Hundreds of Washington, D.C. Children Missing Already in 2017, Officials Seek FBI Help, Fear Pedophile Network Growing

/0 Comments/in , , /by

A total of 501 juveniles have been reported missing in D.C. since the beginning of the year. This startling number has forced the hands of several officials who’ve written a letter to call on special help from the Justice Department in investigating the matter.

The letter, obtained by the Associated Press, asked FBI Director James Comey and Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “devote the resources necessary to determine whether these developments are an anomaly or whether they are indicative of an underlying trend that must be addressed.” It was signed by Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Cedric Richmond (D-La) and Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who represents D.C. in Congress.

“Ten children of color went missing in our nation’s capital in a period of two weeks and at first garnered very little media attention. That’s deeply disturbing,” Richmond’s letter said.

As the AP reports, the District of Columbia logged 501 cases of missing juveniles, many of them black or Latino, in the first three months of this year, according to the Metropolitan Police Department, the city’s police force. Twenty-two were unsolved as of March 22, police said.

The Twitter profile for the DC police department is quite literally riddled with images of missing young black and latino girls. In spite of the officials’ concern and the posts on Twitter, police are assuring the public that there is nothing out of the ordinary. (Read more from “Hundreds of Washington, D.C. Children Missing Already in 2017, Officials Seek FBI Help, Fear Pedophile Network Growing” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Will Trump Take Advantage of This New Lawsuit to Hold Hillary Clinton Accountable?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Several unanswered questions remain In the Hillary Clinton State Department email scandal. For instance, there was never an official government report detailing if and how her illegal email practices damaged national security.

Now, Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit to find an answer to that question.

“In the critical matter of Hillary Clinton’s illegal email practices, the Director of National Intelligence simply ignored a directive requiring a damage assessment and a report,” Judicial Watch said in a statement.

As such, they have filed a lawsuit in federal court to force the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) and the Department of State to comply with the law.

The suit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, cites the requirement in Intelligence Community Directive (“ICD”) 732, issued on June 27, 2014, that a damage assessment be conducted whenever there is “an actual or suspected unauthorized disclosure or compromise of classified national intelligence that may cause damage to U.S. national security” ICD 732(D)(2) (Judicial Watch v. Office of the Director of National Intelligence et al. (No. 1:17-cv-00508)).

Since the election is over, and because President Trump has declined to prosecute the case against Clinton’s mishandling of classified information, the story has fallen out of the news. It is important to remember that Clinton’s actions weren’t scandalous merely because she was a presidential candidate, but because her actions might have enabled America’s enemies to access classified State Department intelligence.

With all the suspicion over suspected Russian hacking, one would assume there would be bipartisan support for determining how Hillary Clinton may have compromised America’s security. If nothing else, there should be interest in preventing such gross negligence from happening again.

Judicial Watch says this new lawsuit presents the Trump administration with the opportunity to hold Clinton and others responsible for compromising national security to account. (For more from the author of “Will Trump Take Advantage of This New Lawsuit to Hold Hillary Clinton Accountable” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trial Against Multi-Billion Dollar Psychotropic Drug Giant Reveals Almost 900% Suicide Increase With Antidepressant Use

/0 Comments/in , , /by

A trial is currently underway in Illinois as a widow seeks to hold pharmaceutical manufacturer GlaxoSmithKline accountable for improper labeling and minimizing a potentially serious side effect of a well-known antidepressant.

Paroxetine is a widely prescribed antidepressant and anti-anxiety drug under the class of drugs known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Paroxetine is most commonly known as the brand name of Paxil, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK).

Since 2012, Wendy Dolin has been engaged in a legal battle against GSK following the suicide of her husband, Stewart Dolin. Wendy says that in the summer of 2010, Stewart was prescribed a generic version of Paxil for anxiety issues related to work. According to Wendy, Stewart Dolin complained of becoming increasingly anxious and restless and was unable to sleep while taking the drug. On July 15, 2010, less than one week after beginning this medication, Stewart committed suicide by walking in front of a train. . .

