activistpost--2019-04-10--The Los Angeles Department of Transportations Ride Tracking Pilot is Out of Control

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation’s Ride Tracking Pilot is Out of Control

The Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) is about to make a bad privacy situation worse, and it’s urgent that Los Angeles residents contact their city council representatives today to demand they put the brakes on LADOT’s irresponsible data collection. The agency plans to scoop up trip data on every single e-bike and scooter ride taken within the city and, left unchecked, it will do so in the absence of responsible and transparent policies to mitigate the privacy risks to Los Angeles riders.  Tell The City Council To Put The Brakes on LADOT’s Rider Surveillance Program  Location data is among the most sensitive forms of information related to a person’s privacy. Collected over time, people’s movements from place to place reveal a good deal about them: where they work, where they play, where they worship, their political leanings, and even personal and familial relationships. While the U.S. Supreme Court and California’s State Legislature are in agreement on the sensitivity of location data, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation appears to be much less convinced.  EFF and OTI have called on LADOT to start taking the privacy of Los Angeles residents seriously and cease moving forward with its invasive data collection plans until it has real policies in place to protect the data. Make your voice heard, too.  In September, after the streets of Los Angeles were overwhelmed with dockless e-bikes and scooters, the Los Angeles City Council passed an ordinance calling for the creation of a Shared Mobility Device Pilot Program. In part, the ordinance called on LADOT to issue permits and set guidelines aimed at reducing sidewalk interference and regulating vehicle speed.  LADOT’s Mobility Data Specification (MDS), part of which went into effect shortly after the ordinance passed in September, gives the agency the ability to request massive amounts of information about Los Angeles riders and their day-to-day travels. Specifically, the MDS requires dockless mobility permit holders like LimeBike and Bird to provide LADOT access to a provider-side application processing interface (API), allowing the agency to demand granular trip data for dockless bicycle and scooter rides. This trip data includes extremely precise, time-stamped, location data from the beginning to the end of each trip.  The problem? LADOT has not grappled with the serious privacy and civil liberties issues implicated by such a massive data collection campaign. Months later, despite requests from EFF and the Open Technology Institute; and the Center for Democracy and Technology, LADOT still fails to acknowledge the raw trip data it collects through its MDS is personal data pertaining to real movements of real individuals. More importantly, it has failed to set out basic privacy protections for the sensitive location data it collects every time Los Angeles residents take a dockless scooter or e-bike ride through their city.  Now, despite their lack of a clearly articulated plan to protect Los Angeles residents from the potential harms that could result from the exposure of this data, LADOT plans to make a bad situation worse. Beginning on April 15, LADOT will require dockless mobility operators to push trip data for each and every e-bike and scooter ride taken within the City directly to LADOT, and its for-profit partner Remix, through a new agency-side API as well.  In our letter to the Los Angeles City Council, EFF and OTI have called on the Council to put the brakes on these additional data sharing requirements before the April 15 deadline. LADOT should by no means be moving forward with increased data demands when it has yet to address the privacy and civil liberties concerns raised by earlier stages of the MDS.  So far, LADOT has issued only high-level “Data Protection Principles,” which amount to a list of aspirations and buzz words you would want to see in a strong policy: ‘de-identification,’ ‘data minimization,’ ‘aggregation.’ But they provide no meaningful, enforceable restrictions to protect the privacy of Los Angeles residents. These “principles” are a far cry from the transparent, actionable, and enforceable data privacy policies we would expect of any city agency demanding this level of sensitive information about Los Angeles residents.  Furthermore, LADOT’s failure to limit law enforcement access to raw trip data through anything less than a warrant signed by a judge is in seeming opposition to the Supreme Court’s holding in Carpenter v. United States, which held that “the Government must generally obtain a warrant supported by probable cause before acquiring” location records. In its ruling, The Court recognized that time-stamped location data “provides an intimate window into a person’s life, revealing not only his particular movements, but through them his familial, political, professional, religious, and sexual associations.” The Supreme Court’s analysis of the sensitivity of location data was echoed by the California State Legislature when it passed the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA)—explicitly listing geolocation information as personal information and affirming that “any information that can be reasonably linked, directly or indirectly, with a particular consumer should be considered “personal information.”  Part of the problem is LADOT’s failure to acknowledge the sensitive nature of trip information, claiming that the MDS requires “no personally identifiable information about users directly.” (emphasis added). But even with names stripped out, location information is notoriously easy to re-identify—particularly for habitual trips.  To demonstrate the process through which this information could be re-identified, EFF Staff Technologists—in a cursory analysis of publicly available data from New York City’s rideshare program, CitiBike—identified what is likely a single rider regularly leaving home between 7:30 am and 8 am each morning and returning home just after 6 pm each evening. Unlike New York’s public rideshare program, which requires riders to pick-up and return bikes at docking stations dispersed throughout the city, LADOT’s program applies to dockless bikes and scooters, so the location data acquired through Los Angeles’ dockless mobility program is even more unique to each rider. Yet, even with the data available through CitiBike, one need only wait for our rider’s regular routine to begin one morning in order to confirm his identity. This may seem innocuous, but what if our rider was a domestic violence survivor at risk of being stalked by their assaulter? Or, instead of a regular commute to and from work or school, the data showed our rider taking regular trips to attend Jummah prayer at a local mosque or meetings of a local political organization? The potential threat to their safety as well as religious and political freedom makes it easy to see how critical it is that LADOT and the City Council act to protect this sensitive personal information. LADOT’s GitHub Repository and June 2018 press release announcing “A New Digital Playbook for Mobility” make it clear the department has no intention of stopping at dockless e-bikes and scooters. At the same time, LADOT’s General Manager Seleta Reynolds, in her capacity as an official within the National Association of City Transportation Officials, also seems intent on spreading this methodology to other cities across the U.S. The people of Los Angeles and cities across the country deserve safe streets. They also deserve the freedom to move about those streets without undue risks to their privacy and physical well-being through unchecked vehicle surveillance. With the April 15 compliance deadline for the next phase in Los Angeles dockless mobility program quickly approaching, it’s urgent that Los Angeles residents contact their City Council representative today, and demand that they put the brakes on LADOT’s irresponsible data collection. As EFF’s Grassroots Advocacy Organizer, “nash” works directly with community members and organizations to take advantage of the full range of tools provided by access to tech, while engaging in empowering action toward the maintenance of digital privacy and information security. Having witnessed the results of aggressive and militarized policing in the United States, Honduras, and Palestine; and as a target of racial profiling, biased broken windows policing, and police brutality in his own life; nash has worked extensively to help activists and communities mitigate the damage of harmful interaction with law enforcement. nash co-founded the Black Movement Law Project and is a founding member of Just Info, a 24-hour hot-line providing no-cost legal information in New York City. As a member of Mutant Legal, nash organized training’s in Ferguson, New York, and other cities on how to document police conduct, exercise legal rights, counteract state repression and actively participate in one’s legal defense.


activistpost--2019-04-24--FBI Fails Privacy And Accuracy Tests On Its Facial Recognition Tools According To GAO Report While

FBI Fails Privacy And Accuracy Tests On Its Facial Recognition Tools According To GAO Report, While A.I. Police State Advances

The FBI has failed to assuage concerns of the Government Accountability Office (GAO) on its use of facial recognition technology according to a new report.  Numerous issues were raised three years ago after the congressional watchdog urged the FBI to improve its practices in order to meet privacy and accuracy standards expected.  Since 2015, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies have used the Next Generation Identification-Interstate Photo System, which uses facial recognition software to link potential suspects to crimes, pulling from a database of more than 30 million mugshots and other photos, Nextgov reported.  The organization then proposed six changes to be made to the FBI’s practices. All of those concerns have been failed to be addressed according to the report.  One of the recommendations made by auditors to the FBI was to ensure annual tests to guarantee the highest levels of accuracy and effectiveness of its facial recognition technology.  The report slams the FBI for its failure to moderate its use of facial recognition software. This comes as the Bureau increases its use of the technology, currently trialing Amazon’s Facial Rekognition software, which has had its accuracy questioned in the past numerous times.  Save Independent Media for as Little as $1 Per Month  The Government Accountability Office (GAO) further found the FBI is failing to test the accuracy of some of its facial recognition tools developed by third parties such as those programmed by state and federal law enforcement agencies.  This was deemed unnecessary by the FBI as “no users have expressed concerns” with the system, it claimed.  Auditors responded by stating that annual assessments are mandatory under FBI, Justice Department and Office of Management and Budget policy and are not discussable.  I guess the FBI missed the report when the American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California tested Amazon’s facial Rekognition software and the program erroneously and hilariously identified 28 colored members of Congress as people who have been arrested for crimes.  Activist Post previously reported on another test of facial recognition technology in Britain which resulted in 35 false matches and 1 erroneous arrest. So the technology is demonstrated to be far from foolproof.  In 2018 it was reported that the FBI and other law enforcement agencies were using this same Amazon Facial Rekognition technology to sift through surveillance data.  Amazon employees who are against the company selling facial recognition technology to the government have protested the company’s decision.  Over 20 groups of shareholders have sent several letters to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos urging him to stop selling the company’s face recognition software to law enforcement.  One letter was sent in June of last year signed by 20 groups of Amazon shareholders sent to Bezos, urging him to stop selling the company’s face recognition software to law enforcement.  Another letter was just sent in January 2019, organized by Open Mic, a nonprofit organization focused on corporate accountability, and was filed by the Sisters of St. Joseph of Brentwood both letters warned the technology poses “potential civil and human rights risks.”  Numerous civil rights organizations have also co-signed a letter demanding Amazon stop assisting government surveillance; and several members of Congress have expressed concerns about the partnerships.  Several lawmakers have even chimed in to voice concerns about Amazon’s facial recognition software, expressing worry that it could be misused, The Hill reported.  The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) obtained hundreds of pages of documents showing Amazon offering the software to law enforcement agencies across the country.  In a 2018 report,  the ACLU called Amazon’s facial recognition project a “threat to civil liberties.”  Amazon responded by essentially shrugging off the employees’ and shareholder concerns by the head of the company’s public sector cloud computing business, stating that the team is “unwaveringly” committed to the U.S. government.  “We are unwaveringly in support of our law enforcement, defense and intelligence community,”  Teresa Carlson, vice president of the worldwide public sector for Amazon Web Services, said July 20th at the Aspen Security Forum in Colorado, FedScoop reported.  Amazon has since released an update claiming to fix all of the problems with lighting that caused inaccuracy to its systems according to the company.  Meanwhile, facial recognition technology is being pushed as a new means for an A.I. police state without human involvement — a frightening thought to say the least. Defense One reports that “AI-Enabled Cameras That Detect Crime Before it Occurs Will Soon Invade the Physical World” are in the works and on display at ISC West, a recent security technology conference in Las Vegas.  Activist Post has previously reported in its own way that the rise of facial recognition technology is inevitable and, as a result, the death of one’s privacy is sure to come with it.  This writer has focused on facial recognition technology. From Amazon helping law enforcement with its Facial Rekogntion software, DHS wanting to use it for border control, to the Olympics wanting to use the tech for security.  Even retail is pushing for the technology as an anti-theft mechanism to be introduced in a number of stores using biometric facial recognition software FaceFirst to build a database of shoplifters, as Activist Post reported.


