Friday, 3 January 2014

Re: Kim Jong-Un had uncle stripped naked, thrown into a cage and eaten alive by dogs | Mail Online

Yeepers!

The only Kingdoms left are Communists. Castro too.

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Kim Jong-Un had uncle stripped naked, thrown into a cage and eaten alive by dogs | Mail Online

N.Korea is china's little pistol.so that might be better phrased as
the illusion of china's patience.

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:
> I heard this earlier in the day while driving back to Tampa.
>
> Kim Jung Un seems to be one dangerous "Mutha". The media that we see coming
> out or the DPRK is almost unbelievable, and this is the DPRK actually
> producing the film footage!
>
> It's hard to determine or gauge the internal feelings of the People, but it
> does seem if China's patience is wearing thin.....
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnMQTvZumn0
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Bear Thatbearguy <thatbearguy@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Wow
>>
>>
>> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2533088/How-Kim-Jong-Un-killed-scum-uncle-Dictator-stripped-naked-thrown-cage-eaten-alive-pack-dogs.html
>>
>> --
>> --
>> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
>> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>>
>> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
>> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
>> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>>
>> ---
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "PoliticalForum" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
> --
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "PoliticalForum" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Re: Kim Jong-Un had uncle stripped naked, thrown into a cage and eaten alive by dogs | Mail Online

This just posted from the You Tube Channel: "North Korean Television" (which is a misnomer, "North Korean Television" is produced by a gentleman by the name of Alun Hill).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJtxuGPaQRU

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:

I heard this earlier in the day while driving back to Tampa.

Kim Jung Un seems to be one dangerous "Mutha". The media that we see coming out or the DPRK is almost unbelievable, and this is the DPRK actually producing the film footage!

It's hard to determine or gauge the internal feelings of the People, but it does seem if China's patience is wearing thin.....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WnMQTvZumn0

On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 5:40 PM, Bear Thatbearguy <thatbearguy@gmail.com> wrote:

Wow

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2533088/How-Kim-Jong-Un-killed-scum-uncle-Dictator-stripped-naked-thrown-cage-eaten-alive-pack-dogs.html

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Fwd: [New post] Oh, NOES! U.S. State Department reiterates its concern over Egypt’s formal declaration that the Muslim Brotherhood is a “terrorist group”

Po Mo's Bros n da Hood.

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

Oh, NOES! U.S. State Department reiterates its concern over Egypt's formal declaration that the Muslim Brotherhood is a "terrorist group"

by BareNakedIslam

The newly sharia-compliant U.S. State Department said, "The onus is on Egypt's military leadership is tasked with creating a climate inclusive for all parties and groups." (Including groups like the Muslim Brotherhood which have several members working in the Obama Regime) Deputy spokesperson for the department Marie Harf reiterated her government's concern regarding the Egyptian cabinet's […]

Hey Plain Ol?

Greetings Everyone!

This message is for everyone, but in particular, I am most curious as to what Plain Ol' American thinks about the latest news coming out of the "Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea" ("DPRK").

I have been watching videos from North Korea frequently, and try to keep abreast with as much information as I can obtain, but most recently, the information seems to become more troubling than ever.

As Bear posted earlier, Kim Jong Un has claimed to have executed his Uncle, who several months ago was the No. 2 Man in the DPRK. If the reports are true, (which seem to be eminating from Bejing) then it is a most gruesome execution, of which Kim Jung Un and his Cabinent of 300 all watched.

What is I think just as interesting, is that Kim Jung Un's New Year's message three weeks ago claimed that "Dear Beloved Uncle" had been killed by firing squad:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJ5sspDyySY

(Again, note how bizarre this video is to Western Standards!)

Two weeks ago, Kim Jong Un started making references alluding to "Uncle" being, "worse than a dog":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aFcA8_w0IKw

Today, (Less than five hours ago, which is tomorrow, January 4th in the DPRK) "Dear Uncle" was purportedly fed to ravished dogs with five os his aides:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msU1KA9CTrw

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2533088/How-Kim-Jong-Un-killed-scum-uncle-Dictator-stripped-naked-thrown-cage-eaten-alive-pack-dogs.html

Fwd: [New post] You know what they say, the best conservatives are former liberals who have been mugged

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

You know what they say, the best conservatives are former liberals who have been mugged

by BareNakedIslam

ISRAEL: "He grabbed me and pounded my face." Young woman leftist advocate of illegal African (mostly Muslim) infiltrator 'rights,' has her eyes opened after an unexpected 'encounter' with an African illegal alien in downtown Tel Aviv. INN (h/t Liz) A young Jewish woman was brutally assaulted Wednesday evening by an illegal African infiltrator in southern Tel […]

Fwd: The Muslim Brotherhood: Wolf not even in sheep’s clothing....

