Angelbabe43's Blog


Posts Tagged ‘Facebook’


Posted by angelbabe43 on November 26, 2012

Facsimile of the original draft of the United ...

Facsimile of the original draft of the United States Declaration of Independence with images of the signers around the border. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The TIME HAS COME. The monumental wave of participation in the secessionist petitions has gotten their attention! It is now time for America to unite under ONE BANNER, ONE IDEAL, ONE PEOPLE!It matters not your gender, your lifestyle, your political or spiritual beliefs, your color, your ethnicity, your station or your occupation. You are either free or you are slaves, there is no in between. You can have Freebies or you can have Freedom but you most certainly cannot have both. …

For the FIRST TIME IN HISTORY SIGN YOUR DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE! LET THEM KNOW YOU ARE FREE, YOU ARE AMERICAN AND YOU ARE THE BOSS! SIGN THE DECLARATION (Audio File by Teri Hinkle) DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE 2012 no preamble Sign the Full Document here… Sign the petition that lets them know here: Full Audio of Declaration on YouTube (Entire Declaration Audible) Note:  Be sure to sign BOTH the Full Document at Soldierhugs and the petition! THE QUESTION IS NOT ABOUT SOCIAL ISSUES, THE QUESTION IS, DO YOU BELIEVE YOURSELF FREE OR DO YOU WANT TO BE LED AROUND BY THE NOSE FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE? DO YOU WANT THAT FOR YOUR CHILDREN? Don’t hesitate to stand and speak for Freedom and Liberty. Since the installation of the Homeland Security Fusion Centers and the government takeover of Facebook they now know more about you than you do yourself! Let them know they have no right and they DO NOT OWN YOU! Stand with ALL AMERICANS and show them YOU ARE NOT A HUMAN RESOURCE FOR THEM TO BUY AND SELL!

Posted in FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, freedom | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

The 50 Best Signs From #OccupyWallStreet

Posted by angelbabe43 on October 8, 2011

Your Post Has Been Launched!

It looks great! Don’t forget to tell your friends on Twitter and Facebook!

The 50 Best Signs From #OccupyWallStreet

Politics Buzz Now in its third week, and the biggest one thus far, Occupy Wall Street continues to gain steam. While the protestors’ individual messages are often unclear, their signs show the awesome solidarity that exists within the movement.

Josh Fjelstad posted about 4 hours ago

Posted in Occupy Wall Street | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

A new law-enforcement tool: Facebook searches

Posted by angelbabe43 on September 16, 2011

The Seal of the United States Federal Bureau o...

Image via Wikipedia

NEW YORK, July 12 (Reuters) – U.S. law-enforcement agencies are increasingly obtaining warrants to search Facebook, often gaining detailed access to users’ accounts without their knowledge.

A Reuters review of the Westlaw legal database shows that since 2008, federal judges have authorized at least two dozen warrants to search individuals’ Facebook accounts. Many of the warrants requested a laundry list of personal data such as messages, status updates, links to videos and photographs, calendars of future and past events, “Wall postings” and “rejected Friend requests.”

Federal agencies seeking the warrants include the FBI, DEA and ICE, and the investigations range from arson to rape to terrorism.

The Facebook search warrants typically demand a user”s “Neoprint” and “Photoprint” — terms that Facebook has used to describe a detailed package of profile and photo information that is not even available to users themselves.

These terms appear in manuals for law enforcement agencies on how to request data from Facebook. The manuals, posted on various public-advocacy websites, appear to have been prepared by Facebook, although a spokesman for the company declined to confirm their authenticity.

The review of Westlaw data indicates that federal agencies were granted at least 11 warrants to search Facebook since the beginning of 2011, nearly double the number for all of 2010. The precise number of warrants served on Facebook is hard to determine, in part because some records are sealed, and warrant applications often involve unusual case names. (One example: “USA v.Facebook USER ID Associated with email address,” a sealed case involving a drug sale.)

In a telephone interview, Facebook’s Chief Security Officer, Joe Sullivan, declined to say how many warrants had been served on the company. He said Facebook is sensitive to user privacy and that it regularly pushes back against law-enforcement “fishing expeditions.”


None of the warrants discovered in the review have been challenged on the grounds that it violated a person’s Fourth Amendment protection against unlawful search and seizure, according to a review of the cases.

