Saturday, January 31, 2015

New computer vulnerabilities for y'all to be aware of. Airgap is no longer king!

D-link and TP-Link DSL routers have a big fat hole in them.

A vulnerability found in a DSL router model from D-Link allows remote hackers to change its DNS (Domain Name System) settings and hijack users' traffic. The issue might also affect other devices because it is located in a popular firmware used by different manufacturers, according to a security researcher.

More fun, disconnecting your computers from the internet  is no longer a guarantee of computer privacy.

Hacked has a piece about Georgia Institute of Technology researchers keylogging from a distance using the electromagnetic radiation of CPUs. They can reportedly do this from up to 6 meters away. In this video, using two Ubuntu laptops, they demonstrate that keystrokes are easily interpreted with the software they have developed.

This has been done before

The main idea behind the research is to use radio frequencies in order to transmit the secret data from the computer to the mobile phone. Mobile phones usually come equipped with FM radio receivers and it is already known that software can intentionally create radio emissions from a video display unit. Yes, from the computer screen. Still, this is the first time that a mobile phone is considered in an attack model as the intended receiver of maliciously crafted radio signals emitted from the screen of the isolated computer. AirHopper demonstrates how textual and binary data can be exfiltrated from physically a isolated computer to mobile phones at a distance of 1-7 meters, with effective bandwidth of 13-60 Bps (Bytes per second). Enough to steal a secret password.

Thus, none of your data is secure. At all.

The government's response is interesting.

Tuesday, the federal government continued its offensive against default consumer encryption enabled by Apple and Google and anonymity tools like Tor, saying that greater privacy and security has created a "zone of lawlessness" that law enforcement is having trouble cracking.

Leslie Caldwell, an assistant attorney general at the Justice Department, said that the department is "very concerned" by the Google's and Apple's decision to automatically encrypt all data on Android and iOS devices. Her comments aren't entirely surprising, considering that FBI Director James Comey previously said that the agency would push Congress to make automatic encryption illegal, and President Obama has also expressed concern with the development.

The problem that privacy and security advocates have pointed out is that the US government doesn't really seem to understand what it's asking for. Caldwell was being interviewed as a part of the annual State of the Net Conference in Washington, DC. One minute, she was vilifying encryption; the next, she was sending a message to the country's citizens and companies that they need to be "more conscious of cybersecurity."

"They need to be assuming they are vulnerable, assuming their data can be taken," she said.

The government of the United States, as well as the government of Canada, and those of Europe and so forth, are very happy with the current state of affairs. They can read pretty much anything they like on YOUR computers.

Bear it in mind, my friends. And vote accordingly.

Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Finally, Obama sticks up for America!

Yes friends, Obama has told the Wahabi fruitbats of Saudi Arabia that America has its own customs and traditions, and they are to be respected. In no uncertain terms I might add.

Well no, not Barry. He's still a hopeless wanker, bowing all over the place. It was Moochelle!

Joining President Barack Obama for a condolence visit after the death of the King Abdullah, Mrs. Obama stepped off of Air Force One wearing long pants and a long, brightly colored jacket — but no headscarf.

That's right, the First Klingon First Lady showed up with no head-scarf, no blackbird  tent, no nuthin'. She even wore pants ladies and gentlemen, PANTS. If that's not a FUCK Y'ALL!!!, nothing is.
Check out the GUNS on that woman! Like Schwarzenegger!

Not one of those Saudi boys said a word to her about it either. Probably because she was six inches taller than anybody else in the room and could crush their little heads one handed. The picture says it all, her arms are bigger around than their legs.

Moochelle Obama, Klingon Warrior Princess!  My new heroine of the moment, the First Lady who walks her talk like a boss. I bet she kicked the Secret Service guy out of the front seat and drove the limo too.

Go Moochelle!

The Phantom

Tuesday, January 27, 2015

DEA tracks your car in real-time now.

US Federal government has created a -nation wide- license plate tracking system that follows you around wherever you go on major highways.

The Justice Department has been building a national database to track in real time the movement of vehicles around the U.S., a secret domestic intelligence-gathering program that scans and stores hundreds of millions of records about motorists, according to current and former officials and government documents.

The primary goal of the license-plate tracking program, run by the Drug Enforcement Administration, is to seize cars, cash and other assets to combat drug trafficking, according to one government document. But the database's use has expanded to hunt for vehicles associated with numerous other potential crimes, from kidnappings to killings to rape suspects, say people familiar with the matter.

Officials have publicly said that they track vehicles near the border with Mexico to help fight drug cartels. What hasn't been previously disclosed is that the DEA has spent years working to expand the database "throughout the United States,'' according to one email reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Many state and local law-enforcement agencies are accessing the database for a variety of investigations, according to people familiar with the program, putting a wealth of information in the hands of local officials who can track vehicles in real time on major roadways.

In English, this means that not only are Fed super spies tracking your car near borders, they are doing it -everywhere-, they are doing it all the time, and they are letting Deputy Dawg the local cop track whoever he wants, whenever he wants, for whatever he wants.

