Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Clintons Sell US Uranium Mines to Russia ?

April 27, 2015

Perhaps the most surprising thing about the forthcoming book rocking Washington right now is the number of stunning facts liberal media outlets have already confirmed and verified are accurate.

Here, then, are 11 facts that mainstream media say are true, verified, and facts from the upcoming blockbuster, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich.

CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Foundation Hid a $2.35 Million Foreign Donation from the Head of the Russian Govt’s Uranium Company that Had Business Before Hillary Clinton’s State Dept.—a Clear Violation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama Administration

The New York Times has confirmed that Hillary Clinton violated the Memorandum of Understanding she signed with the Obama administration promising to disclose all foreign donations during her tenure as Sec. of State.

As Clinton Cash reveals, Ian Telfer, the foreign head of the Russian-owned uranium company, Uranium One, which Hillary Clinton approved to acquire U.S. uranium, made four individual hidden donations to the Clinton Foundation totaling $2.35 million, none of which appear in Clinton Foundation disclosures.

CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Bagged $500,000 for a Speech in Moscow Paid for by a Kremlin-linked Bank

The New Yorker confirms that, as Clinton Cash claims, Bill Clinton made $500,000 for a Moscow speech that was paid for by “a Russian investment bank that had ties to the Kremlin” at the time of the Uranium One deal.

“Why was Bill Clinton taking any money from a bank linked to the Kremlin while his wife was Secretary of State?” asks the liberal publication. 

CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Brother Sits on the Board of a Mining Company that Scored an Extremely Rare “Gold Exploitation Permit” in Haiti as Hillary and Bill Clinton Disbursed Billions of U.S. Taxpayer Dollars in Haiti

The Washington Post confirms the accuracy of Clinton Cash’s revelation that Hillary Clinton’s brother, Tony Rodham, serves on the board of a mining company that scored a coveted and lucrative “gold exploitation permit” in Haiti as then-Sec. of State Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton were doling out billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars in the wake of the Haiti earthquake.

According to the Post, Rodham’s mining company “won one of the first two gold-mining permits the Haitian government had issued in more than 50 years,” just as Clinton Cashreveals.

CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Foundation Hid a Foreign Donation of 2 Million Shares of Stock by a Mining Executive with Business Before Hillary’s State Dept.—a Clear Violation of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Obama Administration

The Wall Street Journal confirms the book’s revelation that another foreign donation, one by Canadian mining executive Stephen Dattels, made a hidden donation of two million shares in Polo Resources that the Clinton Foundation chose not to disclose in violation of the Memorandum of Understanding the Clintons signed with the Obama administration.

“About two months later, the U.S. ambassador to Bangladesh pushed the energy adviser to that nation’s prime minister to allow ‘open pit mining,’ including in Phulbari Mines, where Polo Resources has a stake,” reports the Journal.

CONFIRMED: Hillary’s Approval of the Russian Takeover of Uranium One Transferred 20% of All U.S. Uranium to the Russian Govt.

The New York Times confirms, “The sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States.”

The Times also verifies the book’s reporting that Hillary’s uranium transfer to Russia represented, at the time, a projected 50% of all U.S. uranium output.

CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton was Paid by a For-Profit Education Company Laureate While the Company Benefitted from an Increase in Funding from Hillary’s State Dept.

Bloomberg has confirmed that, as reported in Clinton Cash, Bill Clinton was paid by “Laureate International Universities, part of Laureate Education, Inc,” a position he abruptly resigned from on Friday.

Bloomberg’s examination confirms that “in 2009, the year before Bill Clinton joined Laureate, the nonprofit received 11 grants worth $9 million from the State Department or the affiliated USAID. In 2010, the group received 14 grants worth $15.1 million. In 2011, 13 grants added up to $14.6 million. The following year, those numbers jumped: IYF received 21 grants worth $25.5 million, including a direct grant from the State Department.”

The company nor the Clintons will release the exact amounts Bill received for working for the controversial for-profit education company.

CONFIRMED: The Clinton Foundation has Been Forced to Refile at Least 5 Years of Annual Tax Returns and May Audit Other Clinton Foundation Returns

Reuters has confirmed that “Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns” as “the foundation and its list of donors have been under intense scrutiny.”

CONFIRMED: At Least $26 Million of the Clintons’ Wealth Comes from Speaking Fees by Companies and Organizations that are Also Major Clinton Foundation Donors

The Washington Post has confirmed in an article based on Clinton Cash that, according to the Post’s independent analysis, “Bill Clinton was paid more than $100 million for speeches between 2001 and 2013, according to federal financial disclosure forms filed by Hillary Clinton during her years as a senator and as secretary of state.”