Some constitutional-law experts said the Facebook searches may not have been challenged because the defendants – not to mention their “friends” or others whose pages might have been viewed as part of an investigation — never knew about them.

By law, neither Facebook nor the government is obliged to inform a user when an account is subject to a search by law enforcement, though prosecutors are required to disclose material evidence to a defendant.

Twitter and several other social-media sites have formally adopted a policy to notify users when law enforcement asks to search their profile.

Last January, Twitter also successfully challenged a gag order imposed by a federal judge in Virginia that forbade the company from informing users that the government had demanded their data.

Twitter said in an email message that its policy was “to help users protect their rights.” The Facebook spokesperson would not say whether the company had a similar policy to notify users or if it was considering adopting one.


In several recent cases, however, Facebook apparently did not inform account-holders or their lawyers about government snooping.

Last year, several weeks after police apprehended four young Satanists who burned down a church in Pomeroy, Ohio, an FBI agent executed a search warrant on Facebook seeking data about two of the suspects.

All four ultimately pleaded guilty and received sentences of eight to ten years in state prison (along with a message of forgiveness from a church official who called the sentence “God’s time out,” and presented them with a Bible). It is unclear if data obtained from the warrant was used in the investigation.

Lawyers for the two defendants were unaware of the searches until they were contacted by Reuters.

In another case, the DEA searched the account of Nathan Kuemmerle, a Hollywood psychiatrist who pleaded guilty in Los Angeles federal court after a joint operation last year by the DEA and local police revealed he had run a “pill mill” for celebrity customers.

Westlaw records show that that the DEA executed a warrant to search Kuemmerle’s Facebook account weeks after his arrest.

At Kuemmerle’s bail hearing, a Redondo Beach police detective pointed to comments Kuemmerle made on Facebook and in the site’s popular game “Mafia Wars” to argue that he should be denied bail.

According to Kuemmerle’s lawyer, John Littrell, the detective testified on cross-examination that the information was from “an undercover source.” Littrell told Reuters that neither he nor his client was ever informed about the warrant, and that he only learned of its existence from Reuters.

The detective said in an e-mail message that he did not recall being asked about how he obtained the Facebook information. The DEA did not reply to requests for comment.


The Facebook searches potentially open up new legal challenges in an area that at one time seemed relatively settled: How much protection an individual has against government searches of personal information held by third parties. In a 1976 case, United States v. Miller, a divided U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a bank did not have to inform its customer when it turned over his financial records to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.

In doing so, the Supreme Court held that the customer could not invoke Fourth Amendment rights against illegal search and seizure because the records were bank property in which he had no legitimate “expectation of privacy.”

Under this reasoning, a person would have no more expectation of privacy in Facebook content than in bank records. A key difference, however, is the scale of information that resides on social networking sites.

“It is something new,” said Thomas Clancy, a constitutional-law professor at the University of Mississippi. “It”s the amount of information and data being provided as a matter of course by third parties.”

Eben Moglen, a cyberlaw professor at Columbia Law School, says the Facebook searches show that courts are ill-equipped to safeguard privacy rights in an age of digital media. In his view, “the solutions aren’t legal, they”re technical.”

Clancy, the Mississippi professor, said that courts are divided over whether the unprecedented volume of digital records in the possession of third parties should give rise to special rules governing the search of electronic data.

He added that the Supreme Court had an opportunity to clarify the issue in a case called Ontario v. Quon, but that it decided to “punt.”

The Quon case concerned a California policeman who claimed his employer violated his Fourth Amendment rights when it read sexually explicit messages that he had sent from a work pager.

The Court found that that the employer’s search was not unreasonable, but declined to rule on the degree to which people have a privacy interest in electronic data controlled by others.

Explaining the court’s caution, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, “The judiciary risks error by elaborating too fully on the Fourth Amendment implications of emerging technology before its role in society has become clear.”

(Reporting by Jeff John Roberts)

Posted in Facebook, Fourth A mendment Rights | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

DARPA funded Facebook under fire from Euro regulators for revealing massive facial recognition database

Posted by angelbabe43 on June 14, 2011

By M. Ruppert

Editor of End the Lie

The fact that this is surprising to people is beyond all comprehension. This technology has been under development since Facebook took on massive funding from CIA/NSA connected firms. Of course this is brushed off by the corporate special interest media, after all the Bilderberg Group is just an exclusive tea party and the Council on Foreign Relations is a luncheon group, right?