The DEA program collects data about vehicle movements, including time, direction and location, from high-tech cameras placed strategically on major highways. Many devices also record visual images of drivers and passengers, which are sometimes clear enough for investigators to confirm identities, according to DEA documents and people familiar with the program.

The documents show that the DEA also uses license-plate readers operated by state, local and federal law-enforcement agencies to feed into its own network and create a far-reaching, constantly updating database of electronic eyes scanning traffic on the roads to steer police toward suspects.

Why is this bad? Its bad because it doesn't track bad guys. It tracks EVERYONE. Then Deputy Dawg decides who he's interested in, and the database tells him where that car is and where it has been. Since forever, if he wants.

Naturally they say its being used to track people suspected of major crimes, but that's not true. It tracks everyone. It records everyone. Then the cops decide if they care where you've been or not.

Here's another reason why its a bad thing. California wants to impose a mileage tax. Guess what technology they're going to use to make that happen. Uh huh. license plate cameras. Because then you don't have to modify every car, just stick cameras all over the place.

The Phantom

Monday, January 26, 2015

Maclean's loses the thread again: Canada's race problem worse than USA!!!

Maclean's, in a frantic scramble to find relevance, wanders further off into the blasted wasteland of lost Leftist causes. Canada, they intone, is a racist nation. Woe be unto us for we have sinned.

The racial mess in the United States looks pretty grim and is painful to watch. We can be forgiven for being quietly thankful for Canada's more inclusive society, which has avoided dramas like that in Ferguson, Mo. We are not the only ones to think this. In the recently released Social Progress Index, Canada is ranked second amongst all nations for its tolerance and inclusion.

Unfortunately, the truth is we have a far worse race problem than the United States. We just can't see it very easily.

Yes, we have sinned indeed, for we have left the Poor Indians in dire straits.

Terry Glavin, recently writing in the Ottawa Citizen, mocked the idea that the United States could learn from Canada's example when it comes to racial harmony. To illustrate his point, he compared the conditions of the African-American community to Canada's First Nations. If you judge a society by how it treats its most disadvantaged, Glavin found us wanting. Consider the accompanying table. By almost every measurable indicator, the Aboriginal population in Canada is treated worse and lives with more hardship than the African-American population. All these facts tell us one thing: Canada has a race problem, too.

How are we not choking on these numbers? For a country so self-satisfied with its image of progressive tolerance, how is this not a national crisis? Why are governments not falling on this issue?

Well, mostly because the plight of the Indians in Canada is 100% created and maintained by the Federal government. If they just cut off all the welfare and stopped flying stuff in to those remote reserves... they'd all move away and join the rest of us in Civilization. They'd get jobs, buy homes, and generally behave like everybody else. Or, you know, close enough.

Government stops that from happening by flying free food, fuel and snowmobiles in to hamlets of 45 people deep in the bush, 200 miles from the nearest road. The result, crushing poverty and societal malfunction on an epic scale. Duh.

But I'm a RAAAAACIST for saying so. I'm supposed to just shut up and pay the money.

Here's another example of Big Charity faceplanting into Reality.

By way of Small Dead Animals, another megaFail from the UN and Dr. Feelgood Charities Inc. You know those anti-malaria mosquito nets that are getting handed out to the Poor Bastards in Africa?

They use them for fishing.

Nets like his are widely considered a magic bullet against malaria — one of the cheapest and most effective ways to stop a disease that kills at least half a million Africans each year. But Mr. Ndefi and countless others are not using their mosquito nets as global health experts have intended.

Nobody in his hut, including his seven children, sleeps under a net at night. Instead, Mr. Ndefi has taken his family's supply of anti-malaria nets and sewn them together into a gigantic sieve that he uses to drag the bottom of the swamp ponds, sweeping up all sorts of life: baby catfish, banded tilapia, tiny mouthbrooders, orange fish eggs, water bugs and the occasional green frog.

Note that this dragging entirely denudes the ponds of -everything-, including all those fish and animals that eat mosquito eggs. Thereby making everything to do with malaria so much worse.

Is this because Mr. Ndefi is an idiot? No. Its because there's no food, no agriculture and no industry, so Mr. Ndefi and his family eat bugs.  They pretty much won't live to see the environmental devastation of tomorrow if they don't capture every last ounce of edible matter out of that swamp today. The mosquito net is FREE, too. Therefore OBVIOUSLY Mr. Ndefi uses the net to fish, and damn the malaria. Way to go, Western charities. Oh and way to cover it up too, this is going on for a decade now and the New York Times is mentioning it only because the tree huggers are in an uproar.

Basically, the people we have trusted and given money to for a couple of generations now to look after Mr. Ndefi are a pack of lying assholes, who pretty much just steal all our charity donations. And we don't care. We give money to African charities because it makes us feel better, not because we really give a shit about Mr. Ndefi. If we gave a shit we'd go there ourselves and help the guy out, like missionaries used to do. Easier just to give money, right?

That's why I give money to the Canadian Warplane Heritage instead of OXFAM et al. At least my money is going to support something worthwhile, namely maintaining and flying antique weapons of war that remind us all of the sacrifices made so we can be free. It doesn't really help Mr. Ndefi, but at least he doesn't have to suffer MORE to make me feeeeeeeeeelz better about myself.

