their noses in disgust. Technology companies like Yelp have accused the company of acting like a brutal monopolist that is using the dominance of its search engine to steer consumers toward Google services, even if that means giving the customers inferior information.

Financially speaking, Mr. Page is leaving his chief executive job at Google at a time when things could not be better. The company’s revenue continues to grow about 20 percent a year, an impressive figure for any business, but particularly so for one that is on pace to generate approximately $60 billion this year.

In fact, the company’s main business issue seems to be that it is doing too well. Google is facing antitrust charges in Europe, along with investigations in Europe and the United States. Those issues are now mostly Mr. Pichai’s to worry about, as Mr. Page is out looking for the next big thing.

It is hard to imagine how even the most ambitious person could hope to revolutionize so many industries. And Mr. Page, no matter how smart, cannot possibly be an expert in every area Alphabet wants to touch.

His method is not overly technical. Instead, he tends to focus on how to make a sizable business out of whatever problem this or that technology might solve. Leslie Dewan, a nuclear engineer who founded a company that is trying to generate cheap electricity from nuclear waste, also had a brief conversation with Mr. Page at the Solve For X conference.

She said he questioned her on things like modular manufacturing and how to find the right employees.

“He doesn’t have a nuclear background, but he knew the right questions to ask,” said Dr. Dewan, chief executive of Transatomic Power. “‘Have you thought about approaching the manufacturing in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about the vertical integration of the company in this way?’ ‘Have you thought about training the work force this way?’ They weren’t nuclear physics questions, but they were extremely thoughtful ways to think about how we could structure the business.”

Dr. Dewan said Mr. Page even gave her an idea for a new market opportunity that she had not thought of. Asked to be more specific, she refused. The idea was too good to share.

Doris Burke contributed reporting from New York.

A version of this article appears in print on January 24, 2016, on page BU1 of the New York edition with the headline: Innovator in Chief. Order Reprints| Today’s Paper|Subsc

 

 

How Google and Facebook Are Raping Your Privacy and Manipulating Your Life

How Google and Facebook Are Raping Your Privacy and Manipulating Your Life

The real, actual, truth about Silicon Valley’s Biggest Secrets!

If you really care about your REAL friends and family, print this article out and hand it to them. Pass it around.

1. Google and Facebook receive tens of billions of dollars to send all of your information to the DEA, The IRS, The FBI, The CIA, The NSA and agencies you never even heard of.

2. Everything you ever put on their websites, or anybody else puts on their website, about you, is stored on file forever and used to analyze your politics, mental health, sexual activities, voting intentions, dating activities, buying habits, pregnancy status, sexual orientation and thousands of other things about you via computer analysis.

3. Which ever political party is currently in power gets reports about what your political thoughts, texts, emails, favorites and ideas are, from reports provided by these companies.

4. Not only do they read and psychologically analyze you via every email, VOIP call, message, photo, video, voice-mail, or other action on their sites, but they believe that your use of their site gives them permission to follow you to other sites and track your actions there, too.

5. They can hear you on your telephone, tablet and computer microphone and see you on your telephone and computer camera any time they want to.

6. The executives and investors of each company are under constant investigations for crimes including rapes, infidelity, hiring huge numbers of prostitutes and under-age sex suppliers, murders by prostitutes, tax evasion, unfair termination for anyone who does not drink the Kool-aid, drunk driving, embezzlement and other illicit acts.

7. They make half of their money by spying on you for advertisers and half by spying on you for politicians.

8. They don’t hire women, blacks or American labor and try everything they can think of to displace Americans from jobs and bring in cheap foreign labor.

9. They have been caught bribing Senators and White House staff.

10. They are monopolies who use their monopolistic forms for political and economic manipulation.

11. There is not a single thing in your life that you need them for.

12. Most of the effect of their existence has been to harm society.

13. They created and make money off of cyber-bullying.

14. Every credible child psychologist has stated that they cause severe mental and emotional damage to most people under 30.

15. They have caused more suicides than any other companies on Earth.

16. The owners have demonstrated such a wanton sense of arrogance, elitism, self-importance and hubris that they sicken most normal people.

17. They use you as tools to harvest your privacy and sell it to others. You are like a human cow to them.

18. Their purpose in life is to abuse mass volumes of people and seek to steer those volumes of people to their own twisted billionaire perspectives.

19. Most of the owners have had sex scandals and bizarre divorces resulting in abuse charges. The money people behind these companies are the same people.

20. The people that finance them are a Cartel of very twisted old elitist white fraternity-house males with deep-seated fringe beliefs, outside of those of 90% of the population.

21. They not only just don’t care about you, but they see you as too much trouble to even bother with, if you ask questions, complain or get out of line.

22. Their “free services” are sucker-bait carnival tricks to get you to loosen your caution and start talking about your inner thoughts.

23. The “comfy family community” that you think you are experiencing on their sites, is all fake and populated by trolls, meat puppets, click farms and computerized fake “likes”, generated by the millions, to make you think that people are paying attention to you on their sites when, in fact, nobody is, and it is all a facade to suck you in.

24. Most of your experiences on their sites is with a computer. Computer brains and human brains could not be more different. Everything you do on their sites is warped by the machine mind and, ultimately, leaves you emotionally cold and empty.

25. Most of your on-line dating attempts, on their sites, will fail because all actual dating only works with in person experiences known as “chemistry”.

26. If you only stopped to ask yourself this simple question, you would never actually use them: “Do I trust a multi-billion dollar computerized corporation, already charged with mercenary behaviors, with the most intimate parts of my personal life?”

27. They breed, and promote, a form of mental illness called “Narcissism”, which can destroy lives, social groups and families

28. They edit and delete news and videos to fit their owners personal beliefs

29. Over-all, they have engaged in the largest violations of public privacy rights in human history

30. They are just evil

If you really care about your REAL friends and family, print this article out and hand it to them. Pass it around. You have a moral obligation to save as many people as possible from the Silicon Blight.

Facebook friends are almost entirely fake, study finds – REUTERS

You can only count on about four of your friends, and most don’t even care if anything bad happens to you

REUTERS/Dado Ruvic

Most of your Facebook friends don’t care about you and probably wouldn’t even sympathise with your problems, according to a new study.

Many people have hundreds of Facebook friends. But people can only really depend on four of them, on average, according to new research.

Robin Dunbar, a professor of evolutionary psychology at Oxford University, undertook a study to find out the connection between whether people have lots of Facebook friends and real friends.

Read more

the smarmy stick-figure meme taking Facebook by storm

He found that there was very little correlation between having friends on social networks and actually being able to depend on them, or even talking to them regularly.

The average person studied had around 150 Facebook friends. But only about 14 of them would express sympathy in the event of anything going wrong.

The average person said that only about 27 per cent of their Facebook friends were genuine.

Those numbers are mostly similar to how friendships work in real life, the research said. But the huge number of supposed friends on a friend list means that people can be tricked into thinking that they might have more close friends.

“There is a cognitive constraint on the size of social networks that even the communication advantages of online media are unable to overcome,” Professor Dunbar wrote wrote. “In practical terms, it may reflect the fact that real (as opposed to casual) relationships require at least occasional face-to-face interaction to maintain them.”

Facebook friends tend to organise in different layers, the research claims. About five people will be in the first and closest one, then 15, 50 and 150 different friends will be in each of the groups as they move further out.

Google and the Spy: How a spoonful of dirt almost destroyed America

Google and the Spy: How a spoonful of dirt almost destroyed America

111007_solyndra_fundraise_ap_605

By Tom Enders, Bradley Pogue, Wendy Offerman and Dave Chen. Originally submitted for The Guardian.

The White House just announced that billions and billions of dollars would be reserved for Tesla and Google’s self driving cars (Both companies having been funded by the Obama Administration). At the same time, John Krafcik, the Google executive, said in Detroit at an Automotive News conference Tuesday held in conjunction with North American International Auto Show, that Google wants to be the boss of self-driving cars and wants the auto industry to join it. At the same time Google has hired former White House Deputy National Security Adviser Caroline Atkinson to lead its global policy team, to push self-driving cars, as the Internet advertising giant seeks an advocate to deal with regulators around the world.

The funny thing is, nobody in America knows of anybody that says that they want a “self-driving car”. Are Self Driving cars really a thing, or just another way to scam taxpayer dollars into Silicon Valley’s latest boondoggle.

While many believe that this is just another illicit campaign financing kick-back scheme, this time for Hillary’s campaign, as Solyndra was for Obama’s campaign; the reality is far darker.

Let’s step back in time:

Robert James Woolsey, Jr was born in Tulsa, Oklahoma, the son of Clyde (Kirby) and Robert James Woolsey, Sr.[1] He graduated from Tulsa’s Tulsa Central High School. In 1963, he received his BA from Stanford University (Phi Beta Kappa), and in 1965 his MA from Oxford University, where he was a Rhodes Scholar, and an LLB from Yale Law School in 1968.

Woolsey was founder and president of Yale Citizens for Eugene McCarthy for President from 1967 to 1968. Woolsey is credited as having created the idea to offer the Internet to the public as a way to spy on citizens with their knowledge.

Woolsey is a member of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) and was one of the signatories to the January 26, 1998 letter sent to President Clinton that called for the removal of Saddam Hussein.[11] That same year he served on the Rumsfeld Commission, which investigated the threat of ballistic missiles for the U.S. Congress.[12] In 2008, Woolsey joined VantagePoint Venture Partners as a venture partner.[13]

John McCain hired Woolsey as an advisor on energy and climate change issues for his 2008 U.S. Presidential election campaign.[14] In April 2011, Lux Capital announced that Woolsey would become a venture partner in the firm.[15]

In July 2011, Woolsey, in cooperation with Robert McFarlane, co-founded the United States Energy Security Council. Woolsey currently sits on the Board of Advisors for the Fuel Freedom Foundation.[16]

He currently serves as Chancellor at The Institute of World Politics.[19]

Woolsey was CIA director when Aldrich Ames was arrested for treason and spying against the United States. The CIA was criticized for not focusing on Ames sooner, given the obvious increase in Ames’ standard of living;[5] and there was a “huge uproar” in Congress when Woolsey decided that no one in the CIA would be dismissed or demoted at the agency. Woolsey declared: “Some have clamored for heads to roll in order that we could say that heads have rolled…Sorry, that’s not my way.” Woolsey was forced to resign from the CIA in shame.[6]

Woolsey was a keynote speaker at the EELPJ symposium on wind energy and biofuels in Houston, Texas on February 23, 2007, during which he outlined the national security arguments in favor of moving away from fossil fuels.[23] In a July 2007 interview with The Futurist magazine he argued that U.S. dependence on Middle Eastern oil ranks “very high” as a national security concern.[24]

and use of biomass fuels such as cellulosic ethanol both of which he, his family and associates own/owned stock in. He is a founding member of the Set America Free Coalition, dedicated to freeing the United States from oil dependence. He is on the board of directors for the electric vehicle advocacy group Plug In America.

