Finland to Start Imprisoning Illegal Migrants

By Ben Warren

See the source image

Finland has created a new law allowing the imprisonment of illegal migrants.

The law specifically targets migrants who enter the country after they were given an “entry ban,” according to the Finnish Ministry of Justice.

“The President of the Republic today adopted amendments to the law by which a new provision on violation of the ban on entry is added,” said the Ministry. “To date, violation of the prohibition has generally led to fines for foreigners offenses.”

“In the future, the punishment for breach of the ban shall be fines or imprisonment for a maximum of one year.”

Additionally, the law is effective at the start of 2019 and authorities expect it to discourage further illegal movement into the country.

This legal maneuver against the surge of migrants comes after Finland’s Immigration Service (Migri) admitted they couldn’t identify almost half of the migrants applying for asylum.

“People who are fleeing do not have the possibility of leaving with the required documents in their pockets,” said a Migri official. “Some of them come from countries that don’t even have passport systems.”

Correspondingly, it is unclear if the country has enough prison space to honor the new law as Migri is on record demanding more funding to construct additional facilities for migrants.

See the source image

All corrupt on the Western front? Der Spiegel latest to fall from media mountaintops

See the source image

By Robert Bridge

Once again, a reporter has been accused of writing fake stories – over a span of years – reinforcing the suspicion that we are living in a post-truth world where words, to paraphrase Kipling, “are the most powerful drug.”

This week, Der Spiegel, the German news weekly, was forced to admit that one of its former star reporters, the award-winning Claas Relotius“falsified his articles on a grand scale.”

Indeed, it seems the disgraced journalist was motivated more by fiction writers John le Carre and Tom Clancy than by any media heavyweights, like Andrew Breitbart and Walter Cronkite.

Relotius, who just this month took home Germany’s Reporterpreis (‘Reporter of the Year’) for his enthralling tale of a Syrian teenager, “made up stories and invented protagonists,” Der Spiegel admitted.

All corrupt on the Western front? Der Spiegel latest to fall from media mountaintops

There is a temptation to rationalize Relotius’s multiple indiscretions, not to mention the failure of his fastidious employer to unearth them for so long, as an unavoidable part of the dog-eat-dog media jungle. After all, journalists are not robots – at least not yet – and we are all humans prone to poor judgment and mistakes, perhaps even highly unethical ones.

That explanation, however, falls short of explaining the internal forces battering away at the foundation of Western media, an institution built on the shifting sand of lies, disinformation and outright propaganda. And what is readily apparent to those outside of the Western media fortress is certainly even more apparent to those inside.

A good example is Russiagate. This elaborate myth, which has been peddled repeatedly and without an ounce of 100-percent real beef since the US election of 2016, goes like this: A group of Russian hackers, buying a few hundred social media memes for just rubles to the dollar, were able to do what all the Republican campaign strategists, and all the special interests groups, with all of their billions of dollars in their massive war chest, simply could not: keep Democratic voters at home on the couch come Election Day – a tactic now known as “voter suppression operations” – thereby handing the White House to Donald Trump on a silver platter. Or shall we say ‘a Putin platter’?

Capture

Don’t believe me? Here’s the opening line of a recent Washington Post article that should be rated ‘R’ for racist: “One difference between Russian and Republican efforts to quash the black vote: The Russians are more sophisticated, insidious and slick,” wailed Joe Davidson, who apparently watched too many Hollywood films where the Russkies play all of the villains. “Unlike the Republican sledgehammers used to suppress votes and thwart electorates’ decisions in various states, the Russians are sneaky, using social media come-ons that ostensibly had little to do with the 2016 vote.”

Meanwhile, Der Spiegel, despite being forced to come clean over the transgressions of Claas Relotius, will most likely never own up to its own factual shortcomings with regards to their dismal reporting on Russia.

For example, in an article published last year entitled ‘Putin’s work, Clinton’s contribution,’ the German weekly lamented that “A superpower intervenes in the election campaign of another superpower: The Russian cyber-attack in the US is a scandal.” Just like their fallen star reporter, Der Spiegel regurgitated fiction masquerading as news.

Capture

However, there is no need to limit ourselves to just media-generated Russian fairytales. The Western media has contrived other sensational stories, with its own cast of dubious characters, and with far greater consequences.