activistpost--2019-04-24--Police State Madness Cops In DUI Vans Drawing Motorists Blood

Police State Madness: Cops In DUI Vans Drawing Motorists’ Blood

Halloween is less than six months away but that has not stopped law enforcement from taking people’s blood. In fact, police officers want our blood so bad that they are purchasing blood draw vans … sorry, I meant DUI vans like the one pictured above.  Last year, I wrote an article about police officers forcing hospitals to draw a drunk or drugged suspect’s blood. But what I could never have imagined is that within a year, police officers would be physically drawing motorists’ blood.  Save Independent Media for as Little as $1 Per Month  A recent article in Pew Charitable Trusts revealed that police DUI vans in Arizona and California are drawing people’s blood.  What makes this story so disturbing is that typically a person must be a certified phlebotomist or healthcare professional who is trained to draw blood from a patient in a safe and sanitary manner. But as you can imagine that is not what is happening.  I will eat my hat if law enforcement claims their vans and police departments are sanitary. Alleging that police officers should be treated like healthcare professionals and be allowed to physically draw blood from a person is obscene.  As the article reveals, the real reason why police officers want our blood is to “save money because they don’t need to pay phlebotomists and hospitals for blood draws.”  I cannot possibly discuss all the different things that could go wrong with police officers drawing blood, so I will only focus on two.  When a police officer calls a DUI blood van to forcibly draw a person’s blood based on a hunch that they might be on drugs or drunk, we no longer have a Bill of Rights to protect us.  As attorney John Whitehead said, forced blood draws make a mockery of the Fourth Amendment. The act of merely driving on state-owned roads should not mean that we give up our rights.  In Massachusetts, judges are starting to question so-called Drug Recognition Expert police officers who claim to have special senses that can detect if a person is impaired.  What sort of country refers to forcibly taking Americans blood as a “game-changer?”  The International Association of Police Chiefs, which is the mouthpiece of law enforcement, cannot wait for vampire cops to draw motorists’ blood.  When law enforcement has judges on-call to issue e-warrants within minutes, it is like having a fellow cop on-call authorizing the shredding of our rights.  Attorney Ramsell is correct; having judge’s on-call to OK e-warrants without second guessing a police officer’s hunch will have major civil rights implications. If the public meekly accepts this invasive and horrific practice of allowing police to conduct forced blood draws, then forced DNA swabs cannot be far behind. As a teenager, I watched hundreds of horror movies but I never once had nightmares that police would FORCIBLY take blood from Americans! But times have changed and it won’t be long before Hollywood makes a law enforcement reality blood draw TV show. Here are a few names for their new show. Instead of calling it Hawaii Five-O why not call it Hawaii Type O or call the The First 48, The First Blood Draws. Last but not least, why not rename Blue Bloods the Blood Suckers? As I said before, allowing police officers to conduct their own blood draws is a monumentally bad idea that will have major civil rights implications for everyone. You can read more at the MassPrivateI blog, where this article first appeared. Provide, protect and profit from what is coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2019-04-30--Cities Are Tracking Everyones Cell Phone Signal

Cities Are Tracking Everyone’s Cell Phone Signal

If ever you needed a reason to turn off your cell phone, then maybe this story this will convince you.  The Palm Beach Post recently revealed how the City of Palm Beach, Florida wants to track everyone’s cellphones:  The idea is to analyze where downtown visitors go — what shops, what public places, and at what time — and how they get there. The city could use it to study traffic flow and gauge the impact of changes it makes to the streetscape, while merchants could use the data to strategize to improve business.  Big Brother and businesses are frothing at their mouths in anticipation of tracking everyone.  According to Jason Hallstrom, professor in FAU’s Department of Computer and Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, “the research is possible because 80 percent of the U.S. population owns network-connected smartphones, whose signal can be tracked with precision.”  Leaving your cell phone on all the time, allows corporations and Big Brother to know your exactly who and where you are.  “Whether you use the device or not, it is constantly chattering,” sending out a “hello beacon which says, ‘I would like to connect to a network.’ Within that message is a unique code, etched in the silicon. It is constantly being broadcast as you walk around with that device,” Hallstrom said.  A recent Bloomberg investigation revealed that retailers are using location analytics hidden in apps to determine where you are and where you sleep.  A NY Times article titled “Your Apps Know Where You Were Last Night, and They’re Not Keeping It Secret,” revealed that tracking our cell phones is a $21 billion dollar industry.  Palm Beach law enforcement has also been secretly using Stingray devices to intercept everyone’s phone calls and text messages for years. So it really should not surprise anyone to find out that cities want to do the same.  What is surprising, though, is finding out that the Knight Foundation is giving Palm Beach $300,000 to track everyone.  The Knight Foundation, which claims to “believe in freedom of expression and in the values expressed in the First Amendment,” apparently does not think that tracking everyone’s cell phones is un-American.  But tracking everyone’s cell phone signal, apparently fits right into the Knight Foundation’s goal of “capitalizing on communities.”  Unfortunately, spying on everyone’s cell phone signal is not limited to Florida.  Cities like Loveland, Colorado, Seattle, Washington and Mesa, Arizona have been tracking people’s cellphones for years. Two years ago, Miami’s Department of Public Works considered purchasing WiFi readers and surveillance cameras to capture speeders.  Big Brother’s appetite for spying on everyone is now focused on our children.  The Martin County Sheriff’s office has a course designed to encourage parents to spy on their kid’s social media.  “We are here tonight to find out what your children are doing online,” said Corporal Brian Broughton with the Martin County Sheriff’s Office. An article in the South Florida Sun Sentinel reveals, that Palm Beach law enforcement has been secretly using GeoFeedia to spy on kid’s social media accounts for years. How do we know that law enforcement lies about spying on our cell phones and social media accounts? Because law enforcement has turned obfuscation into an art form, as attorney Stephanie Lacambra of the EFF Foundation explained. “There’s nothing that prevents law enforcement from lying,” she said. “They are protected, they can lie to your face and most people don’t know or expect that.” This story shows that cities and law enforcement are no longer hiding their desire to spy on everyone … and that is frightening. You can read more at the MassPrivateI blog, where this article first appeared.