Plug In America is a lobby group funded by Silicon Valley venture capitalists who hold monopolies in lithium ion batteries. Tesla and Google’s investors and owners are the core backers of Plug-in America.

He is an advisor to The Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, a think tank/lobbyist focused on “energy security”. He overtly hates hydrogen energy and fuel cells because they compete with, and obsolete, his lithium battery investments.

Woolsey is known for clearly articulating his hatred of clean, sustainable hydrogen and fuel cell energy. He has advocated for measures to fight global warming[2] using the lithium ion batteries he has invested in.

woolsey aka gollum

Woolsey was interviewed in Boris Malagurski‘s documentary film The Weight of Chains 2 (2014), in which he said that the “United States and the CIA made mistakes and make mistakes all the time”.[40]

Woolsey was outed as a “War Profiteer” in the article: Woolsey Needs to Make a Choice Between Being a War Profiteer or War Pundit The Washington Note July 10, 2005. In this, and many other articles, the Gollum-like Woolsey is called out for making money off of the manipulation of war and espionage situations.

In July 2011, Woolsey, in cooperation with Robert McFarlane, co-founded the United States Energy Security Council. Woolsey currently sits on the Board of Advisors for the Fuel Freedom Foundation.

[16] The Fuel Freedom Foundation was officially launched in October 2012 by philanthropists Yossie Hollander and Eyal Aronoff.[1] The foundation has a mission to end the United States’ dependence on oil by removing barriers to competition in the transportation fuel market. Through this group, Woolsey pushed his own stock holdings .[2]

While the Japanese auto industry disagreed with Woolsey on the idea that the deadly, toxic, explosive, cancer-causing, worker killing lithium ion batteries were the “end run” for vehicle alternative energy, Detroit embraced his pitch.

During Woolsey’s time, the CIA announced that it had “uncovered” documents that revealed that “Trillions of dollars of lithium” was in Afghanistan and that “Afghanistan is the Saudi Arabia of Lithium”. Indeed, thousands of news articles, under those headlines reveal the true story. The lithium mines of Afghanistan were a bait-and-switch shell game promoted by the departing Russian’s, who had just given up on Afghanistan.

The recent U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was promoted by Silicon Valley billionaires, including Google’s owners, who had been promised the monopoly on those lithium fields, for their electric cars.

The initial intelligence was provided by a CIA team run by one Mr. Woolsey. Who owned stock in the lithium ion.

Nothing shady there? Right?

A small spoonful of dirt had been “covertly returned to our labs by clandestine CIA geologists”, operating deep inside Afghanistan on a dry lake bed. That dirt revealed that “vast wealth lays in the desert ripe for our taking”. But did it?

Goldman Sachs, long a beneficiary of the scrapings of CIA adventures, was pitching that dirt like it was the water from the fountain of youth. To this day, the argument continues about whether or not the Russian’s faked that sample, or not. Was it the real deal or was it as cooked and stinky as the Afghan goat poop laying all around it?

The Silicon Valley VC’s put Elon Musk and Solyndra in charge of exploiting the fruits of the war. Both companies were designed to exploit the mining of Afghanistan. Google as silent shareholders, covertly ran the marketing, stock hype and exploitation of Tesla, Solyndra, V-Vehicle, Plug-in America, The Google “RechargeIT” initiative and now: “The Self Driving Cars” program. All of it just to push the failed Afghan mined lithium ion batteries and indium that all of Google’s insiders had acquired a monopolistic hold on. All promoted to them by Woolsey and his spy “advisors”.

So far, most of the car and battery companies created to exploit the war profiteered Afghan lithium have “blown up”, literally. Lithium blows up when it gets bumped or wet. This reality, after epic fires, FBI raids and horrific corruption, has sent most of those Obama financed companies into bankruptcy.

Back to today:

Now the scheme has gone to hell…

  • Propublica is reporting that the whole U.S. got scammed on this deal. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction has labeled this Afghan mining scheme a disaster for the U.S. Investigative reporter: Megan McCloskey ,and her team, found that the problem was worse than anyone imagined
  • The loss to the American taxpayer, to date, from the U.S. adventure in Afghanistan, is over six trillion dollars. Many analysts attribute the missteps in Afghanistan to the creation of ISIS and the biggest damage to the American economy in modern times
  • Steven Chu, the bag man for the Obama administration, gave quite a bit of emergency Department of Energy money to Russian held companies. This shocked many Americans. Many wondered if this was part of the payoff for the Russian “tips” about the Afghan lithium. Those “tips” turned out to be a scam, though. Chu, and his staff, resigned in shame.
  • Panasonic, a lithium ion battery partner of The Silicon Valley Cartel, has since been charged with dumping, bribery, corruption, price rigging, killing workers, and other nasty lithium ion activities
  • Lithium and Afghan mining executive Frank Guistra has now figured prominently into the email leaks and Clinton Foundation funds
  • Multiple other senior spy executives have been fired, or forced to suddenly resign, after being caught running private war profiteering. A woman who was the top NSA spy was even caught profiteering, and terminated
  • The famously missing Malay MH370 passenger jet had it’s cargo compartment stuffed with lithium ion batteries destined for Tesla and others. Did they blow up like all of the hover-board lithium ion batteries that blew up this Christmas
  • The auto industry has rejected Woolsey’s pitch for lithium ion and dedicated the future to clean hydrogen energy and fuel cells
  • “Plug In America” has been outed as a sham meat puppet troll for the lithium ion industry
  • Google has been exposed as the recipient of CIA funding and the operator of the largest taxpayer spying operation in history
  • Google, Tesla and the rest of the “Cleantech Leaders” all have turned out to have been the primary campaign financiers of the Obama, Reid and Feinstein political campaigns as well as the exclusive beneficiaries of the largest taxpayer give-aways in history
  • Nobody wants a lithium ion Tesla, now known as: “The official car of douchebags and assholes”. Tesla’s orders are 1000% below what Tesla wrote in it’s federal documents. Tesla’s cars never stop blowing up and Tesla has even lost a LEMON CAR lawsuit
  • Oh, yes; those “largest taxpayer give-aways in history” were all distributed to them under orders from Obama, Reid and Feinstein, who all owned stock in those companies, just like Mr. Woolsey

So when you hear about Google doing something with electric cars, don’t dream of electric sheep, or be like electric sheep. Don’t be naive. Ignore the sham facade of altruism that Google ties to coat all of it’s political and greed-based maneuvers with.

Google’s bank accounts are built on the bodies of dead American soldiers, and napalmed Afghan shepherd families and some of the most overt Washington DC corruption in history.

Eric Schmidt, the head of Google, has spent more time in the White House, telling the White House who to hire, what laws to make and what companies to fund, than all of the members of Congress combined. When Schmidt isn’t in his “sex penthouse” he is in The White House directing FCC laws, reductions in consumer privacy protection, energy policy, Patent office roll-backs and other Machiavellian treats.

Google got in bed with bad spies, did do evil, and never stopped doing evil.

Google’s Kick-Back Scheme With Crooked Politicians For Electric Car Monopolies

Download and read this free report on Corruption schemes that Google Created For Lithium Ion (Click Here For Report)

WHY A WEBSITE COMPANY DESPERATELY WANTS TO PUSH ELECTRIC CARS! GOOGLE’S AWFUL SECRET

Google’s owners got an exclusive kickback scam between themselves and the White House over lithium ion batteries ravaged from war profiteering in Afghanistan, political rigging in Bolivia and other war incursions.

Google wants to push electric cars to keep it’s owners political payola scams alive.

Deadly, toxic, explosive, a risk to national security, fetus damaging…yet Google charged full speed ahead into it.. READ THE REPORT TO SEE WHY!

lithiumcombvo

The dirtiest deal in Silicon Valley:

GOOGLELOGO

AFGHAN-LITHIUM-JOHN-DOERR

The U.S. Spent a Half Billion on Mining in Afghanistan With ‘Limited Progress’

The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction has labelled yet another project in danger of failing. This time its U.S. plans to develop the country’s oil, gas and minerals industries.

A coal miner at work in the Karkar Valley coal mines in Puli Khumri, Afghanistan. (Benjamin Lowy/Getty)

The United States has spent nearly half a billion dollars and five years developing Afghanistan’s oil, gas and minerals industries — and has little to show for it, a government watchdog reported today.

The project’s failings are the result of poorly planned programs, inadequate infrastructure and a challenging partnership with the Afghan government, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction wrote in its newest damning assessment of U.S. efforts in the war-torn country. The finding comes after some 200 SIGAR reports have detailed inefficient, unsuccessful or downright wasteful reconstruction projects. A recent ProPublica analysis of the reports found that there has been at least $17 billion in questionable spending.

We Blew $17 Billion in Afghanistan. How Would You Have Spent It?

Here’s just what the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction found. See for yourself how that money could have been used at home. Explore the app.

The United States Agency for International Development and a Pentagon task force were in charge of developing a so-called “extractive” industry in Afghanistan — basically a system for getting precious resources out of the ground and to the commercial market. SIGAR called out both USAID and the Defense Department last year for their failures to coordinate and to ascertain the ability of Afghans to sustain the project, which unsurprisingly is not promising. In fact, when international aid stopped supporting the Afghan office responsible for oversight of the petroleum and natural gas industries, two-thirds of the staff were fired.

Exploiting these resources, which are estimated to be worth as much as $1 trillion, is pivotal to Afghanistan’s economic future. SIGAR noted that the Afghan government has shown progress under USAID’s tutelage in regulating and developing the commercial export of the resources. But the report said the project was still hampered by corruption, structural problems and a lack of infrastructure for the mining industry, such as reliable roads. Many of the mines operate illegally, with some profit going to the insurgency, SIGAR said.

When it came to individual extractive projects, there was little progress made, the IG found.

The controversial Pentagon task force in charge of much of the effort, the Task Force for Business Stability Operations, spent $215 million on 11 extractive programs, but “after operating in Afghanistan for 5 years, TFBSO left with nearly all of its extractive projects incomplete,” SIGAR found. Three of the programs technically met objectives, but one of those is of questionable value at best. The task force built a gas station for an outrageously inflated cost and in the end it didn’t have any customers. So while the objective to create the station was achieved, SIGAR doubted it was a worthwhile venture.