· JPost.com

The Muslim Brotherhood: Wolf not even in sheep's clothing

By ZVI MAZEL

The West continues to fail to understand the nature of Muslim Brotherhood: to impose Shari'a by all means, if necessary by violence

Clash at Nasr City district in Cairo November 22, 2013. Photo: REUTERS

The Muslim Brotherhood's avowed goal since the creation of the movement in 1928 has been to impose Shari'a, Islamic law, first on Egypt, then, the rest of the world, turning it into a Muslim- ruled caliphate.

Eighty years later, the fall of Hosni Mubarak paved the way for the dream to come true; the Brotherhood won both parliamentary and presidential elections and formed the government of Egypt. Barely a year after the election, president Mohamed Morsi was arrested and the government toppled by the people, aided and abetted by the army.

The Brotherhood refused to accept their defeat and launched a series of violent protests with their Salafi allies, followed by terror operations that have already caused the death of 350 members of the police and military forces. The interim regime first banned their activities and when that did not help, declared the Brotherhood a terrorist organization.

Interestingly, the West – and the Western press – put their own spin on what they saw as a military coup against the legitimate government of a movement they persist in calling "moderate" or "pragmatic," insisting that the Brotherhood acted in nonviolent ways.

History tells otherwise. The Brotherhood has been banned before; president Gamal Abdel Nasser tried to eliminate it after being the target of a failed assassination attempt. He threw 60,000 members – 60,000! – in detention camps and had their leaders executed, including Sayyid Qutb, considered the father of modern fundamentalism and the man who advocated imposing Shari'a by force. A few years earlier, in 1949, King Farouk had Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the movement, executed after the "secret organization" he had created assassinated the prime minister and a number of judges.

The Brotherhood created sister branches in Arab countries in the '40s; starting in the '60s it launched so-called cultural centers and mosques in Western Europe and the US to propagate its brand of Islam. The world organization of the Muslim Brotherhood has members in Great Britain, Switzerland, Turkey, Qatar and elsewhere, coordinating and aiding local branches, though these branches are largely autonomous.

With the influx of immigrants from Muslim countries into Europe in the '80s, more specialized organizations were created to deal with different sectors: students, women, culture, professional unions and more. There are now thousands and thousands of such front organizations affiliated with the Brotherhood in the EU and the States.

Documents seized in Europe and the US expose the strategy of the Muslim Brotherhood in the West; they demonstrate that the movement intends to undermine the regimes from within by using democratic values and freedom of speech.

When Anwar Sadat became president in 1970, he thought he would need the Brotherhood to get rid of what was left of the pro-Soviet supporters of his predecessor, Nasser; he set its members free upon their solemn promise not to go back to violence.

Yet some of the newly released Brothers set up jihadist organizations like Takfir wal-Hijra and al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, which immediately launched terror operations against the regime, such as the bloody attack against the military academy in 1974, the assassination of a former endowments minister in 1977. Sadat himself was their next victim.

These movements advocated Qutb's goal of imposing Islam on the world by persuasion or force, and reviving the caliphate. Al-Qaida and other Salafi movements were created by former Brothers and are at work today in Iraq, Syria, Sinai and North Africa, as well as in the rest of Africa and Asia.

They continue to launch terror attacks in the West, from Spain to England to the US, and their spiritual leaders preach that not only non-Muslims but even Muslims may be killed to achieve their supreme goal.

As for the Brotherhood, its activities were forbidden under the Mubarak regime, but the movement has tried to advance through nonviolent means. It seized its chance when the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF), which ruled after the fall of that regime, let it act openly. Its parliamentary and presidential candidates were elected by millions of Egyptians, who put their trust in Islam and believed that the movement, which had been persecuted for so long, would usher in a new era of economic progress and freedom without infringing on the Islamic nature of the country.