The lawsuit alleges that GSK whitewashed the suicide risks of Paxil in its data given to the FDA. The complaint explains that in 1989, GSK”s “Integrated Summary of Safety Information,” required to gain approval from the FDA, included a presentation identifying the number of suicide and suicide attempts during clinical trials. The suit alleges that GSK’s summary “skewed the statistical analysis of the data presented and obscured the true risk” by including suicide attempts “of placebo patients that had taken place in the placebo run-in (or wash-out) phase” before the clinical trials began. “Run-in” or “wash-out” refers to a time period of removing any other drugs in a trial participant’s system; any “adverse events” that take place during those periods are not appropriate or generally accepted for inclusion in calculations during clinical trials, the suit claims. . .

The trial against GSK is in progress and is expected to last a few weeks. Bob Fiddaman, a blogger and author who has written extensively about his own experiences with paroxetine, has been covering the developments of the trial. Fiddaman wrote that a “startling revelation” was unveiled on March 22nd: “Attorneys representing widow Wendy Dolin showed the ratio of Paxil-induced suicidality in adults is a staggering 8.9. It is not 6.7, as previously claimed and reported by Glaxo. The 6.7 figure is astoundingly high in itself, but the 8.9 ratio is flabbergasting! Plaintiff witness, Dr. David Ross, said this figure is ‘astounding.’ What you should remember here is that GSK’s 1989 drug application for Paxil said the suicidality odds ratio was 2.6.” (For more from the author of “Trial Against Multi-Billion Dollar Psychotropic Drug Giant Reveals Almost 900% Suicide Increase With Antidepressant Use” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Virginia Judge Says Trump Order Is Not a Muslim Ban, but Actually Protects Citizens From Terror

/0 Comments/in , , /by

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and Linda Sarsour, a militant Palestinian activist, have lost their lawsuit against President Donald Trump over his immigration moratorium stopping foreign nationals attempting to enter the United States from six terror-tied countries.

Judge Anthony Trenga, who sits on the U.S. Eastern District Court of Virginia, said the president does indeed have the authority to protect the country’s national security interests.

“The President has provided a detailed justification for the Order based on national security needs, and enjoining the operation of [executive order] would interfere with the President’s unique constitutional responsibilities to conduct international relations, provide for the national defense, and secure the nation,” Judge Trenga said in his opinion.

“The President has unqualified authority to bar physical entry to the United States at the border,” Trenga added.

Several officials from the Hamas-tied Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) sued Trump over what they called a “Muslim Exclusion Order.” Officials listed on the docket have in the past expressed support for U.S.-designated terrorist organizations, cheered terrorist attacks, and campaigned against cooperating with the FBI.

In his 32-page ruling, Judge Trenga rejected that the moratorium is a “Muslim ban.”

The order “clearly has a stated secular purpose — to protect U.S. citizens from terrorist attacks,” Tenga said.

The moratorium — which was recently struck down by federal courts in Hawaii and Maryland — imposes a temporary stop on citizens from six terror tied countries — Syria, Iran, Yemen, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan — from entering the United States.

As Conservative Review’s Daniel Horowitz has explained, the courts do not have the plenary power to interfere with the president’s executive order, and other decisions concerning national security and immigration matters.

The Department of Justice said in a statement in reaction to the ruling: “As the Court correctly explains, the President’s Executive Order falls well within his authority to safeguard the nation’s security.”

CAIR, the radical group that brought the suit, will appeal the ruling, according to their lawyers from the far-left American Civil Liberties Union.

An additional lawsuit was filed against the Trump order in a D.C. federal court Friday. The Universal Muslim Association of America (UMMA) — an Islamic group funded in part by a foundation connected to the regime in Iran — says the president’s executive order is harmful to Muslims and inflicts “a damaging stigma upon them based on their religious affiliation.” (For more from the author of “Virginia Judge Says Trump Order Is Not a Muslim Ban, but Actually Protects Citizens From Terror” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

This Calif. Dem Just Gave the Dumbest, Most Ignorant Reason to Oppose Gorsuch … EVER

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Freshman Senator Kamala Harris, D-Calif., might have one of the most disturbing – albeit increasingly common – arguments against Trump’s Supreme Court nominee yet: He’s not a judicial activist.

Friday morning, the former Golden State attorney general made known that she wouldn’t support Judge Neil Gorsuch to replace Justice Antonin Scalia because he “has consistently valued legalisms over real lives.”