The Vicious and Uncaring Racist Phantom

Friday, January 23, 2015

Gun law, and the importance of having Friends.

Remember when David Gregory went on Meet the Press live from Washington DC, and showed an AR-15 mag on TV? Remember how many people wondered why he wasn't arrested and charged with a gun crime for that? Here's why:'s William A. Jacobson wrote: "The short version is that the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department warned NBC News that it could not possess an actual high-capacity magazine, but NBC News went ahead and did it anyway. The MPD recommended a warrant for Gregory's arrest, but that request was nixed by the D.C. Attorney General Irvin Nathan because — my paraphrase — Gregory was just too nice a guy and had no other criminal intent."

The incident occurred Dec. 23, 2012 when Gregory displayed a 30-round magazine for effect while interviewing LaPierre following the Newtown shootings.

In Washington [DC], it is illegal to possess a magazine holding 10 rounds or more, even if empty.

Yeah, its illegal... unless you have a Special Deal with the district attorney's office. Then all that matters is if you're a "nice guy" or not. Clearly "nice guy" means loyal DemocRat and VIP in the media.

If Wayne LaPierre had held the magazine, they'd most likely have charged him AND perp-walked him out of the studio in cuffs on live TV. Because Wayne LaPierre is not a "nice guy" by those standards.

It pays to have friends.

The Phantom

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Liam Neeson speaks with forked tongue about guns. Must be Wednesday.

Mr. Neeson's remarks regarding the private ownership of firearms have annoyed the company that supplies him guns for his movie roles... where the characters he portrays do a lot of shooting.

"There's just too many... guns out there," Neeson told Dubai's Gulf News last week. "Especially in America."
He continued: "I think the population is like, 320 million? There's over 300 million guns. Privately owned, in America.
"I think it's a disgrace. Every week now we're picking up a newspaper and seeing, 'Yet another few kids have been killed in schools.'"
Neeson made his comments in reply to a question about the Charlie Hebdo shootings in Paris earlier in the month.
This despite the fact that French gun laws disarmed everybody except the killers at the Charlie Hebdo atrocity.

But does the never-ending stream of Hollywood bang bang movies perhaps have anything to do with people shooting each other?

"I grew up watching cowboy movies, loved doing that [gun gesture] with my fingers, 'Bang, bang, you're dead!' I didn't end up a killer," he [Neeson] said.
"A character like Bryan Mills going out with guns and taking revenge: it's fantasy."
"Naw, that's cwaaaayzy tawk!" Mr. Neeson is pleased to have it both ways in the same conversation. Constant media propaganda about shooting guys for revenge has no effect on society, but the mere existence of guns in private hands is a "disgrace".

So, nothing new here then. Same old Hollywood bullshit, different day.

The company that supplied the guns used in the "Taken" movies, by characters who are portrayed as armed private citizens not to put too fine a point on it, is not amused.
PARA USA said Neeson's comments reflected a "cultural and factual ignorance that undermines support of the Second Amendment and American liberties".
On their Facebook page, the company added: "We will no longer provide firearms for use in films starring Liam Neeson and ask that our friends and partners in Hollywood refrain from associating our brand and products with his projects."
That's PARA Ordinance, a formerly Canadian company that according to Wiki is based out of North Carolina these days but maintains a factory in Scarborough Ontario. How they manage that I can't imagine, but they do.
Nice to see a firearms company sticking up for themselves and telling the Big Star to go pound salt.

Free plug for PARA Ordinance, they're purty.

Now, I've never been shy of talking about the gun control issue, and the extent to which people like Liam Neeson are full of shit. I'll be generous in his case and put it down to "going along to get along", because if he didn't spout anti-gun platitudes at the right time he'd never get another acting job the rest of his life.

But really, the more one looks into the issue the more one discovers a singular truth: virtually all gun murders take place in a few geographic locations. Namely, black neighborhoods in large DemocRat administered cities. If you plot the geographic location of murders on a map with tiny red dots, most of the map is completely empty and the part of downtown that looks like its on fire is the black neighborhood.

For those tempted to scream RAAAAAACIST!!! at this point, after punching yourself in the face you should consider that all black people don't live downtown. Or in cities run by Democrats. Its not about race, per se.

Here's a genius article that lays out the demographics pretty bluntly for y'all. Found it over at Five Feet of Fury today.
... Most gun deaths are urban homicides - maybe four a week in Chicago. In fact, eleven American cities – Chicago, New Orleans, Detroit, Los Angeles, Jacksonville (Fla.), Miami, Orlando, Omaha, Atlanta, Aurora, IL, and Dallas, account for over 70% of all American gun homicides – with a weekly rate of nearly 30 shootings.
Narrowing further, according to the 2013 DOJ crime statistics, 53% of all US homicides are committed by black young men (15 to 30) in urban violence with handguns. Blacks are about 14% of US population; but young black men are about 13% of the total black population. So, 13 X 14 = 1.82, less than 2% of our population commits more than half of all American gun murders. Thus, a very small percent of the US population commits most gun homicides. There are no recorded comments about this circumstance from CNN or the New York Times however.
Faced with that particular fact, Mr. Liam Neeson would I think be struck dumb by the implications. I'm sure the best retort he'd be able to muster would be "RAAAAACIST!!!"

