A series of drone sightings over New Jersey that began in mid-November has left residents and lawmakers spooked about the possibility of foreign adversaries breaching US airspace with drone swarms. While officials have attempted to reassure the public, some lawmakers have stoked fear, leading to widespread panic on social media, with people interpreting anything moving in the night sky as a potential drone (even commercial jets and stars).
Days ago, the FBI and the US Homeland Security Department released a statement indicating, "We have no evidence at this time that the reported drone sightings pose a national security or public safety threat or have a foreign nexus."
"Historically, we have experienced cases of mistaken identity, where reported drones are, in fact, manned aircraft," the federal agencies said.
White House national security communications adviser John Kirby said many of the purported drone sightings are commercial jets with no evidence of a national security or public safety threat.
If actual 'truck-sized' drones (some say Iranian origin) were flying in some of the world's most restricted airspace, let's use common sense—the Pentagon would have scrambled F-22s and F-35s on the East Coast almost immediately. Since that hasn't happened (as far as we know), we can't help but be suspicious about the whole drone situation. Additionally, no private satellite data shows that Iranian drone carriers are parked off the coast; in fact, these vessels are located 7,500 miles away.
Let's take a step back and review some of Elon Musk's tweets on X:
Sept. 30: "Drone swarm battles are coming that will boggle the mind"
Sept. 29: "Epic drone wars coming"
Jan. 5, 2023: "The Drone Wars are already a big deal, but we ain't seen nothing yet …"
What did Elon know ahead of time?
Congress moves to BAN parts of Bible that mention Christ being killed by Jews
Known as the Antisemitism Awareness Act, the legislation came in response to the outburst of campus protests over Israel's genocidal actions in the Gaza Strip. Its purpose is to silence students and their professors from speaking out in defense of the Palestinian people who are being slaughtered by Israeli Defense Forces (IDF).
The legislation contains a list of "contemporary examples" of antisemitism that would be prohibited, should it get signed into law. One of the examples presented is a statement made by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) against Israel's actions in Gaza.
Other examples of antisemitism that would be prohibited under the Antisemitism Awareness Act include "using the symbols and images associated with classic anti-Semitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis."
The bill would also prohibit "accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel ... than to the interests of their own nations," as well as making allegations "about a world Jewish conspiracy and / or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government" and "drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."
(Related: Did you hear about the deceased Christian IDF soldier whose family is having to replace his headstone because Israel officials are offended that it bears a cross?)
ShareFacebookTwitterRedditTelegramVK  Email |
  Former President Donald Trump pledged to restore the power of the Israel Lobby over Congress during a "Fighting Antisemitism" event with pro-Israel megadonor Miriam Adelson on Thursday.  |
Hall Of Shame II: Thanks To Congress, The NSA Is ‘Just Days From Taking Over The Internet’
You might remember when AT&T willingly partnered with the NSA to set up listening (“peering”) posts inside the main switching centers around the country. The initial discovery was made in San Francisco, and the world was aghast. Like two illicit lovers caught naked in bed with each other, both AT&T and the NSA swore that they would never cheat on the American people again. Everyone assumed that this transgression was dealt with and that the partnership was dissolved.
Fat chance. Not only was the San Francisco operation NOT dismantled, but others were discovered in Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Seattle, Washington, DC, New York City, and Atlanta. These comprise the “backbone” of AT&T’s network in the U.S.
According to The Intercept
A body of evidence – including classified NSA documents, public records, and interviews with several former AT&T employees – indicates that the buildings are central to an NSA spying initiative that has for years monitored billions of emails, phone calls, and online chats passing across U.S. territory.
The NSA considers AT&T to be one of its most trusted partners and has lauded the company’s “extreme willingness to help.” It is a collaboration that dates back decades. Little known, however, is that its scope is not restricted to AT&T’s customers. According to the NSA’s documents, it values AT&T not only because it “has access to information that transits the nation,” but also because it maintains unique relationships with other phone and internet providers. The NSA exploits these relationships for surveillance purposes, commandeering AT&T’s massive infrastructure and using it as a platform to covertly tap into communications processed by other companies.
All of this spying activity on Americans was patently illegal, and everyone knew it. It is still illegal, but who is going to tell the NSA what to do? It is totally rogue, chock full of Technocrats who answer to no one.
This backstory in critical to understanding the legislation up vote on April 19. It is the physical part of the Internet that is being handed over to the NSA. It will grandfather in all the previous illegality that was allegedly “voluntary” between AT&T and the NSA, but now it will give legal authority to the NSA to force mandatory cooperation by anyone who has access to the physical hardware of the Internet.