This did not happen. Instead of dealing with Egypt's pressing economic and social problems, the Brotherhood made an all-out effort to turn the country into a religious dictatorship. Morsi betrayed the Salafi parties which had helped him achieve power – such as al-Nour – and did not hesitate to use extreme force to quell the rising swell of opposition, including opening fire on the demonstrators.

In fact, this is one of the crimes he is accused of today.

However, such was the disenchantment of the masses that they protested in ever greater numbers until, with the help of the army, they managed to stop the Brotherhood – just in time to prevent it from taking over the security apparatus.

What the millions of Egyptians who rebelled against the Brotherhood wanted was to put the revolution back on track, in the hope that a new regime would fulfill their expectations.

The West, sticking to a narrow definition of democracy, protested the ousting of a "democratically elected president" and condemned what it saw as a military coup. This led some to comment that had the people of Germany, with the help of the army, ousted democratically elected leader Adolf Hitler from power in the '30s, 50 million people would not have died and the world would be a different place today.

With the Brotherhood and their supporters turning more violent, staging deadly attacks against the army and security forces as well as civilian targets, the interim regime had no choice but to ban the movement – as King Farouk, Nasser and Mubarak had done in their time – and declare it a terror organization.

But the West is not ready to follow suit. The US and the EU, representing the so-called enlightened world, are turning their back on Egypt, though it is fighting their common enemy, radical Islam – thus tacitly encouraging the Brotherhood to keep up their fight.

__._,_.__

__,_._,___

Fwd: 9 Things You Didn't Know About the Second Amendment - PolicyMic

http://www.policymic.com/articles/24557/9-things-you-didn-t-know-about-the-second-amendment

9 Things You Didn't Know About the Second Amendment

1. The Second Amendment codifies a pre-existing right

The Constitution doesn't grant or create rights; it recognizes and protects rights that inherently exist. This is why the Founders used the word "unalienable" previously in the Declaration of Independence; these rights cannot be created or taken away. In D.C. vs. Heller, the Supreme Court said the Second Amendment "codified a pre-existing right. The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it "shall not be infringed ... this is not a right granted by the Constitution" (p. 19).

2. The Second Amendment protects individual, not collective rights

The use of the word "militia" has created some confusion in modern times, because we don't understand the language as it was used at the time the Constitution was written. However, the Supreme Court states in context, "it was clearly an individual right" (p. 20). The operative clause of the Second Amendment is "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed," which is used three times in the Bill of Rights. The Court explains that "All three of these instances unambiguously refer to individual rights, not 'collective' rights, or rights that may be exercised only through participation in some corporate body" (p. 5), adding "nowhere else in the Constitution does a 'right' attributed to "the people" refer to anything other than an individual right" (p. 6).

3. Every citizen is the militia

To further clarify regarding the use of the word "militia," the court states "the ordinary definition of the militia as all able-bodied men" (p. 23). Today we would say it is all citizens, not necessarily just men. The Court explains: "'Keep arms' was simply a common way of referring to possessing arms, for militiamen and everyone else" (p. 9). Since the militia is all of us, it doesn't mean "only carrying a weapon in an organized military unit" (p. 11-12). "It was clearly an individual right, having nothing whatever to do with service in a militia" (p. 20).

4. Personal self-defense is the primary purpose of the Second Amendment

We often hear politicians talk about their strong commitment to the Second Amendment while simultaneously mentioning hunting. Although hunting is a legitimate purpose for firearms, it isn't the primary purpose for the Second Amendment. The Court states "the core lawful purpose [is] self-defense" (p. 58), explaining the Founders "understood the right to enable individuals to defend themselves ... the 'right of self-preservation' as permitting a citizen to 'repe[l] force by force' when 'the intervention of society in his behalf, may be too late to prevent an injury' (p.21). They conclude "the inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right" (p.56).

5. There is no interest-balancing approach to the Second Amendment

Interest-balancing means we balance a right with other interests. The court notes that we don't interpret rights this way stating "we know of no other enumerated constitutional right whose core protection has been subjected to a freestanding "interest-balancing" approach. The very enumeration of the right takes out of the hands of government the power to decide on a case-by-case basis whether the right is really worth insisting upon. A constitutional guarantee subject to future judges' assessments of its usefulness is no constitutional guarantee at all" (p.62-63). This doesn't mean that it is unlimited, the same as all rights (more on that below). However, the court states that even though gun violence is a problem to be taken seriously, "the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table" (p.64).