Just to rub some salt in the wound now, the cities listed are the ones with the most stringent local gun control laws in the USA.

Mr. Neesom, please go punch yourself in the face at your earliest opportunity.

The Phantom

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

US cops now have radar "x-ray vision", didn't tell anybody.

Doppler radar on a single chip has been around for quite a long time now, I remember reading about it in the early 1990's in Scientific American.

Using radar to look inside a house has been a thing for quite a while now as well. Because when there's radar-on-a-chip available to fiddle with, people fiddle with them and discover they can do things that are pretty interesting. Like they can detect the motions of a human breathing from outside a house. They can obviously spot a human moving around inside a house as well.

Well, it seems that somebody built some of these super Tom Swift radars. Rolled 'em out to cop departments all over the USA. One problem: they didn't tell anybody.

At least 50 U.S. law enforcement agencies have secretly equipped their officers with radar devices that allow them to effectively peer through the walls of houses to see whether anyone is inside, a practice raising new concerns about the extent of government surveillance.

Those agencies, including the FBI and the U.S. Marshals Service, began deploying the radar systems more than two years ago with little notice to the courts and no public disclosure of when or how they would be used. The technology raises legal and privacy issues because the U.S. Supreme Court has said officers generally cannot use high-tech sensors to tell them about the inside of a person's house without first obtaining a search warrant.

Obtaining a search warrant is of course something they have not been doing. They've been scanning to see if there's anybody home first and asking permission later.

Agents' use of the radars was largely unknown until December, when a federal appeals court in Denver said officers had used one before they entered a house to arrest a man wanted for violating his parole. The judges expressed alarm that agents had used the new technology without a search warrant, warning that "the government's warrantless use of such a powerful tool to search inside homes poses grave Fourth Amendment questions."

By then, however, the technology was hardly new. Federal contract records show the Marshals Service began buying the radars in 2012, and has so far spent at least $180,000 on them.

And the court has been letting them.

Agents arrested Denson for the parole violation and charged him with illegally possessing two firearms they found inside. The agents had a warrant for Denson's arrest but did not have a search warrant. Denson's lawyer sought to have the guns charge thrown out, in part because the search began with the warrantless use of the radar device.

Three judges on the federal 10th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the search, and Denson's conviction, on other grounds. Still, the judges wrote, they had "little doubt that the radar device deployed here will soon generate many questions for this court."

Despite the fact that scanning a residence with any kind of sensor, be it thermal, radar or even a drug-sniffing dog without a warrant has been specifically disallowed by the Supreme Court of the USA.

Because its just too handy to be able to use penetrating imaging for fishing expeditions. It may not hold up in court, but if you do it secretly you can always find another reason to raid a guy's place if you try hard enough.

Incidentally there are drone-mounted versions of this technology available that can work at extended range. I would think a quadcopter would be large enough to carry something like that, their power consumption is relatively small and physically the whole guts of the unit will be the size of a cell-phone. There are also larger side-looking radar sets that can be mounted on an aircraft or dirigible which can image arbitrarily large areas. Just crank up the power and you can see inside stuff for miles.

Brings a whole new level of irony to the term "tinfoil hat" doesn't it?

Just thought y'all ought to know. Maybe get some aluminum siding on the house and mylar in those windows, eh?

Monday, January 19, 2015

Sandy Hook commission grinds its way to inevitable conclusion: ban guns.

Whenever there's Something Bad that happens, the state and the local governments always form a commission or a panel of inquiry to "look into the matter" and "see what can be done" to prevent the next Bad Thing. Such panels inevitably find that the existing government policy is correct, except it didn't go far enough, so they always propose a new regulation or tax or law or some other newer,bigger, better restriction of the freedoms enjoyed by regular citizens.

Because people are stupid. They have to be controlled.

Well, wouldn't you know that there was just such a commission formed after the Sandy Hook public school shooting. And they announced their report today.

HARTFORD, Conn. – A Connecticut government commission created after the Sandy Hook school massacre will be proposing a "gun ban."

The Morning Journal reports:

An advisory panel charged with looking at public safety in the wake of the deadly Newtown school shooting agreed Friday to include in its final report a recommendation to ban the sale and possession of any gun that can fire more than 10 rounds without reloading.

"Whether or not this law would stand the test of constitutionality is not for this commission to decide," says former Hartford Police Chief Bernard Sullivan, a member of the panel.

"The commission has expressed very strongly that this is a statement that is needed regarding the lethality of weapons."

The group wants to emphasize that there "needs to be more regulation of guns that can inflict mass casualties, even if it causes some inconvenience to recreational shooters."

Obviously. Because its easy, and accepted by their bosses, and will obviously be accepted by the media. That such a thing is 100% unconstitutional in the USA is "not for this commission to decide". Which was pretty awesome coming from a cop who swore to uphold the Constitution of the United States when he got hired to that job.