Naturally, the idea that a judge ought not be more concerned with the application of the law, rather than its outcome, raised some eyebrows.

Harris links to her recent op-ed in the San Francisco Chronicle, where the senator seeks to paint Trump’s nominee in the same league as the Tin Man from the Wizard of Oz, a creature desperately in search of a heart.

The implication? Our jurists should be more concerned with emotions and outcomes versus faithful application of the law, and Neil Gorsuch is a big meanie-head.

But that supposedly absent heart debuted on the judge’s sleeve during the hearings. Faced with such questions and accusations multiple times this hearing, the answer or implication thereof has been simple: He didn’t like the outcome, but that’s the law as written (i.e., his job). If legislators don’t like it, change the law or pass a new one.

In her defense, Senator Harris is quite new to her position and may not quite be used to the job of a federal legislator, but she and the 534 members of Congress have the power to change laws and outcomes they don’t like. It’s all lined out in Article I of the Constitution.

But rather than embrace her role as a legislator and Gorsuch’s as a judge, Harris opts to openly defend judicial activism and cite it as the definitive reason for fighting his confirmation, quoting Thurgood Marshall’s aphorism to “do what you think is right and let the law catch up.”

One only wonders what any of the founders would think of that statement from a member of the “weakest branch of government,” or the use of it to defend bench legislation by a U.S. Senator. Well, they wouldn’t like it.

As stated concisely by attorney T. Greg Doucette, “I’m sure there are intellectually honest reasons to oppose Gorsuch. ‘Legalisms over real lives – for a judge – is not one of them.”

(For more from the author of “This Calif. Dem Just Gave the Dumbest, Most Ignorant Reason to Oppose Gorsuch … EVER” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why the Deep State Is Gunning for President Trump

/0 Comments/in , , /by

According to some, the “Deep State” is just another conspiracy theory. It’s hard to prove claims about unelected and unaccountable officials in government and intelligence agencies. They operate in secret. In another sense, however, the Deep State is an obvious — and troubling — fact.

The president and those whom he appoints and we elect are but the tip of a deep iceberg. Below them sits a huge pyramid of bureaucracies and civil servants. The federal government is the largest employer in America.

But whom does this army of civil servants serve? They’re supposed to serve the American people. Too often, it seems, they put party loyalty above that.

Deep State Functionaries Give 90 Percent to Democrats

What party is that? Here’s a clue: federal employees working in 14 agencies donated $2 million to the recent presidential campaign. Of that 95 percent went to Hilary Clinton. No surprise that 99 percent of donations from State Department employees went to Clinton. But Department of Agriculture employee donations also went 99 percent to Clinton. So did gifts from Department of Education employees (99.7 percent) and Department of Labor employees (99.4 percent). Department of Justice workers contributed 97 percent. IRS employees gave 94 percent.

The State Department winked at Clinton’s use of her private server to handle classified information. You don’t need a conspiracy theory to see why. When the Justice Department exonerates Clinton, there’s no mystery there. The people who make these decisions, and the lower-level people who back them up, are all Clintonites. That is to say, left-leaning Democrats. They don’t take their cues from the American people or from the Constitution. They do what the Democratic Party wants.

By any reading of the statute, Clinton clearly violated the Espionage Act. Not once, but thousands of times. Her actions clearly compromised national security. Foreign powers surely could access her communications. Nevertheless, for the Deep State Democrats, party loyalty trumped national security. So she wasn’t prosecuted.

Obama Stuffed the Pentagon with His Followers

But how about the security agencies themselves? If you believe what you see in the movies, military top brass are all rock-ribbed conservatives. Yet Defense Department employees contributed 84 percent to Clinton. Homeland Security workers donated 90 percent. The figures suggest that the people in charge of our nation’s security are mostly rock-ribbed Democrats.

This partisan edge may explain why President Trump is having a tough time with some of his security appointments. General H.R. McMaster, his National Security Advisor, subscribes to the Obama-era fantasy that terror has nothing to do with Islam. General James Mattis, Trump’s choice for Secretary of Defense, seems to be picking his own appointees from Hillary’s discarded wishlist.