Of that, reports the Post, “Bill Clinton was paid at least $26 million in speaking fees by companies and organizations that are also major donors to the foundation he created after leaving the White House, according to a Washington Post analysis of public records and foundation date.”

CONFIRMED: Clinton Cash author, Peter Schweizer, is Currently Conducting a Deep Dive Investigative Report on Republican Presidential Candidate Jeb Bush’s Financial Dealings

CBS News has confirmed that author Peter Schweizer is working on a similar investigation into GOP presidential candidate Jeb Bush’s financial records and relationships.

“The wide-ranging examination will appraise the possible 2016 contender’s involvement in Florida real estate deals, an airport deal that involved state funds while Bush was Florida’s chief executive, and Chinese investments in Bush’s private equity funds,” reports CBS News.

CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Delivered Numerous Speeches Paid for By Individuals and Corporations with Pending Business Before Hillary’s State Dept.

ABC News has confirmed Clinton Cash’s reporting that myriad businesses and individuals paid Bill Clinton to deliver speeches even as their companies had business on Sec. of State Hillary Clinton’s desk.

“Records supported the premise that former President Clinton accepted speaking fees from numerous companies and individuals with interests pending before the State Department,” reported ABC News.

ABC News noted it found “an instance where paid and unpaid speaking appearances were conflated,” but that Clinton Cash’s essential “premise” is “supported by records” ABC News independently analyzed. 

CONFIRMED: Bill Clinton Lied about Hosting a Meeting with Frank Giustra and Kazakh Nuclear Officials at Clinton’s Home in Chappaqua, New York

New York Times Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter Jo Becker confirmed in a one-hour Fox News television special on Clinton Cash that Bill Clinton lied when questioned about whether Clinton, Giustra, and executives from the Kazakh-owned nuclear company Kazatomprom ever met in Clintons’ home.

“When I first contacted both the Clinton Foundation—Mr. Clinton’s spokesman—and Mr. Giustra, they denied any such meeting ever took place,” said Becker.

“And then when we told them, ‘Well we already talked to the head of Kazatomprom, who not only told us all about the meeting, but actually has a picture of him and Bill at the home in Chappaqua, and that he proudly displayed it on his office wall.’ They then acknowledged that yes, the meeting had taken place.”

The Hillary Clinton campaign continues to struggle in its efforts to spin and distract from the growing pile of Clinton Cash facts mainstream media outlets have already confirmed and verified are correct.

As Politico concludes, “Hillary’s Clinton Cash dismissal is dead in the water.”

The book drops May 5th.

TPP – Trans-Pacific Partnership of NWO

April 27, 2015

Something else besides attracting investment money and encouraging foreign trade seems to be going on. The TPP would destroy our republican form of government under the rule of law, by elevating the rights of investors – also called the rights of “capital” – above the rights of the citizens.

That means that TPP is blatantly unconstitutional. But as Joe Firestone observes, neo-liberalism and corporate contributions seem to have blinded the deal’s proponents so much that they cannot see they are selling out the sovereignty of the United States to foreign and multinational corporations.


The Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Death of the Republic

By Ellen Brown

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.    — Article IV, Section 4, US Constitution

April 23, 2015 “Information Clearing House” – A republican form of government is one in which power resides in elected officials representing the citizens, and government leaders exercise power according to the rule of law. In The Federalist Papers, James Madison defined a republic as “a government which derives all its powers directly or indirectly from the great body of the people . . . .”

On April 22, 2015, the Senate Finance Committee approved a bill to fast-track the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a massive trade agreement that would override our republican form of government and hand judicial and legislative authority to a foreign three-person panel of corporate lawyers.

The secretive TPP is an agreement with Mexico, Canada, Japan, Singapore and seven other countries that affects 40% of global markets. Fast-track authority could now go to the full Senate for a vote as early as next week. Fast-track means Congress will be prohibited from amending the trade deal, which will be put to a simple up or down majority vote. Negotiating the TPP in secretand fast-tracking it through Congress is considered necessary to secure its passage, since if the public had time to review its onerous provisions, opposition would mount and defeat it.

Abdicating the Judicial Function to Corporate Lawyers

James Madison wrote in The Federalist Papers:

The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, . . . may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny. . . . “Were the power of judging joined with the legislative, the life and liberty of the subject would be exposed to arbitrary control, for the judge would then be the legislator. . . .”