That it will make no difference if it becomes law is unimportant. That it will 99% likely fail to even become law is unimportant. That it wouldn't have saved a single child at Sandy Hook had it been law at the time... is unimportant.

What's important is that some government guys got paid to sit around and waste a bunch of time and resources generating one more bullshit report that nobody will ever read, and then went on TV to say how much they care.

That's what modern government is and what it does, in a nutshell. Repeat this hundreds of thousands of times per year, it gives you some indication of what goes on all over Western Civilization.

All I'm saying is, couldn't we all get by with a bit less of this? Couldn't we fire at least half of these assholes and not even notice they were gone?

I think we could.

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Pope says there are limits to free speech.

Well my friends, it appears that Free Speech has very few friends in high places these days. No less a leader than the Pope of Rome has decided Charlie Hebdo was asking for it.

Francis spoke about the Paris terror attacks while en route to the Philippines, defending free speech as not only a fundamental human right but a duty to speak one's mind for the sake of the common good.
But he said there were limits.
By way of example, he referred to Alberto Gasparri, who organizes papal trips and was standing by his side aboard the papal plane.
"If my good friend Dr. Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch," Francis said, throwing a pretend punch his way. "It's normal. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others."
 It goes on.
Francis, who has urged Muslim leaders in particular to speak out against Islamic extremism, went a step further when asked by a French journalist about whether there were limits when freedom of expression meets freedom of religion.
Francis insisted that it was an "aberration" to kill in the name of God and said religion can never be used to justify violence.
But he said there was a limit to free speech when it concerned offending someone's religious beliefs.
"There are so many people who speak badly about religions or other religions, who make fun of them, who make a game out of the religions of others," he said. "They are provocateurs. And what happens to them is what would happen to Dr. Gasparri if he says a curse word against my mother. There is a limit."
There you have it, my friends. No making fun of Islam, because the Pope says you're asking for it. Even though people mock Catholicism every single day and nobody does squat to them.

This is not "tolerance". This is not "consideration". This is the hidden racism of low expectations. Translating for His Holiness from the ecclesiastical double-talk, it goes like this: "Yes, Catholics can control themselves when somebody mocks Jesus, but those Mooselimbs, they're savages you know. Best not to provoke them, they'll kill you."

Darth Vader explains Charlie Hebdo to Princess Leia.

Or even shorter: "Shut up!" he explained.

The Phantom.

Wednesday, January 14, 2015

Tyranny begins at home. Fight it here first.

As usual, the Ivory Tower is on the cutting edge of "Shut up and do as you're told!" Today's adventure in tyranny is another "its for the children" Trojan horse. Mechanized attendance enforcement.

Skipping class undetected for a game of ultimate Frisbee might become a thing of the past as more universities adopt mandatory-attendance policies and acquire high-tech trackers that snitch when students skip.

At Villanova University, student ID cards track attendance at some lectures. Administrators at University of Arkansas last semester began electronically monitoring the class attendance of 750 freshmen as part of a pilot program they might extend to all underclassman. And at Harvard, researchers secretly filmed classrooms to learn how many students were skipping lectures.

The moves reflect the rising financial consequence of skipping too many classes and, consequently, dropping out. More than four in 10 full-time college students fail to graduate in six years. Many are stuck with crippling student debt and no credentials to help them pay it back. Graduation rates also figure into closely watched school rankings.

At Harvard they just secretly filmed lectures and identified students from their ID pics. Nothing creepy about that, eh?

As usual, they pretend concern for the students, but the real deal is they're concerned about student loans. There's something like a trillion dollars worth of outstanding student loans out there right now, because it costs a couple hundred grand to get an MA these days. Less than an MA doesn't get you squat, PhD's are better but still no guarantee.

As usual, they pretend they are doing the public a favor by allowing their kids to attend these stately and august institutions.

As usual, the truth is still plain to see: WE pay THEM. THEY do not pay US.

And parents, if your kid can't be trusted to get his ass in gear and do the coursework, why are you paying for him to be at school? Let him pay you for room and board instead, while he learns that life sucks when you work as a landscaper's helper.

The Phantom

Tuesday, January 13, 2015

Obama attacks the Internet.

Here it comes. The final push to shut down the Intertubes.

President Barack Obama said Tuesday the cyber attacks against Sony and the Pentagon's Central Command highlight the need for toughened laws on cybersecurity.

Obama made the comment as the White House unveiled a proposal to revive cybersecurity legislation stalled over the past few years.

"With the Sony attack that took place, with the Twitter account that was hacked by Islamist jihadist sympathizers yesterday, it just goes to show how much more work we need to do -- both public and private sector -- to strengthen our cybersecurity," the president said at a meeting with congressional leaders.

Obama said he had spoken to the Republican leaders of the House and Senate and "I think we agreed that this is an area where we can work hard together, get some legislation done and make sure that we are much more effective in protecting the American people from these kinds of cyberattacks."

This is bullshit, obviously. The fact that the Pentagon even -has- a Twitter account is a sign that "cyber security" is not taken at all seriously by the people in the White House.

You know what they do take seriously? Blogs. On-line searchable newspapers. Drudge Report.