This is why famed NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden recently said “The NSA is just DAYS from taking over the Internet, and it’s not on the front page of any newspaper — because no one has noticed.” ⁃ TN Editor
The United States National Security Agency (NSA) is only days away from “taking over the internet” with a massive expansion of its surveillance powers, according to NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
In an April 16 post to X, Snowden drew attention to a thread originally posted by Elizabeth Goitein — the co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice — that warned of a new bill that could see the U.S. government surveillance powers amplified to new levels.
The bill in question reforms and extends a part of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) known as Section 702.
Currently, the NSA can force internet service providers such as Google and Verizon to hand over sensitive data concerning NSA targets.
However, Goitein claims that through an “innocuous change” to the definition of “electronic communications surveillance provider” in the FISA 702 bill, the U.S. government could go far beyond its current scope and force nearly every company and individual that provides any internet-related service to assist with NSA surveillance.
Additionally, the people forced to hand over data would be unable to discuss the information provided due to hefty gag order penalties and conditions outlined in the bill, added Goitein.
The bill initially received heavy pushback from privacy-conscious Republicans but passed through the U.S. House of Representatives on April 13.
Part of the pushback saw the bills’ proposed spying powers time-frame cut from five years to two years, as well as some minor amendments to the service providers included under the surveillance measures.
However, according to Goitein, the amendment did very little to reduce the scope of surveillance granted to the NSA.
In her view, the amendment could even see service providers such as cleaners, plumbers and IT service providers that have access to laptops and routers inside people’s homes be forced to provide information and serve as “surrogate spies,” claimed Goitein.
The bill has seen strong pushback from both sides of the political aisle, with several government representatives claiming the bill violates citizen’s constitutional rights.
Democratic Senator Ron Wyden described the bill as “terrifying” and said he would do everything in his power to prevent it from being passed through the Senate.
Republican Congressperson Anna Paulina Luna, who voted against the bill in the House of Representatives, said Section 702 was an “irresponsible extension” of the NSA’s powers. Luna added that if government agencies wanted access to data, they must be forced to apply for a warrant.
The bill is slated for a vote on April 19 in the U.S. Senate.
Source: technocracy.news
Hall Of Shame: Congress Votes For Warrantless Surveillance Of Americans
It is assumed that all your electronic data is already available: phone calls, emails, letters/packages sent/received via the post office, GPS tracking data, DMV records, income tax filings, financial transactions, et cetera ad infinitum. Do you really want some law enforcement agency digging through your “file” looking for criminal activity on a whim?
According to The Dispatch, abuses are routine and shocking:
These violations include alarming abuses. Among many other examples, the government has performed baseless searches for the communications of members of Congress, journalists, and 19,000 donors to a congressional campaign. The FBI has performed “tens of thousands” of unlawful searches “related to civil unrest,” including searches targeting 141 people protesting the murder of George Floyd and more than 20,000 people affiliated with a group suspected of involvement in the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. Most recently—and despite procedural changes implemented by the FBI to stem abuses—FBI agents performed improper searches for the private communications of a U.S. senator, a state senator, and a state court judge who reported alleged civil rights violations by a police chief to the FBI.
In fact, in 2021 alone, the FBI conducted a record 3.4 million warrantless searches.
⁃ TN Editor
Eighty-six House Republicans on Friday voted against an amendment to require a warrant for surveillance of Americans’ communications.
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ) proposed an amendment to the Reforming Intelligence and Securing America Act (RISAA), a bill that would reauthorize Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). Section 702 is a law that is meant to target foreign adversaries, but often surveils Americans’ private communications without a warrant.
The amendment tied at 212-212 in the House; a tie in the House means that the measure fails. Although Biggs’s amendment did receive support from a majority of Republicans, 86 House Republicans failed to support the proposal.
A warrant requirement is overwhelmingly backed by Americans. A YouGov poll commissioned by FreedomWorks and Demand Progress found that 76 percent of Americans support a warrant requirement, while only 12 percent oppose.
Only one member of House Republican leadership voted with the majority of the House Republican Conference on warrants requirements: House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-MN). Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), and House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik (R-NY) voted against the warrant requirement.
Johnson used to support closing the backdoor search loophole, or the ability to surveil Americans through Section 702, which is meant to target foreigners. However, he changed his mind after seeing a classified briefing after becoming Speaker.