The Karkar Valley coal mines in Puli Khumri, Afghanistan. (Benjamin Lowy/Getty)

The task force, made up of mostly civilian business experts and designed to develop the Afghan economy, has come under fire from SIGAR and Congress for demanding unusual and expensive accommodations in the country, allegedly punishing a whistleblower, and lacking overall accountability. The Senate is holding a hearing on the task force next week.

In today’s report, SIGAR highlighted that the task force spent $46.5 million to try to convince companies to agree to develop the resources, but not one ended up signing a contract. About $122 million worth of task force programs had mixed results, SIGAR said.

The Defense Department declined SIGAR’s request to comment on its findings. In its response, USAID said it has helped Afghanistan “enact investor-friendly extractive legislation, improve the ability to market, negotiate and regulate contracts, and generate geological data to identify areas of interest to attract investors.” Any conclusions and criticisms, USAID told SIGAR, “need to be substantially tempered by the reality that mining is a long-term endeavor.”

Megan McCloskey

Megan McCloskey

Megan McCloskey covers the military for ProPublica. Previously she was the national correspondent at Stars and Stripes.

Formal FCC Complaint filed over Google Investor Ownerships and covert hidden campaign financing

Formal FCC Complaint filed over Google Investor Ownerships and covert hidden campaign financing

November 1, 2015

Tom Wheeler, Chairman

Mignon Clybum, Commissioner

Jessica Rosenworcel, Commissioner

Ajit Pai, Commissioner

Michael O’Rielly, Commisioner

Federal Communications Commission
445 12th Street SW
Washington, DC 20554
Phone: 1-888-225-5322
TTY: 1-888-835-5322
Videophone: 1-844-432-2275
Fax: 1-866-418-0232

FORMAL FCC COMPLAINT –

FILED PUBLICLY. VOTERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO FILE THEIR OWN PERSONAL VERSION OF THIS COMPLAINT ON THE FCC.GOV WEBSITE

Tom Wheeler| Chairman

Tom Wheeler was sworn in as the 31st Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission on November 4, 2013. Chairman Wheeler was appointed by President Barack Obama and unanimously confirmed by the United States Senate.

Bio | Staff | Speeches | Statements | Twitter | Email | Blog

Mignon Clyburn | Commissioner

Mignon Clyburn served as Acting Chairwoman of the Federal Communications Commission, following her appointment by President Barack Obama on May 20, 2013. She was nominated for her first term as Commissioner on June 25, 2009 and sworn-in on August 3, 2009. As Commissioner, she is serving a second term for which she was sworn in on February 19, 2013.

Bio | Staff | Speeches | Statements | Twitter | Email | Blog

Jessica Rosenworcel | Commissioner

Jessica Rosenworcel was nominated for a seat on the Federal Communications Commission by President Barack Obama and on May 7, 2012 was confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate. On May 11, 2012, she was sworn in.

Bio | Staff | Speeches | Statements | Editorials | Twitter | Instagram | Email

Ajit Pai | Commissioner

Ajit Pai was nominated to the Federal Communications Commission by President Barack Obama and on May 7, 2012 was confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate. On May 14, 2012, he was sworn in for a term that concludes on June 30, 2016.

Bio | Staff | Speeches | Statements | Testimony | Editorials | Twitter | Email

Michael O’Rielly | Commissioner

Michael O’Rielly was nominated for a seat on the Federal Communications Commission by President Barack Obama on August 1, 2013 and was confirmed unanimously by the United States Senate on October 29, 2013. He was sworn into office on November 4, 2013.

Dear Chairman and Commissioners:

This is a formal complaint filed with the FCC against Google, Inc. Copies of this document, and associated evidence have been published globally and CC:d to all concerned parties.

Google, Inc., and, it’s financially connected front companies, and investors, have provided billions of dollars of non-disclosed campaign financing in the form of search engine manipulation, public user mood manipulation, counter-ideology news story hiding and DNS server re-direction, along with other media communications selective ideological information manipulation. Recent court decisions have proven that Internet social media advertising and information manipulation IS a campaign contribution.

Google has not reported their use of these political actions, nor have they reported the parties who financed them to undertake these actions, nor have they reported their true ownerships and pass-along controls of these actions by extreme political interests among their owners and handlers.

This is a violation of U.S. laws and a violation of the trust of the public with which you are charged.

Google has been paid billions of dollars from the U.S. Treasury.

Google’s investors were exclusively awarded billions of dollars in the Department of Energy “Cleantech Scandal”. In that scandal, Google used U.S. communications resources to falsify stock valuations for people like Elon Musk, while promoting Elon Musk and hiding all negative news about Elon Musk while Google investors exclusively profited from those manipulations using U.S. communications resources.

More heinously, Google used U.S. Communications resources, to character assassinate domestic U.S. Citizens who were U.S. voters in order to engage in political retribution against those citizens attempts to report Google’s violations. Senators, CBS news reporters, average citizens, competitors and many more, numbering in the thousands have lost their lives, incomes and careers because of Google’s malicious political attacks ordered by the extremists Silicon Valley Billionaire Cartel owners.

The voters of America ask that a Special Prosecutor be appointed to investigate these charges.

The voters of America ask the U.S. Congress to hold special public hearings to review the evidence in these charges.

While it is well known that the current FCC represents the interests of the Democrat political party, even the most liberal views cannot tolerate the private, covert, extreme political manipulations engaged in by Google and it’s egotistical narcissistic investors. No matter your ideology, to condone the conspiratorial private business manipulations that Google, and it’s investors, have engaged in, at the expense of the American public, must be beyond the conscientious tolerance of any political employee.

Tens of thousands of published news stories, along with hundreds of thousands of pages of evidence, now en-route to your committee, prove this to be fact. The key points include:

  • ## The Silicon Valley billionaire Cartel controls much of the content broadcast on a Internet via their ownership of GOOGLE assets.

  • ## GOOGLE is part of an expanding global web of websites in which the Silicon Valley billionaire’s involvement is obscured.

  • ## When candidates, whistle-blowers and public news reporters need to be killed, with character assassination, top political operatives issue the kill-order to GOOGLE

  • ## Behind GOOGLE’s coverage is a fact that’s never broadcast: The The Silicon Valley billionaire Cartel controls much of what airs on the Internet, which can be heard on Capitol Hill and at the White House.

  • ## Elon Musk was given tens of Billions of free taxpayer dollars as a kick-back and then Google covered the whole thing up. “That whole Solyndra “Cleantech” fisaco was just a scam to finance their White House takeover plot.” Eric Schmidt has spent more time inside the White House, on lobby campaigns, than all of the members of Congress, combined.

  • ## Investigations, spanning every state, have identified at least hundreds of communications entities that are part of a covert U.S. news web structured in a way that obscures its majority shareholder: GOOGLE and it’s stock benficiaries.

  • ## Corporate and regulatory filings around the world, identify a web of news Internets connected to Silicon Valley campaign financing Billionaires and behind-the-scenes control of Google operations

  • ## Google, inc. has covertly, illicitly and unethical harvested U.S. voters personal information, psychologically analyzed that private data and sold user and voter psychological profiles to outside third parties, without fully disclosing those third parties, and their intents.

  • ## Reporters monitored broadcasts in many of these states, programming distributed primarily in English and Silicon Valley Billionaires, but also in local languages, including Spanish, Italian and Chinese. Regulatory, zoning, property, tax, immigration and corporate records, including news Internet purchase contracts and lease agreements prove that these associated Internets primarily broadcast content created or supplied by GOOGLE or by media companies it controls in the United States, Australia and Europe. Silicon Valley Billionaire businessmen, who are GOOGLE’s local partners, run the companies and in some cases own a stake in the Internets. The network reaches across America and to outside territories.

  • ## In almost all cases Google, through covert ownership tricks, owns the majority control of the news information but obfuscates that fact by theatrical record-keeping.

  • ## U.S. law enforced by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) prohibits covert secret internal governments, or their representatives, from holding a news license for a U.S. broadcast Internet. Under the Communications Act, covert payola individuals, governments and corporations are restricted from ownership in entities that can be manipulated to control public perceptions for ideology.

  • ## These allegations state that Google, and it’s investors have engaged in organized crime and the violation of U.S. laws by operating covertly for private business and political gain.

  • ## U.S. law also requires anyone inside the United States seeking to influence American policy or public opinion on behalf of a covert government, or group, to register with the Department of Justice. Public records show that GOOGLE’s U.S. Silicon Valley Billionaires-American business partner and his companies haven’t registered as lobbyists or political agents under the law. Google has clearly engaged in the broadcasting of propaganda for private personal gain and the manipulation of U.S. policy to benefit the personal stock holdings of its investors and the politicians they compensate with those stock holdings.

Sincerely,

The Voters of the United States

In Reply to: Record Keeping Secretary – Senate Ethics Committee- U.S. Senate

CC: All relevant parties

Enclosures: Evidence Packs 1 through 122. Provided on DVD and in torrent uploads on common file sharing servcices.

(VIDEO) How Google Proved It’s “Kill Mode” on Rick Santorum, For a Major Partner

As the story goes, A famous Google executive bet a DNC leader that he could destroy any Senator within 30 days. The DNC leader said: “OK, Do Rick Santorum”. Within 30 days, the entire internet search system had listed Rick Santorum as “Anal Sex Butt Froth”, from every search result on Earth. Santorum’s Congressional staff charged Google with rigging, and locking search engine results but Eric Schmidt publicly stated that “it was not possible for Google to target search engine results”. The world now knows that Schmidt lied!

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

(VIDEO) DID GOOGLE TRY THIS WITH THE WHITE HOUSE, TOO?

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

(VIDEO) The Dangers of Working At Google

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

 

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

 

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

(VIDEO) How To Sue Google

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

(VIDEO) JUST BE EVIL: The Unauthorized History Of Google

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

(VIDEOS) Google Charged With Using Psychological Warfare Tricks On Consumers

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

(VIDEO) The Cleantech Crash: How Google Insiders Screwed America

The Cleantech Crash: How Google Insiders Screwed America

Google VC’s, owners, investment bankers, lobbyists and executives were the primary financing and manipulation group behind the taxpayer scam documented in the 60 MINUTES episode, called THE CLEANTECH CRASH. This abuse of public funds, via a payola campaign finance kick-back scam has lost taxpayers nearly a trillion dollars of their money. While the public is aware of the FBI raid on Solyndra and the mysterious, sudden, disappearance of Abound, Fisker, Ener1, A123, and the rest, immediately after receipt of vast amounts of taxpayer dollars; the deep connections to all of the Google key players, finances and holdings is truly disturbing. The fact that Google billionaire: Eric Schmidt’s position, in White House policy meetings and federal hiring decisions, exceeds the combined positions of ALL OF THE U.S. CONGRESS is disturbing to most people from ANY political party.