This is dismissed as conspiracy theory, mainly because the funding didn’t come directly from In-Q-Tel, the venture capital firm established by the Central Intelligence Agency back in 1999. How can any self-respecting journalist assert that the CIA would directly and openly fund a covert domestic surveillance and data mining project? This just isn’t how it works and every real conspiracy that has been exposed over the years proves this.

Global Research makes it pretty evident that these links are not tenuous enough to dismiss as fringe conspiracy theory,

“Facebook’s first round of venture capital funding ($US500,000) came from former Paypal CEO Peter Thiel. Author of anti-multicultural tome ‘The Diversity Myth’, he is also on the board of radical conservative group VanguardPAC.

The second round of funding into Facebook ($US12.7 million) came from venture capital firm Accel Partners. Its manager James Breyer was formerly chairman of the National Venture Capital Association, and served on the board with Gilman Louie, CEO of In-Q-Tel, a venture capital firm established by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1999. One of the company’s key areas of expertise are in “data mining technologies”.

Breyer also served on the board of R&D firm BBN Technologies, which was one of those companies responsible for the rise of the internet.

Dr Anita Jones joined the firm, which included Gilman Louie. She had also served on the In-Q-Tel’s board, and had been director of Defence Research and Engineering for the US Department of Defence.

She was also an adviser to the Secretary of Defence and overseeing the Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), which is responsible for high-tech, high-end development.”

Two members of In-Q-Tel’s board who directly involved in data mining technologies and the Information Awareness Office of the Defense Advanced Projects Research Agency, better known as DARPA, directly provided the most major funding that launched Facebook into what it is today.

Yep, you must be schizophrenic to think that Dr. Anit Jones’ involvement with the Information Awareness Office which has the stated goal of “Total Information Awareness” has anything to do with the data mining capabilities of Facebook.

Sarcasm aside, I think you really must purposefully ignore the majority of the evidence if you are to think that Facebook has no ties with the government and that they are not utilized as a massive domestic intelligence gathering system. The fact is that the links between intelligence agencies and Facebook is undeniable and the rationale between the ties is equally irrefutable.

Why wouldn’t a branch of the government who openly wants to gather every single bit of information about every single American citizen invest heavily and take control of a system like Facebook in which citizens voluntarily frame their faces in squares for ease of facial recognition while choosing to disclose their intimate details and thoughts. Not to mention the fact that people actually use the website to “check in” places, creating a wonderful outline of activity and habits, or the ability to run a script that scrapes, analyzes, and assimilates every single communication and friend link creating an in-depth intelligence file that would otherwise take warrants and months of surveillance to compile.

Facial recognition technology has been under development since at least 1964, although it would be ignorant to think that there were not highly secretive government research programs occurring before this. In fact, this project itself was funded by an “unnamed intelligence agency” however, they allowed some of the research to be published. If this were a completely black project there would be no publishing of any data whatsoever. Therefore, we can conclude that this technology has been consistently refined and improved over at least 47 years.

Knowing that these systems have been in development for nearly half a century, can you confidently assert that Facebook has not been using facial recognition technology since they introduced the tagging system in which you put someone’s face into a box? Of course now this is not necessary as facial recognition technology has advanced to the point where even the lowest-end point-and-shoot digital cameras include facial recognition.

The fact is that Facebook controls what is arguably the largest database of pictures of people from around the world, most of which are tagged by name, associated with a date, and have meta tag information with GPS coordinates, camera model and settings, etc. With the open implementation of the advanced facial recognition technology, they are simply confirming the fact that this database has been built around this purpose since day one.

The European countries seem to be much more active in investigating companies for massive privacy infringement, while the American government relishes such invasions of privacy. Will the European regulators be able to actually do anything? I doubt it. This is essentially the equivalent of a few Congressmen or Senators trying to investigate Facebook or Google. Sure they’ll entertain their whimsies far enough so the American people still hold on to the delusion that our representatives do anything, but no real investigation will take place.