6. The Second Amendment exists to prevent tyranny

You've probably heard this. It's listed because this is one of those things about the Second Amendment that many people think is made up. In truth, this is not made up. The Court explains that in order to keep the nation free ("security of a free state"), then the people need arms: "When the able-bodied men of a nation are trained in arms and organized, they are better able to resist tyranny" (p.24-25). The Court states that the Founders noted "that history showed that the way tyrants had eliminated a militia consisting of all the able bodied men was not by banning the militia but simply by taking away the people's arms, enabling a select militia or standing army to suppress political opponents" (p. 25). At the time of ratification, there was real fear that government could become oppressive: "during the 1788 ratification debates, the fear that the federal government would disarm the people in order to impose rule through a standing army or select militia was pervasive" (p.25). The response to that concern was to codify the citizens' militia right to arms in the Constitution (p. 26).

7. The Second Amendment was also meant as a provision to repel a foreign army invasion

You may find this one comical, but it's in there. The court notes one of many reasons for the militia to ensure a free state was "it is useful in repelling invasions" (p.24). This provision, like tyranny, isn't an everyday occurring use of the right; more like a once-in-a-century (if that) kind of provision. A popular myth from World War II holds Isoroku Yamamoto, commander-in-chief of the Imperial Japanese navy allegedly said "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." Although there is no evidence of him saying this, there was concern that Japan might invade during WWII. Japan did invade Alaska, which was a U.S. territory at the time, and even today on the West Coast there are still gun embankments from the era (now mostly parks). The fact is that there are over 310 million firearms in the United States as of 2009, making a foreign invasion success less likely (that, and the U.S. military is arguably the strongest in the world).

8. The Second Amendment protects weapons "in common use at the time"

The right to keep and bear arms isn't unlimited: "Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited" (p. 54). The Court upheld restrictions like the prohibition of arms by felons and the mentally ill, and carrying in certain prohibited places like schools and courthouses. What is protected are weapons "in common use of the time" (p.55). This doesn't mean weapons in common use "at that time," meaning the 18th Century. The Court said the idea that it would is "frivolous" and that "the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding" (p.8). The Court's criteria includes weapons in popular widespread use "that [are] overwhelmingly chosen by American society" (p. 56), and "the most popular weapon chosen by Americans" (p. 58).

9. The Second Amendment might require full-blown military arms to fulfill the original intent

The Court didn't rule specifically on this in D.C. vs. Heller, but noting that weapon technology has drastically changed (mentioning modern day bombers and tanks), they stated "the conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment's ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty. It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large" (p. 55).

They further added that "the fact that modern developments [in modern weaponry] have limited the degree of fit between the prefatory clause and the protected right cannot change our interpretation of the right" (p. 56). A full ruling has not been made, as this was not in the scope the court was asked to rule on in the D.C. vs. Heller case, but they left the door open for future ruling.

__._,_.___

__,_._,___

Fwd: Mayor de Blasio giddy about turning New York into a Marxist paradise

http://allenbwest.com/2014/01/mayor-de-blasio-giddy-turning-new-york-marxist-paradise/

Mayor de Blasio giddy about turning New York into a Marxist paradise

You might recall our story about New York City's new "progressive socialist" Mayor Bill de Blasio and how close we are to fulfilling all ten points of the Communist Manifesto.

According to the speakers and message at de Blasio's inauguration today, the Big Apple's new Fidel can't get there soon enough.

Writing for the National Review Online, John Fund described a veritable Marxist/socialist love fest at the event, beginning with pro-Communist activist Harry Belafonte.

Fund writes that Belafonte proclaimed:

"We will be no longer a divided city," as he compared today's New York to a "Dickensian" nightmare, as departing mayor Mike Bloomberg looked on stone-faced. "We can become America's DNA for the future." Not to be outdone, Belafonte was followed by the Reverend Fred Lucas Jr., whose talk was dominated by slavery metaphors and analogies. He compared New York's five boroughs to a "plantation" and managed to cram into his short speech other references to slavery, such as "shackles," "bondage," "auction blocks," "the Emancipation Proclamation," the "Civil War," and the "Reconstruction Era."

