Marine Le Pen HAILS UK Parliament for ‘sticking to will of the people’ & delivering Brexit

MARINE Le Pen has praised the British Parliament for its “remarkable and honourable” respect for the will of the people after Theresa May was given the green light to begin Brexit negotiations.

Article source link :



Russian government warns citizens to stay away from ‘evil game’ with ‘end game connections’ – Is this the biggest trojan horse in history?

The bizarre new story coming to us out of Russia from Gizmodo tells us that 22-year old video blogger Ruslan Sokolovsky has been detained for two months before trial for ‘inciting hatred’ and ‘insulting religious feelings’ by playing Pokemon Go inside of the historic Russian Cathedral seen in the photograph with Sokolovsky below. You can also hear about this story from RT in the first video below.

Still facing up to 5 years in prison for his ‘crimes’, the story of Sokolovsky is just the latest coming to us from Russia about this ‘game’ that quickly set the world on fire with record downloads but has Russian authorities and religious leaders claiming it is ‘evil’. As was reported on Kotaku, Russian officials are flipping out about Pokemon Go and believe that it will have a destabilizing effect upon their society so they are developing their own, “more patriotic” version of it. This story from Foreign Policy tells us that according to one Russian lawmaker, people hunting down ‘Jigglypuff’ and ‘Snorlax’ through Pokemon Go make him “feel like the devil has arrived and is trying to tear our mortality apart from the inside“.

While at first the bizarre story of Sokolovsky seems to some to paint the Russian nation as even more tyrannical than the West has suddenly become in its drive towards system collapse and global dictatorship, when we learn the reasons why Russia is making these moves and is so infuriated by Pokemon Go, it all makes a bit more sense. While jailing a blogger will do nothing to stop the madness behind the game, it’s clear we’re watching something sinister unfolding. As we’re told in the final video below, we now have 100% proof that Pokemon Go has an ‘end game’ connection to DARPA, the CIA, the illuminati and the New World Order. And according to one Russian user, the rules of the game are quite simple:

“Pokemon is simple and clear: you find them, you collect them and then you make them fight one another.”

Sounds like something right out of the ‘nwo’ playbook: find them, round them up and make them go to war.

russian Cathedral
All News Pipeline

According to the Russians, Pokemon Go is one of the greatest spy tools to ever emerge from the West via Niantic, a company with links to the CIA and is being secretly used to gather intelligence on a ‘colossal’ scale.

Niantec CEO John Hanke created Keyhole in 2001 – which was later bought by Google. Most of the money used to create Keyhole came from the National Geo-Spatial Intelligence Agency and the CIA. Pokemon GO is the pinnacle of Hanke’s intelligence gathering career thus far. He is a New World Order intelligence operative whose career has been creating ingenious ways to spy on unsuspecting citizens and siphon the information back to intelligence agencies.

The ultimate ‘sheep-in-wolves-clothing-trojan-horse’? We’re told with the launch of this monstrous game, the CIA has effectively recruited millions of unaware and distracted people to work as intelligence and surveillance operatives, gathering massive amounts of information that was previously extremely time consuming and expensive.

Just pretend you’re a govt agency that wants to be everywhere at once, to see everything going on in any place and every place. Your endless surveillance cameras on every street corner and store and drones in the sky don’t quite cut it so what better way to do so than to send an army of totally distracted and completely ignorant ‘Poke-people’ wherever you want them to go with two cameras and a microphone on nearly every phone gathering data for those ‘in control’ of the phones?

Hey Bob, we need to see inside of ABC store on West street” the order is shouted out from the ‘X’ intelligence agency operative to the other op who quickly chimes back, “you got it, Pikachu’s heading there now“…to be quickly joined by their unpayed staff of countless mindless morons following the non-existent ‘augmented-reality’ creatures wherever they go.

Players of the game can be sent on a chase for a rare Pokemon inside of almost any location such as a park, tourist attractions or almost any public building in the world, including the Kremlin where Pokemon have been found according to this story, and immediately, ‘Poke Spies’ have immediate access to whatever intelligence the phones of a countless number of ‘Poke Sheep’ are seeing and hearing and collecting for them.

Russians have already been found playing Pokemon Go in Red Square and the Kremlin has warned players to stay away from Vladimir Putin’s residence as well as from government buildings. China also fears that players of the game could unwittingly give up highly secretive information via the process of elimination or if someone is actually playing the game inside of military bases or other government buildings and also warns the game is a ‘trojan horse’ for the US and Japan. Iran has also already banned the game due to security concerns.

As we’ve previously reported on ANP, people have been hurt, killed, robbed, fallen off cliffs and crashed into cop cars in their mindless pursuits of a computer screen creature that doesn’t even exist in real life. Taking absurdity to absolutely new levels while giving spy agencies unprecendent access to huge amounts of data, officials in the state of Maryland have called the game a possible public safety hazard with private homes and private institutions also being ‘invaded’, quite literally putting those who want nothing to do with the game in the path of those trying to find a ‘rare monster’ and turning neighborhoods into nightmares.

If they’re collecting all of this data, why aren’t they using it to round up those who are true threats to US national security or do ISIS jihadists simply not play Pokemon? If they’re not using this intelligence to gather information on those who want to slaughter us, who are they gathering the information on? It might be easier for some Americans to accept such activities if they knew that jihadis were being rounded up using the information but we haven’t seen any of that yet that we’re aware of.

Is Pokemon Go the biggest trojan horse in history, giving ‘colossal access’ to ‘new world order’ spies and operatives across the globe and quite literally, ‘the devil’s arrival to tear our morality apart from the inside’ as the Russian lawmaker warned? While very disrespectful, should this Russian vlogger be getting prison time for such an offense? Do any ANP readers have family or friends or co-workers who are players of this ‘game’? If so, we’d love to hear any experiences that you’ve had or noticed with others ‘fascination’ with Pokemon Go that you think our other readers would find interesting in the comment section below.

Via All News Pipeline

The post Russian government warns citizens to stay away from ‘evil game’ with ‘end game connections’ – Is this the biggest trojan horse in history? appeared first on Intellihub.

Article source link :



U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee investigators request total ‘preservation of Russian-tied information or communications’ with Trump Camp.

Deep State takes another whack at Trump

(INTELLIHUB) — CNN’s Manu Raju has confirmed that the Senate Intelligence Committee is investigating the alleged ‘Russian interference of the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election’ and any potential Russian ties to Trump campaign staffers.

Chairman Richard Burr, R-North Carolina along with Sen. Mark Warner, D-Virginia, are heading up the panel which has already put out requests to a number of agencies, organizations, and individuals, 12 in total, requesting that they preserve any and all information or communications that fall within the scope of the investigation.

FBI Dir. James Comey attended the classified panel behind closed doors Friday where members decided to expand their investigation into Russia’s alleged meddling with the U.S. election system.

Reporting over the phone for CNN, Raju said that the panel is very concerned with any potential contacts or conversations Trump campaign staffers or transition team members may have had with the Russians.

Ruju also said according to reports “certain [Trump] campaign officials” had “constant contact” with “Russian operatives during the campaign.”

The Senate Intelligence Committee is doing a “deep dive,” Raju said.

“What they want are records to make sure that nothing that the Trump administration or that any federal agency has relating to Russia should be destroyed. They want to preserve these documents, review them and they have the power to subpoena those as well.”

Additionally, Raju reported that several other investigations into the matter are currently underway but are slow-going.

H/T: Tabertronic/Twitter

Featured Image: (Mark Warner/Flickr)
©2017. INTELLIHUB.COM. All Rights Reserved.

The post U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee investigators request total ‘preservation of Russian-tied information or communications’ with Trump Camp. appeared first on Intellihub.

Article source link :



Astana Talks on Wednesday to Focus on Separation of Terrorists, Syria Opposition

The main topic of the second day of the Astana talks on Syria will become the separation of positions of terrorists and moderate opposition in the country, head of Damascus delegation to the talks Bashar Jaafari told Sputnik.

Article source link :



Why Government always gets cybersecurity wrong

Otto Von Bismarck is thought to have said that if you want to respect law and sausage you should watch neither being made. Charlie Mitchell supports this view in his recent book Hacked: The Inside Story of America’s Struggle to Secure Cyberspace by providing an in-depth, comprehensive history of cybersecurity policy during the Obama administration. The chronological account explores interactions between the White House, bureaucracy, special interests, and Congress. Mitchell considers several points of view and gives the reader a thorough understanding of competing perspectives on issues such as privacy and regulation.

This is a historical work, not a theoretical one (Public Choice Theory is never mentioned), but it is of great value to Public Choice scholars because it explores issues at the heart of the discipline, such as how legislators, bureaucrats, and special interests respond to the incentives they face and how policy gets made (or not made) in light of these competing incentives.

John McCain asked for a cyber committee to be created, until he took control of a committee that dealt with it.

The Politics of Cybersecurity Legislation

The articulation of a cybersecurity policy began in earnest towards the end of the Bush administration, with the Obama White House picking up where they left off. However, after congress failed to pass legislation dealing with the issue during his first term, President Obama issued an Executive Order in February 2013 calling for (among other things) a non-regulatory approach to cybersecurity based on collaboration between the government and technology industry.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) was tasked with developing a framework of “voluntary standards” for cybersecurity in collaboration with the tech industry.  This was done through a series of conferences where representatives from the two sides met at various college campuses across the country to hash out what such a framework might look like. During and after this process, other government agencies pursued cybersecurity within their various spheres of influence, some successfully (Federal Communications Commission), some unsuccessfully (Department of Homeland Security).

A constant theme throughout the book is Congress’s struggle to pass significant cybersecurity legislation. The issue seems to constantly be before congress during Obama’s second term, but it is frequently kicked to the curb by partisan fighting, elections, government shutdowns, congressional recesses, and other legislative concerns. Cybersecurity legislation is finally passed in the house in April 2015, and in the Senate in October of the same year.

Tech industry representatives distrust government agencies and are afraid that the “voluntary” framework process will quickly devolve into harsh regulation.

As mentioned earlier, the story of cybersecurity policy during the Obama administration is ripe for Public Choice analysis because it is a story of incentives and self-interest on the part of the legislature, special interests, and bureaucracy.

Congress has very few incentives to deal efficiently with the cybersecurity problem. Doing so would most likely require the creation of a cybersecurity committee. This, however, is highly unlikely because, as retired Rep. Jane Harman says, “people in [Congress] earned their power through committee positions.” Cybersecurity is currently under the jurisdiction of several different committees, none of which will be willing to give up power or influence over such an important issue.

Mitchell shows this by mentioning that John McCain asked for a cyber committee to be created, until he took control of a committee that dealt with it. Additionally, Hacked shows how the perverse incentives of party politics and re-election push legislators to shortsighted policies. Cybersecurity legislation is repeatedly passed over because of looming elections, government shutdowns, squabbles between Republicans and Democrats, the budget, immigration, and the Iran nuclear deal. This essential element to national security that should be rather straightforward is constantly left in the hopper with little hope of floor time because politicians are busy with more “pressing” matters.

The Role of Special Interests

Special interests loom large in the discussion of any significant piece of legislation and cybersecurity is no exception. Tech industry representatives distrust government agencies and are afraid that the “voluntary” framework process will quickly devolve into harsh regulation. They and other interest groups make their voices heard throughout the legislative process. The two competing special interests seen in the book are those arguing for privacy protection such as the ACLU and the Center for Democracy and Technology and those representing the cyber industry such as the US Chamber of Commerce.

Indeed, DHS only took on cybersecurity because it “saw cyber as a potential ‘win’ area.”

To protest the Cyber Information Sharing Act (CISA) privacy advocates sent faxes to senators urging them to vote against the bill (they claimed to be using 1984 technology to protest a bill reminiscent of “Big Brother” in the George Orwell classic). On the other side of the issue, industry representatives began a “myth-versus-fact” campaign to show that CISA wasn’t a surveillance bill. Both sides end up fighting not for the best policy but for the one that benefits them the most.

The Expanding Footprint of DHS

The federal bureaucracy is an excellent example of the Public Choice principle that public actors respond to incentives the same way private ones do, namely that they are concerned with their own self-interest. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is seen as unwilling to cooperate with industry (it has no incentives to do so), and did little to change this reputation. DHS, which has more cybersecurity responsibilities than any other federal agency has many other concerns besides cyber, and because of this, is not incentivized to give the issue the attention it deserves.

Indeed, DHS only took on cybersecurity because it “saw cyber as a potential ‘win’ area.” The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) provides an example of a bureaucratic agency trying to enlarge its footprint. The FTC sees itself as protecting consumers from “unfair and deceptive [business] practices.” It sought to extend this power into the cyber realm and had its authority to regulate and punish companies affirmed by two 2015 court cases. Security companies took advantage of this and in a “bootleggers and Baptists” scenario created NIST framework-based products asserting that because of the FTC’s newfound powers, cybersecurity was mandatory.

However, Hacked does provide one example of public and private incentives aligning, namely, the NIST framework creation process. NIST has several institutional advantages; it is small, but well respected and “it doesn’t provoke jealousy or underhanded attacks from other government agencies because it’s not a regulator and has no interest in bureaucratic turf wars.” It was likely unable (and had few incentives) to push the private sector around.

This, as well as the fact that the framework it created was to be voluntary and the result of a collaborative process helped to create a system where the government and the private sector worked together. The non-regulatory nature of the program also meant that the threat of government regulation could incentivize companies to use the framework.

Mitchell closes the book with musings on the future of cybersecurity in the United States. Restructuring the bureaucracy or congress would better equip the government to deal with the problem and questions still remain about how to encourage companies to invest in cybersecurity and whether the government or the private sector will drive innovation. He states that policy cannot be reactionary, it must be adaptable to changing circumstances and it must be made with the goal of threat reduction because this problem is not going to disappear. His closing comments provide needed insight into a complicated field, and his book helps scholars see Public Choice Theory in action.


The post Why Government always gets cybersecurity wrong appeared first on Intellihub.

Article source link :