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

Google and Gawker Media: Partners In Character Assassination

From politicians to celebrities to journalists to CEO’s; Google and Gawker Media work hand-in-hand to synchronize character assassinations, defamation programs and brand destruction against their assigned political enemies.

When a billionaire Silicon Valley campaign financier or a West Wing press aide wants someone killed, covertly, without breaking too many laws, they have the Google/Gawker take-down machine go to work.

Just like the two girlfriends in the notorious Internet film: “Two Girls, One Cup”, they each produce a coordinated volume of targeted media waste and then share it, and regurgitate it back and forth to each other.

Gawker sets up the hatchet-job ball and Google kicks it down the court, over, and over, and over again.

Google uses it’s monopolistic, web-baron, control of the entire Internet to lock the attack articles and hatchet jobs on the top line of the first page of it’s search engine results and on the top results on it’s YOUTUBE site.

Billions of people, across the planet just saw you being falsely accused of being a “Prostitute”, “Rapist”, “Child Porn Enthusiast”, or other life-ending thing, by the world’s biggest monopolistic search engine.

Both companies have the same financial connections, backers, advertisers, lobbying connections, off-shore tax evasion tricks, political connections, party invite lists and email and text each other with political coordination plans. They are linked by common players, strategies, timing, stock pumps and beneficiaries.

For More on this, see the following news coverage aggregations….

DOWNLOAD NEWS AGGREGATION SET ONE (CLICK HERE)

 

DOWNLOAD NEWS AGGREGATION SET TWO (CLICK HERE)

 

GAWKER-POST


 

 

From The New Yorker Magazine:

“Gawker Stalker: Nick Denton Spotted in Cayman Islands Written by John Cassidy

Here’s the real skinny:

1) Gawker’s top advertising executive, Chris Batty, the person primarily responsible for bringing in the green that pays the rest of the staff’s wages, has quit or been pushed out, and he’s taking with him the firm’s top salesman. Actually, the media-savvy Denton put this bad news out himself, in a long e-mail to staff that was leaked earlier this week. But Salmon has lots of background to Batty’s departure, which he says is likely to hit Gawker’s revenues in the coming months. Seems Batty and Denton disagreed about the wisdom of junking the blog format that Gawker pioneered and trying to become an online cable network, which is what appears to be in Denton’s mind.

2) Gawker is organized like an international money-laundering operation.

Much of its international revenues are directed through Hungary, where Denton’s mother hails from, and where some of the firm’s techies are located. But that is only part of it. Recently, Salmon reports, the various Gawker operations-Gawker Media LLC, Gawker Entertainment LLC, Gawker Technology LLC, Gawker Sales LLC-have been restructured to bring them under control of a shell company based in the Cayman Islands, Gawker Media Group Inc.

Why would a relatively small media outfit based in Soho choose to incorporate itself in a Caribbean locale long favored by insider dealers, drug cartels, hedge funds, and other entities with lots of cash they don’t want to advertise? The question virtually answers itself, but for those unversed in the intricacies of international tax avoidance Salmon spells it

out: “The result is a company where 130 U.S. employees eat up the lion’s share of the the U.S. revenues, resulting in little if any taxable income, while the international income, the franchise value of the brands, and the value of the technology all stays permanently overseas, untouched by the I.R.S.”


“By Rusty Weiss |

Financial journalist, Felix Salmon reported:

Gawker Media has been going through a big corporate revamp over the past year or so. The ultimate parent company has never been in the U.S.: it used to be Blogwire in Hungary, but now Blogwire Hungary has become a subsidiary of a Cayman Islands entity called Gawker Media Group Inc, which also owns various U.S. operations like Gawker Media LLC, Gawker Entertainment LLC, Gawker Technology LLC, and Gawker Sales LLC.

Then there’s this little tidbit of information; something regarding obscene profits, untaxed revenue, and side-stepping the IRS…

The Hungarian companies get all of Gawker’s international income, which flows in from 13 different salespeople in ten different countries and which, since it’s international income flowing to a Hungarian company owned by a Cayman Islands parent, is basically pure profit which never comes close to being taxed in the U.S. The result is a company where 130 U.S. employees eat up the lion’s share of the U.S. revenues, resulting in little if any taxable income, while the international income, the franchise value of the brands, and the value of the technology all stays permanently overseas, untouched by the IRS.”

 

 

Standing Up To Corporate Bullies and Asshole Billionaires

69AckM8 - Imgur

In most people’s opinion, Google is a big corporate bully run by “Asshole billionaires” with a penchant for demagoguery. Individuals and the voting public, as a whole, must stand up to big, unethical bullies like these!


 

Bullying is the use of force, threat, or coercion to abuse, intimidate, or aggressively dominate others. The behavior is often repeated and habitual. One essential prerequisite is the perception, by the bully or by others, of an imbalance of social or physical power, which distinguishes bullying from conflict.[1] Behaviors used to assert such domination can include verbal harassment or threat, physical assault or coercion, and such acts may be directed repeatedly towards particular targets, like bribing politicians to attack competitors and rigging the largest search engine on Earth to destroy voters lives.


Posted by Cecil Rosner

Cecil RosnerCecil Rosner

One of the most potent threats to investigative journalism comes from the legal departments of big corporations, writes Cecil Rosner. Here’s a great example and the lessons for journalists.

The BBC wasn’t  mincing its words last May when it reported on a shocking incident involving a multinational corporation and one of the poorest countries on earth.

“It is the biggest toxic dumping scandal of the 21st century,” the public broadcaster said, “the type of environmental vandalism that international treaties are supposed to prevent. Now Newsnight can reveal the truth about the waste that was illegally tipped on Ivory Coast’s biggest city, Abidjan.”

The story involved the giant oil and mineral-trading firm Trafigura, which was attempting to treat and dispose of hundreds of tons of toxic sulphur sludge. In the dead of night on August 18, 2006, the waste was off-loaded in Abidjan and dumped all over the city. Residents picked through debris, looking for anything of value. Thousands later got sick.
Reporters NotebookReporters Notebook

The BBC interviewed Fidel Kouadio, eight months pregnant when the fumes invaded her home. She gave birth prematurely and her baby died within a day. According to some reports, nearly 100,000 people eventually sought hospital treatment, and more than 30,000 launched a lawsuit against the company, citing breathing problems, diarrhea and other health issues.

Ever since the episode had begun in 2006, Trafigura tried to deflect responsibility for the dumping and argued that the materials weren’t particularly dangerous anyway, only that they smelled bad. The company also launched a comprehensive public relations campaign to counteract negative publicity. And they aggressively threatened to sue media outlets who waded into the story.

According to the Guardian newspaper, whenever journalists tried to write critically about the company, they were pressured by Carter-Ruck, London’s most aggressive libel lawyers. The BBC was slapped with a libel writ for its reporting, and other journalists in the Netherlands and Norway were put on notice as well.

Last month, the story took another twist when the Guardian and BBC revealed internal company emails showing that Trafigura knew the waste dumped in Abidjan was so toxic it was banned across Europe. The emails revealed an effort to profit from suspect methods of treating the waste. As the story was breaking, Trafigura countered with compensation offers to the thousands of people who had initiated the lawsuit against it.

The damning internal emails had been gathered by a group of agencies including Greenpeace and Amnesty and shared with reporters at different media outlets. The Guardian said the effort was a good example of international co-operation among media outlets. Spokesmen for Greenpeace said they noticed many media outlets shying away from the story in the early going because of fears they would be sued. But the eventual release of the emails gave the story a different complexion.

Even the UN human rights special rapporteur, Okechukwu Ibeanu, criticized the company for potentially stifling independent reporting and public criticism in a report Trafigura ironically tried to prevent being published as well. Trafigura maintains the settlement of the court case vindicates its position, and it continues to deny direct responsibility for the dumping, which was done by a sub-contractor.

What are the lessons for investigative journalists from this episode? For one thing, it demonstrates that even in an age of international awareness of human rights and environmental concerns, there can be disturbing cases of illegal activities that affect so many thousands of people. What is equally disturbing is how little coverage the case has received  in North America.

Secondly, the case is another reminder of the courage that journalists need to show in the face of intense pressures. Threats of lawsuits and gag orders can weigh heavily on individual journalists and their organizations. The BBC responded with a fighting defence, arguing that Trafigura’s denials lacked candour and credibility, and accusing the company of a cover-up.

Even though Trafigura has agreed to pay about $50 million to settle compensation claims, and an additional $160 million to the Ivory Coast government for the cleanup, the case is not over. Greenpeace now wants to prosecute Trafigura in the British courts for manslaughter and causing grievous bodily harm.

(Image by alex-s. Used under Creative Commons license.)

Cecil Rosner is managing editor for CBC Manitoba and editor of J-Source’s Investigative Journalism area. He teaches investigative journalism at the University of Winnipeg, and is the author of Behind the Headlines: A History of Investigative Journalism in Canada.


Standing Up to Corporate Bullies: When the Courtroom Becomes the Playground

I have come to realize that my professional life basically boils down to standing up to bullies. The only difference is that the playground is now a courtroom instead of an asphalt lot behind my elementary school. Our practice primarily consists of representing franchisees who have been ripped off by con men and thieves disguised as franchisors who, many times, are no different from the bullies we all encountered as kids. Instead of using physical strength that childhood bullies use, these grown-up bullies use their money to try to control their prey. The vast resources these bullies have can be a very effective deterrent to those who may seek to challenge questionable business practices. However, when those victimized by such bullies stand up to these con men and thieves, the victims usually win. I use the bully analogy as a way of introduction to one of our recent cases. Beautiful Brands International, LLC, (“BBI”) is a company based in Oklahoma. They tout themselves as “premier franchise development and restaurant innovation company.” However, if recent articles in the Tulsa World and Franchise Times are to be believed, the “innovation” is failing and there are many unhappy franchisees and brand partners. I am not here to talk about the problems in the BBI system, though. This article is about the blatant bully tactics this company is taking to silence its critics.

After the article critical of BBI was published by the Tulsa World, several comments were made online about the company. A few of those comments were made by a user known as Unhappy Franchisee and Unhappyfranchisee.com. Keep in mind that there were several other comments by other posters on the site. However, BBI singled out Unhappy Franchisee and filed suit against “John Doe.” BBI used that filing to issue subpoenas to the Tulsa World and Google to obtain identifying information about Unhappy Franchisee. I was contacted by “Mr. Doe” and agreed to take the case. At first, Mr. Doe and I discussed filing motions attacking the subpoenas by asserting his First Amendment right to free speech. However, after further discussions, it occurred to us that BBI was simply using the subpoenas to bully my client and as a deterrent to others standing up to their suspicious business practices. We know that BBI already knows the identity of “John Doe” as several threatening, crude and outrageous tweets have been directed to him by this “premier” franchise development company. Reading those tweets brought me full circle back to the days on the playground. It was time to stand up to the bully.