And to think that when I made references to economic slavery, dependency, and the 21st century economic plantation, liberal progressives and their black henchmen went apoplectic. As Spock would say, "fascinating."

After all this bluster, there was America's "first black president," Bill Clinton who in typical fashion, attempted to moderate the tone and appear statesmanlike, according to Fund,

Bill Clinton then rose and tried to strike a little balance. But the crowd was having none of it. When he praised retiring mayor Bloomberg for leaving New York "stronger and healthier" after twelve years in office, there was dead silence. The cheers were saved for de Blasio, who proclaimed a "new progressive direction" that will "take dead aim at the 'Tale of Two Cities'" injustices he emphasized in his campaign.

He then recited the key elements of his platform: affordable-housing projects, an end to hospital closures, reform of the "broken" stop-and-frisk policy, and a tax on upper-income earners. After each item, he would say, "We won't wait, we'll do it now."

Sound familiar, America? And the similarities and common ties to Barack Obama do not just end at governing philosophy. Fund noted that Bertha Lewis, the former national head of the scandal-ridden ACORN "community-organizing" group, was an honored guest, and apparently ACORN has been wanting to get DiBlasio into the mayoral mansion since 2001.

I know everyone is focusing on a Hillary Clinton run for president in 2016 but be wary of sleight of hand. The insidious far left progressive socialists are drunk with election success. America has given them our country and its largest city to be led by individuals whose ideology and beliefs are completely antithetical to our Constitutional Republic.

I say look out for Elizabeth Warren or even Bill de Blasio in 2016. I'd lean more to Senator Warren because the liberal progressives need another marketing gimmick, with America's first female president.

How can it be that the center for free market capitalism and entrepreneurship is now led by an avowed Marxist/socialist? If we continue to bury our heads in the sand, the community organizers and the low to no information voters will turn us from citizens into subjects.

The Marxist-style message being promulgated by progressives such as Obama and de Blasio has never been successful anywhere in the world. Instead of income equality we will end up with shared misery, just like so many failed socialist states.

Perhaps New Yorkers felt a need to be avant-garde, but in the long run you're looking at potential economic devastation that will make David Dinkins pale in comparison (pun intended). We can only hope it will turn out as Sir Winston Churchill stated: "Americans can be counted on to eventually do that which is right, after they have exhausted all other means."

Doggone, didn't know that meant we would have to test our tolerance for Marxism. We are dangerously close to seeing the implementation of the fine points of the Communist Manifesto. And to think the Left went crazy when I said so in 2012 – I guess they didn't like anyone calling them out. Funny think, I never saw my name next to four Pinocchios or listed as the "Lie of the Year." Fascinating.

__._,_.___

__,_._,___

Fwd: [New post] NSA builds “back doors” in computers before they reach consumers

Respond to this post by replying above this line

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

NSA builds "back doors" in computers before they reach consumers

by Dr. Eowyn

Just how much are Americans willing to tolerate?

It's not enough that President Lucifer's NSA (National Security Agency) intercepts and spies on our every email, phonecall, bank and credit card transaction, and other communications, the NSA actually intercepts, i.e., hijacks, computers before they reach the consumers.

Why?

So as to build a "back door" in the computers which enables the NSA to spy on us.

Raphael Satter reports for the AP that a German magazine, Der Spiegel, reported on Dec. 29, 2013, that an elite division of the NSA (1) intercepts computer deliveries; (2) exploits hardware vulnerabilities; and (3) even hijacks Microsoft's internal reporting system to spy on their targets. The NSA division is known as Tailored Access Operations (TAO), which is a team of super-hackers specializing in stealing data from the toughest of targets.

Citing internal NSA documents, Der Spiegel said TAO's mission is "Getting the ungettable," and quoted an unnamed intelligence official as saying that TAO had gathered "some of the most significant intelligence our country has ever seen." TAO employs a catalog of James Bondish high-tech gadgets for particularly hard-to-crack cases, including:

Computer monitor cables specially modified to record what is being typed across the screen;
USB sticks secretly fitted with radio transmitters to broadcast stolen data over the airwaves;
Fake base stations intended to intercept mobile phone signals on the go.