activistpost--2019-07-24--New Arkansas Law Ends Civil Asset Forfeiture

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (July 24, 2019) – Today, a bill that reforms Arkansas’ asset forfeiture laws to prohibit the state from taking a person’s property without a criminal conviction in most situations went into effect. Arkansas has already taken a step to shut a loophole that would allow state and local police to circumvent the more stringent state asset forfeiture process by passing cases off to the feds.  Sen Bart Hester (R-Cave Springs) sponsored Senate Bill 308 (SB308). The new law specifically ends civil asset forfeiture in most Arkansas cases and replaces it with a criminal procedure. Under the law, prosecutors cannot proceed with forfeiture without a criminal conviction in all but a handful of cases.  The Institute for Justice gave Arkansas former forfeiture laws a D- grade, calling them “awful.”  The House passed SB308 by a 93-0 vote. The Senate approved the measure 35-0. With Gov. Asa Hutchinson’s signature in March, the new law went into effect July 24.  While some people believe the Supreme Court “ended asset forfeiture,” the recent opinion in Timbs v. Indiana ended nothing. Without further action, civil asset forfeiture remains. Additionally, as law professor Ilya Somin noted, the Court left an important issue unresolved. What exactly counts as an “excessive” in the civil forfeiture context?  Going forward, opponents of civil asset forfeiture could wait and see how lower federal courts will address this “over the next few years,” or they can do what a number of states have already taken steps to do, end the practice on a state level, and opt out of the federal equitable sharing program as well.  While the current asset forfeiture process in Arkansas desperately needed reforming, the state had already taken a step toward withdrawing from a federal program that allows state and local police to circumvent the state process. This is key now that SB308 has become law. And it’s particularly important in light of a policy directive issued in July 2017 by then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions for the Department of Justice (DOJ).  A federal program known as “Equitable Sharing” allows prosecutors to bypass more stringent state asset forfeiture laws by passing cases off to the federal government through a process known as adoption. The DOJ directive reiterates full support for the equitable sharing program, directs federal law enforcement agencies to aggressively utilize it, and sets the stage to expand it in the future.  Law enforcement agencies can circumvent more strict state forfeiture laws by claiming cases are federal in nature. Under these arrangements, state officials simply hand cases over to a federal agency, participate in the case, and then receive up to 80 percent of the proceeds. However, when states merely withdraw from participation, the federal directive loses its impact.  Until recently, California faced this situation. The state has some of the strongest state-level restrictions on civil asset forfeiture in the country, but state and local police were circumventing the state process by passing cases to the feds. According to a report by the Institute for Justice, Policing for Profit, California ranked as the worst offender of all states in the country between 2000 and 2013. In other words, California law enforcement was passing off a lot of cases to the feds and collecting the loot. The state closed the loophole in 2016.  Arkansas law prohibits the transfer of property to the feds without judicial approval.  (1) No state or local law enforcement agency may transfer any property seized by the state or local agency to any federal entity for forfeiture under federal law unless the circuit court having jurisdiction over the property enters an order, upon petition by the prosecuting attorney, authorizing the property to be transferred to the federal entity. (2) The transfer shall not be approved unless it reasonably appears that the activity giving rise to the investigation or seizure involves more than one (1) state or the nature of the investigation or seizure would be better pursued under federal law.  As the Tenth Amendment Center previously reported the federal government inserted itself into the asset forfeiture debate in California. The feds clearly want the policy to continue.  We can only guess. But perhaps the feds recognize paying state and local police agencies directly in cash for handling their enforcement would reveal their weakness. After all, the federal government would find it nearly impossible to prosecute its unconstitutional “War on Drugs” without state and local assistance. Asset forfeiture “equitable sharing” provides a pipeline the feds use to incentivize state and local police to serve as de facto arms of the federal government by funneling billions of dollars into their budgets.


activistpost--2019-07-26--Military Will Use Facial Recognition Goggles to Help Soldiers Identify People Through Weapons System

Military Will Use Facial Recognition Goggles to Help Soldiers Identify People Through Weapons Systems

Public resistance in the United States has finally begun to mount against the use of facial recognition systems due to privacy issues as well as documented inaccuracies. Even police departments have begun to dump the use of biometrics, particularly in the area of pre-crime algorithms that also have demonstrated the failures of artificial intelligence to be accurate enough for use in law enforcement.  Also Read: Amazon Facial Rekognition Software Trial In Orlando Canceled After 15 Months  Nevertheless, the military is firmly embracing both uses as the Army aims to roll out facial recognition goggles that would enable soldiers to “see through the eyes” of any weapons system and highlight people for further investigation … and presumably to be targeted for elimination.  “Very soon” U.S. soldiers could be able to identify enemies, suspects, or any persons of interest they’re seeking just by looking through the goggles on their head. U.S. Army officials are testing a new headset that will—potentially—allow soldiers looking through them to recognize the faces of individuals in a crowd, and much more, including translate foreign language street signs into English, see through the eyes of nearby flying bug drones, and train anywhere in a semi-virtual environment, all through the same lens. “We’re going to demonstrate very, very soon, the ability, on body — if there are persons of interest that you want to look for and you’re walking around, it will identify those very quickly,” said Col. Chris Schneider, project manager for IVAS, at a U.S. Army Futures Command demonstration in Virginia.  This plan would seem to take the military one step closer toward their long-held vision to build a full-scale matrix of (smart) war that has been labeled the Internet of Battlefield Things (IoBT).  This latest development appears to be an extension of a project called MUSIC that I covered back in 2011. It was part of Future Combat Systems to integrate unmanned and manned aircraft across all branches of military, and would include a variety of autonomous systems, including drone swarms.  Once the pieces on the battlefield are interconnected, the next logical step is to integrate the soldier into the information feed.  This was clearly laid out in a 2017 Army solicitation that defined its goals:  Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!      - Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom The ability of the Army to understand, predict, adapt, and exploit the vast array of internetworked things that will be present of the future battlefield is critical to maintaining and increasing its competitive advantage. The explosive growth of technologies in the commercial sector that exploits the convergence of cloud computing, ubiquitous mobile communications, networks of data-gathering sensors, and artificial intelligence presents an imposing challenge for the Army. These Internet of Things (IoT) technologies will give our enemies ever increasing capabilities that must be countered, but commercial developments do not address the unique challenges that the Army will face in using them.  The Internet of Battlefield Things would look something like this:  All of the concerns already expressed about facial recognition systems and the use of biometrics as predictive tools down here at the civilian level will be amplified once they are fully integrated into warfare, and the consequences could be far more grave than a mistaken arrest.  Soldiers literally will be going in functionally blind as the Army admits in details about the first step of the program that will be enhanced night vision goggles:


activistpost--2019-10-01--Octopus PROMIS The Conspiracy Against INSLAW Software And The Murders To Cover Up A Scandal Bigger

Octopus PROMIS: The Conspiracy Against INSLAW Software, And The Murders To Cover Up A Scandal Bigger Than Watergate