Mattis’ choice of Anne Patterson for undersecretary of defense for policy is particularly disturbing. This is the fourth most powerful position in the Pentagon. During Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, Patterson was Ambassador to Egypt. She was also an ardent supporter of Mohammed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Even after General El-Sisi turned the Brotherhood out of power, she lobbied to have them reinstated. According to Raymond Ibrahim, she was widely known in Egypt as the “Brotherhood stooge.” She “was arguably one of the most hated individuals by the millions of Egyptians who took to the streets against Morsi and the Brotherhood.” One senior Republican foreign policy advisor told the Washington Free Beacon:

Anne Patterson is the embodiment of the Obama administration’s failed approach to the Middle East … it’s beyond irresponsible to put her in charge of the Pentagon’s policy apparatus.

Mattis has since withdrawn Patterson’s name under pressure from the White House. But why did he pick her in the first place? Some say that the choice of McMaster and Mattis was just poor judgment. Maybe. Or maybe there aren’t that many good people to choose from. Trump needs candidates who are competent and can be confirmed swiftly by the Senate. Mattis’s quick confirmation suggests that the Democrats weren’t too worried about his policy views.

Could Mattis have been steeped too long in the culture of Obama’s Pentagon? Was he surrounded by people who couldn’t see a problem with the Muslim Brotherhood? During his eight year tenure, Obama replaced several hundred generals and admirals. He put in people who would go along with his anti-win policy. While Obama was gutting the Pentagon’s budget, he was also busy weeding out all those rock-ribbed patriotic types.

Are Iran’s Stooges Setting Our Foreign Policy?

Too many government agencies are top-heavy with liberals. That will make it extremely hard for the new administration to make a fresh start. The Deep State is stuffed with holdovers from the Obama administration who are committed to his failed policies.

A prime example is Sahar Nowrouzzadeh. She formerly worked for the National Iranian-American Council (NIAC). That’s a lobbying group for the Islamic Republic of Iran. She also served as the Iran Director for President Obama’s National Security Council. Experts call her one of the architects of the suicidal Iran nuclear deal. You’d think that the new administration would want to cut her out of the loop.

Yet Nowrouzzadeh is now in charge of Iran policy for the State Department’s Policy Planning Staff. She got this position in 2016. Recently, a high-ranking official of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps boasted about a “guerrilla movement” of Iranian agents who work and live in the United States. But with people like Nowrouzzadeh working at State, they need hardly have bothered.

The Travel Ban Was Nixed by an Obama Crony

And then there are the courts. Federal judges might be expected to keep the Deep State in check. But some of them act more like partisan functionaries. A case in point is Judge Derrick Kahala Watson. He was appointed as a U.S district court judge in Honolulu by fellow Hawaiian and Harvard Law classmate Barack Obama. Judge Watson issued a restraining order against President Trump’s temporary travel ban. He didn’t cite legal grounds. So what was his argument? During the campaign, Trump had used heated rhetoric when speaking of Muslims.

The purpose of the travel ban is to protect Americans from radical Islam. The judiciary, in contrast, seems determined to put Americans at risk. The law itself is solidly on the side of the president. The president is empowered by 8 U.S. Code 1182 to “suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants” whose entry “would be detrimental to the interests of the United States.”

Alas, the lawyer left is not interested in the law. As former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy writes, “There is no way of crafting an order restricting immigration from Muslim countries that will satisfy them.” So what then? If the judges will not follow the law? If the bureaucratic holdovers from the Obama administration are more loyal to him than to the Constitution?

We Are Headed for an Ugly Showdown That Trump Might Lose

Then we are headed for a dangerous confrontation. It will be hard to resolve through courts. Will we end up with one law enforcement body following orders from a court, against another following orders from the President?

And then there’s the question of just how much power the President has over the Deep State. Columnist Daniel Greenfield suggests that Obama controls more of the government through his network of embedded loyalists than Trump does. As Mark Steyn puts it, “You don’t need a presidency for life, if you’ve got a bureaucracy for life.”

But why would leftist actors in Deep State risk such a dangerous encounter? Perhaps because they’re fairly confident they would win it. They have plenty of allies in the government and in the courts.

Add to that the support of universities and all those grads whom they’ve trained to believe that they can flout any laws they don’t like. In addition, they can count on a network of leftist nonprofits such as Obama’s Organizing for Action (OFA) which has 33,000 volunteers and 250 offices across the country.