“Mr. Doe” authorized me to disclose his identity to the attorney for BBI which I did today. Mr. Doe is a man by the name of Sean Kelly. Mr. Kelly operates a website known as http://www.unhappyfranchisee.com. That site is an invaluable resource for those considering the purchase of a franchise and for those having issues with their franchisor. There is power in numbers and the site gives a voice to those who have been bullied and beat down by fraudulent and failing franchise systems. Needless to say, Sean Kelly is not very popular with the bullies. Sean should be commended because by agreeing to the disclosure of his identity, he has now opened himself up to a lawsuit alleging that he defamed this “innovative” company. However, Sean Kelly not only talks the talk, he walks the walk. Sean is in the business of helping franchisees like I am. He has been in that line of work much longer than me. I can tell you that we do not do this to get rich. We do it because it’s the right thing to do. It will now be interesting to see what the bully does.

I have a 9-year-old son (actually, he’ll be 10 at the end of this month). I have always told my son, much to the dismay of his mother, that if you stand up to a bully, 99% of the time they will back down. The other 1% of the time, the bully keeps coming because they lack the intellectual capacity to see that they have lost their power. I see the exact same scenario play out in the courtroom. When those victimized by these overgrown bullies stand up to them in our playground known as the courtroom, they see that they are now on a much more level playing field. Unlike the playgrounds of our youth, the justice system operates under a set of rules that all parties must respect. Justice requires that these rules be applied in a non-discriminatory fashion without regard to the financial strength of the parties. Many times franchisors try to use the court system to further bully their victims. However, if the victims stand up for their rights, our justice system will neutralize that improper and perverted use of the system.

I am proud to represent individuals who, at one time, felt like they lacked the power to stand up to bullies. To see their joy and happiness when they are vindicated in the justice system is worth more than any amount of money I could ever be paid. I am also proud to represent Sean Kelly, a friend and a man who has inspired and given me the strength to continue these fights throughout the past several years. This is not an easy profession, but Sean Kelly, through his actions, shows me that I am not alone. If you have been victimized by a company who has taken money from you by fraud, don’t be afraid to stand up for yourself. We are here to guide you through the legal system and take the fear of the unknown out of the equation. We are here to use the power of the judicial system to advocate for you. Call us for a free and completely confidential consultation.

Jonathan E. Fortman
LAW OFFICE OF JONATHAN E. FORTMAN, LLC
250 Saint Catherine Street
Florissant, Missouri 63031
(314) 522-2312
jef@fortmanlaw.com

http://www.fortmanlaw.com


Google’s Corporate bullies – YouTube

Bullying and Corporate Psychopaths at Work: Clive Boddy at TEDxHanzeUniversity – Duration: 14:33. by TEDx Talks 106,171 views. 14:33 How to Handle a …


The Great GOOGLE Hack! PART 2

EVERY Server Has Been Broken Into!

  • Any network with even a single Cisco, or Juniper Networks, device was “wide-open” to “any kid with a keyboard for last ten years”

  • Hackers have “run amuck” through corruption records, political kick-back documents, Department of Energy files and background check files

  • Agencies warned over eight years ago but refused to remove Cisco and Juniper hardware because of supplier kick-back deals

  • Any Chinese hacker could get in “with ease, and very little skill”…

  • HUGE implications for 2016 election revelations. Hacked campaign documents already rolling in…

(Mis)Uses of Technology

by Mike Masnick

Filed Under:
backdoors, china, cybersecurity, privacy, russia, security

Companies:
juniper networks

Permalink.

US Gov’t Agencies Freak Out Over Juniper Backdoor; Perhaps They’ll Now Realize Why Backdoors Are A Mistake

from the wishful-thinking dept

Last week, we wrote about how Juniper Networks had uncovered some unauthorized code in its firewall operating system, allowing knowledgeable attackers to get in and decrypt VPN traffic. While the leading suspect still remains the NSA, it’s been interesting to watch various US government agencies totally freak out over their own networks now being exposed:

The FBI is investigating the breach, which involved hackers installing a back door on computer equipment, U.S. officials told CNN. Juniper disclosed the issue Thursday along with an emergency security patch that it urged customers to use to update their systems “with the highest priority.”

The concern, U.S. officials said, is that sophisticated hackers who compromised the equipment could use their access to get into any company or government agency that used it.

One U.S. official described it as akin to “stealing a master key to get into any government building.”

And, yes, this equipment is used all throughout the US government:

Juniper sells computer network equipment and routers to big companies and to U.S. government clients such as the Defense Department, Justice Department, FBI and Treasury Department. On its website, the company boasts of providing networks that “US intelligence agencies require.”

Its routers and network equipment are widely used by corporations, including for secure communications. Homeland Security officials are now trying to determine how many such systems are in use for U.S. government networks.

And, of course, US officials are insisting that it couldn’t possibly be the NSA, but absolutely must be the Russians or the Chinese:

The breach is believed to be the work of a foreign government, U.S. officials said, because of the sophistication involved. The U.S. officials said they are certain U.S. spy agencies themselves aren’t behind the back door. China and Russia are among the top suspected governments, though officials cautioned the investigation hasn’t reached conclusions.

Yeah, sure. Anything’s possible, but the NSA still has to be the leading suspect here, and the insistence that it’s the Chinese or the Russians without more proof seems like a pretty clear attempt at keeping attention off the NSA.

And, of course, all of this is happening at the very same time that the very same US government that is now freaking out about this is trying to force every tech company to install just this kind of backdoor. Because, as always, these technically illiterate bureaucrats still seem to think that you can create backdoors that only “good” people can use.

But that’s not how technology works.

Indeed, now that it’s been revealed that there was a backdoor in this Juniper equipment, it took one security firm all of six hours to figure out the details:

Ronald Prins, founder and CTO of Fox-IT, a Dutch security firm, said the patch released by Juniper provides hints about where the master password backdoor is located in the software. By reverse-engineering the firmware on a Juniper firewall, analysts at his company found the password in just six hours.

“Once you know there is a backdoor there, … the patch [Juniper released] gives away where to look for [the backdoor] … which you can use to log into every [Juniper] device using the Screen OS software,” he told WIRED. “We are now capable of logging into all vulnerable firewalls in the same way as the actors [who installed the backdoor].”

Putting backdoors into technology is a bad idea. Security experts and technologists keep saying this over and over and over and over again — and politicians and law enforcement still don’t seem to get it. And, you can pretty much bet that even though they now have a very real world example of it — in a way that’s impacting their own computer systems — they’ll continue to ignore it. Instead, watch as they blame the Chinese and the Russians and still pretend that somehow, when they mandate backdoors, those backdoors won’t get exploited by those very same Chinese and Russian hackers they’re now claiming were crafty enough to slip code directly into Juniper’s source code without anyone noticing.

Permalink.

Blackberry CEO Gives Public One More Reason To Not Buy Its Phones By Arguing For Greater Law Enforcement Cooperation

from the the-greater-good-is-apparently-whatever-the-government-says-it-is dept

Blackberry’s CEO John Chen feels the company hasn’t hit rock-bottom yet. In a post for the company’s blog, Chen announces that the phone favored by much of The Establishment will continue to support the hopes and dreams of The Establishment.

There will be no “going dark” at Blackberry.

Leaked Documents Expose The Cell Phone Surveillance System that listened in on crimes that Google executives, owners and VC’s may have committed while rigging campaigns and policy decisions

from the and-they-are-legion-(and-expensive) dept

The Intercept has done it again. An anonymous source “concerned about the militarization of domestic law enforcement” has handed the site a catalog of cell phone surveillance equipment. Many of the products discussed in the pages are making their public debut, presumably to the deep chagrin of the manufacturers and the government agencies that use them.

While much of the equipment’s capabilities has been sussed out with FOIA requests and the occasional courtroom disclosure, the leaked documents confirm that many law enforcement agencies not only have the technology to sweep up cell phone information in bulk, but also to intercept phone calls and text messages.

The Great GOOGLE Hack! A Tsunami Of Sadness For Eric Schmidt

The Great GOOGLE Hack! A Tsunami Of Sadness For Eric Schmidt

By Ellen K and Tom L.

It is now commonly reported in the news that The White House ordered the NSA to order Cisco, Juniper Networks and other network providers to put spy back-doors into their equipment so that officials could cull any communications that indicated potential criminal terrorist activity.

Catching epically huge criminals is, generally, considered to be a good thing, by the majority of the public. Spying on the public in order to control votes and ideology is, almost entirely, frowned upon by the public.

There is a strange twilight zone in-between those concerns. What if an epically huge organization was doing bad criminal things in order to control the votes and ideology of the public. That would be: GOOGLE.

It is also commonly reported in the news that Chinese, Russian and entrepreneurial hackers got the “keys” to Cisco’s, Juniper Networks, and most of the other back-door’d server companies gear. They came in to the top Fortune 2000 companies and spent over a decade taking everything. They swept through the U.S. Department of Energy over 300 times. They took EVERY background check file the U.S. government has produced. They got into the White House, The CIA and … everything.

At the same time the Chinese, and entrepreneurial dark web independent hackers, went on a shopping spree through every R&D department of every defense company and Silicon Valley company that had interesting technology. They Hoover-ed up the keys to the kingdoms.

Cisco and Juniper Networks executives are now known to have fully cooperated in the placing of these back-doors in their customers products. History has proven that the back-doors had high-school level security which any good hacker could crack in less than an hour. John Chamber’s has left Cisco at the same time this was discovered. In a few years, you can expect hundreds of billions of dollars of lawsuits over this, from companies who lost everything because their security supplier sold them swiss cheese security hardware. Typical daily news revelations now include stories such as this:

reuters2

Related: Tech

Juniper Networks will drop code tied to National Security Agency

SAN FRANCISCO | By Joseph Menn

A National Security Agency (NSA) data gathering facility is seen in Bluffdale, about 25 miles (40 km) south of Salt Lake City, Utah, December 16, 2013. Jim Urquhart/REUTERS
A National Security Agency (NSA) data gathering facility is seen in Bluffdale, about 25 miles (40 km) south of Salt Lake City, Utah, December 16, 2013. Jim Urquhart/REUTERS

 

Juniper Networks Inc said late on Friday it would stop using a piece of security code that analysts believe was developed by the National Security Agency in order to eavesdrop through technology products.