For instance, last year Google came under heavy fire from individuals in the United States and Europe for stealing personal information over Wi-Fi through their Google Street View cars. The Register reported, “Germany’s Federal Commissioner for Data Protection Peter Schaar says he’s “horrified” by the discovery. […] “I am appalled… I call upon Google to delete previously unlawfully collected personal data on the wireless network immediately and stop the rides for Street View,” according to German broadcaster ARD.”

While the German Federal Commissioner for Data Protection wasn’t scared to use stern language in rebuking this naked illegal invasion of privacy, the United States government was silent as per usual. This violation of privacy was not isolated to Europe, in fact a class action lawsuit was filed against Google for these breaches in Oregon. Yet, our supposed representatives idly twiddled their thumbs and sucked on the teats of corporate lobbyists.

CNET reported, “So far the U.S. government hasn’t announced an investigation into Google’s practices, but Congressional leaders are asking the Federal Trade Commission to get involved. On Wednesday, Reps. Ed Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, and Joe Barton, a Texas Republican, sent a letter to the head of the FTC.”

Clearly a great deal of change came out of these actions as Google has just pressed on with their data mining and Facebook has obviously never relented in their efforts either.

The Financial Times reports the following on this most recent public roll-out of the facial recognition technology,

“In the US, a number of privacy groups have been asked to back a complaint to the Federal Trade Commission in the US being organised by the Electronic Privacy Information Centre, which also led a 2009 protest against the company, according to people contacted about the matter.

Facebook said that it was in talks with European regulators but said that it did not believe the facial recognition feature posed privacy concerns.

“We have heard the comments from some regulators about this product feature, and we are providing them with additional information which we are confident will satisfy any concerns they will have,” Facebook said.

After protests started this week, Facebook hurried to update an earlier blog post to disclose the international roll-out of the feature and to admit it should have handled the process differently.

“We should have been more clear with people during the roll-out process when this became available to them,” Facebook said in a statement on Tuesday.”

Well as long as they apologize, who can hold them at fault for creating the world’s largest facial recognition database without anyone’s consent? Who can blame them for retaining every single picture, message, search, conversation, or friend request even if you attempt to cancel your account?

It is sad to say that once you’re in Facebook’s grasp, there is no escape. After all, you shouldn’t care about privacy unless you have something to hide, right?

Posted in FACEBOOK FACIAL RECOGNITION | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Censored By Facebook

Posted by angelbabe43 on April 9, 2011

Facebook profile shown in 2007

Image via Wikipedia

Copyright 2011-3011 Alternative News Forum, All Rights Reserved.

ALERT: I am trying to post this essay and each time I attempt to publish all the identifying tags fall out of it. This has NEVER happened before on WordPress. Here are some of the tags I applied to this post, just in case you are wondering why such a thing might happen:

Obama White House spying on WordPress bloggers

American civil liberties freedom of speech

NSA, CIA, NCS, Obama White House surveillance

internet Freedom of speech in peril

Freedom of speech in America in peril

Facebook and the death of privacy


civil liberties

Something is up with Facebook. It’s not legal, and it IS NOT OK. First, I would like to state that I am not particularly a fan of the social networking and secret surveillance service, and I have posted numerous essays outing the CIA seed money and NCS roots of Facebook since 2008.

Alternative News Forum keeps a presence on FB, which I use to announce new posts, articles and essays which appear on this news blog. Today something happened which is flat-out illegal and should never be allowed to take place on a so called “free” social networking site. Keep in mind that the supposed reason that FB was founded in the first place was to assist like minded individuals and groups to find one another and socialize online. Right?

Wrong! Facebook has pretended this was the reason they were founded. The real reason FB was founded was to babysit America and keep an eye on what people are saying, thinking, and doing.And if what Americans are saying, thinking and doing on FB displeases the site, they will be blocked – which is just a geeky way of saying “censored” on FB.

How do I know This? The final proof is what happened today 4.8.11 when I tried to post a simple description and URL to one of my most recent essays.

Below is a simple screen shot of the description I typed and the URL of the essay:

Plain and simple truth telling, right?