Anybody can post for free. Anybody can read for free. Anywhere. So word of what they do every day is becoming common knowledge.

This is killing the socialists. They depend on people not knowing what they're doing, because mostly what they're doing is screwing around and stealing tax money. The more we know about what they're doing up there in Toronto, and Ottawa, and Washington and so forth, the more we're not voting for their lazy corrupt lying asses. Therefore, if they want to hold on to their power and prerogatives, and MONEY, they have to make the Internet shut up.

That's what this Washington "cyber security" push is all about. They're explaining to me that I better shut the hell up or they'll come and kick my door down.

Good thing I live in Canada, eh? I'm safe... for now.

The Phantom

Charlie Hebdo: Jimmy Carter blames Israel.

Can't make this crap up.

Appearing on "The Daily Show" Monday, Carter was asked by host Jon Stewart whether the violence the world saw on the streets of Paris was actually fueled by something else other than Islamic extremism.

"Well, one of the origins for it is the Palestinian problem," Carter replied. "And this aggravates people who are affiliated in any way with the Arab people who live in the West Bank and Gaza, what they are doing now — what's being done to them. So I think that's part of it."

Yep. The JOOOOOOOS! did it. If it wasn't for them damn JOOOOOOS! screwing things up in the Middle East none of this shit would have happened.

Ladies and gentlemen, if you are Jewish or know someone who is, I strongly counsel you to avoid voting for the DemocRats in the USA or the Liberals/NDPee here in Canada. They are going to blame you for every atrocity and terrorist act that happens in the world so long as they remain in power. For a former President of the Unitied States to come out and say that terrorists trained and funded by YEMEN are motivated by the "plight of the Palestinians" is just code for "Look, shiny thing!"

The plain fact is that mass immigration of individuals whose culture is inimical to Western values is a stupid idea. In the event that there are "read until offended" social justice warriors reading this at any point, please note the modifier "mass" in front of immigration.  A few hundred or a few thousand individuals from a hostile culture will make no difference to the country when they immigrate here. They won't like it, and we locals might not like them if they're obnoxious about it, but that's not really a national scale problem. Obnoxious people come from all races and religions, no single group has a monopoly. 

But if you import over a million of them in ten years, that's a problem. Its also Liberal Party of Canada policy. They're the ones who started that ball rolling, they're the ones who scream "RAAAAAACIST!" if you even mention the subject. In the USA of course, its the DemocRats who started this mass immigration thing and continue to support it. Former President Jimmy Carter was instrumental in instituting this policy.

Rather than wear the blame for this failed policy, Mr. Carter is pleased to blame Israel.  Which is typical of both Mr. Carter and socialists everywhere.

Look for young Justin Trudeau to mouth some similar platitude in the days ahead. It probably plays well in focus groups.

The Phantom

Wednesday, January 07, 2015

Why did 12 people have to die today?

Here's why.

Masked gunmen on Wednesday attacked the Paris offices of Charlie Hebdo, a French magazine known for its biting humor — and, more specifically, for a string of satirical cartoons about Islam and the Prophet Muhammed.

Charlie Hebdo, whose name translates roughly to "Charlie Weekly," is a weekly publication that covers French politics through cartoons, satirical articles, and jokes. Although its editor-in-chief Stéphane Charbonnier, who was killed in the attack, has said that he considered the magazine a leftist-pluralist publication, its stance can perhaps better be described as anti-institutional. Its biting satire habitually targeted the government, high-profile politicians, and organized religion. The magazine was founded in 1969, and was resurrected in 1992 following a three-year hiatus.

Those cartoons have provoked a backlash against the magazine in the past, including a firebomb attack on its offices in 2011. But for the editors of the magazine, the offense was the point: the cartoons were directed as much at public sanctimony about Islam and multiculturalism as they were at their nominal subjects. They believed that the short-term decision to avoid offense would damage French secular culture in the longer term.

That debate is not limited to the pages of Charlie Hebdo. The question of whether Islam poses a threat to French culture is a hot-button issue in France, where "laïcité" — secularism — has such importance that it has been described as a "founding myth" of the French republic.

The magazine's cover this week seems to highlight the dangers of avoiding offense. It featured a cartoon figure saying "In 2015, I lose my teeth. In 2022, I observe Ramadan!"

Because liberals.

The Phantom

More "mentally ill individuals" attack in Paris. Gun control working as intended.

When is a terrorist attack not a terrorist attack? When you are a Liberal.

"Based on what we know right now it does seem that's what we're confronting here. And this is an act of violence that we certainly do condemn, and if based on this investigation it turns out to be an act of terrorism, then we would condemn that in the strongest possible terms, too," said [White House press secretary Josh] Earnest.

This is regarding an attack in Paris today when the following was reported:
Heavily armed gunmen shouting Islamist slogans stormed a Paris satirical newspaper office Wednesday and shot dead at least 12 people in the deadliest attack in France in four decades.

Police launched a massive manhunt for the masked attackers who reportedly hijacked a car and sped off, running over a pedestrian and shooting at officers.

Police said witnesses heard the attackers, who were armed with a Kalashnikov and rocket launcher, shout "we have avenged the prophet" and "Allahu akbar" (God is greatest).