The Silicon Valley maker of networking gear said it would ship new versions of security software in the first half of this year to replace those that rely on numbers generated by Dual Elliptic Curve technology.

The statement on a blog post came a day after the presentation at a Stanford University conference of research by a team of cryptographers who found that Juniper’s code had been changed in multiple ways during 2008 to enable eavesdropping on virtual private network sessions by customers.

Last month, Sunnyvale-based Juniper said it had found and replaced two unauthorized pieces of code that allowed “back door” access, which the researchers said had appeared in 2012 and 2014.

The 2014 back door was straightforward, said researcher Hovav Shacham of the University of California, San Diego, allowing anyone with the right password to see everything.

The 2012 code changed a mathematical constant in Juniper’s Netscreen products that should have allowed its author to eavesdrop, according to Shacham and his fellow investigators.

Juniper’s initial patch had gotten rid of that constant in Dual Elliptic Curve and replaced it with the version it had been using since 2008.

But the academics who studied the code said that while Juniper had not disavowed the 2008 code, it had not explained how that constant was picked or why it was using the widely faulted Dual Elliptic Curve at all.

Still another curve constant, quietly provided by the NSA and required for some federal certification, was exposed in documents leaked by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden as a key to the back door.

Until now, the most influential adopter of Dual Elliptic Curve was believed to be RSA, part of storage company EMC, which Reuters reported received a $10-million federal contract to distribute it in a software kit for others.

Though the academic team looking at Juniper has not named a suspect in the 2008, 2012 or 2014 changes, 2008 was one year after veteran cryptographers raised questions about Dual Elliptic Curve.

A very advanced adversary could have seen how to manipulate Dual EC and in theory managed to insert code through a cooperative or unsuspecting Juniper employee, but the company had not advertised the fact that it was using the formula at all.

A more logical suspect, said expert Nicholas Weaver of the International Computer Science Institute, was the NSA, which might have been displaced later by other countries’ agencies or top-level hackers in 2012 and 2014.

The NSA did not immediately respond to an emailed request for comment.

Juniper said it was continuing to investigate. here

It declined to answer questions from Reuters about the revisions.

(Reporting by Joseph Menn; Editing by Clarence Fernandez)

———–

So the spy stuff is out. The back-doors were/are there. They were poorly secured. They cost U.S. companies trillions of dollars in information and competitive market losses. But; this is not the end of the story.

Google has been facing, and losing, an escalating number of abuse lawsuits. Wouldn’t it be great if those who are suing Google, for using their global architecture to abuse and attack, people, had copies of Eric Schmidt’s emails and text messages saying “Go wipe him out, use the entire Google network to turn him, and his company, into dirt..”?

That may be about to happen.

Since before 2008, Google investors, executives, contractors and owners have had all of their email and business information on network systems which were run by Juniper and Cisco network hardware. It only takes a SINGLE Cisco or Juniper device to let you inside of an entire corporate network. Ask Sony! Even though IT experts warned Google that “we might have a problem”, the thought of finding, and pulling out, every single Juniper and Cisco hardware device, in every building and email system, was more than the Google finance people could wrap their heads around. Short term profit greed overcame long term vision.

So the great Google Hack happened.

A huge number of people and organizations hate Google. Many would have just plundered Google for pure revenge and spite.

The Chinese, Russian, Anonymous, Lizard Squad, North Korean, Guccifer-like and weird Ukrainian bored 14 year old contingent went on a rampage throughout Google, Google’s partners, Google’s investor’s and anybody that an interesting Google executive had emailed or Google-voiced to.

Want to read an email between the notorious Kleiner Perkin’s Cartel boss John Doerr and Eric Schmidt plotting a campaign financing scam? Just post the dates of the email sets that you want on 4Chan, or some other dark web site, and you will get a price quote from a Chinese or Estonian IP address. The files will show up on GitHub 48 hours after you send your Bitcoin payment. These state-class hackers have set up a mall-type commerce system to sell all of the info they scooped up.

Google has often felt like they were untouchable because they controlled Eric Holder, Half the White House, The U.S. Patent Office, The FCC and had paid off half of Congress and the California Senate. Holder is gone. Snowden happened. More leaks are coming. Russia, China, the entire EU, the Cable and Wireless industry, the GOP, and many others have gone to war against Google, advertisers are running to the hills and Google is hated by more and more of the world.

Anything, that any law enforcement or litigation investigator finds on-line is fair game. Hackers even have “Chinese take out” menus of information sets:

Hillary emails $220,000.00 US

Eric Schmidt divorce emails $80,000.00 US

Brin Sex Scandal sexy texts and emails with Google Glass girl $71,000.00 US

The truth is out there. It is in a little apartment in Beijing. It is in a trailer in Minsk. It is in a warehouse in Sao Paolo. In most cases, it only took a 22 year old with a laptop to gut the biggest darkest, spookiest secrets of the biggest Internet company in history. How could one or two of these kids scour through millions of pages of Google documents? Microsoft File Search tools, left running all night, help the hacker kiddies plow through reams of material by simply putting the keyword “campaign funds”, “antitrust”, “Musk”, or other interesting phrases, in the search fields.

Google’s “don’t do evil” motto turned out to be the exact opposite of what Google actually did do. Their billions, their hubris, and their immorality without consequence, left Google feeling like it was above the law. Now, the reality will dawn on Google. The law has a long arm!

——————

How Do Back Doors Work?

Hacking Corporate and Political emails, and servers just became as easy as sliced pie

– Every Political candidate paying “Opposition Researchers” for hacked secrets on the other candidates

– NO MORE SECRETS may even be possible due to wide-open back-doors with the poorest security in the world

Let me tell you that almost every day of the year, it’s been a complete and unmitigated disaster for security. Encryption is used by banks to keep your money safe, it’s used by government to keep its secrets safe, and it’s used by companies to protect your data. But despite being the very fabric of keeping society and the internet safe and secure, encryption has been threatened by far too many narrow-minded bureaucrats with little knowledge or foresight to the consequences of its unraveling, who are paid by businesses to act as proxy spokespeople on their behalf for the trade-off of staying in power.

Encryption. It’s become the hot topic of the year, with sides both for and against fighting for their heartfelt belief. The security community has consistently had to fight to be heard, knowing their views will be unlikely to influence policy, because they are — sadly — people without a badge or an embossed business card, or an office on the Washington DC political mile.

FBI director James Comey has called on companies to use encryption backdoors, so much so he’s promised he’s not a “maniac” about it. Senate intelligence committee chair Richard Burr called encryption a “big problem out there that we are going to have to deal with,” despite also saying that it likely wasn’t used in the Paris terrorist attacks, or more recently, the shooting in San Bernardino. And Britain, on the other side of the pond, is pushing for counter-encryption legislation, which may force companies to weaken or ditch encryption at the behest of the government.

All too often, the encryption debate has been driven by the ill-informed media citing unnamed and anonymous US intelligence officials, who by virtue of their jobs have a biased stances. And yet some of those media outlets also called the Juniper firewall backdoor code discovery akin to “stealing a master key to get into any government building.”

In the case of Juniper, it really is that bad. The networking equipment maker, with thousands of enterprise customers, said last week it had found “unauthorized” code that effectively allowed two backdoors to exist for as long as three years. Nobody disputes that this was a backdoor. Juniper said it had no evidence to suggest the backdoor had been used, but also warned there was “no way to detect” if it had been.

The NSA was blamed for creating weakened cryptography that Juniper went on to modify — and badly. Exactly how the other backdoor got there remains a big question. In any case, companies who were running affected versions of Juniper’s firewalls were likely also targets of the suspected nation state attacker.

Juniper’s clients also include the US government, including the Defense Dept., Justice Dept. and the FBI, and the Treasury Dept., reports The Guardian, which may put federal government data at risk.

If ever there’s been a shining example of why government backdoors are a bad idea, the motherlode just got served up hot on a platter.

The Juniper breach is by far the best example of why backdoors in any products, services, or technology is a bad thing. Once the backdoors were found, it took just three days for the master password used in the backdoor to be posted online, sparking open season for any hacker to target a Juniper firewall.

If whoever planted the backdoor was non-American, it highlights the point the security community has been making for months: these backdoors can and will be used and abused by the enemy.

—————

Contrasting The Google Case with the FDR “Business Plot”

In one case, the evidence is presented proving that Google/Alphabet operates as a private government by controlling portions of the U.S. Government, the European Union and major market systems. This is not only illegal but begins to break the very fabric of the Constitutional construct of many nations. By placing it’s staff, and bribery money, inside of top state and federal agencies, Google has attempted “Coup”-like behaviours in order to promote wild ideologies held by it’s billionaire owners, who have no concept of normalcy. Did Google VC’s and owners try to copy the Smedley Butler situation?

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

An American Coup d’État?

An attempted American coup d’etat: 1934.

An attempted coup d’etat censored out of our history books, courtesy of corporate America, but not supported by the military, so European fascism didn’t happen that time. Fascism has to have the support of both corporate power and will and military/police power and obedience together or it doesn’t happen. Watch out America; the Pentagon and the Multinationals are already in allignment and have instituted Friendly Fascism outside our borders already; just ask Afghanistanis, Iraqis, Iranians, Colombians, Nicaraguans and the rest of the exploited and raped third world and the suffering poor in our own American ghettos and concentration camps.

By Gary G. Kohls, MD 1306 E. 8th St, Duluth, MN 55805

Error
This video is suspended due to terms of service violation

 

An American Coup d’État?

Some Americans regard our country as superior to other nations because we
don’t change governments by coup d’état — and we never have. Perhaps
because of our long tradition of power changing hands by election, we regard
our nation as immune to the use of force for political purposes. True,
assassins have killed four of our Presidents, but these deaths did not lead
to turmoil and chaos; the government followed well-established procedures
for transferring control to the men previously elected Vice President.
Unlike other nations where assassination often leads to civil war, the
United States has avoided this.

How different is America from nations where political power comes quite
directly “from the barrel of a gun”? A curious footnote to American history
suggests that, except for the personal integrity of a remarkable American
general, a coup d’état intended to remove President Franklin D. Roosevelt
from office in 1934 might have plunged America into civil war.


The General

This remarkable man was Smedley Darlington Butler, retired U.S. Marine Corps
Major General. Butler is the sort of person for whom the word “colorful” is
woefully inadequate. Butler won America’s highest military award for bravery
(the Congressional Medal of Honor) twice. His style of warfare was unusual
not only for his personal courage, but for the energy he put into avoiding
bloodshed when it was possible to achieve his aims in other ways. Not
surprisingly, this engendered a remarkable loyalty among the men who served
under him — and that loyalty was why certain men asked Butler to lead a
military attack on Washington, D.C., with the goal of capturing President
Roosevelt.