The 86 House Republicans that voted for warrantless surveillance of Americans are:
| Aderholt | Republican | AL | NO |
| Bacon | Republican | NE | NO |
| Balderson | Republican | OH | NO |
| Barr | Republican | KY | NO |
| Bice | Republican | OK | NO |
| Buchanan | Republican | FL | NO |
| Bucshon | Republican | IN | NO |
| Burgess | Republican | TX | NO |
| Calvert | Republican | CA | NO |
| Carl | Republican | AL | NO |
| Carter (GA) | Republican | GA | NO |
| Carter (TX) | Republican | TX | NO |
| Chavez-DeRemer | Republican | OR | NO |
| Cole | Republican | OK | NO |
| Crawford | Republican | AR | NO |
| Crenshaw | Republican | TX | NO |
| D’Esposito | Republican | NY | NO |
| De La Cruz | Republican | TX | NO |
| Diaz-Balart | Republican | FL | NO |
| Duarte | Republican | CA | NO |
| Ellzey | Republican | TX | NO |
| Estes | Republican | KS | NO |
| Ezell | Republican | MS | NO |
| Feenstra | Republican | IA | NO |
| Ferguson | Republican | GA | NO |
| Fitzpatrick | Republican | PA | NO |
| Flood | Republican | NE | NO |
| Franklin, Scott | Republican | FL | NO |
| Gallagher | Republican | WI | NO |
| Garbarino | Republican | NY | NO |
| Garcia, Mike | Republican | CA | NO |
| Gimenez | Republican | FL | NO |
| Gonzales, Tony | Republican | TX | NO |
| Granger | Republican | TX | NO |
| Graves (MO) | Republican | MO | NO |
| Guthrie | Republican | KY | NO |
| Hill | Republican | AR | NO |
| Hinson | Republican | IA | NO |
| Johnson (LA) | Republican | LA | NO |
| Joyce (OH) | Republican | OH | NO |
| Kean (NJ) | Republican | NJ | NO |
| Kelly (MS) | Republican | MS | NO |
| Kelly (PA) | Republican | PA | NO |
| Kiggans (VA) | Republican | VA | NO |
| Kim (CA) | Republican | CA | NO |
| Kustoff | Republican | TN | NO |
| LaHood | Republican | IL | NO |
| LaLota | Republican | NY | NO |
| Lamborn | Republican | CO | NO |
| Latta | Republican | OH | NO |
| LaTurner | Republican | KS | NO |
| Lawler | Republican | NY | NO |
| Letlow | Republican | LA | NO |
| Lucas | Republican | OK | NO |
| Malliotakis | Republican | NY | NO |
| McCaul | Republican | TX | NO |
| McHenry | Republican | NC | NO |
| Miller (OH) | Republican | OH | NO |
| Miller (WV) | Republican | WV | NO |
| Miller-Meeks | Republican | IA | NO |
| Moore (UT) | Republican | UT | NO |
| Moylan | Republican | GU | NO |
| Murphy | Republican | NC | NO |
| Nunn (IA) | Republican | IA | NO |
| Obernolte | Republican | CA | NO |
| Pence | Republican | IN | NO |
| Pfluger | Republican | TX | NO |
| Rogers (AL) | Republican | AL | NO |
| Rogers (KY) | Republican | KY | NO |
| Rouzer | Republican | NC | NO |
| Rutherford | Republican | FL | NO |
| Salazar | Republican | FL | NO |
| Scalise | Republican | LA | NO |
| Scott, Austin | Republican | GA | NO |
| Smith (NE) | Republican | NE | NO |
| Smucker | Republican | PA | NO |
| Stefanik | Republican | NY | NO |
| Strong | Republican | AL | NO |
| Tenney | Republican | NY | NO |
| Turner | Republican | OH | NO |
| Valadao | Republican | CA | NO |
| Van Orden | Republican | WI | NO |
| Wagner | Republican | MO | NO |
| Waltz | Republican | FL | NO |
| Wenstrup | Republican | OH | NO |
| Womack | Republican | AR | NO |
Conservatives and progressives blamed congressional leadership for pushing against genuine privacy reform.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) wrote, “This is how the Constitution dies. By a tie vote, the amendment to require a warrant to spy on Americans goes down in flames. This is a sad day for America. The Speaker doesn’t always vote in the House, but he was the tie breaker today. He voted against warrants.”
Demand Progress Policy Director Sean Vitka said in a statement after the vote:
House
Leadership has pushed its thumb on the scale against privacy
protections throughout this debate, as it has done for more than a
decade. After wrongfully stopping the House Judiciary Committee’s
legislation from reaching the floor, denying a vote on closing the data
broker loophole, and rewarding the House Intelligence Committee for
operating in staggeringly bad faith.
…
We applaud the leaders of the House Judiciary, including Reps. Andy Biggs, Pramila Jayapal, Jim Jordan, Jerry Nadler, Warren Davidson, and Zoe Lofgren, for fighting tirelessly for over a year to advance the serious privacy protections that the public overwhelmingly supports and deserves. Their efforts were heroic and fundamentally changed this debate, which is all the more impressive considering the deceit and dirty tricks wielded against reform over the past year.
Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) wrote, “Here they go again, expanding FISA. Bipartisan skulduggery. A sad day for America.”
Rep. Scott Perry (R-PA) wrote, “Today’s FISA warrant amendment vote was tied, which means every single vote was the deciding vote. Make your decisions about who represents you based on supporting your Constitutional rights.”
Source: Technocracy.news