Two police were confirmed among the dead and four people were critically injured.

The capital was placed under the highest alert status after the attack on Charlie Hebdo, a satirical weekly that has sparked anger in the past among Muslims for publishing cartoons of the prophet Mohamed.

Now, why does the header of this post say "gun control working as intended"? Because one of the best ways for a "soft" tyranny such as French Socialism to punish its ideological enemies is to let "terrorists" do it for them. All you have to do is ban the private ownership of weapons, and sit back. Sooner or later somebody will decide that the satirical weekly newspaper has said the wrong thing and go shoot the place up with an illegally obtained firearm or two. Then you respond by viewing this event with alarm and INCREASING gun confiscation efforts.

The main problem I have with liberals is that they don't see this as odd. Disarming the victim and appeasing the attackers is entirely reasonable to liberals. They see weapons of self defense as a provocation to violence, they think that the presence of a firearm in an emotionally charged situation will in fact cause violence to occur. They believe the absence of weapons creates peace.

Problem is, they're wrong. Values matter. Culture matters. Morals and courage matter. You give a gun to a scumbag, he'll do murder with it. Not because the gun made him do it, but because he's a scumbag. You give a gun to a normal person from the Western civilization with normal values and the courage normal people generally have, he will stick it in a holster on his belt and leave it there. He'll never pull it out of that holster and point it at another human unless they are trying to KILL him. At which point said human will 99% of the time stop what they're doing and run away.

This is not some ideological fantasy, this is recorded fact. This is what actual humans actually do in countless thousands of robberies, burglaries, fights, road rages or what have you. Victim pulls a gun, bad guys run.

That this is inconvenient for Left leaning governments is all you need to know about Left leaning governments.

Here endeth the rant.

The Phantom

NYC arrests drop by half.

What would happen if the cops in NYC just flat-out stopped arresting black people?  Here's your answer:

Across the city, officers made a total of 2,401 arrests, compared with 5,448 for the same week the year before - a 56 per cent reduction.

The declines came after a drastic drop in activity that began shortly after the murders of officers Rafael Ramos and Wenjian Liu on December 20.

However, police union leaders have denied that the declines represent any work action. But they have acknowledged that they've told staff to put their safety first. 

I speculate that "safety first" means

Now, do I -know- they've stopped arresting only black people? No, I don't know that. I'm sitting in my basement in the middle of rural Ontario, I have no special knowledge of NYPD scuttlebutt.

But I do know that according to the FBI crime statistics, pretty much half the crime in NYC or any other big city in the USA is done by black males. The other half is done by everybody else. 56% reduction looks just about right.

As union job actions go, this one is pure genius. All the rank-and-file cops just stop pulling over, questioning, ticketing, arresting, investigating or otherwise giving a crap about the black population of New York and their ill behavior. You can see the gears turning in their heads. "So, we're all racist/sexist/bigot/homophobes? So we got it in for the Black Man? Everything bad is our fault? No problem. Black guys are now sacred in NYC, we don't arrest nobody for nuttin'."

NYPD also stopped issuing traffic and parking citations.  You asked for it. since the 1960's you've been asking for it.  You finally got it.

Enjoy, Noo Yawk!

In other news, 10 million New York City denizens are now discovering the downside of gun control. I TOLD YOU.

The "I told you so!" Phantom

Tuesday, January 06, 2015

No, cops don't target Blacks. The reverse, if anything.

Another Lefty shibboleth staked through the heart. New studies show that American cops not only do not deliberately single out Black men for destruction, they actively try not to shoot them. Because = paperwork.

It's widely assumed that white police officers are more likely to shoot black suspects as a result of racial bias, but recent research suggests the opposite is true. An innovative study published in the Journal of Experimental Criminology found that participants in realistic simulations felt more threatened by black suspects yet took longer to pull the trigger on black men than on white or Hispanic men.

Yeah, no kidding. You shoot a white guy, all you get is nightmares the rest of your life. You shoot a black guy, you get the same nightmares PLUS you get Al Sharpton and his goon squad ripping your town apart, PLUS you get the personal attention of the entire federal Justice Department who will find or make a way to hang you.

"This behavioral 'counter-bias' might be rooted in people's concerns about the social and legal consequences of shooting a member of a historically oppressed racial or ethnic group," said the paper, which went practically unnoticed when it was published online on May 22, but took on new significance in the wake of a series of high-profile police-involved shootings involving black victims over the summer.

Went unnoticed because it doesn't fit the narrative, obviously. Here's some more common sense:

The results back up what one of the researchers, University of Missouri-St. Louis professor David Klinger, has found after independently interviewing more than 300 police officers: While they don't want to shoot anybody, they really don't want to shoot black suspects.

"Across these 300 interviews, I have multiple officers telling me that they didn't shoot only because the suspect was black or the suspect was a woman, or something that would not be consistent with this narrative of cops out there running and gunning," said Mr. Klinger, a former cop and author of "Into the Kill Zone: A Cop's Eye View of Deadly Force" (2006).