And that, from what we now know of the TPP’s secret provisions, will be its dire effect.

The most controversial provision of the TPP is the Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) section, which strengthens existing ISDS  procedures. ISDS first appeared in a bilateral trade agreement in 1959. According to The Economist, ISDS gives foreign firms a special right to apply to a secretive tribunal of highly paid corporate lawyers for compensation whenever the government passes a law to do things that hurt corporate profits — such things as discouraging smoking, protecting the environment or preventing a nuclear catastrophe.

Arbitrators are paid $600-700 an hour, giving them little incentive to dismiss cases; and the secretive nature of the arbitration process and the lack of any requirement to consider precedent gives wide scope for creative judgments.

To date, the highest ISDS award has been for $2.3 billion to Occidental Oil Company against the government of Ecuador over its termination of an oil-concession contract, this although the termination was apparently legal. Still in arbitration is a demand by Vattenfall, a Swedish utility that operates two nuclear plants in Germany, for compensation of €3.7 billion ($4.7 billion) under the ISDS clause of a treaty on energy investments, after the German government decided to shut down its nuclear power industry following the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011.

Under the TPP, however, even larger judgments can be anticipated, since the sort of “investment” it protects includes not just “the commitment of capital or other resources” but “the expectation of gain or profit.” That means the rights of corporations in other countries extend not just to their factories and other “capital” but to the profits they expect to receive there.

In an article posted by Yves Smith, Joe Firestone poses some interesting hypotheticals:

Under the TPP, could the US government be sued and be held liable if it decided to stop issuing Treasury debt and financed deficit spending in some other way (perhaps by quantitative easing or by issuing trillion dollar coins)? Why not, since some private companies would lose profits as a result?

Under the TPP or the TTIP (the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership under negotiation with the European Union), would the Federal Reserve be sued if it failed to bail out banks that were too big to fail?

Firestone notes that under the Netherlands-Czech trade agreement, the Czech Republic was sued in an investor-state dispute for failing to bail out an insolvent bank in which the complainant had an interest. The investor company was awarded $236 million in the dispute settlement. What might the damages be, asks Firestone, if the Fed decided to let the Bank of America fail, and a Saudi-based investment company decided to sue?

Abdicating the Legislative Function to Multinational Corporations

Just the threat of this sort of massive damage award could be enough to block prospective legislation. But the TPP goes further and takes on the legislative function directly, by forbidding specific forms of regulation.

Public Citizen observes that the TPP would provide big banks with a backdoor means of watering down efforts to re-regulate Wall Street, after deregulation triggered the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression:

The TPP would forbid countries from banning particularly risky financial products, such as the toxic derivatives that led to the $183 billion government bailout of AIG. It would prohibit policies to prevent banks from becoming “too big to fail,” and threaten the use of “firewalls” to prevent banks that keep our savings accounts from taking hedge-fund-style bets.

The TPP would also restrict capital controls, an essential policy tool to counter destabilizing flows of speculative money. . . . And the deal would prohibit taxes on Wall Street speculation, such as the proposed Robin Hood Tax that would generate billions of dollars’ worth of revenue for social, health, or environmental causes.

Clauses on dispute settlement in earlier free trade agreements have been invoked to challenge efforts to regulate big business. The fossil fuel industry is seeking to overturn Quebec’s ban on the ecologically destructive practice of fracking. Veolia, the French behemoth known for building a tram network to serve Israeli settlements in occupied East Jerusalem, is contesting increases in Egypt’s minimum wage. The tobacco maker Philip Morris is suing against anti-smoking initiatives in Uruguay and Australia.

The TPP would empower not just foreign manufacturers but foreign financial firms to attack financial policies in foreign tribunals, demanding taxpayer compensation for regulations that they claim frustrate their expectations and inhibit their profits.

Preempting Government Sovereignty

What is the justification for this encroachment on the sovereign rights of government? Allegedly, ISDS is necessary in order to increase foreign investment. But as noted in The Economist, investors can protect themselves by purchasing political-risk insurance. Moreover, Brazil continues to receive sizable foreign investment despite its long-standing refusal to sign any treaty with an ISDS mechanism. Other countries are beginning to follow Brazil’s lead.

In an April 22nd report from the Center for Economic and Policy Research, gains from multilateral trade liberalization were shown to be very small, equal to only about 0.014% of consumption, or about $.43 per person per month. And that assumes that any benefits are distributed uniformly across the economic spectrum. In fact, transnational corporations get the bulk of the benefits, at the expense of most of the world’s population.