Butler was more than a remarkable soldier. He served as police commissioner
of Philadelphia during 1924-25 (on loan from the Marines), in an attempt to
enforce Prohibition. While the effort was a failure, his insistence on
enforcing the law against wealthy partygoers as well as poor immigrants
established his reputation as a man of high integrity. He was not
universally loved, but he was widely respected.

Butler is best remembered today for his oft-quoted statement in the
socialist newspaper Common Sense in 1935:

I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests
in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City
Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen
Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. The record of
racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international
banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-12. I brought light to the Dominican
Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras
“right” for American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see
to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested…. Looking back on it, I
felt I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to
operate his racket in three city districts. We Marines operated on three
continents.

In War Is A Racket, Butler argued for a powerful navy, but one prohibited
from traveling more than 200 miles from the U.S. coastline. Military
aircraft could travel no more than 500 miles from the U.S. coast, and the
army would be prohibited from leaving the United States. Butler also
proposed that all workers in defense industries, from the lowest laborer to
the highest executive, be limited to “$30 a month, the same wage as the lads
in the trenches get.” He also proposed that a declaration of war should be
passed by a plebiscite in which only those subject to conscription would be
eligible to vote.

>From 1935 through 1937, Butler was a spokesman for the League Against War
and Fascism, a Communist-dominated organization of the time. He also
participated in the Third U.S. Congress Against War and Fascism, sharing the
platform with well-known leftists of the era, including Langston Hughes,
Heywood Broun, and Roger Baldwin. When the Spanish Civil War (1936-39)
threatened the collapse of the Soviet-supported Spanish government, the
League’s pacifism evaporated, and they supported intervention. Butler,
however, remained true to his belief in non-interventionism: “What the hell
is it our business what’s going on in Spain?” But before Butler became
involved in these causes, he had already exposed a fascist plot against his
own government.


The Plot

Butler had friends in the press and Congress, so he could not be ignored
when he came forward in late 1934 with a tale of conspiracy against
President Roosevelt, in which he had been asked to take a leading role. At
first glance, Butler seems an unlikely candidate for such a position. While
Butler was a Republican, in 1932 he campaigned for Roosevelt, calling
himself a “Republican-for-Ex-President Hoover.” (Butler had a poor
relationship with Hoover going back to their time together during the Boxer
Rebellion.)

But there were good reasons why someone seeking to overthrow the U.S.
government would have wanted Butler involved. Butler was a powerful symbol
to many American soldiers and veterans — an enlisted man’s general, one
that spoke out for their interests while on active duty, and after
retirement. Butler would have attracted men to his cause that would not
otherwise have participated in a march on Washington.

Butler would have been a good choice also because of his military skills.
His personal courage and tactical skill would have made him a powerful
commander of an irregular army. Finally, his ties of friendship to many
officers still on active duty might have undermined military opposition to
his force, as friends and colleagues sought to avoid a direct confrontation
with him.

Another reason that the plotters might have approached such an unlikely
candidate was that Butler was not regarded as a great intellect. After World
War I, the Marine Corps had began to emphasize a new college-educated
professionalism. Butler, one of the less educated “bushwhacker” generals,
might have seemed easy to manipulate.

Butler testified that bond trader Gerald MacGuire had approached him in the
summer of 1933. MacGuire claimed to represent wealthy Wall Street broker
Grayson Murphy, Singer sewing machine heir Robert Sterling Clark, and other
unnamed men of wealth. They asked Butler to speak publicly on behalf of the
gold standard, recently abandoned by President Roosevelt. MacGuire’s
rationale for why Butler should ally himself with the gold standard cause
was that the veterans of World War I were due a bonus in 1945. As MacGuire
told Butler, “We want to see the soldiers’ bonus paid in gold. We do not
want the soldier to have rubber money or paper money.”

It appears that the plotters underestimated Butler’s intelligence and
character. When this explanation failed to persuade Butler, MacGuire and
Clark offered him money, abandoning any pretense of civic-mindness. Butler’s
sense of honor prevented him from speaking in favor of any policy for
mercenary reasons.

MacGuire eventually told Butler their real goal. MacGuire asked Butler to
lead an army of 500,000 veterans in a march on Washington, D.C. The stated
mission was to protect Roosevelt from other plotters, and install a
“secretary of general welfare” to “take all the worries and details off of
his shoulders.” But Butler saw through their supposed concern for Roosevelt.
He testified before Congress that he told MacGuire:

[M]y interest is, my one hobby is, maintaining a democracy. If you get these
500,000 soldiers advocating anything smelling of Fascism, I am going to get
500,000 more and lick the hell out of you, and we will have a real war right
at home..

Yes; and then you will put somebody in there you can run; is that the idea?
The President will go around and christen babies and dedicate bridges, and
kiss children. Mr. Roosevelt will never agree to that himself.

Butler eventually deduced that the real goal was a coup d’état to take
Roosevelt captive, and force reinstatement of the gold standard, the loss of
which many wealthy Americans feared would lead to rapid inflation. The
plotters would keep Roosevelt as a figurehead until he could be “encouraged”
to retire.

That MacGuire had significant financial backing behind him seems clear,
considering the substantial bank savings books he showed to Butler. What
remains unclear is whether the names MacGuire dropped (other than Robert
Sterling Clark) were really involved, or whether MacGuire was a con man.

MacGuire’s claims and financial resources alone did not convince Butler that
such a conspiracy actually existed. The fulfillment of a series of startling
predictions by MacGuire did finally persuade Butler that there was more than
just hot air involved. MacGuire knew in advance of significant personnel
changes in the White House. He correctly predicted the formation of the
American Liberty League (the major conservative opposition to Roosevelt),
and the principal players in it. Especially disturbing was that many of the
supposed backers of the plot were also members of the League. MacGuire’s
claim that the League (“villagers in the opera” of the scheme, in MacGuire’s
words) was part of the plot could not be easily dismissed.

The American Liberty League was a successor to the highly successful
Association Against the Prohibition Amendment, the lobbying organization
responsible for the repeal of the “Noble Experiment.” From its formation in
1918 until 1926, the AAPA made little progress, at least partly because it
had little money. But in 1926, money poured into the AAPA from some of
America’s wealthiest men, including Pierre, Irenee, and Lammot du Pont, John
J. Raskob, and Charles H. Sabin. The AAPA spent its new found wealth on
distribution of literature, and on the formation of a bewildering number of
associated organizations. These associated organizations gave the impression
of a grassroots movement, rather than a collection of millionaires feeding
press releases to friendly newspapers. The AAPA also rapidly took control of
the Democratic Party, with one of their supporters, Al Smith, receiving the
1928 Democratic Presidential nomination. While AAPA had powerful friends
within the Republican Party, they never achieved control of it.

The AAPA’s motivations were a mixture of idealism and pragmatism. The stated
concern was that Prohibition had done serious damage to the principle of
federalism — that the federal government’s authority did not include the
police powers used to enforce Prohibition. But it appears that this was not
the only motivation, or even the reason most important to the men who funded
the AAPA. Like many other Americans, these business leaders “found
themselves unable to gratify what seemed a natural, more or less innocent,
desire without breaking a law” (i.e., the consumption of alcoholic
beverages). To suddenly find themselves among the criminal classes was not
pleasant to a group who had always thought of themselves as law-abiding and
respectable members of American society. There is also strong evidence that
the backers of the AAPA saw Repeal as a method of reducing income and
corporate taxes, by taxing alcoholic beverages instead.

The AAPA went out of business at the end of 1933, with the end of
Prohibition. But within a year, from the same offices, with most of the same
backers, many of the same employees, and much of the same style, it
reappeared as the American Liberty League. Throughout the next six years, it
led the fight against the New Deal, arguing that much of Roosevelt’s program
was contrary to the letter and spirit of the Constitution. In an age when
Hitler and Mussolini had commandeered extraordinary economic powers, the
fears that the American Liberty League expressed about Roosevelt’s vaguely
similar gathering of economic power could not be summarily dismissed.

The League, in spite of its impressive resources, was rapidly made to appear
“ridiculous or dangerous” or both by the Roosevelt Administration. Most
importantly, the leadership of the League was largely rich men. The
Depression-era gap between rich and poor had become too wide, too obvious,
and too painful for the League to be credible to the majority of Americans.
Butler’s testimony before Congress claimed that some of the people
associated with the League were the very ones that had approached him —
including Grayson Murphy, the League’s treasurer.

In the depths of the Great Depression, in that nadir of despair before
Roosevelt gave his stirring first inaugural address in 1933, America was
awash in political groups identifying in greater or lesser degrees with
communism or fascism. Rep. Samuel Dickstein (D-NY), concerned about the
threat of such groups, persuaded the House of Representatives to create the
Special Committee to Investigate Nazi Propaganda Activities in the United
States. This committee investigated Butler’s charges in late 1934.

MacGuire, not surprisingly, denied that such a plot existed. Instead, he
claimed his activities had been political lobbying to preserve the gold
standard, but he quickly destroyed his credibility as a witness by giving
contradictory testimony. While the final report agreed with Butler that
there was evidence of a coup d’état plot against Roosevelt, no further
action was taken on it. The Committee’s authority to subpoena witnesses
expired at the end of 1934, and the Justice Department started no criminal
investigation.

Part of the reason for the lack of prosecution of the alleged plotters may
have been the untimely death of the only man who could have testified
against the rest: Gerald MacGuire. He died at age 37 from complications of
pneumonia, less than a month after the Committee released its report.
MacGuire’s physician claimed that his death was partly the result of the
stress of the charges made by Butler, but there is no reason to assume that
MacGuire’s death was in any way suspicious.

The Committee’s report excluded many of the most embarrassing names given by
MacGuire, and repeated by Butler. MacGuire had claimed that 1928 Democratic
President candidate Al Smith, General Hugh Johnson (head of Roosevelt’s
National Recovery Administration), General Douglas MacArthur, and a number
of other generals and admirals were privy to the plot. Since Butler had no
evidence of their involvement, other than MacGuire’s claims, it was
certainly reasonable for the Committee to exclude these details from the
final report as “certain immaterial and incompetent evidence.” But in
conjunction with MacGuire’s apparent advance knowledge of the details of
internal White House staff activities, it certainly suggests that if a coup
was planned, it had significant support within the Roosevelt Administration.


The News Media Downplays The Plot

The news media gave an inappropriately small amount of attention to the
report. Time magazine ridiculed Butler’s claims. The week following Butler’s
testimony, Time described it as a “Plot Without Plotters,” simply because
the alleged plotters claimed innocence. But Time admitted that Veterans of
Foreign Wars commander James Van Zandt confirmed that he, too, had been
approached to lead such a march on Washington.