Most of all, the Deep State can count on the “fourth estate” — the media — to cover for it by slanting the news. If, as some contend, we are in the midst of a “quiet coup” by a shadow government, you can be sure that the media will do its best to keep it quiet. Or even to justify it.

Those who think that Trump’s electoral victory will surely result in a safer and more secure America haven’t come to grips with the Deep State’s capacity to stir up deep trouble. (For more from the author of “Why the Deep State Is Gunning for President Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mainstream TV Show Watched by Millions Exposes Elite Government-Linked Pedophile Ring

/0 Comments/in , , /by

In an exclusive interview seen by millions across the United States, Dr. Phil exposed the deadly secretive, and the highly organized world of elite pedophilia — with a former child sex slave going by the name of “Kendall” describing being literally born into, and growing up in, the world of elite sexual slavery.

Kendall explains that she was born to be a sex slave, as her parents intentionally had her for the trafficker she calls her “owner.” Kendall says that her parents sold her at birth to an elite pedophile ring that serviced some of the world’s power elite, describing her first memories as being passed around groups of rich and prominent men and women for them to “take turns” with her for sadistic sexual pleasure.

Making her first public appearance after escaping from the man she calls her “owner,” Kendall describes being forced to participate in actions that shock the conscience. She explains that she was forced to rape children as young as 5- years-old, and even admits to having been forced to kill a baby by the human trafficker she describes as her “owner”. . .

She says she doesn’t even know her actual age, as she has been a sex slave her entire life, being trafficked around the globe to be molested and raped by the societal elites – including high ranking law enforcement official, major sports franchise owners and even high level U.S. politicians.

She describes having birthed 3 children while in captivity, all of which have been taken from her by her owner/trafficker, and are believed by Kendall to now be child sex slaves themselves. . .

She recalls one of her most fearful memories was that of the pedophiles hosting a “hunting party” on one of their large private plots of lands, making numerous children run and hide in fear, as they were the “prey” to be hunted. The pedophiles would then hunt the children as they ran and hid in fear – raping and torturing them when they were captured. . .

She claims that she was trafficked to pedophile politicians, and taken to political parties attended by high-level politicians who used her for their personal pleasure. The politicians always took great care to hide what they were doing, according to Kendall, who confirmed that there are many elite U.S. politicians that have been engaged in raping children for many years — a reality that has consistently been covered up and completely hidden from voters.

Perhaps the reason these crimes have been so steadfastly hidden from public view, is that high-level law enforcement officials have also been implicated as being part of the elite pedophile network.

(Read more from the “Mainstream TV Show Watched by Millions Exposes Elite Government-Linked Pedophile Ring” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Who Controls The (Alternate) ‘Reality’ In America?

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Who’s really got the power in America? Most people are living in an alternate reality created by those with the biggest platforms.

Individual “reality” is defined by what people believe to be true more than what actually exists. A firmly held opinion can create such a vast cognitive dissonance that many people can actually witness something that challenges their belief and still deny that they could be incorrect.

This sounds like the biggest conspiracy theory ever, but if you are here reading this, you probably at least suspect that there are manipulations at play in nearly everything we view or read. There are just a few hundred people who control the media, entertainment, and the Internet, and unless we are completely unplugged, we are lambasted with their versions of reality relentlessly every day.

Let’s talk about how opinions are really formed and who has the influence to sway the people of America. No matter how well-informed a person tries to be, the truth can be hard to come by when bias is presented from so many primary sources.

The Places People Get Their News and Information

According to the Pew Research Group, people get their information from the following sources:

PJ_2016.07.07_Modern-News-Consumer_1-01

Photo Credit Journalism.org
This means that those with the power to influence are the people who pull the strings of network news, those in entertainment, those who make the rules of major social media platforms, and those with the biggest websites. Radio and print newspapers have little influence these days, and for that reason, most major print newspapers also have online outlets.

Notice also how people of varying age groups rely more strongly on different sources for their information.

Network News

Who remembers sitting at the table or just after dinner, being bored to tears as a little kid while your parents were glued to the evening news? I remember my dad wanted to watch the news from three sources because he wanted more than one opinion. I get it now, but at the time, it felt like “the news” would never be over. I usually ended up playing with my Barbies or reading a book.