Something else besides attracting investment money and encouraging foreign trade seems to be going on. The TPP would destroy our republican form of government under the rule of law, by elevating the rights of investors – also called the rights of “capital” – above the rights of the citizens.

That means that TPP is blatantly unconstitutional. But as Joe Firestone observes, neo-liberalism and corporate contributions seem to have blinded the deal’s proponents so much that they cannot see they are selling out the sovereignty of the United States to foreign and multinational corporations.

For more information and to get involved, visit:

Flush the TPP

The Citizens Trade Campaign

Public Citizen’s Global Trade Watch

Eyes on Trade


Ellen Brown is an attorney, founder of the Public Banking Institute, and author of twelve books including the best-selling Web of Debt. Her latest book, The Public Bank Solution, explores successful public banking models historically and globally. Her 300+ blog articles are at

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.


TPP is the NWO NAFTA & GATT sequels:

EU Big Brother Versus US Internet

April 24, 2015

European Union Mulling New Regulator To Watch Over Internet Giants Like Google, Facebook

By @KukilBora on April 24 2015 3:07 AM EDT
  • High Speed Internet_Creative
  • GüntherOettinger-EU
    The new regulator is being viewed as a solution if it is allowed to govern the relations between Internet companies and other businesses. In picture, the EU Digital Commissioner Günther Oettinger. Reuters

The European Union is considering a powerful new regulator, which can oversee dominant — mainly U.S.-based — Internet companies operating in Europe. The move essentially reveals deep concerns within the 28-member union about the potential economic threat from companies like Google, Facebook and Yahoo.

According to a leaked document from the office of the EU Digital Commissioner Günther Oettinger, the EU is working on a blueprint for the regulation of well-established Internet companies in Europe, the Wall Street Journal reported. Officials in the EU, who have in the past few days slapped anti-trust lawsuits on foreign companies like Google and Gazprom, fear that these companies could abuse their market position on the continent to the detriment of locally-based businesses and consumers.

Some platforms, such as search engines, online marketplaces and social networks “are transforming into super-nodes that can be of systemic importance” for the European economy, the document, which still has a long way to go before becoming policy, reportedly says. “Only a very limited part of the economy will not depend on them in the near future.”

Asked about the document, a spokesperson for Oettinger said that he has requested his department “to look into the possibilities,” the Journal reported, adding that the document listed 32 companies, five of which are U.S.-based while only one is based in Europe. The document suggests a new “supervision framework” to govern relations between Internet companies and other businesses, and envisions the new regulator as one to ban “unfair” practices and require online platforms not to discriminate between their own services and those offered by third parties.

Last week, the EU accused Google of abusing its dominant position by distorting Internet search results and favoring its own products and services over those of others. The union also launched an investigation into the search giant’s Android operating system to determine if the company’s agreements linked to the use of Android violated any EU antitrust rules.

In another instance of a pushback against Google, the European Parliament had passed a non-binding vote in November, urging anti-trust regulators to break up the search giant’s various businesses. Google controls about 90 percent of the search market in Europe, while also conducting businesses ranging from enterprise services to online maps.

Oettinger said in Germany earlier this month that Europe’s online businesses were “dependent on a few non-EU players world-wide” because the continent had “missed many opportunities” to develop its own online platforms. He also reiterated the union’s view on the need to “replace today’s Web search engines, operating systems and social networks,” but did not take any names, the Journal reported.

Margrethe Vestager, the EU’s commissioner for competition, recently attempted to clarify the union’s stance on pursuing Google for its alleged anti-competition practices.

“We have no grudge, we have no fight with Google,” the New York Times quoted Vestager as saying at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington last week. “We have a focus on a certain conduct, a certain behavior, which, if our doubts are going to be proven, we would like to change because we believe that it hampers competition.”

World Residensea Almost Seasteading ?

April 24, 2015

Perhaps one step away from Seasteading Islands ?

In 2002 The World of Residensea launched circumnavigating the world continuously, with 165 luxury individually owned condominiums on board, that has since visited 800 ports in 140 countries. Construction costs exceeded $250 million.

Seasteading Islands Beyond Government Reach ?

April 24, 2015


Floating Cities: Innovative Living Free of Traditional Power Structures?

By  October 27, 2014  

Designing artificial islands and floating platforms on which pioneering innovators could build their own city-states is one of the more radical propositions among the general trend towards creating new innovative work spaces.