The leftist magazine New Masses carried an article by John Spivak that
included wild claims of “Jewish financiers working with fascist groups.”
Spivak’s article spun an elaborate web involving the American Jewish
Congress, the Warburg family, “which originally financed Hitler,” the Hearst
newspaper chain, the Morgan banking firm, the du Ponts, a truly impressive
list of prominent American Jewish businessmen, and Nazi spies! Spivak’s
article raised some disturbing and legitimate questions about why much of
Butler’s testimony was left out of the final committee report. But these
important concerns were seriously undermined by Spivak’s paranoid ravings.
The left-of-center magazines Nation and New Republic were unconcerned about
it, since in their view “fascism originated in pseudoradical mass
movements,” and therefore could not come from a wealthy cabal.

Newspaper descriptions of the final report are also astonishing for how
lightly most treated it. A New York Times article about subversion and
foreign agitators started on the front page, but gave only two paragraphs to
the coup plot inside the paper. “It also alleged that definite proof has
been found that the much publicized Fascist march on Washington… was
actually contemplated.” It was not a major story.

The San Francisco Chronicle took the story more seriously. The only headline
with a larger type size that day concerned the recent fatal crash of the
airship Macon. The Chronicle carried an Associated Press story headlined,
“Justice Aids Probe Butler Fascist Story.” The first five paragraphs were
devoted to Butler’s allegations. The Chronicle quoted the Committee report
that it “was able to verify all the pertinent statements by General Butler,
with the exception of the direct statement suggesting creation of the
organization.”

A third newspaper sampled showed an even more astonishing lack of interest
than the New York Times: the Sacramento Bee used a substantially different
Associated Press wire story that emphasized propaganda efforts by foreign
agents. Another AP wire story, at the bottom of page five, described
Butler’s allegations, taking the Committee’s report at face value. This wire
story includes the comforting knowledge that the committee found “no
evidence to show a connection between this effort” and any foreign
government.

An apparently serious effort to overthrow the government, perhaps with the
support of some of America’s wealthiest men, largely substantiated by a
Congressional committee, was mostly ignored. Why? Roosevelt’s Secretary of
the Interior, Harold Ickes, wrote a book in 1939 about the concentration of
American journalism. He claimed that, “In 1934, 82 per cent of all dailies
had a complete monopoly in their communities.” Newspaper chains, in Ickes’
view, “control a dangerously large share of the national daily circulation
and in many cities have no competition.”

Ickes’ book was largely devoted to proving that the major newspapers of the
United States were intentionally distorting the news, and in some cases,
directly lying. Ickes argued that newspaper editors did so in the interests
of both their advertisers and in defense of the capitalist class. Ickes
mentioned the Liberty League as one of the “propaganda outfits” who were
allied with the major newspapers. Indeed,the New York Times, one of the
papers that had downplayed the Committee’s report, had editorialized in
favor of the Liberty League’s formation.

Did newspapers and magazines consciously play down the plot, because it
represented an embarrassment to people of influence? Or did editors simply
give it low visibility because they regarded it as an absurd story?

We must consider another disturbing possibility. Butler was associated with
the loose alliance of progressive and populist forces that were dragging
Roosevelt towards the left. It is easy to forget that for much of
Roosevelt’s first term as President from 1932-36, he was the rope in a tug
of war between conservative and progressive forces in America. The
popularity of men such as Senator Huey Long (D-Louisiana) and the nationally
known radio priest Father Coughlin-and the need to short-circuit their
rising political power-appears to have caused Roosevelt’s increasingly
leftward movement in 1935-36.

Is it possible that Butler concocted this story as a way of creating
animosity towards conservatives by Roosevelt? If Butler had lied to the
Committee, and no such conspiracy was ever planned, why did MacGuire
apparently perjure himself before the Committee? Or, alternatively, could
leftward leaning members of the Roosevelt Administration have manipulated
Butler into believing that such a plot actually existed as a way of creating
animosity towards conservatives, thus dragging Roosevelt to the left? Either
theory could explain why MacGuire, Murphy, Clark, or the other supposed
plotters were never prosecuted.

Yet another possibility (though less likely) is that there was no
prosecution because Roosevelt’s own advisors had taken part in the plot, as
MacGuire claimed. A criminal prosecution would have washed the Roosevelt
Administration’s dirty laundry in public.


Why Is The Plot So Poorly Known?

Butler’s account of the MacGuire plot was a very serious accusation. If
MacGuire had told Butler the truth, a large number of wealthy men had made
serious plans to overthrow representative government in the United States —
though their concern that Roosevelt was creating a government in the style
of Mussolini or Hitler, might provide some legitimate reason for their
actions. Why doesn’t this plot appear in history books? That conservatives
might discount the plot is not unexpected; that liberals have tended to
ignore the plot is a little more surprising.

It is hard to imagine how different American politics was in the 1930s. The
collapse of the world economy had shaken the faith of many Americans in
individualism and free market capitalism. Many traditionalists, here and in
Europe, toyed with the ideas of Fascism and National Socialism; many
liberals dallied with Socialism and Communism. Prominent populists such as
Huey Long and Father Coughlin sided with progressives in support of
isolationism, redistribution of wealth, and a federal government that would
play a more active role in the American economy.

In hindsight, the moral and economic deficiencies of these various
collectivized systems are now clear. In 1934, however, people of good will
persuaded themselves that Hitler, Mussolini, and Stalin were doing good, and
ignored the great evils that were already underway. To turn over the rock
exposing MacGuire’s plot raises unpleasant questions about the political
sensibilities of both right and left in 1930s America.

How Secure Are The Institutions of Legal Government In America?

How secure, indeed? It would be tempting to write off this entire matter as
a group of con men separating wealthy conservatives from their money by
pretending to hatch a plot against the Roosevelt Administration. But there
are too many disturbing pieces of evidence in this tale that suggest that
the Zeitgeist of the 1930s was not limited to Europe.

If MacGuire’s claims to Butler were true, some U.S. military commanders were
prepared to stand aside while 500,000 veterans marched on Washington and
took Roosevelt captive. (Between the World Wars, the United States Army was
so small that 500,000 veterans might have given them a serious fight — even
if every officer remained loyal to Roosevelt.)

But unlike many European countries, American government was highly
decentralized in 1934, and this would have worked against any serious
military action against the legitimate government. Every state governor had
control of state militia units, armed with out of date, but still
serviceable military weapons.

In addition to the regularly organized state militias, the population of the
United States, then as now, was heavily armed with the sort of weapons well
suited to military operations. Whatever the advantages of the plotters’ army
of 500,000 veterans, they would have been far outnumbered by the unorganized
militia of the United States — then as now, consisting of every U.S.
citizen between 18 and 45, and legally obligated by state laws to fight at
the order of the governor in the event of insurrection, invasion, or war.

But in a nation that was suffering from the ravages of the Great Depression,
another model exists for what might have happened: the Spanish Civil War.
The divisions over religion in America were not as dramatic as those that
ripped apart Spanish society. But many Americans were beginning to lose
their faith in American institutions — as evidenced by the growth of
American Nazi and Communist movements during the 1930s. It is frightening to
think of what might have happened if a general as capable as Butler had
become the man on a white horse.

In the words of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Hugo Black, delivered at New York
University in 1960 concerning the protections of the U.S. Bill of Rights:

I cannot agree with those who think of the Bill of Rights as an 18th century
straitjacket, unsuited for this age.. The evils it guards against are not
only old, they are with us now, they exist today..

Experience all over the world has demonstrated, I fear, that the distance
between stable, orderly government and one that has been taken over by force
is not so great as we have assumed.

Indeed, the plot that Butler exposed — if what MacGuire claimed was true —
is a sobering reminder to Americans. We were not immune to the sentiments
that gave rise to totalitarian governments throughout the world in the
1930s. We make a serious mistake when we assume, “It can’t happen here!”

—————————————————————————-


Clayton E. Cramer is a software engineer with a Northern California
manufacturer of telecommunications equipment. His first book, By The Dim And
Flaring Lamps: The Civil War Diary of Samuel McIlvaine, was published by
Library Research Associates (Monroe, NY) in 1990. Mr. Cramer’s second book,
For The Defense of Themselves And The State: The Original Intent and
Judicial Interpretation of the Right To Keep And Bear Arms was published by
Praeger Publishers (Westport, Conn.) in 1994. Mr. Cramer recently completed
his B.A. in History at Sonoma State University.

—————————————————————————-

Bibliography for the above

Archer, Jules, The Plot To Seize The White House, (New York: Hawthorn Books,
1973).

Brinkley, Alan, Voices of Protest, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1982).

Butler, Smedley D., War Is A Racket, (New York: Round Table Press, 1935).

Cahn, Edmond, The Great Rights, (New York: Macmillan Co., 1963).

Ickes, Harold L., America’s House of Lords: An Inquiry into the Freedom of
the Press, (Rahway, N.J.: Harcourt, Brace & Co., 1939).

New York Times, February 16, 1935; March 26, 1935.

Schmidt, Hans, Maverick Marine, (Lexington, Ky.: University Press of
Kentucky, 1987).

Sevareid, Eric, Not So Wild A Dream, (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1946).

Spivak, John L., “Wall Street’s Fascist Conspiracy”, New Masses, January 29,
1935, 9-15; February 5, 1935, (page numbers missing on the microfilm)..

Sacramento Bee, February 15, 1935.

San Francisco Chronicle, February 16, 1935.

Time, 24:23 [December 3, 1934].

U.S. House of Representatives, Special Committee on Un-American Activities,
Investigation of Nazi Propaganda Activities and Investigation of Certain
Other Propaganda Activities, Hearings 73-D.C.-6, Part 1, 73rd Cong., 2nd
sess., (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1935).

U.S. House of Representatives, Special Committee on Un-American Activities,
Public Statement, 73rd Cong., 2nd sess., (Washington, D.C.: Government
Printing Office, 1934).

Wolfskill, George, The Revolt of the Conservatives: A History of the
American Liberty League, 1934-1940, (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1962).


_____________________________________________________________
“One is called to live nonviolently, even if the change one works for seems impossible. It may or may not be possible to turn the US around through nonviolent revolution. But one thing favors such an attempt: the total inability of violence to change anything for the better” – Daniel Berrigan

Smedley Butler – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

cached

Smedley Darlington Butler (July 30, 1881 – June 21, 1940) was a United States Marine Corps major general, the highest rank authorized at that time, and at the time of his death the most decorated Marine in U.S. history.

google yahoo