"When it comes to the issue of race, I've never had a single officer tell me, 'I didn't shoot a guy because he was white.' I've had multiple officers tell me, 'I didn't shoot a guy because he was black,' " Mr. Klinger said. "And this is 10, even 20 years ago. Officers are alert to the fact that if they shoot a black individual, the odds of social outcry are far greater than if they shoot a white individual."

This is what I hear when I hear gunshop bull sessions between cops. They may hate blacks, and some do, but they're all deadly afraid of the shitstorm which will inevitably follow if they shoot one. This is simple common sense, again. Leaving aside the entire human/emotional issue, shooting a black guy in a 100% righteous shoot is still a potential career ender, so guys don't want to do it. Duh.

Which raises an even more interesting issue. If cops really don't want to shoot black guys, how come so many of 'em are getting shot?

The Phantom

Monday, January 05, 2015

Another DemocRat mugged by Reality, another new Republican voter is born.

A "tiny house" ecoHipster gets mugged by Reality. The outrage is palpable.

An advocate for so-called green living, Friday and his wife had invested 2 1/2 years and $35,000 into building a tiny home from the ground up.

They had just moved it to a plot of land they had purchased in Spring Branch.

However, someone stole it, leaving behind only a damaged paver driveway they had recently built.

So how does one steal a "tiny home"? The usual way. You back up, drop the hitch on your trailer ball and drive away.

On his blog, Friday wrote:  "I'll be completely honest – I didn't even know that a hitch lock was a 'thing' before our house was stolen. I only researched them after the house was gone. I am now WELL aware of multiple forms of security that I hope ALL tiny housers will implement on their own Tiny House builds."

Because its not a "tiny home", its a friggin' house trailer. Mr. Friday is trying to pretend like he's all genteel and ecofriendly, but he's really a trailer park dweller. Just because you change what you call something doesn't mean you've changed what it is.

He just face-planted into the reality that most people who live in trailers do so because they're poor, and most poor people are poor because they're scumbags with poor impulse control.

According to the article Mr. Friday is now renting a non-ecofriendly apartment and is looking to unload his trailer, no doubt because he just now realized how bad living in a trailer surrounded by thieving assholes is going to suck. Also, I'm sure Mr. Friday is wondering how so many scumbags are allowed to walk around loose, and why the cops don't arrest them. He's going to be shocked when he finds out about the DemocRat mandated catch-and-release policy.

The Phantom

Thursday, January 01, 2015

Ferguson, Feds point guns at citizens protecting buildings from arson.

I used to hear all the time that soldiers and cops in the USA would never enforce a law to ban all guns. They would never follow an order to fire on honest Americans.

I don't hear that these days. Because clearly, there's plenty that would.

Case in point, story dated November 30th 2014, Oathkeepers in Ferguson Missouri have been protecting some buildings in the downtown area from arson the last few weeks. Because as we know from TV, the "demonstrators" have been burning stuff down quite freely. This protection of private property apparently did not sit well with Federal authorities.

The four businesses include Natalie's Cakes and More, a bakery that was featured on Fox News, a beauty supply store, a dentist's office and a Chinese restaurant.

In addition to their work keeping businesses safe, and the people living there, the group has also seen some totally bizarre interactions by the federal government and the state highway patrol.

According to Rhodes, "We had an alarming incident that happened last night with our team spotting what looked like a fed three-man sniper team moving into a nearby house on higher ground, and then pointing their rifles at our team of American combat veterans, while our team was guarding the buildings against looters."

Rhodes said the team even observed the state highway patrol snipers deploy onto the roof of a nearby fire hall and point rifles at them.

"Our team leader called Unified Command to find out what was going on and then local police responded," he explained.

He said that the local police were unaware of what the federal government were doing and that there was no coordination. "The local police are on our side and expressed gratitude for us being there, but the Feds are trying to run us out."

Well, it seems that later on the Feds and State Police assholes dropped by and offered to arrest the men guarding the four businesses. Those men told the cops to piss off, got some legal advice and came back the next night.

Members of Oath Keepers, a national group that includes current and retired military and law enforcement personnel, have rejected orders from St. Louis County Police to abandon posts on top of private businesses that invited their protection, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported Monday. The order to stand down was issued under presumed authority of a county ordinance prohibiting unlicensed security personnel.

"Once we read the statute, we laughed at it," local Oath Keepers leader Sam Andrews commented, explaining the ordinance applies to employed security personnel. "Then, the next night, we were there."

The committed presence of Oath Keepers could renew confrontation dangers, as group founder Stewart Rhodes had earlier cited a report of members being targeted, presumably by a federal law enforcement sniper team. Per Rhodes, such teams had not communicated with local law enforcement, let alone coordinated activities with them.

Confirming the Post-Dispatch report is an update from Rhodes sent to members and supporters Wednesday, explaining that, contrary to some reports, the group did not abandon their posts. The alert also included a letter from an Oath Keepers attorney.

Now just offhand I would say that this seems to indicate that the Federal government has some interest in keeping the Ferguson pot boiling, and they clearly aren't well disposed toward any private citizen types who show up to calm things down.

Happy New Year!

Ha ha, its 2015! Very best wishes to all of y'all for 2015.