Interest in ‘seasteading platforms’ – basically small cities floating on the sea – has been revived now that a number of Internet billionaires, including Peter Thiel and Larry Page, have become attracted to the idea of building communities that will enable people to escape from the restrictions of United States legislation. Google founder Larry Page argues that US Federal law is in fact seriously hampering certain areas of theoretical and applied research and has expressed interest in creating a space where research could be carried out free of these constraints. To such thinkers, ‘seasteads’ installed in international waters could well provide a means of evading the tendency of US regulation to clamp down on the more progressive notions and disruptive business ideas for which California has become famous – witness the struggles Google has faced to push ahead with its driverless Google Car and the fight Airbnb continues to have with the hotel lobby. Those libertarians who back the floating city concept think it would be a good thing if statehood were a matter of international economic competition, with countries having to offer the best possible living and working conditions to attract high-potential citizens. However, most people would view such projects as utopian pipe-dreams, and even many keen proponents suggest gradual, iterative progress towards the construction of artificial islands way out in international waters where entrepreneurs from the whole world could experiment freely.

Startups as autonomous governments?

A key driver of this trend is the non-profit organisation Seasteading Institute set up by Patri Friedman, the grandson of the economist Milton Friedman, which is working to enthuse Silicon Valley philanthropists about the idea of an entrepreneurs’ paradise located outside US Federal jurisdiction. Leading tech guru Peter Thiel has already come on board as an investor in the project.
Patri Friedman understands the importance of testing out a number of different blueprints for a sustainable floating city. Trials on a small scale are due to start soon in San Francisco Bay with platforms designed and constructed by DeltaSync. The Seasteading Institute publicity material stresses the need to balance physical comfort against the hoped-for increase in freedom. Friedman admits that for the moment it seems more reasonable to plan to install a floating city relatively close to land, i.e. in the territorial waters of an existing coastal country, so as to be able to use local logistics. The Seasteading Institute-driven floating city concept, whose design was completed in 2013, is based on 2,000 square metre, four or five-sided, modular platforms which can be attached to one another. With eleven modules, a structure costing an estimated $167 million could accommodate close to 300 people. The structure is designed to be highly mobile so that the floating city could be moved if there any difficulty arose with the host country. In fact mobility is a basic principle of the entire project, and initially there was debate about whether the developers should simply use cruise ships, at around $10 million each, as their floating base instead of the modular floating platform structure at well over $100 million.

Building a smart floating city

One major advantage of a floating city is that urban planners would be able to start from scratch. Connections, cables and buildings could all be constructed on a homogenous pattern, in sharp contrast to those attractive historic towns where regulations require streets and buildings to be preserved in their traditional form.
However, autarky is not a primary goal of the Seasteading Institute. Patri Friedman stresses that “autonomy from a resource point of view is not a priority.” Each floating city could for example specialise in a given production sector, capitalising on its comparative advantages depending on its geographical location. The platforms will be equipped to generate their own power from renewable, sustainable energy sources but supporters point out that the first floating cities will not aim to be entirely self-sufficient and will engage in trade in order to supply themselves.
The platforms have been designed with four strict imperatives in mind: modular structure, storm resistance, cost savings for residents coupled with the right level of comfort and convenience. So it would appear that the traditional key objectives of the ‘smart city’ – i.e. resource management optimisation and empowerment of citizens in the running of their own community – are not among the Seasteading Institute’s central concerns.
Aside from the putative tax advantages, the Seasteading Institute promoters have a number of ideas for monetising their floating cities and making it worthwhile for pioneers to come on board the scheme.  One of these is medical tourism. As the floating city will be operating outside the legislation of the countries of origin of most residents, it might provide a way for patients to undergo treatment which is currently not permissible at home.

Dominica Passport Economic Citizenship for $75,000

April 24, 2015

Dominica Passport Agency

Citizenship in Dominica by Economic Contribution

The Island of Dominica, not to be confused with the Dominican republic, offers an instant economic citizenship program where you can make an donation to the Government and rainforests of Dominica, and receivenaturalized citizenship, and areal passport. You can browse other citizenship by investmentopportunities here.

The passport program, started in 1993 is well established, and over 5000 people have gone through the process.

How To Get A Passport In Dominica – The Process

Step One: Initial consultation | Preparation of applications

Step Two:  Submission of application | Background Check

Step Three:  Comfort Letters and Investment Deposits

Step Four:  Interviews, Taking Of Oaths & Naturalization

Step Five:  Procurement of Passports

Banks Ban Cash in Safe Deposit Boxes ?