This article has been months in the making working with several sources to tell the tales buried in history of “The Octopus” — the INSLAW PROMIS software scandal and those killed in the wake of its tentacles. For the first time ever, new details will be revealed on the decade-old murders of two journalists: a CIA intelligence operative, an NSA whistleblower; and the imprisonment of another CIA whistleblower, in this series aptly titled: “Octopus PROMIS.”  This series will explore the theft of a sophisticated computer software, assassinations, cover-ups involving the DOJ and CIA and compartmentalized commercialized treason against the American people by the hidden underbelly dark world of intelligence. A conglomerate cabal accountable to absolutely no one, known today as the Deep State formed “within the highest councils of government” as Senator Daniel Inyoue said, during the hearings on the infamously known scandal Iran-Contra.  PROMIS is said to be the forerunner to the NSA’s PRISM software that was disclosed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. PROMIS has also been forked into various different softwares over the years used for a myriad of applicable uses within government, which this writer will discuss later.  PROMIS stands for Prosecutor’s Management Information System and was software first used by the U.S. Department of Justice, and later numerous intelligence agencies domestic and foreign. The software was stolen from Bill and Nancy Hamilton of INSLAW corporation, and then bugged by Earl Brian (who was at the time one of President Ronald Reagan and Vice President George H.W. Bush’s envoys to Iran,) and Rafi Eitan, whom was director of Israeli intelligence agency LAKEM. PROMIS was then distributed to allies and enemies alike backdoored with Signal Intelligence (SIGNIT) surveillance technology accessible to U.S. and Israeli intelligence services remotely through encrypted telecommunication signals, according to sources.  This was done primarily through Brian’s company Hadron, and Systematics Inc run by Jackson Stephens, as well as by Mossad-linked super spy media mogul Robert Maxwell who was also said to have been involved with the Russians then-Soviets, at the time. Besides Hadron and Systematics Inc, there were others involved in the theft and sale of the software including the following individuals — Adnan Khashoggi, Richard Armitage, and Manucher Ghorbanifar to name a few, according to a letter sent to then United States Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division William F. Weld discussing conspiracy to sell PROMIS to Sheik Klahid Bin Malfouz as a “gift.”  The letter doesn’t only show that the DOJ was involved in the plot against INSLAW as early as May 1st 1985, more specifically it shows conspiracy with CIA-linked persons of interest that were all involved with the famous Iran-Contra debacle.  In 1999, British BBC journalist and author, Gordon Thomas, published an authorized history of the Israeli Mossad entitled Gideon’s Spies: The Secret History of the Mossad in which he included very detailed admissions by Rafi Eitan about his initial meeting with Earl Brian in Iran in the 1970s.  Earl Brian disclosed his determination to find a way to profit personally from the sale of INSLAW, Inc.’s PROMIS software; Brian’s subsequent success was in getting the Reagan Administration to give copies of PROMIS to Rafi Eitan. Eitan then recruited British publisher Robert Maxwell to sell copies of PROMIS equipped with a Signal Intelligence (SIGINT) “back-door” to the intelligence and law enforcement agencies of friendly and adversarial governments worldwide. This was so that Israel and the NSA could steal other countries’ intelligence secrets. Maxwell succeeded in the sale of more than half a billion dollars of unauthorized, copyright-infringing versions of PROMIS, while the amount of sold copies by Khashoggi, Armitage, Ghorbanifar, Eitan and likely others are unknown.  Gordon Thomas interviewed Rafi Eitan because he had served as the Mossad’s Deputy Director for Covert Operations for almost a quarter of a century. Eitan would become the Director of LAKEM Scientific and Technical Intelligence Agency in the Israeli Ministry of Defense early during the first term of the Reagan Administration around the same time that Eitan had obtained PROMIS software, then recruited Robert Maxwell, and began selling the software to make his profit.  INSLAW Counsel Elliot Richardson passed away on the last day of 1999. In 2000, INSLAW obtained two sworn statements, (which are included in the documents provided) from Gordon Thomas on the circumstances and content of Rafi Eitan’s disclosures regarding Earl Brian and PROMIS. INSLAW also prepared a lengthy memorandum (approximately 45 pages) of evidence the company had pieced together over the years which appeared to corroborate significant elements of Rafi Eitan’s PROMIS admissions to Gordon Thomas. (DOCUMENTS)  Further, according to testimony of former Mossad agent Ari Ben-Menashe, Brian provided a copy of PROMIS to Israel’s military intelligence through Rafi Eitan, who used the alias Joseph Ben-Orr. Israel then contacted an Israeli American programmer, Michael Riconosciuto, who modified the software at Cabazon Indian Reservation near Indio, California. CIA and Israeli intelligence operatives then proceeded to sell the stolen copies and work together to build a more sophisticated version of Main Core, which this author will discuss in a future article in more detail, but will briefly touch on the subject in the third section of this story.  Brian first attempted to buy out INSLAW and PROMIS and then use the company to sell the bugged version of the software. However, his venture was unsuccesful and blocked, so he then turned to Attorney General at the time Edwin Meese whose Justice Department refused to make payments to INSLAW, despite stipulation under a $9.9 million contract with the government for the company to install PROMIS as the Justice Department’s case management software in 94 U.S. attorneys’ offices. In other words, using the software entirely for free, which INSLAW and the Hamiltons have claimed for decades was theft from the company.  Meese’s role in that decision may have been influenced by his own personal friendship with Brian, and the fact that his wife was a major investor in Brian’s businesses. Ironically, the first refused payment to INSLAW was one month after the Hamiltons refused to sell the company to Meese’s friend Brian. Meese, like Brian, was allegedly connected to affairs such as Iran-Contra and Reagan’s October Surprise.  The DOJ stopped paying the Hamiltons in 1983, claiming they weren’t fulfilling their obligations on the contract, and eventually INSLAW went bankrupt and sued the Justice Department. A key fact that most miss is that the person assigned by the Department to manage the contract, C. Madison Brewer, had previously been fired by INSLAW for unknown reasons. Just one month after the contract was signed, Brewer (a disgruntled employee) recommended that the DOJ terminate the agreement even though INSLAW was performing its duties without a single failed delivery.  As a result, INSLAW hired former Attorney General Elliot Richardson as their attorney. Richardson filed a civil suit claiming that the company had been the victim of a conspiracy by the Justice Department.  In 1987 a federal judge, George F. Bason Jr, for the bankruptcy court ordered the government to pay INSLAW $6.8 million; the order was later overturned on a technicality. The court also found that the DOJ run by Meese “took, converted, stole” the software through “trickery, fraud and deceit.”  The DOJ withheld documents on the INSLAW affair from Congress, then appointed Nicholas John Bua as Special Counsel to address the matter with an independent investigation.  Meese wasn’t the only corrupt DOJ head according to Rodney Stich in Defrauding America, “by misusing the power of their office…three U.S. attorney generals in the Reagan-Bush administrations, Edwin Meese, Richard Thornburgh, and Vice President George H.W. Bush’s man William Barr, misappropriated, or aided and abetted, the theft of the software called PROMIS.”  However, Stich missed mentioning an official of the DOJ William F. Weld whom the letter above implicates in the conspiracy to steal and resell PROMIS software.  The scandal became too noisy after several Congressional investigations concluded wrongdoing by the Justice Department and called for the appointment of a special prosecutor, who ended up being former CIA operative and current Attorney General under President Donald Trump, William Barr.  Barr previously served under the Bush administration as Assistant Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, and Attorney General.  “I started off in Washington at the Central Intelligence Agency and went to law school at night while I was working at CIA,” William Barr said during an oral history event in 2001.  As a former AG, Barr got to work helping aid the cover-up of INSLAW, just as he did for the CIA protecting the agency from Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI) and BNL investigations, the Church Committee as a part of the CIA’s Office of Legislative Council (OLC) from 1973 to 1977, and ongoing scandals today walking through a revolving door.  After INSLAW owner Bill Hamilton distributed a report on the INSLAW scandal to each member of the House Judiciary Committee dismissing Bua’s report, Congressmen Jack Brooks (D-TX) and Charlie Rose (D-NC) tried to enact a bill that would force an investigation of the Justice Department and the death of journalist Danny Casolaro, as well as pay reparations to the owners of INSLAW. Among the allegations of criminal statutes the bill and Committee accused the DOJ of included:  The bill, H.R. 4862 was introduced in the House on July 29, 1994, but died without any action by the Democratic leadership in the waning days of the 103rd Congress.  There is also the fact that one week after giving an affidavit to INSLAW regarding the PROMIS software in 1991, CIA spook Riconosciuto was arrested on trumped-up drug charges that he had built a meth lab. The Assistant U.S. Attorney prosecuting the case attempted to cover up Riconosciuto’s intelligence background by claiming to the jury the CIA agent and programmer was “delusional.” (More on Riconosciuto and his importance later.)  Riconosciuto had been introduced to Hamilton by Jeff Steinberg, a longtime top aide in the Lyndon LaRouche organization in May of 1980. Riconosciuto stated that he was involved with the October Surprise, asserting “that he and Earl Brian had traveled to Iran in 1980 and had paid $40 million to Iranian officials to persuade them not to let the hostages go before the presidential election.”  After the two met, Riconosciuto was later introduced to Casolaro who began his investigation into the Octopus in the 1990s. Casolaro dubbed Riconosciuto “Danger Man” for many reasons that will be made apparent in this series, if the former CIA agent being still locked up in an unknown prison for whistleblowing various truths isn’t evidence enough.  In 1992, one year later the U.S. Supreme Court denied an application made by INSLAW, to hear its case. The application had been filed the previous year (see October 9, 1991), as INSLAW sought to overturn an adverse ruling by an appeals court in its dispute with the Justice Department.  In 1998, a U.S. Federal Court ruled that INSLAW owned the copyright to PROMIS software, and that if the U.S. Government had used PROMIS illegally, then royalties should be paid to the company. However, that effort has been consistently stalled and INSLAW has never received a single penny in royalties.  As the story goes from a source, three years later in March 2001, then CIA Director George Tenet was arranged to read two affidavits together with INSLAW’s summary of the corroborative evidence (provided in the document dump) that had been obtained. After reading the documentation, Tenet made a phone call to a mutual friend of Hamiltons and said in that conversation that if the information was accurate, what the government had done to the Hamilton family “was unconscionable” and the “INSLAW case needed to be settled.”  Tenet further stated that he did not understand why Attorney General John Ashcroft was failing to settle the INSLAW case but that he was prepared, if necessary, to settle the CIA’s part of the case. Tenet also allegedly added that he had ordered the CIA General Counsel to report to him by Wednesday the following week on the matter of the CIA’s legal liability to INSLAW for payment of compensatory damages.  One week later, however, CIA Director Tenet again called that same friend to inform that the CIA General Counsel had advised him not to become involved in the INSLAW Affair. This may be because, we now know, that a memo shows that the Agency was offered a government copy of PROMIS as early as 1981, thanks to a FOIA request by Michael Best who wrote:  Not long thereafter during the same spring of 2001, Bill Hamilton contacted retired four-star Admiral Daniel Murphy for the first time since 1991, when they had first met through Elliot Richardson former Secretary of Defense under President Nixon. Murphy had served under Richardson as his Military Adviser so he was considered trusted and loyal by INSLAW’s lawyer.  Murphy later served as Deputy Director of the CIA during the Ford Administration; as Under-Secretary of Defense for Intelligence during the Carter Administration; and as Chief of Staff to Vice President Bush during the first term of the Reagan Administration (when the Reagan Administration’s misappropriation of PROMIS for intelligence projects began).  After hearing Hamilton’s account of the abrupt turn around by CIA Director Tenet regarding his willingness to settle the CIA’s part of the INSLAW Affair, and reading the two sworn statements of Gordon Thomas along with the INSLAW memorandum summarizing evidence corroborative of significant elements of Rafi Eitan’s PROMIS-related admissions, Admiral Murphy vowed to help INSLAW.  According to sources, in August 2001 Murphy introduced Hamilton to former FBI Director and former CIA Director William Webster believing the man could help. The three then met for three hours discussing the INSLAW case. Three days later, Webster phoned Murphy declining to take on INSLAW as a client because he stated “that he was not confident that the George W. Bush would be willing to settle the INSLAW case.”  In 2001, the FBI arrested an FBI Agent, Robert Hanssen, who was accused for almost two decades of spying for the Soviet Union and, after its fall, later for Russia, NY Times reported.  However, in June 2001, the Washington Times published a front-page article reporting that sources familiar with the government’s then-ongoing security debriefing of Robert Hanssen had leaked to the Washington Times the fact that Hanssen, a computer software-savy FBI agent, had sold the Soviet KGB copies of various versions of INSLAW’s PROMIS software that the U.S. Government had misappropriated for intelligence applications, including the FBI’s PROMIS-derivative FOIMS investigative case management system and database systems used by other U.S. intelligence and defense entities.  Soon after the FBI’s arrest of Robert Hanssen, Attorney General John Ashcroft appointed none other than William Webster to conduct a security review of the FBI on the account of Hanssen’s two decades of espionage against the United States.  In September 2001 Admiral Murphy met with C. Boyden Gray, who agreed to represent INSLAW in seeking a settlement. When Murphy was Chief of Staff to Vice President Bush, he hired Gray as the Vice President’s legal counsel and after serving as legal counsel to Vice President Bush for the two terms of the Reagan Administration, Gray became White House Counsel under President George H.W. Bush.  In a separate telephone conversation with Hamilton at the approximate time as the meeting with Gray, Admiral Murphy told Hamilton he had been thinking about what was told to him months earlier regarding the reactions of CIA Director George Tenet in March 2001. Admiral Murphy replied that he had a “hunch” that there was “another PROMIS application INSLAW had not yet discovered, and that the additional PROMIS application involves something so seriously wrong that money alone cannot cure the problem.” Murphy added that the government might never compensate INSLAW unless and until the Company “discovered that additional use of PROMIS.”  Murphy then stated that he was confident that Hamilton would figure out the additional PROMIS use and volunteered to serve as INSLAW’s “intelligence guru,” as well as attend Gray’s meetings with government officials to “keep them honest.” Murphy further told Hamilton what he expected to say to Attorney General Ashcroft when he and Gray met with Ashcroft; “John, let’s cut the crap. This case needs to be settled and here is how to settle it.”  Unfortunately, in late September 2001, Admiral Murphy died unexpectedly. Then the George W. Bush Administration stonewalled INSLAW Counsel Gray for the next two years, the same way previous Republican and Democratic administrations blocked INSLAW Counsel Elliot Richardson prior.  PROMIS was forked into many reported use cases for the U.S. government, including an intelligence application onboard nuclear submarines of the United States and Great Britain, and the use by both the U.S. Government and certain Allied Governments for inventory tracking of nuclear materials and long-range ballistic missiles. But the most bizarre and frightening use was to keep track of dissident Americans under Main Core.  The Main Core database isn’t just a rumor or conspiracy theory, PROMIS software was used by Iran-Contra fall guy then-National Security Council, Lt. Col. Oliver North to create the dissidents list for Rex-84 that would later evolve to Main Core. North used PROMIS software in 1982 in the Department of Justice, and at the White House, to compile a list of American dissidents to invoke if the government ever needed to do so under Ronald Reagan’s Continuity of Government (COG) program as a liaison to FEMA.  In 1993, Wired described North’s use of PROMIS in compiling the Main Core database:  This Main Core database of individuals was given to a handful of individuals, meaning most government officials had no knowledge of the program ever existing. The database was passed off from administration to administration through National Security channels, according to sources.  Enter in the picture former CIA spook, imprisoned whistleblower and INSLAW witness Michael Riconosciuto. Riconosciuto warned about Main Core’s database and the dissident round-up program, he also stated that he was the programmer who backdoored INSLAW PROMIS software. Riconosciuto specifically testified that PROMIS “was stolen as a favor to software-company executive Earl Brian, a friend of Meese’s, for Brian’s help in persuading the Iranian government to hold on to the embassy hostages until the 1980 election was over.”  This means that in the 1990s, Riconosciuto described exactly what intelligence officials would discuss years later in Salon and Radar.  Riconosciuto also whistle-blew regarding the development of alleged ethnic bioweapons by Wackenhut and the Bio-Rad corporation, the Lockerbie incident and Wackenhut’s ties to the CIA, which is now G4S security. Riconosciuto additionally spoke about drug smuggling across various parts of the U.S., according to the book The Last Circle by Cheri Seymour, written at the behest of Congress to understand what had been uncovered by Casolaro which he deemed “The Octopus.”  Somewhere along the line this all became a tongue-in-cheek paranoid joke, and a conspiracy theory instead of a known fearful fact. Within high-reaching intelligence circles it’s one of the most well-kept secrets that the U.S. maintains a list of “marked” individuals considered dissidents to round up and bring to camp FEMA in case of “Martial Law” or a deemed “emergency” event, which isn’t clearly defined.  In 2008, Salon ran an article shedding some light, detailing Main Core software and its evolution. Investigative journalist Tim Shorrock reported the alleged disturbing domestic surveillance activities following 9/11 used by the Bush administration to spy on Americans. Which is ironic as the original non-forked backdoored PROMIS software was used to spy on American and foreign communications prior to 9/11 with Signal Intelligence (SIGINT) technologies implanted by the Israelis and another separate software iteration by the CIA.  Shorrock cited “several former U.S. government officials with extensive knowledge of intelligence operations,” who stated “a vast amount of personal data on Americans, including NSA intercepts of bank and credit card transactions and the results of surveillance efforts by the FBI, the CIA and other agencies” was included in the new and improved code of Main Core software.  Although, PROMIS is one key to 9/11, a subject too vast for full analysis in this piece. PROMIS software and Michael Riconosciuto’s own ties to 9/11 will be included in a future article by this author. This article serves as background introducing the reader to the PROMIS INSLAW affair and its many characters and twists and turns which all roads seem to lead back to the DOJ, NSA and CIA.  Another government official with a high-ranking security clearance spoke to the tabloid Radar the same year, corroborating Riconosciuto and other officials’ claims that Main Core is:  This database had as much as 8 million American names in it, according to Journalist Christ Ketcham who reported the massive number of U.S. citizens “marked” in 2008. The number of names now in Main Core’s database according to a former intelligence source is believed to be in the “high double digit millions, heading for the triple digits millions” spanning across the political spectrum.  The other use of Main Core’s system since its creation under Reagan is using its detailed access into anyone’s life for political blackmail of members of Congress and other influential people, according to a source.  Through extensive research and the aid of several sources, this author was able to track down the evolution of Main Core which will be expanded on in a later article. Main Core after Ronald Reagan was developed further at a base in North Carolina where sophisticated artificial intelligence was inserted in the code, and later advances at a Guatemalan military base with help of the Israelis. We will also discuss the Main Core feeder systems and suspected agencies that are involved with the database.  This writer has spoken to several sources over the course of months. Ted L. Gunderson, one of this reporter’s only sources who will be made public for this article since he is now dead, first told this author about INSLAW PROMIS software almost a decade ago. Ted was a close friend of Riconosciuto and Casolaro, and may have been mutual friends with Ian Spiro, who was also a friend of the “CIA wiz kid.”  Danny Casolaro kept a transcript of a May 1991 meeting attended by Alan Boyak, a lawyer and former CIA operative, Ted L. Gunderson former LA and Dallas head of the FBI, and former CIA, Michael Riconosciuto. Boyak was representing Riconosciuto and Ted was one of the investigators involved with looking into the case to exonerate his friend.  Many remain unaware but Riconoscuito and Gunderson were very connected to intelligence and helped broker a deal for Ronald Reagan and CIA dir. Bill Casey by assisting in setting up the Mujaheddin with unassembled Chinese 107 MM rocket systems at a meeting with Tim Osman (Osama Bin Laden) and Ralph Olberg, in 1986. This was done by Riconoscuito using his contacts in the Chinese industrial and military group Norinco.  These systems could then be reconfigured into portable anti-aircraft guided missile systems, and produced in Pakistan at a facility called the Pakistan Ordnance Works to fire at the Soviets in Afghanistan (Pakistani ISI).  So when Danny Casolaro was put into contact with former CIA spook Riconosciuto, former FBI LA and Dallas head Ted L. Gunderson, NSA Army whistleblower Alan Standorf and possibly even Alan Boyak, it was a significant catalyst. Although, there may have been more people involved in helping Casolaro expose the criminal aspects of “The Octopus,” these were the names that multiple sources all corroborated, with the addition of Ian Spiro, a businessman who got “caught up with the wrong crowd” and a friend of Riconosciuto who held documents for him.  For each of their own reasons, both Spiro and Casolaro tried to tell the tale of PROMIS and the then Octopus (deep state) that used Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCI). Information flowed to Casolaro from former CIA whistleblower Michael Riconosciuto, former FBI senior agent Ted L. Gunderson and NSA whistleblower Alan Standorf, as well as their own sources. Spiro was directly involved in various operations under Eitan. Both men were met with fatal ends due to their pursuits: Spiro for his selfishness and later attempts to protect himself and his family — Casolaro for his drive to muckrake the truth, no matter what the cost.  According to a source, Rafi Eitan may have been responsible for the death of Casolaro and the deaths of Spiro’s family hiring a hitman Joseph Cueller who will be discussed later in this article. Eitan at the time had stated a threat to a friend of Casolaro stating that Danny should “mind his own business.” This was prior to Casolaro slitting his wrist an estimated 12 times; the cuts on the right wrist extended to the tendons, and the cuts on the left hit tendons. Danny was found dead in his bathtub a bloody mess in Sheraton Hotel in Martinsburg, West Virginia. The exact scene seen by investigators mirrored the death of another reporter in Guatemala, Anson NG Yonc, who was also found dead in his bathtub; the only thing different was one was dead from a single gunshot, the other was dead from slit wrists, the Associated Press reported.  Danny had come to Martinsburg two days earlier to meet new sources including William Turner, a former employee of Hughes Aircraft; he also met another source behind the IRS building, who was an unidentified U.S. Army Special Forces covert intelligence officer, presumably Joseph Cueller, according to a source knowledgeable about Casolaro’s final investigation. These sources Casolaro believed would contribute to his year-long investigation into “The Octopus” and, in his words, the evidence that would “bury the Justice Department.”  In Casolaro’s view this massive conspiracy encompassed the alleged theft of PROMIS by Justice Department officials; an effort by a former CIA operative (Riconosciuto) to use a California Indian reservation as a front for supplying weapons to the Nicaraguan Contras (Iran-Contra, Operation Pseudo Miranda); the shady connections between the Wackenhut Corporation and the CIA; the prolific BCCI scandal, S&L debacle; Pan Am 103 and the October Surprise.  This may explain in part why he went to the IRS building prior to his death to attempt to follow the missing or additional money with an audit trail. However, unbeknownst to Danny, that last meeting may have been a set up on the intrepid reporter’s life, as this article illustrates.  “Dan dealt in this nebulous, shadowy world,” Dick O’Connell, a friend of Casolaro’s and publisher of Washington Crime News Services said.  “He was saying ‘they’ took that INSLAW software and sold it overseas and took the profits from that and turned it into arms for the Contras,” O’Connell told the Associated Press. “That’s what he was working on and he told me he thought BCCI was the conduit for all of these money transactions.”  At about 5:30 p.m. the night before his death Casolaro happened to meet a man named Mike Looney who rented the room next to Casolaro’s Room 517. They chatted on two occasions — first at about 5:30 p.m. and then again at about 8:00 p.m. Looney later explained, “[Casolaro] said he was there to meet an important source who was going to give him what he needed to solve the case.”  According to Looney, Casolaro claimed that his source was scheduled to arrive by 9:00 p.m., “But as the appointed hour came and went Casolaro became embarrassed.” Casolaro left Looney, explaining that he had to make a telephone call. He returned a few minutes later and admitted that his source might have “blown him off.” Casolaro and Looney talked until about 9:30 p.m according to sources who are familiar with the story.  At around 10.00 p.m., Casolaro was last seen purchasing a coffee at a nearby convenience store. That was the last time anyone reported seeing Danny Casolaro alive according to the case documents.  Following the death of Casolaro, INSLAW Attorney Elliot Richardson called for an investigation. “It’s hard to come up with any reason for his death, other than he was deliberately murdered because he was so close to uncovering sinister elements of what he called ‘The Octopus,'” Richardson said.  In its Addendum to INSLAW’s ANALYSIS and REBUTTAL of the BUA REPORT, dated February 14, 1994, Inslaw notes the Justice Department’s Office of Special Investigations (OSI): “OSI’s publicly- declared mission is to locate and deport Nazi war criminals. The Nazi war criminal program is, however, a front for the Justice Department’s own covert intelligence service, according to disclosures recently made to INSLAW by several senior Justice Department career officials . . . According to written statements of which INSLAW has obtained copies, another undeclared mission of the Justice Department’s covert agents was to insure that investigative journalist Danny Casolaro remained silent about the role of the Justice Department in the INSLAW scandal by murdering him in West Virginia in August 1991.”  As Casolaro worked on his Octopus story, he came to rely increasingly on an individual named Robert Booth Nichols as a source, and as a friend. Casolaro also relied heavily on Riconosciuto. Danny even flew to Seattle to serve as Riconosciuto’s volunteer pretrial investigator when he was arrested in March 1991 on drug charges, one year after he began his investigation. In time, however, Casolaro became more skeptical of Riconosciuto’s stories which included bizarre alien retrievals by black helicopters to gun smuggling and bioweapons; and within a few months he was refusing to accept his collect calls from jail. But Casolaro had not abandoned his own investigation into The Octopus. (You can read Casolaro’s notes here.)  In July 1991, after Nichols visited Casolaro in Washington, D.C., Danny began to suspect that Nichols was far more sinister than he’d imagined, and began to investigate his past activities. This may be because Casolaro had learned just a few months before his death that Riconosciuto was the source he should have trusted. In the transcript meeting mentioned above in May 1991 with Gunderson and Boyak, Riconosciuto described an occasion where Nichols wanted to deliver a message to a mobster from Chicago. “He hung the man upside down on a hoist in an airplane hangar in front of a prop plane, then started the engine of the plane and revved it up, so that the man hanging on the hoist was sucked toward the propellers.” According to Riconosciuto, “By the time Bob got finished with him, he wanted to die.”  Three days before Casolaro died, he called Thomas Gates, who worked in the bureau’s L.A. office. As Gates testified before the House Judiciary Committee, Casolaro told Gates that Nichols had warned or threatened him after his last visit on July 7th, “If you continue this investigation, you will die.” Approximately a month later in August, Danny was found dead.  According to an affidavit sworn by Agent Gates during the course of a 1987 investigation into mob activities in Hollywood, Nichols was identified by the FBI as early as 1978 as a drug trafficker and money launderer. If that’s not enough, it turns out Nichols was head of Meridian Arms, which in turn joined up with a tiny California Indian tribe the Cabazon Band of Indians and the CIA-connected Wackenhut Corporation in a scheme to manufacture arms on the Indians’ reservation to then be sent to the Contras along with the production of bioweapons sold to the U.S. military and later Japan according to Riconosciuto.  Casolaro had become too trusting despite the nature of his investigation. On August 9th, William Turner said he delivered “two packets of documents” to Casolaro in Martinsburg. In a sworn statement, Turner explained Casolaro planned “to swap some info to his source for more information on INSLAW.” Turner stated the documents included “computer printouts and other documents Casolaro had received from Alan Standorf, Michael Riconosciuto and unnamed sources, relating to the sale of modified PROMIS software . . . to Canada, Australia and Israel to name a few countries.”  Casolaro told Turner that the meeting with a source in Martinsburg “had been arranged by Joseph Cuellar” according to a March 14th, 1994 affidavit by Turner, provided in the documents.  In 1992, Hamilton began receiving information from a never-identified U.S. intelligence source through a third party, a retired Army Criminal Investigation Division officer.  “My intelligence source claimed that Danny was murdered by U.S. Army Special Forces Intelligence Major Joseph Cuellar in the course of a covert intelligence operation,” Hamilton stated.  “The objective of the operation was to recover every copy of computer printouts from a Defense Intelligence Agency PROMIS-based domestic surveillance database system called Main Core, acquired through the assistance of National Security Agency employee Alan Standorf.”  Despite the fact that FBI agent Scott Erskine misconstrued Hamilton’s words, in his notes taken during their meeting about Casolaro’s death stating Danny became “embarrassed” by his own investigation. Erskine let slip a key fact that the Martinsburg Police had a witness who claimed she saw an unknown man leaving Casolaro’s room the morning of his murder that matched the description of the man he met at the bar the night before who was “impatient.”  Hamilton wonders whether Cuellar was the man an unnamed Sheraton Inn maid told the Martinsburg Police she saw leaving Casolaro’s room the morning of his death on August 10th, provided documents indicate.  “A male in his 30s, with an excellent sun tan, wearing a fashionable tee-shirt, dark slacks, and deck shoes,” according to the unknown maid and Charles Work a lawyer for INSLAW wrote in a letter to then Assistant Associate Attorney General John C. Dwyer deputy of Attorney General William Hubbell.  According to sources, this is due to a claim by a retired FBI agent, who was working for INSLAW at Business Risks International (BRI) where Cuellar was then working as well, who said the maid may have misconstrued Cuellar’s Hispanic complexion for the sun tan she described. The retired FBI agent secretly observing Cueller further stated that the maid’s description of the man’s expensive sports clothes matched the way he usually dressed.  However, this information was covered up by authorities, and the DOJ at the time ordered the notes to be sealed. Despite the fact that the description matches the same exact man Casolaro met at the bar the night before his death, INSLAW lawyer Charles Work wrote in a 1994 letter provided to this writer by INSLAW INC. months ago.  Further, the INSLAW lawyer states that INSLAW had confidential sources tell them that Casolaro had been found with ethyl alcohol absolut in his system, but not just anywhere — injected into his spine to “deaden the nerves below his head.” INSLAW was also provided the inventory lot number according to Charles which he stated was: “6810-00-242-3645.” A forensic pathologist Dr. Kit Green who worked for almost a decade at the CIA claimed the inventory number indicates the poison came from a U.S. Army inventory.  According to INSLAW’s counsel Charles Work, Danny was even warned through Hamilton after receiving a threat or warning relayed from CIA Charles Hayes not to go to DC and meet a source behind a certain facility. INSLAW suspects that building was a townhouse on Jackson Place just behind Blair House used during both the Reagan and Bush administrations for White House “dirty tricks.” The property was used by former CIA employees equipped with computer equipment and encrypted communications. It was also used for “very sensitive U.S. government intelligence, law enforcement and national security databases on U.S. citizens.”  In other words, the townhouse was likely an operation HQ of the Main Core database, which Casolaro had just obtained printouts from Alan Standorf. Allegedly, Casolaro obtained Standorf’s documents from William Turner who passed off copies to Casolaro according to a source who helped this writer tell this mysterious tale.  Hayes was a former longtime clandestine contractor with Division D of the CIA which was comprised of CIA clandestine service officers and NSA engineers. Division D was apparently the predecessor organization to the stand-alone joint NSA/CIA agency known as the Special Collection Service (SCS). Division D of the CIA allegedly had a major role within the CIA on the illicit intelligence uses of PROMIS. So the “warning” coming from Hayes alleged by Hamilton, looks much more like one of many threats that were given to Casolaro before the end of his life.  However, Hayes caused the resignation of several corrupt politicians in his time until he was thrown in prison on suspicious charges like Riconosciuto. Hayes was also dubbed on the internet as the Angel Of Death because he was the head and public representative of the Fifth Column, a group of hackers who tracked political payoffs through money-laundering channels.  On an interesting note the Angel Of Death was quoted stating: “I don”t want another Danny Casolaro on my hands,” when speaking about why the Fifth Column was necessary. Further, Hayes testified in favor of INSLAW in a a Chicago grand jury in 1992 and later in 1996 he was deposed by Department of Justice, Beth Cook. On both occasions Hayes accused the DOJ of “lying, cheating, and stealing.” Beyond that Hayes is who came up with the crafty name “The Octopus” for the web of people that surrounded scandals of the 1980s, which according to Orlingrabbe Hayes was also a source who worked with Casolaro.  So its far more likely that Hayes was sending a warning than a threat before Danny lost his life.  Hayes was later arrested in 1996 and jailed after he was accused of hiring a $5,000 hit on his son by an unknown FBI agent as testified by FBI agent David R. Keller who alleged the incident. The timing of that event was suspicious in that it occurred after Hayes assisted then Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr in drafting indictments against Hillary and Bill Clinton.  Turner also went to jail to serve time for a bank robbery that many believe he committed to avoid being killed by the same forces that killed Danny Casolaro, and Alan Standorf. Such a scenario seems nonsensical to this writer. If someone in a position of power wants to have one killed, the last place one would want to be is behind four walls with no escape. But maybe Turner felt safer behind bars? A source claim that could not be confirmed stated that Turner entered into FBI witness protection after the robbery. If true, this may indicate that Turner did the robbery to get the FBI’s attention, which would make more sense then to simply just go to prison.  Spy Magazine reported the horrific bizarre murder scene of Danny Casolaro, observed by Barbara Bittinger, the assistant head housekeeper of the Sheraton Inn in Martinsburg, West Virginia that further contradicts that Danny committed suicide.  “Under the sink, lying more or less flat, were two bloody towels. It looked like someone tried to wipe up the blood on the floor and slid the towels under the sink,” said Bittinger, who was only interviewed by police briefly the day the body was found and never by any journalists before speaking to Spy. “It looked like someone” – not the maid, Bittinger tells us – “threw the towels on the floor and tried to wipe the blood up with their foot, but they didn’t get the blood, they just smeared the floor,” Spy Magazine wrote.  According to the Bua Report, included in this document dump, Casolaro began reporting death threats “during the last few weeks of his life,” with only a single report of a death threat told to the police by Olga Mokros, an Arlington, Virginia neighbor the Monday before Casolaro’s death. According to the Bua Report, “Mokros could not recall any other specific occasions on which Mr. Casolaro received such a call, even though she was at his house nearly every day.” This statement is contradicted by the notes in a police interview with Mokros, in which it’s expressed that she had answered Casolaro’s phone months before his death only to hear threats to kill him and “cut him into pieces.”  Less than an hour later, a different man hissed in the phone to Olga: “Drop dead.” Then there was a third call…, but Olga remembered only that no one spoke and that she heard only music as though a radio were playing in the same room as the caller. “Don’t call him no more,” she said hanging up the phone. A fourth call was the same as the third, and a fifth came later that night. “No music…and no one spoke.” After this she slammed the receiver down.  Olga’s statements contradict the official claims and conclusions of the Justice Department and the Special Counsel investigation led by Judge Nicholas John Bua in the infamous Bua Report, providing another sliver of proof that Danny Casolaro didn’t commit suicide, according to a Muckrock FOIA request.  Casolaro himself documented the threats, telling his brother Tony, “I have been getting some very threatening phone calls. If anything happens to me, don’t believe it was accidental.” Tony was also skeptical because, “none of his notes on the case were found with his body.”  It turns out that Tony wasn’t the only person Danny had told that he might be in danger; he’d also told Gates, a special agent of the FBI.  As previously written, Casolaro had uncovered that one of his sources, Robert Booth Nichols, had secrets. It turned out that Nichols was an international money launderer and an associate of the Gambino organized crime family. This information was derived by Danny from his other sources, including Gates and Richard Stavin, who corroborated Riconosciuto’s claims about the man. Stavin was a former special prosecutor for the Justice Department who had been assigned to the MCA case, another case Casolaro had later eyed. In his investigation of the MCA case, it turns out Stavin unearthed documents about Nichols, who was also a target of his probe. On July 31, 1991, Casolaro had a conversation with Stavin. It was in this conversation that Stavin told Danny that Nichols had been a money launderer and that he was connected to the Gambino crime family and the Yakuza through Harold Okimoto an associate of Frank Carlucci (who served as Secretary of Defense and Deputy Director of the CIA before becoming Chairman of The Carlyle Group).  But then Stavin told Danny something that he regretted in an interview years later. Stavin expressed to Danny that Nichols had offered his services as an informant to several U.S. Government agencies. “Maybe I shouldn’t have told him,” said Stavin. In Stavin’s opinion: “It seemed like a cover-your-ass situation.”  It was during this period of Danny’s investigation that he had learned the secret hidden from many: that organized crime rings and the mafia had infiltrated intelligence agencies and government in general. Casolaro was now on borrowed time living on a thread.  One of this writer’s sources also disclosed that Eitan had been seen by a maid/witness known only as Paula at Ian Spiro’s home in the San Diego area at the time of his and his family’s murders in the fall of 1992. Spiro’s 40-year-old wife, Gail, daughters, Sara, 16, and Dina, 11, and son Adam, 14, were allegedly killed during the incident. Spiro was then found in his car miles away dead of cyanide poisoning.  Ari Ben Menashe, mentioned earlier in this article, also claimed that in approximately May 1993, Eitan met him at a hotel in Montreal and warned there would be “consequences” if both Menashe and Hamilton were to continue speaking about Israeli intelligence’s role with PROMIS software, according to Hamilton’s notes.  Menashe further claimed that Ian Spiro had served as a courier to the Middle East for Eitan of documents stolen by Jonathan Pollard and had freelanced in some way for his personal financial gain from the documents, which accounted for his murder in San Diego.  It is publicly known that Pollard had access to a massive trove of classified material which was very appealing to Israeli intelligence and Eitan. Over the years, Pollard is said to have handed over thousands of files to Israel. The U.S. government eventually caught on to Pollard’s activities and arrested him in 1985. It took years before Israel acknowledged its ties to Pollard but the Zionist state eventually admitted its connection to his espionage against the U.S.  The Israelis gave some of Pollard’s Top Secret documents to the Russians in exchange for Moscow expediting Jewish immigration to Israel. Israel also granted Pollard citizenship in 1995, despite the man being imprisoned for his crimes.  In autumn 2015, just a few years ago, U.S. authorities caved to Zionist pressure and released Pollard from prison under parole. Pollard is said to remain in New York City under round-the-clock surveillance in fear that he might escape and flee to Israel, The New York Times reported.  Another source whom wished to remain entirely anonymous including their former profession who seemed quite knowledgeable about Spiro corroborated Menashe stating:  The source wouldn’t confirm or deny but seemed to hint at Spiro and Eitan both being involved in Iran-Contra together. That information got this writer digging. Surprisingly, it is apparently public information that Ian Spiro was involved with the Iran-Contra weapons for Western hostages deal in Lebanon and aided Terry Waite. This fact was documented in a book by BBC journalist Gavin Hewitt and according to Oliver North’s Notes.  In other words, the evidence at hand suggests that Mossad may have been involved with the clandestine sale of guns, and trade off of guns for drugs smuggling going on in Iran-Contra and beyond (Operation Pseudo Miranda), since the two men worked so closely together. A report by Haartez in 2010, discloses an Israeli operation called ‘Tipped Kettle,’ in which weapons stolen by Israel from the PLO in Lebanon were transferred to the Contras; and the bigger kicker here is to “anti-American elements in Iran” during the 1980s. So it wouldn’t be much of a surprise if Eitan was also involved with Spiro and his connections. This time period paints a picture of a lot of secret aggression against the U.S. by Israel from espionage, to arming anti-Americans in Iran.  A report by San Diego Magazine with a quote from one of the hostages corroborates even further:  “Former hostage Peter Jacobsen confirmed to the media that Spiro was indeed involved in the release of hostages in the Middle East,” San Diego Magazine wrote.  However, Ian Spiro is much more important to INSLAW, because according to court documents filed shortly after the murders, Spiro was holding computer equipment essential for Michael Riconosciuto to prove a Justice Department conspiracy to steal the sophisticated computer software.  Just like Casolaro, Spiro started receiving threatening phone calls prior to his own death.


activistpost--2019-10-07--FBI Data Shows 5 Times More People Killed by Knives Than Rifles Last Year

On September 30, the FBI issued a press release noting they have published their 2018 crime statistics. Most notable about the report is the fact that despite constant fear mongering by the mainstream media and the government that crime is running rampant, the number of violent crimes decreased 3.3 percent as compared to the previous year. Also contained in the report were the numbers and causes of deaths in murder cases. Although the FBI did not make the comparison themselves, when reading the data we can see the number of murders carried out with knives or cutting devices was five times higher than the number of murders carried out with rifles. This comparison is particularly important given the current gun climate in America.  Before we go on, it is important to mention that handguns were responsible for the majority of firearms deaths. It is also important to point out that all firearms deaths combined made up the majority of all murders in the United States. Of the 14,123 murders in 2018, 10, 265 of them involved firearms—a 7 percent drop from the previous year. That being said, the number of rifle deaths is extremely important given that this is the weapon most often targeted by gun grabbers.  “Hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” Democratic presidential candidate Beta O’Rourke recently said to a crowd in Houston, Texas. “We’re not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore.”  But as the statistics show, it really isn’t being used against that many Americans. In fact, far more Americans are dying by knives. According to the FBI data, 1,515 were stabbed, cut, or maimed to death by a knife or other cutting instrument. This is a number 5 times higher than those killed by rifles, which sits at just 297.  What’s more, twice as many people were beaten to death with hands, fists, and feet (672) than were killed by rifles. And, nearly 150 more people (443) were bludgeoned to death with hammers and other blunt objects than killed with rifles.  The weapon most often targeted by gun grabbers appears to play a rather tiny role in the majority of murders carried out in the United States. This is in spite of Americans owning around 16 million AR style rifles.  Another important fact is that the FBI data does not differentiate as to what kind of rifle was used in the murder—meaning that it is not likely that all 297 rifle deaths were caused by AR type rifles. The FBI data includes all rifles — including bolt action, pump or lever action rifles — not just AR-15s.  If we were to compare stabbings to just AR-15 rifle deaths, that disparity would more likely than not be even greater.  Knowing these facts about rifles makes the gun grabbers calls for taking your AR-15s that much more hollow. Even if they were able to disarm all Americans of their AR-15 rifles, this would have little to no effect on the number of total murders.  Perhaps this is the reason the right has joined the left in pushing for red flag gun laws which “take the guns first” and “go through due process second,” as Donald Trump famously said last year after the Parkland shooting.  But would grabbing guns from people deemed a risk by the state actually have any effect on mass violence? Not likely.  Stronger background checks would have little to no effect on mass shootings as most of the mass shooters acquire their guns legally and pass the background checks. As Reason points out:  But what about red flag laws that take guns from people deemed a risk?  Citizens who are targeted by these laws will be deemed guilty first and only after their guns are taken, will they have a chance to defend themselves in court. This is the de facto removal of due process.  As Reuters reports, under the legislation, a family member or law enforcement officer could petition a judge to seize firearms from a person they think is a threat to themselves or others. The judge could then hold a hearing without the targeted person being present and grant a temporary order for 14 days.  Under the fifth and fourteenth amendments, due process clauses are in place to act as a safeguard from arbitrary denial of life, liberty, or property by the government outside the sanction of law.  In spite of what officials and the media claim, when a person is stripped of their constitutional rights, albeit temporarily, without being given the chance to make their own case based on what can be entirely arbitrary accusations, this is the removal of due process. And, it doesn’t work.  We’ve seen this play out before already. Earlier this year, a tragedy unfolded in California as a deranged gunman, Kevin Douglas Limbaugh, walked up on an innocent woman, officer Natalie Corona, pulled out his guns and began shooting her repeatedly until she died. Limbaugh then fired several more shots at others before turning the gun on himself and taking his own life. Had more people been nearby, Limbaugh would’ve likely carried out a mass shooting.  Limbaugh’s case is important to bring up due to the fact that — before he killed a cop — he was subject to California’s “red flag” laws in 2018. Limbaugh was given a high-risk assessment that ordered him to turn in his registered weapons to police, the only one being a Bushmaster AR-15. On November 9, Limbaugh turned in the weapon. Despite being banned from possessing a weapon, he still obtained one illegally and used it to commit murder. Perhaps this push for taking AR-15s from law abiding citizens is a strategical one. Despite being used in very few murders, the AR-15 is an extremely effective deterrent against tyranny. The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subjugated races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjugated races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. — Adolf Hitler, Hitler’s Table Talk, 1941-1944: Secret Conversations Matt Agorist is an honorably discharged veteran of the USMC and former intelligence operator directly tasked by the NSA. This prior experience gives him unique insight into the world of government corruption and the American police state. Agorist has been an independent journalist for over a decade and has been featured on mainstream networks around the world. Agorist is also the Editor at Large at the Free Thought Project, where this article first appeared. Follow @MattAgorist on Twitter, Steemit, and now on Minds. Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month. Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2019-10-07--FBI Says They Are Closely Monitoring Social Media Posts About “Joker”

According to a recent joint FBI and Department of Homeland Security bulletin, federal law enforcement agencies are monitoring social media posts about the film Joker, in search of threatening comments.  The film has been the topic of opinion pieces in the news for months, with many pundits suggesting that it could provoke angry or mentally ill people to carry out acts of violence. Fans of the film say that the violence is intended to make a statement about the consequences of child abuse and the mistreatment of the mentally ill.  The film has been massively popular in its opening days, breaking several box office records with a $93.5 million opening weekend.  While there have been plenty of violent movies that have managed to avoid controversy, Joker has some themes that are especially sensitive in today’s political climate. The fact that a mass shooting has taken place during a Batman film in 2012, likely contributed to the hyper-vigilance about this film.  Most theaters throughout the country banned any type of masks or cosplay costumes for opening weekend.  Luckily, there was no violence on opening weekend, although there was one particularly awkward encounter in New York, where a drunk and belligerent man was kicked out of a theater and detained for loudly clapping and cheering during the film’s murder scenes.  “About halfway through when Joker started killing people and monologuing about how society is evil he started clapping really loudly and incessantly for a good minute. People started yelling for him to shut up, but he kept clapping and cheering like mad,” one witness, Nathanael Hood, told reporters.  Some people in the theater rushed for the exits because he made them feel uncomfortable, and he reportedly yelled and spit at them as they left.  Police seem to be on high alert about the film. A statement from the FBI, obtained by The Hill, said,  The FBI also claims that they have been receiving anonymous tips about “unspecific mass shootings” related to the film since May.  “Credible sources indicate a known extremist group may be behind the threat,” an FBI spokesperson said, noting that, “no specific threat is identified.”  The New York Police Department has reportedly stationed undercover police officers in screenings of the film, and other jurisdictions are taking similar measures as well.  Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Follow us on Minds, Twitter, Steemit, and SoMee. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month.  Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.