It seems that times haven’t changed much, if the Pew survey cited above is to be believed, and it appears that the older people are, the more likely they are to watch the news on TV.

But here’s the catch.

Although there are thousands of news stations across the country, nearly all of them are owned by six corporations. In the ’80s, the stations were dispersed through about 50 different companies – not a lot but a far more diverse sampling than you have now that your news is filtered through the lenses of billionaire corporations.

So, basically, everything we hear on the news is controlled by these six companies:

Time Warner
Walt Disney
News Corp.
Viacom
CBS Corporation
NBC Universal

Whatever their opinions are, those are the biases from which your news will be presented.

But it goes even deeper than just news because these corporations also control the entertainment industry. And what better way to control the masses than through propagandized drama in which the abnormal is normalized, and agendas are insidiously promoted without the knowledge of an unaware watcher?

Here is a glimpse at the networks owned by these corporations.

media-ownership

Photo Credit The Global Movement
As you can see, nearly anything you watch on any channel is influenced by a handful of people – those who run these major corporations. If they want to push an agenda, you can rest assured that agenda will be present on each of their outlets in some form.

The Rulers of the Internet

People under 50 get more of their news and information from the web than any other source these days.

One hundred websites get the majority of the traffic on the Internet, and that traffic is massive. The people behind these websites are major influences in the reality perceived by Americans.

Think about this:

Google gets 28 billion visits per month. That means when you look something up on Google, you are provided with the answer Google wants you to have, which may or may not be the actual answer.

YouTube follows quickly behind with 20.5 billion visits. (source) I’m sure by now you have heard that YouTube has taken advertising privileges away from a lot of videographers whose points of view are contrary to the agenda they wish to promote. They’re saying that the content is not “advertiser friendly” – and obviously, this discourages people who dedicate their days to advancing the truth from doing so. They, too, must make a living, and video editing is a time-consuming process. One well-done 10-minute video can take 8 hours to produce.

These are the 100 websites that provide the “reality” for the majority of the people who rely on the Internet for their news, as per Alexa.com’s traffic reporting system.

100-websites-rule-internet-1070

Photo Credit Visual Capitalist

Social Media

You may have noticed in the infographic above that a massive amount of traffic goes to social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter.

Both of those networks are notorious for censoring points of view that are not part of a liberal outlook. Unless you’ve been living under a rock, you probably heard about Twitter permanently banning a bunch of popular Alt-Right people, most infamously, Milo Yiannopoulos for his perspective.

Now, personally, I’m not a fan of the Alt-Right viewpoint. It seems like they’re presenting meanness as “truth” when they could just as easily state true things without being jerks about it. But that is beside the point. If these people are going to be banned for their unsavory ways of communicating, why does Twitter allow things like #RapeMelania to trend? Why does Twitter allow actual threats against the president? If you’re going to start banning offensiveness, shouldn’t it be across the board?

Then there’s Facebook, who has actually been busted running social experiments on its users by attempting to alter people’s moods with what they show in their timelines. But it doesn’t stop there. Nearly every blogger I know who works in the alternative news genre has been in Facebook jail at least once for presenting an unpopular opinion. I personally got warnings when I posted this article on my page – the article was taken down dozens of times and reported as “hate speech” when the “hate” it reported on was certainly not MY hatred.

Of course, when you sign up to use any of these social media networks, you agree to their terms and conditions. They’re businesses and are under no obligation to be truthful or have integrity. Go ahead and use them – I do because they are helpful to my business – but do so fully aware that what you see presented there reflects the opinions of the management and not actual reality.

So how do we get the truth?

There really aren’t any unbiased sources out there. Having worked as an alternative journalist, I can tell you honestly that no matter how hard you try to be unbiased, your personal feelings sneak in, at least a little bit. Maybe it’s with the background information you provide to support your story because you can see the direction what you are reporting on is going. Maybe it is with a little bit of snarky commentary or a pithy headline.

Because of this, many people pick the reality in which they want to live. Maybe they select ultra-conservative websites that reflect their religious beliefs. Perhaps they opt for anti-establishment outlets that gleefully point out in a non-partisan fashion that all of the politicians are sell-outs. For others, they want “news” that supports their warm, fuzzy liberal view of the world.

It’s pretty easy to get manipulated through the subliminal messages and the predictive programming, but some folks seem to be immune. You really want to be one of those people, and if you aren’t, you can get there.

I wrote about this previously:

What if some people are genetically more susceptible than others? What if some of us are immune to this constant bombardment of images, words, and ideas that most people seem to buy into without question?

Could this be the difference between the vast majority of the people and those of us are that are awake and aware? Are we just mutants? Is this why I can explain this stuff until I lose my voice and just get a blank stare from people who think I am the crazy one?

The vast majority of people in the United States are completely accepting of the official message:

They believe that the government will be there to save them in all circumstances.

They don’t question or inquire. They simply accept what they are told.

They don’t share our fears that something big is on the horizon.

They exist in a bubble and don’t look at the bigger picture.

They refuse to prepare for bad things because they honestly don’t believe it’s possible that those things will happen.

Most people like us (those who are aware, the self-sufficient minority) watch less TV than the masses. Some of us watch no TV at all. I watch a few shows on Netflix or Amazon Prime, but we don’t have cable TV with its commercials and *cough* news. We have other things to do, things that will help us when there are soldiers on the streets “for our own protection.” Things that will help our kids survive when the store shelves are empty and the majority relies on government rations to live (if they behave well enough to get one that is, and behave they will because hunger is a massive motivator to do as you’re told.)

Even if you have a tendency to be mind-controlled, it’s possible to snap out of it. I wasn’t always the tinfoil-clad blogger you see before you today. When I was in my early 20s, I truly did believe that the government agencies like the EPA and the FDA were looking out for our best interests, that food or medicine wouldn’t be sold if it was harmful, and that schools truly were in the business of educating children. Most of us have to shake off our early training at the hands of the education system and the television.

And sort of like in the movie, The Matrix, if you can get someone to swallow the red pill, they become a lot less willing to believe whatever they’re fed.

Subliminal messaging can change people’s views, can change the way they think, can change what they want to eat, what car they want to buy, maybe even how they vote. All you need is the cash to get your message out there and buy a few split seconds of screen time.

It can sow the seeds that make acceptance of abnormal and dangerous situations easier. It can teach people not to question and to be good little sheep.

Sitting for hours in front of the television mindlessly watching the drivel produced by companies who call it “entertainment” is brainwashing people and turning them into idiots, making the best current day example of predictive programming the movie Idiocracy.

All you have to do is look around and you’ll see that it’s here.

What if you don’t want to live in an alternate reality created by the media?

First of all, this doesn’t even touch on other influences like the ridiculous fear culture perpetuated in our schools or the Marxist indoctrination in our colleges and universities, where they teach you that gender isn’t a real thing and you get to pick whenever you want. There are many more players in the alternate reality game than just the media, but you have to start somewhere.

My advice for those who don’t want to live in an alternate reality:

Turn off the TV.

Vet your sources.

Try to get several points of view – even the ones you don’t like. The truth lies somewhere in between.

Look out for talking points that are used ad infinitum like “deep state” or “with an abundance of caution” or “the Russians.” The things you hear repeated over and over are repeated for a reason – to brainwash you.

In the famous words of Fox Mulder, “The truth is out there.” You just have to seek it diligently. (For more from the author of “Who Controls the (Alternate) ‘Reality’ in America?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Security Alert: Windows 10 Has Been Quietly Logging EVERY KEYSTROKE You Type And Sending It To Microsoft (This Is How To Stop It)

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Yesterday we reported that an international group of hackers claim they have breached Apple’s iCloud user database and stolen 300 million usernames and passwords. The group has threatened to initiate a widespread factory reset on April 7th, 2017, potentially wiping out data on tens of millions of iPhones and iCloud accounts should Apple fail to pay a ransom.

But that breach by nefarious hackers, while serious, is nothing compared to what your trusted operating system provider may be doing on your personal computer.

According to a recent report, if you are a Windows 10 user then every single keystroke you have ever typed on your computer may have been logged and sent to Microsoft.

You know those nagging questions during the installation process that ask you whether or not you want to “help” improve Windows by sending data to Microsoft? If you happened to answer “yes” to one of these questions, or if you went with the Microsoft default installation, there is a real possibility that everything you have done on your computer from the get-go, including sending “secure” messages (because the keyboard logger captures your keystrokes before they appear in your secure messaging app), is now a part of a massive user database somewhere.