April 24, 2015



War on cash intensifies


Some JPMorgan Chase customers are receiving letters informing them that the bank will no longer allow cash to be stored in safety deposit boxes.

The content of a post over on the Collectors Universe message board suggests that we may be about to see a resurgence of the old fashioned method of stuffing bank notes under the mattress.

My mother has a SDB at a Chase branch with one of my siblings as co-signers. Last week they got a letter outlining a number of changes to the lease agreement, including this:

“Contents of the box: You agree not to store any cash or coins other than those found to have a collectible value.”

Another change is that signatures will no longer be accepted to access the box. The next time they go in they have to bring two forms of ID and they will be issued a four-digit pin number that will be used to access the box then and in the future.

The letter, entitled “Updated Safe Deposit Box Lease Agreement,” was sent out to customers at the beginning of the month.

“Hide your wallets, the banksters are on the move,” warns the Economic Policy Journal.

As of last month, Chase has also instituted a new policy which, “restricts borrowers from using cash to make payments on credit cards, mortgages, equity lines, and auto loans,” writes Professor Joseph Salerno of the Mises Institute.

The news arrives on the back of comments by Citi’s Willem Buiter, who recently advocated abolishing cash altogether in order to “solve the world’s central banks’ problem with negative interest rates”.

Last month we also reported on how the Justice Department is ordering bank employees to consider calling the cops on customers who withdraw $5,000 dollars or more.

Efforts to impose restrictions on the use of cash by banks are seen by many as an attack on anonymity and an example of how financial institutions are positioning themselves to handle the fallout of the next economic crash – at the expense of customers.

According to reports which emerged last year, HSBC is now interrogating its account holders in the UK on how they earn and spend their money as well as restricting large cash withdrawals for customers from £5000 upwards.

Banks in the U.S. are also making it harder for customers to withdraw and deposit cash, with Chase imposing new capital controls that mandate identification for cash deposits and ban cash being deposited into another person’s account.

In October 2013, we also covered policy changes instituted by Chase which banned international wire transfers while restricting cash activity for business customers (both deposits and withdrawals) to a $50,000 limit per statement cycle.

Last month, French Finance Minister Michel Sapin hailed the introduction of measures set to come into force in September which will restrict French citizens from making cash payments over €1,000 euros.

Google Records Everything U Search

April 24, 2015

Google will let you see everything you’ve ever searched

see video link for 34 second story:,AAAAAEA-5AE~,7pYsU79IKz2CXW_BSQItHbG6JoyZCfQ5
By Julian Hattem – 04/21/15 08:01 AM EDT

Google is famous for keeping discreet tabs on how people browse the Internet in order to market ads back to them and point them toward the websites, videos and services they want.

Now, it’s possible for the average Web user to get a slice of some of that information.

Over the weekend, an unofficial Google blog highlighted a new feature that the Internet giant had quietly rolled out to let people download their entire Google search histories.

To find everything they’ve ever searched for, users should go to Google Web History, click the gear icon and click “Download.”

“Create an archive of your search history data,” the Web company promises.

In a few moments, it sends an email with downloadable cache of data about people’s past searches.

The archive won’t work for people who have altered their privacy settings, and only records searches that occurred while logged in to Google, such as through Gmail.

Still, the archive is a demonstration of how much information Google quietly retains about its users. The company is by no means unique in compiling scores of data about people’s browsing habits, but its size has made it a target for privacy advocates who fear companies having access to vast amounts of personal information.

In addition to Google, companies known as data brokers — which make a business out of compiling dossiers on consumers in order to sell use for advertising — have come under scrutiny from Capitol Hill and Washington regulators, who fear that people’s privacy is not being adequately protected.

That search history can also be useful to the government, in order to track down potential terrorists or criminals. Among other things, federal agents are able to subpoena lists of search histories from companies like Google during the course of an investigation.

World Bank Whistleblower Karen Hudes

April 23, 2015

Karen Hudes

Acting General Counsel (former)

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Legal Counsel Global Debt Facility TVM-LSM-666

Karen Hudes

Acting General Counsel (former)

International Bank for Reconstruction and Development

Legal Counsel Global Debt Facility TVM-LSM-666

Three Hundred Dodecallion USD CFR Trilateral Commission

April 22, 2015

Embedded image permalink

Molocanang World Head Pijao Palace Parliament – Royal God Allied Head Palace Dovest Dove – International Reserved of the Phillipines & Heavenly World – What does one make of this ???


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,177 other followers

%d bloggers like this: