image courtesy of the EFF  

Today the Wall Street Journal announced that it uncovered a new government program ominously dubbed “Perfect Citizen”. The project will bring NSA monitoring equipment to corporate computer networks that the government deems to be “critical infrastructure” with the stated goal of detecting cyber-attacks. Sources familiar with “Perfect Citizen” told the Wall Street Journal that “[the NSA] wouldn’t persistently monitor the whole system”, which is troubling since that statement indicates that the system can be persistently monitored. Since the NSA had no qualms about illegally tapping every phone in America, how can they be trusted not to abuse the “Perfect Citizen” system? In my mind, trusting the NSA with this power is akin to leaving a junkie locked in a room with their drug of choice and telling them not to touch it. For now at least, companies will have to opt-in to allowing the NSA to install sensors onto their networks. However, with the recent Chinese attack on Google held up as an example, what company would choose not to participate in program to “protect national security”, especially if there was any chance of it being leaked that they declined to participate in something called “Perfect Citizen” (ever notice that the more onerous the program or law the more patriotic sounding the name – PATRIOT Act anyone?).

This of course brings me to the obvious poster child for “Perfect Citizen”, Google. At the beginning of this year it came to light that a number of systems belonging to Google, as well as systems of several other large corporations were penetrated by hackers. According to Google (and later persons within the US government as high ranking as Secretary of State Clinton) the attacks originated from China. From the onset the attack was represented to the public as a state sponsored cyber-attack. In fact, the phrase “act of war” was bandied about in some circles. As Google’s investigation progressed (aided by the NSA), however, little supporting evidence was presented despite strong accusations against the Chinese Government. For the world at large the die had been cast, China had attacked US computers. Admittedly, even I accepted Google’s story as fact. At least until this morning when the Wall Street Journal released the details of “Perfect Citizen”. I started thinking, why would China risk such a widespread attack that was certain to be uncovered and could possibly be considered an act of war. Especially in the case of Google where (according to what we were told) the attacks targeted uncovering dissidents, whose identities are almost certainly not worth going to war to uncover.

Read the rest of this entry »

While there is no information given as to when or where this video was taken, it still is an interesting piece of evidence related to the fake plane phenomena. As I have said before, most “fake plane” videos are easily explainable. However, this video, like the one filmed in Moscow that I posted a last month, is different. As you watch the plane fly across the sky, there appears to be something strange about the aircraft’s tail section.

Looking closely, it becomes apparent that the bulge is significantly larger than the rest of the fuselage. Additionally, it appears to be off center. Paying close attention to the shadows on the bulge it appears that all of it’s edges are rounded suggesting a elongated saucer like shape. What isn’t visible in the video, is whether or not the bulge is actually attached to or part of the plane.

With this limited information, I have two hypotheses that potentially explain what we are seeing in this video. The first is that the bulge is attached to the plane and that the plane is not really a plane, just camouflage being used to disguise the what ever the bulge actually is.

While there are planes that are capable of carrying cargo outside of the fuselage, the cargo is almost always mounted on top and centered over the wings. Mounting cargo under the tail section would be highly problematic both from an aerodynamic standpoint and because it would complicate takeoff and landing (if it didn’t make either outright impossible). This leaves us with the possibility that the wings and front fuselage are just window dressing to camouflage the true nature of the bulge, much like the allies did with tanks during the second World War. Now what the bulge actually is, that is anybody’s guess. It could be anything from a new aircraft design to a UFO.

My second hypothesis focuses on the bulge not being attached to the aircraft. In this case, I would posit a guess that the bulge is in fact a second craft of some type flying close to underside of the airplane to avoid detection by radar and observation from the ground. As with my first hypothesis, the bulge could be anything from a secret aircraft (though I doubt anyone would endanger two aircraft by flying so close when there are easier ways to hide the second craft) to a UFO whose technology allows it to easily compensate for the increased turbulence and movements of the airplane it is flying underneath.

It is also worth noting that some people have theorized that the bulge is just the result of jpeg compression causing a brightly colored tail section to appear larger than the more neutral fuselage. While, I have seen this effect in other videos, I have never seen it cause size to be exaggerated quite as much as would be required in this case. Additionally, this theory does not account for the shadows that indicate that the front of the bulge is also curved. Because of these points, I feel that this theory is unlikely, but as with all investigations into the unknown, it is important to be aware and open to ALL possible explanations.

Chemtrail tanker… What’s under the back?

This past December, when the country was distracted by healthcare reform and the awarding of questionable nobel peace prizes, a bill quietly passed the US House of Representatives that flies in the face of one of the most basic tenants that the Unites States was founded on. Introduced by Rep. Gus Bilirakis (pictured left), H.R. 2278 would allow the US to classify any satellite provider that carries broadcasts deemed by the government to be of a terrorist nature as “Specially Designated Global Terrorists” and to “consider implementing other punitive measures”. Additionally it says that as a policy the US should “urge” governments and investors to oppose transmitting “terrorist” networks. The bill passed with only 3 dissenting votes and has been sent to committee in the Senate for consideration.

When I first read this bill a chill shot down my spine. I find it utterly repulsive that a bill that instructs the government to limit free speech would even be penned by anyone who took an oath to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States”, even more so by the fact that it passed almost unanimously. Worse still is how vague the language of the bill is. Who is to decide what is a “terrorist” broadcast and what is not. There is nothing to stop the government from labeling any broadcast that is opposed to US foreign policy as “terrorist”. Simply carrying these “terrorist” broadcasts allows the US to label satellite carriers as terrorist organization and/or take “other punitive measures” against them. Does this mean the US will use foreign governments or private contractors to attack networks that will not block broadcasts that are not US approved like we are currently doing to other terrorist organizations overseas? The bill also contains an edict to “urge” investors with the ability to influence what broadcasts the networks carry to block anti-US stations. Will this “urging” be at the barrel of a gun with investors facing being labeled a terrorist, or worse?

As much as I don’t want to be the target of a terrorist action, I am a firm believer in free speech. If someone hates the US with every fiber of their being (and with the recent actions the US has taken it’s easy to see why), I believe they have the right to tell others about it and make their case in a public forum, regardless if they enjoy the protections of our Constitution or not. If this bill passes, it is a slippery slope that will lead to US broadcasts being labeled as terrorist for criticizing the government (we are already labeling US citizens as terrorists and marking them for assassination without trial) and the end of free speech. This bill needs to die before it even reaches the full Senate for a vote, so if your senator is on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, please consider urging them to reject this outrageous affront to free speech.

Full Text of H. R. 2278