There’s been heaps of controversy associated with Microsoft’s latest operating system Windows 10 since it was launched, but the latest issue takes the cake – apparently Windows has been quietly logging every single keystroke users make on their keyboards from the beginning. Even better, that data is being constantly sent to Microsoft’s servers on a regular basis.

Via IB Times

It’s been reported that Microsoft has been using the data to improve artificial intelligence writing and grammar software, but it’s not clear what else they are doing with it.
If you are OK with sharing your personal messages, usernames and passwords with Microsoft for the betterment of the Windows universe, then there is nothing else you need to do at this time.

But if you are concerned about your personal privacy, there are two ways to avoid having your computer spied on using this keylogger method.

Choose A Custom Installation

When installing Windows 10 for the first time you’ll want to select a ‘Custom Install’. This will allow you to choose what you do or do not want activated. To be safe, select ‘no’ for all options related to sending information or data to Microsoft or third-parties.

Update Your Privacy Settings

There is a simple way to identify whether or not your typing activities are being logged.

Simply click on your Windows 10 Start Menu. From there, go to Settings (or the gear icon) -> Privacy -> General

You’ll want to turn off the option that says, “Send Microsoft info about how I write to help us improve typing and writing in the future.”

msft-screenshot2

Once moved to the ‘Off’ position, Microsoft keyword logging should no longer be a problem.

But even though Microsoft will no longer be accessing your data, keep in mind that recent leaked documents reveal most devices have been compromised by intelligence services, meaning that not only can they see what you are typing to friends, family and business colleagues, but they can remotely monitor your voice and video communications in real-time without you even knowing its happening, including when you think your computer is turned off. (For more from the author of “Security Alert: Windows 10 Has Been Quietly Logging EVERY KEYSTROKE You Type and Sending It to Microsoft (This Is How to Stop It)” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Ridiculous Reason the FBI Has Decided to Investigate Conservative Websites

/0 Comments/in , , /by

The FBI is investigating whether conservative news sites, including Breitbart and InfoWars, cooperated with the Russian government in an effort to influence the presidential election.

McClatchy reports the investigation is focused on the use of strategically-timed social media “bots” employed to blitz social media with pro-Donald Trump and anti-Hillary Clinton stories.

A bot is simply a program that gathers information based on defined specifications.

“The bots’ end products were largely millions of Twitter and Facebook posts carrying links to stories on conservative internet sites such as Breitbart News and InfoWars, as well as on the Kremlin-backed RT News and Sputnik News,” sources told McClatchy.

“This may be one of the most highly impactful information operations in the history of intelligence,” one former U.S. intelligence official stated on a condition of anonymity.

Federal investigators are seeking to discover if Breitbart and other sites cooperated in the efforts.

According to Alexa, Breitbart’s web traffic shot up dramatically in October, in relation to other similar websites, and has remained at a high level since. It currently is in the top 100 most viewed websites in the country, even outpacing FoxNews.com.

Breitbart reported on Nov. 19 that it experienced a record 300 million page views over the previous 31 days.

The news site did not respond for comment about the McClatchy story.

Breitbart’s former chairman, Steve Bannon, stepped down to become the CEO of the Trump campaign in August. He now serves as a top adviser on the president’s White House staff.

InfoWars’ Alex Jones responded to the story on his radio program on Monday.

“To be called a Russian asset by McClatchy and by the LA Times and by a bunch of other publications today is funny, if it wasn’t so serious,” he said.

“I don’t personally take this as a threat … I’m threatened for the country. I mean if the Russians want to secure our borders, cut our taxes, not have us go bankrupt, rebuild our military, block radical Islam — well then, hell, I’m a Russian agent! But I’m not,” Jones added, according to The Daily Caller.

As reported by Western Journalism, FBI Director James Comey confirmed on Monday in testimony before the House Intelligence Committee that his agency is investigating “alleged links” between the Russian government and the Trump campaign.

Earlier this month, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated on Meet the Press there was “no evidence” of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., voiced the same conclusion on Fox News Sunday. (For more from the author of “The Ridiculous Reason the FBI Has Decided to Investigate Conservative Websites” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.