activistpost--2019-12-10--Police Use Surveillance Zones To Monitor Private Internet Purchases Or Swaps

Police departments across the country are creating “Safe Exchange Zones” in front of police stations or inside them to monitor internet purchases or swaps 24/7.  According to Newsweek, police have been encouraging the public to conduct internet purchases or swaps at police-run Internet Exchange Zones since at least 2016.  If I have learned anything in my nearly 10 years of blogging, it is the mass media’s penchant for stoking the public’s fear.  Last year NJ.com’s article titled, “Found an internet deal? Here’s the only place you should meet the seller,” starts out warning the public about the dangers of selling or exchanging items on the internet. And then it claims the only place one should sell or exchange items is in front of a police station.  Another article in WRDW Channel 12 spews the same rhetoric saying, “crimes related to internet exchanges happen every couple of months in our area.”  A recent article in The Metro West Daily News reveals that police departments want people to conduct their exchanges inside police stations.  According to this logic, if someone is afraid to sell or exchange something in front of or inside a police station, then they should be viewed with suspicion. Welcome to America 2019, where even private transactions are considered suspicious.  Police are excited to use CCTV cameras to monitor private purchases  Police in Natick, Mass are also thrilled to use CCTV cameras to identify people and monitor internet exchanges.  “We certainly welcome anyone needing a safe place to conduct this type of transaction to use our lobby to do so,” she said. “We are open 24/7/365 and our doors are always open. We do not have signage such as I have seen elsewhere, but it is not uncommon for people to use the lobby or front of the station for this,” Natick police spokeswoman Lt. Cara Rossi said.  As Newsweek noted, police-run Safe Exchange Zones are everywhere.  How can police identify people making internet purchases or swaps?  Below is a list of six devices police departments commonly use to identify people:  None of those news articles mentioned anything about the loss of anonymity that occurs when letting law enforcement monitor everyone’s online purchases or exchanges. Big Brother’s latest public safety sales pitch is designed around the possibility of theft, kidnapping or murder, and using that fear to justify more surveillance cameras. According to a recent study, America needs less surveillance cameras not more. The US already has the largest number of surveillance cameras per person in the world. The study found found that the US tops the list when it comes to the number of surveillance camera installations per capita, with 50 million CCTVs monitoring the entire US population of over 327 million people. We all need to wake up to the fact that our fears of terror and crime are being used as an excuse to create a national CCTV surveillance network.  You can read more at the MassPrivateI blog, where this article first appeared.  Subscribe to Activist Post for truth, peace, and freedom news. Become an Activist Post Patron for as little as $1 per month at Patreon. Follow us on SoMee, Flote, Minds, Twitter, and Steemit.  Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.