Here’s what happened when I tried to post it. Keep in mind I log into FB about twice a week for about 6 minutes, maintain my presence, then log off. I never spend more than 4 minutes on the site, and the only thing I use my page for is the announcing of new posts and articles on this blog. I have never once spammed FB, although I have been spammed by it repeatedly. This happens when someone I do not know, a “friend of a friend” on FB subscribes me to a group, then hammers my email account with messages from that group.

I have repeatedly opened my email and found 50 or 60 messages at a time, every one of them unsolicited, from these FB groups. I have to tediously go to the site, reset my settings, unsub from the group that I never subbed to in the frist place, and then log off again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

But here is what happened today when I tried to do what I always do, which is announce a new article to my own page on FB:

There was nothing “abusive” or spammy about announcing a blog post. That’s what writers do. When they write, they let their readers know. It just happened to be that what I was writing was not in support of the Obama White House. I am not a fan of him or his administration either, you see, and this is the source of the trouble. FB does not want people like me to speak out. FB is now in the hands of the Obama White House, and most likely has been all along.

I also frequently catch “someone” “somewhere” trying to prohibit me from posting on WordPress and I have a deep hunch that my recent trouble with my news blog just suddenly coming down and being offline for two days with no notice or explanation from WP is also about attempted censorship.

Boy, that stunt sure backfired. My blog traffic skyrocketed and yesterday it broke all records, with 22,023 visits in twelve hours. I have not added today’s visits to that number yet, but they are just as big.

The ugly little secret powers that be which have their arms into FB and WP up to the shoulders are doing all the wrong things to try to hush up Americans who dissent from the Obama Nation. Everything they do will continue to backfire and I will continue to grab screenshots of “all out internet surveillance moments” like this one below and post them.

So help me God, I will continue to write, post, publish and tell the truth about King Obama wearing no clothes, and God will help me keep an internet platform up and running to do this. If you believe in freedom of speech, and enjoy reading what I write, please consider making a one time $1 to $5 donation so I can put this blog on a private site host and get it off of the heavily monitored and surveilled WordPress platform. Then I won’t have to be interrupted by messages like this one below anymore. I now have become an expert at catching this screenshot before the telltale “spy window” goes away. – Chase Kyla Hunter 4.8.11

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Truth Researchers Report Censorship Appearing on Some Research Wikis, Facebook, Web Adverts

Posted by angelbabe43 on March 31, 2011

Posted on 12/18/2010 by CK Hunter

Copyright 2010-3010 I-Witness Internet Report, Updated on 12.19.2010

Yesterday I wrote about incidents of emerging censorship online [ see below ]. Today I add to that a new incident of the Dept of HHS simply “buying” an internet ad that used the term “Obamacare” and then redirecting all hits from it to go to their own chosen pages. This sets another ugly low dipping moment of the Obama White House using censorship to further their own agenda, now stooping so low they actually buy up and redirect traffic from internet ads that oppose Obamacare. Heres’ the link:

Truth researcher Chase Kyla Hunter reports that in the last 7 days she has noted periodic incidents of what appears to be some sort of possible censorship taking place on social networking sites Twitter and Facebook.  She reports also that her Wiki on has had dozens of embedded videos disappear since 2008.

Although in fairness, at least one incident with FB recently could possibly be attributed to the choppy roll-out of Facebook’s new format. For several hours yesterday certain words and phrases of a Christian nature which were typed into a profile disappeared repeatedly after saving them. Chase reports this occurred 6 times at one point. She finally gave up trying to add these Christian phrases to her profile, but will try again soon.

The image below shows the video embed page on Chase’s other Wiki, the original truth research Wiki she started in early 2008. Nearly one fourth of the videos on certain topics have now been mysteriously removed from the web, far too many for it to be a random choice on the part of a YouTube. This really bothered Chase and she included the screenshot below in her email to me. The empty grey panels are removed videos. The subject of all of these videos pertains to the New World Order in some capacity.

Here is the url for the video embed page on Chase’s other Wiki:

If you are a truth researcher or journalist, or citizen journalist who writes about the emerging New World Order and similar things are occurring on your websites, please record and post about it, so we can inform the rest of the internet that censorship is being attempted and try to put a stop to it. This is not nazi Germany in 1938, this is the United States of America in 2010 and this should not be happening.

Copyright I-Witness Internet Report 2010-3010


Related Articles

Posted in censorship, censorship of all kinds | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »