U.S. Censors The Net As Obama Lectures China On Net Censorship

by Scrivener | November 16, 2009 at 07:52 am

745 views | 9 Recommendations | 40 comments

• More apparent "stupid 'humint' surveillance tricks" by rogue operatives at Homeland Security-administered "fusion centers."

GET POLITICAL w/ VIC LIVINGSTON

Certain government agencies are making a liar out of President Obama's remarks to student leaders in China today -- and I bet he and his people won't be too happy when they find out about it here.

This morning, while speaking to a group of students in Shanghai, Obama lectured the Communist Chinese government over its censorship of the internet. He was responding to a question from a brave Chinese student about China's "great internet firewall." The student was one of about a thousand hand-picked by Chinese education officials to attend the event.

According to an account on the Guardian web site, Obama described himself as "a big supporter of non-censorship" and said criticism enabled by freedom of expression in the U.S. made him a better president. He also said this:

"These freedoms of expression, and worship, of access to information and political participation – we believe they are universal rights. They should be available to all people, including ethnic and religious minorities, whether they are in the United States, China or any nation."

What Obama didn't say -- or perhaps what he does not realize -- is that the United States government is exercising draconian, even malicious censorship of the internet -- not merely by blocking full access to web sites, but intercepting and censoring attempts to post comments to web articles, even maliciously tampering with the content of attempted postings.

How can I made this allegation? Because for nearly six years, this journalist has documented persistent interference and censorship of his telecommunications -- internet, email, even telephone. This blatant censorship protocol is the apparent mission of operatives at some 70 regional data and information "fusion centers" around the nation, run under the supervision of the Department of Homeland Security.

My personal experiences and my reporting as an apparently "targeted" journalist lead me to conclude that warrantless surveillance programs enacted as "tools" to fight terrorism are being misused by security, military, law enforcement and intelligence agencies as a pretext to harass and censor persons considered to be "dissidents" or undesirables by a covert multi-agency campaign of extrajudicial punishment and persecution -- including silent, health-degrading torture and impairment inflicted by means of classified microwave and laser radiation weapons systems, in one iteration, camouflaged as cell towers.

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america

The latest example of this apparent government censorship came this morning as I attempted to post a comment to a political blog known as "The Fix," at http://washingtonpost.com/thefix. Each of three times I attempted to post the comment, I received on my end of the connection a full-screen message stating that the comment was received and is "being held for the blog owner." I have confirmed in the past that The Washington Post does not "hold" reader comments unless its software detects foul language, which was not the case here.

It appears that government censors are re-directing my internet traffic to a "spoofed" or faked Washington Post web site controlled by their computers and software, allowing what the geeks call a "man in the middle attack." This real-time surveillance technology allows the censors to review by internet input, censor it, maliciously tamper with it, or pass it on as originally submitted.

And on my end of the connection, I have no sure way of knowing if what I am looking at on my screen -- an apparently "spoofed" web site to which I have been re-directed -- actually has been posted to the REAL web site as I intended.

I have written extensively about such apparent real-time censorship:

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-fusion-center-spying-pretext-harass-and-censor
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/parallel-internet-big-brother-screening-censoring-political-blogs
http://www.nowpublic.com/world/political-bloggers-beware-more-signs-big-brother-censorship

And what political speech did the apparent censors deem worthy of their ham-fisted censorship and prior restraint of publication (which the Supreme Court also has deemed unconstitutional)? Here is the comment that "they" apparently do not want you to read -- starting off with a reference to a political fund-raising trip to Arizona by Vice President Biden:

VP BIDEN: PLEASE PHONE HOME

Considering the revelations likely to come out very soon concerning the run-up to the Fort Hood massacre and the government's failure to prevent it, let's hope VP Biden makes it a quick trip and gets back to take care of pressing business in DC.

***

URGENT TO: POTUS / VPOTUS / D. AXELROD / R. EMANUEL / R. GIBBS / JAY CARNEY / A.G. HOLDER

Did this rogue program help drive the Ft. Hood shooter to kill?

Has microwave/laser radiation weapons torture been done to Gitmo and Bagram detainees to induce exhaustion, weakness, fatigue, confusion, and life-altering injury and disease?

SECRET MULTI-AGENCY FED PROGRAM TORTURES, IMPAIRS, PERSECUTES THOUSANDS OF U.S. CITIZENS WITH NATIONWIDE SILENT MICROWAVE / LASER WEAPONS SYSTEMS, LOCAL VIGILANTISM: JOURNALIST VICTOR LIVINGSTON

• Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan
• FEMA Director Craig Fugate
• NSA Director Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander
• DIA Director Maj. Gen. Michael Maples
• DOJ Asst. Atty. Gen./National Security David Kris
• CIA Deputy Director Stephen Kappes
• FBI Director Robert Mueller

TEAM OBAMA, CONGRESS MUST ASK: What do they know -- and when did they know it?

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-ameria

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-tortures-me-silent-microwave-weapons-ousted-s-prez

OR http://NowPublic.com/scrivener RE: "GESTAPO USA"

***

AS PRESIDENT OBAMA CONDEMNS CHINA FOR INTERNET CENSORSHIP...

...HOMELAND-RUN 'FUSION CENTERS' USE WARRANTLESS SURVEILLANCE AS A PRETEXT TO HARASS, CENSOR AND IMPOSE PRIOR RESTRAINT VIA TELECOMMUNICATIONS

Team Obama: Please Wake Up and Smell the Police State that Threatens Democracy, the Rule of Law, and Your Administration

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-fusion-center-spying-pretext-harass-and-censor

Now, it's quite possible that as I am writing this, at shortly after 10 a.m. on Monday, November 16th, the surveillance operatives who apparently are monitoring my every keystroke in real-time could decide to go ahead and post my original comment on "The Fix" political blog. I have found that they are like schoolyard bullies; when caught beating up the nerds, they put on their "Eddie Haskell" face and pretend they did nothing wrong. But even if they relent, they still have violated my constitutional rights by exercising prior restraint on my constitutionally-protected freedom of speech -- and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures (in this case, of my telecommunications).

So what have these ham-fisted frat boy Nazi censors accomplished? Nothing -- except giving me more fodder, more material, to write about in my ongoing quest to take down their blatantly unconstitutional and anti-American "program" -- a program that makes a mockery of today's comments to Communist Chinese students by a U.S. President whose policies, it would appear, are being subverted from within.

For more on "GESTAPO USA," see:

http://nowpublic.com/world/gestapo-usa-govt-funded-vigilante-network-terrorizes-america

http://nowpublic.com/world/govt-tortures-me-silent-microwave-weapons-ousted-s-prez

OR (if links are corrupted / disabled): http://NowPublic.com/scrivener

FOR THE GUARDIAN'S COVERAGE OF OBAMA'S CHINA REMARKS:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/16/barack-obama-criticises-internet-censorship-china

NowPublic.com readers: Help restore constitutional rights in America. Please re-post this article widely, and send it to the attention of Robert Gibbs, press secretary to the President of the United States, at http://WhiteHouse.gov SEE RELATED ARTICLES AT: http://NowPublic.com/scrivener ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

INDEPENDENT JOURNALIST VIC LIVINGSTON SEEKS UNDERWRITER

The author of these articles is seeking a foundation dedicated to human rights to underwrite his work, which, since the inception of these pages in July 2008, has been strictly pro bono.

The underwriter's financial support would be publicly credited at the top and the bottom of each story. To my knowledge, NowPublic.com does not share its advertising revenues with its editorial contributors.

Those seriously interested in this opportunity to support what I believe is vital and unique journalism, please attempt to contact me via email with contact information (scrivener50@verizon.net). My email has been subject to interception and tampering; so if I do not respond in a timely matter it surely means I did not receive the message. In that event, please leave word in the "comments" section of one of my articles and I will endeavor to reach you by other means -- preferably, in person. I reside within commuting distance of Manhattan.

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend Sign In or Join to post comments

Scrivener

at 10:49 on November 26th, 2009

I know by the fact that sites don't update, and content is tampered with, that it is likely I am looking at spoofed or faked web sites to which I have been redirected. My content is altered in real-time. Re-direction to a spoofed site is the only explanation. I don't need to be an IT expert to know that I am the target of unconstitutional censorship, malicious tampering and other color of law violations. That's what the "preponderance of evidence" indicates. And again I repeat: It's all done very clumsily, so obvious as to be laughable. The intent seems to intimidate and censor -- if this were for legitimate "surveillance" purposes, why would the operatives go out of the way to let me know I am being "watched" -- like throwing up color backgrounds on occasion, or other little psy tricks that they pull constantly? This is a ROGUE OPERATION, and it has been EXPOSED.

batvette

at 23:03 on November 29th, 2009

I don't need to be an IT expert to know that I am the target of unconstitutional censorship, malicious tampering and other color of law violations.

Umm, well if not an "IT expert" you at least need to have some technical knowledge of internet hosting and network protocols, and I think nowadays most ten year olds can positively school you on this stuff. And since you call "throwing up a colored background" some form of "intimidation" it's a safe bet that ten year old- hell a ten year old GIRL can probably whup your ass after 3 o'clock before you get on the short bus that takes you home as well.

That's what the "preponderance of evidence" indicates.

What evidence is that, Vic? FIVE separate times I have given you a link to imaging software, free of charge, that has a screen capture feature so you could save one of these "spoofed" pages. Have you done so? Of course not. You're a fraud.

This is a ROGUE OPERATION,

Yeah sure it is. That's why for months you've been claiming it was officially sanctioned by alphabet agencies.

and it has been EXPOSED.

Okay, I'll bite. Who is doing it? Give me one name of a person in the entire scheme of this and where we can find him. I don't care if he's the head honcho or the guy who sweeps the floors. You always allude to some inside information, now you say "it's been exposed". GIVE US A NAME. ANYONE.

Anonymously Given (not verified)

at 06:57 on November 27th, 2009

What you say is true - if your entire connection has been redirected, or "piped" through a "spoofed" server, then any DNS analysis is meaningless, since (the real DNS) is either never accessed or entirely ignored and replaced. A ROGUE OPERATION, it certainly is ...

batvette

at 21:55 on December 19th, 2009

Cut to the chase here, he claims that by being redirected to MYnowpublic when he logs into nowpublic, that is a spoofed website and evidence of government censorship. Since you don't dare play Vic's sock puppet with your real identity and refuse to register to comment, I'd say you have no clue how stupid his claim is. However your IT knowledege far exceeds mine, you should know he's full of **** anyway.

Anonymously Given (not verified)

at 07:24 on November 27th, 2009

The problem is that the network infrastructure is run by a tightly networked (by necessity) group of corporations with no oversight. What if our public highway system ran that way? Would every driver have free and equal access to any road, anywhere? I doubt it.

Scrivener

at 08:53 on November 27th, 2009

Group of corporations? As if the 70-odd fusion centers don't commandeer the entire system? Oh, there's oversight, all right... this is all done on purpose, and it is a gross violation of constitutional, civil and human rights. In most cases, there is no national security justification for this apparatus, or it wouldn't be so obvious and so ineptly executed. This is done as a CONTROL mechanism, the mechanics of a fascist police state that's camouflaged as "non-profit" regional fusion centers -- run by government and corporate personnel who know exactly what they are doing, and why.

This nation is meekly surrendering to covert, creeping fascism, enabled by the naivete of those who think it can't happen here -- and by cowards on the inside who don't stand up for American values and the rule of law.

Anonymously Given (not verified)

at 06:46 on January 5th, 2010

It is a group of corporations who, based upon the idea that they own specific physical segments of the network, block packets of traffic when such content is transmitted through those segments of the network that they control. For instance, Vic Livingston's traffic may be dropped without so much as a notification to him that they have programmed routers to explicitly drop his traffic. This is legal! It is considered legal because the corporations own the routers! It is a complete censorship regimen, based upon nothing more than fiat or the whimsy of the corporations that control the net. How would it be if the Highway system ran that way? You would be turned back (arbitrarily), on your trip to Grandma's at Christmas-time. The blocked traffic on the net is worse than the trip to Grandma's, because these corporations are not required to do so much as to notify you that they have done it! In the absence of the complete takeover of the internet infrastructure by the government, we need laws to require that notification be given to citizens whose traffic is blocked by these corporations. Then, such citizens could adequate defend themselves from the usurpation of their free speech. Personally, I prefer the takeover of the internet by the government in a fashion similar to the way the government administers the highway system. Vic, your censorship is not now a result of the government -- it is a result of the unwatched, unwashed, and out of control corporations who now run the net.

Soujourner Truth (not verified)

at 18:17 on December 17th, 2009

I'll say you're going through a spoofed server!! Evidently I was, too. The last time I read this thread there were seven pages. Now there are two. None of my posts are on this two pages. I've been spoofed!

batvette

at 22:03 on December 19th, 2009

No, he's got, or did have, a duplicate article on this one. Since I've seen a number of double and triple posts from him that were later deleted, and a few over at the ACLU blogs, I think there's nothing more nefarious going on there than Vic's impatience at seeing his crazy rants appear on the screen.

Anonymously Given (not verified)

at 07:45 on January 14th, 2010

This thread seems to have cooled off a bit. With only a few weeks remaining before it is scheduled to be embalmed by NP, I think I'll feed it a little bit ... When you look at some particular thing frequently is sometimes becomes over-familiar to the point where the mind "snapshots" that particular thing into a static entity. From such a point in time, going forward, the mind sees nothing more in the picture. The analysis is done. Censorship on the net is happening in a gross manner, and in percentage terms -- at a ridiculous level - but we have all been entrained to accept it, and have all "snapshotted" into our consciousness. We have only a few search engines serving up the vast majority of search queries. These search engines, for the most part, use algorithms to decide which few hundred sites will be available upon a search submitted for any particular set of keywords. These few hundred pages vary (rotate) only slightly over time. In other words, the search engines massively censor what we can see. The default settings on most search engines allow only a few hundred sites to navigate to, via listed links. While some can be modified to extend the width of the query result, no one ever attempts to modify such settings. Therefore; we are limited to a very small portion of what is on the net, and it has been culled to represent what the major search engines want us to see. How culled? For any particular set of keywords, there are literally thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of sites on the net with information that corresponds with those keywords. There are 75 million sites on the internet. The "cull level" could easily be sufficient to effectively restrict the public's "view" of the internet to only one percent of it! Talk about censorship! A "mom and pop" store has almost no chance to be really "visible" on the net. Sure, if you type the exact domain name into the browser bar, the site will appear, because domain names are necessarily unique. However, the domain name is usually obtuse relative to the subject, because the main English words are so limited in scope relative to millions of web sites. As an example, "JSmith and Co. - Metal fabricators" may be listed under "jsmithmetal.com, or some such thing, because "metalfabricators.com" was taken long ago. The search engines do index most or all of the sites. However; depending upon the particular algorithm in use, it may be that only the most popular ones are shown. The JSmith and Co. site (made up name) is literally never seen by anyone via search engine queries. What is my point? Unpopular causes, or minority causes are buried by search engines that rank pages by popularity level. The voices of minority groups of people can easily be silenced - and are. This is not so much a problem of intentional censorship, as it the nature of the beast, given that there is too much information available relative to what any surfing person can reasonably sift through. I suppose one could say that the search engines are supplying more information than what any person has the time to cull through themselves. My problem is that the major search engines stop at the foot of the beast. They make no attempt to wrestle with the beast, and they show the same few (1%) of the sites on the net, as per any particular set of query criterion. It is not explained, on the search pages of most engines, exactly how to expand the search beyond that one percent level. For instance, I may want to see the pages that are ranked 101321'th, just because I know somebody like JSmith and his metal shop are buried down there. The major search engine people will say that they don't have the computing power to do this. However; I think that is an insufficient response, and have actually started a little search engine project to see if I can better wrestle with the beast than they. Sure would be nice if NP would allow anon posters to use paragraphs.