1. NSA intercepts computer deliveries to build "back doors"

When a target orders a new computer or other electronic accessories, TAO coordinates with the FBI and the CIA to intercept the hardware in transit, and take it to a secret workshop where it could be discretely fitted with espionage software before being sent on its way. An NSA document cited by Der Spiegel boasts that intercepting computer equipment in such a way is among the NSA's "most productive operations," and has helped harvest intelligence from around the world.

2. NSA exploits hardware vulnerabilities

Purpose: to deliver malicious software to specific computers. The makers of the hardware and software exploited by the NSA include some of the world's leading information technology companies, including:

China's Huawei Technologies Ltd.; and
U.S. companies: Cisco Systems, Inc. of San Jose, California; Western Digital Corp. of Irvine, California; Dell Inc. of Round Rock, Texas.

3. NSA spies on Microsoft Corp.'s crash reports

Microsoft's crash reports are familiar to many users of the Windows operating system as the dialogue box that pops up when a game freezes or a Word document dies. The crash reporting system is intended to help Microsoft engineers improve their products and fix bugs, but unbeknown to Microsoft, the NSA also sifts through the reports to help spies break into machines running Windows.

For its part, Microsoft says the information sent by customers about technical issues in these crash reports is limited. A Microsoft rep said in an email to Der Spiegel: "Microsoft does not provide any government with direct or unfettered access to our customer's data. We would have significant concerns if the allegations about government actions are true."

Microsoft is one of several U.S. firms that have demanded more transparency from the NSA - and worked to bolster their security - in the wake of the revelations of former intelligence worker Edward Snowden, whose disclosures have ignited an international debate over privacy and surveillance.

Der Spiegel did not explicitly say where its cache of NSA documents had come from, although the magazine has previously published a series of stories based on documents leaked by Snowden, and one of Snowden's key contacts - American documentary filmmaker Laura Poitras - was listed among the article's six authors.

And now the latest news:

The Washington Post reports, Jan. 2, 2013, that the NSA is racing to build a quantum computer that's exponentially faster than classical computers, which can break nearly every kind of encryption used to protect banking, medical, business and government records around the world.

According to documents provided by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, the effort to build the quantum computer is part of a $79.7 million research program titled "Penetrating Hard Targets." Much of the work is hosted under classified contracts at a laboratory in College Park, Md.

WORLD NEWS BLOGS

Friday, 3 January 2014

Re: Kim Jong-Un had uncle stripped naked, thrown into a cage and eaten alive by dogs | Mail Online

Re: Kim Jong-Un had uncle stripped naked, thrown into a cage and eaten alive by dogs | Mail Online

Re: Kim Jong-Un had uncle stripped naked, thrown into a cage and eaten alive by dogs | Mail Online

Fwd: [New post] Oh, NOES! U.S. State Department reiterates its concern over Egypt’s formal declaration that the Muslim Brotherhood is a “terrorist group”

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

Oh, NOES! U.S. State Department reiterates its concern over Egypt's formal declaration that the Muslim Brotherhood is a "terrorist group"

Hey Plain Ol?

Fwd: [New post] You know what they say, the best conservatives are former liberals who have been mugged

New post on BARE NAKED ISLAM

You know what they say, the best conservatives are former liberals who have been mugged

Fwd: The Muslim Brotherhood: Wolf not even in sheep’s clothing....

The Muslim Brotherhood: Wolf not even in sheep's clothing

The West continues to fail to understand the nature of Muslim Brotherhood: to impose Shari'a by all means, if necessary by violence

Fwd: 9 Things You Didn't Know About the Second Amendment - PolicyMic

9 Things You Didn't Know About the Second Amendment

Fwd: Mayor de Blasio giddy about turning New York into a Marxist paradise

Mayor de Blasio giddy about turning New York into a Marxist paradise

Fwd: [New post] NSA builds “back doors” in computers before they reach consumers

New post on Fellowship of the Minds

NSA builds "back doors" in computers before they reach consumers

1. NSA intercepts computer deliveries to build "back doors"

2. NSA exploits hardware vulnerabilities

3. NSA spies on Microsoft Corp.'s crash reports

Total Pageviews