Consider the reporting in the Western media prior to the 2003 Iraq War, when most journalists were behaving as cheerleaders for military invasion as opposed to conscientious objectors, or at least objective observers. In fact, two reporters with the New York Times, Michael Gordon and Judith Miller, arguably gave the Bush administration and a hardcore group of neocons inside Washington, which had been pushing for a war against Saddam Hussein for many years, the barest justification it required for military action.

Just six months before the bombs started dropping on Baghdad, Gordon and Miller penned a front-page article in the Times that opened with this stunning claim: “Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today.”

The article in America’s ‘paper of record’ then proceeded to build the case for military action against Iraq by quoting an assortment of anonymous senior administration officials, anonymous Iraqi defectors, and anonymous chemical weapons experts. In fact, much of the story was based on comments provided by one ‘Ahmed al-Shemri,’ a pseudonym for someone purported to have been connected to Hussein’s chemical-weapons program. The authors quoted the mystery man as saying: “All of Iraq is one large storage facility.”

Gordon and Miller also claimed their source had said that “he had been told that Iraq was still storing some 12,500 gallons of anthrax.” Several months later, just weeks before the US invasion of Iraq commenced, US Secretary of State Colin Powell invited the UN General Assembly to imagine what a “teaspoon of dry anthrax” could do if unleashed on the public.

Powell, who later said the testimony would be a permanent “blot” on his record, even shook a tiny faux sample of the deadly biological agent in the Assembly for maximum theatrical effect.

Shortly after the release of the Times piece, top Bush officials appeared on television and alluded to Miller’s story in support of military action. Meanwhile, UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq never found chemical weapons or the materials needed to build atomic weapons. In other words, the $1-trillion-dollar war against Iraq, which led to the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent civilians, was a completely senseless act of aggression against a sovereign state, which the US media helped perpetrate.

Aside from the question of whether readers really put much faith in these fantastic media stories, complete with pseudonymous characters and impossible to prove claims; there remains another question. Does the Western media itself believe its own stories?  The answer seems to be no, at least not always.

With regards to the Russiagate story, for example, an investigative journalism outfit, Project Veritas, caught a few Western journalists off-guard about their true feelings in relation to the claims against Russia, and their feelings in general about the state of the media.

“I love the news business, but I’m very cynical about it – and at the same time so are most of my colleagues, CNN Supervising Producer John Bonifield admitted, unaware he was being secretly filmed.

When pushed to explain why CNN was beating the anti-Russia drum on a daily basis, things became clearer: “Because it’s ratings,” Bonifield said. “Our ratings are incredible right now.”

In the same media sting operation, Van Jones, a prominent CNN political commentator who has pushed the anti-Russia position numerous times on-air, completely changed his tune when caught off-air and off-guard. “The Russia thing is just a big nothing burger,” he remarked.

This brings us back to the story of the fallen Der Spiegel journalist. It seems that a deep cynicism has taken hold in at least some parts of the Western media establishment. Journalists seem increasingly willing to produce extremely tenuous, fact-challenged stories, many of which are barely held together by a rickety composite of anonymous entities.

And why not? If their own media bosses are permitting gross fabrications on a number of major issues, not least of all related to Russia, and further afield in Syria, why should the journalists be forced to play by the rules?

Under such oppressive conditions, where the media appears to be merely the mouthpiece of the government’s position on a number of issues, those working inside this apparatus will eventually come around to the conclusion that truth is not the main priority. The main priority is hoodwinking the public into believing something even when the facts – or lack of them – point to other conclusions.

Thus, it is no surprise when we find Western reporters imitating the greatest fiction writers, because in reality that is what they have already become.

@Robert_Bridge

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

THE NEW YORK TIMES WAS AGAINST WAR IN SYRIA BEFORE IT WAS FOR IT

See the source image

What a difference a year can make for The New York Times

By Joe Simonson

What a difference a year can make for The New York Times.

As President Donald Trump announced his decision Wednesday to withdraw the nation’s 2,000 troops from Syria, a bipartisan cadre of opinion-havers attacked him as recklessly abandoning allies in the region and jeopardizing America’s influence over foreign affairs.

One newspaper was particularly harsh: The Times.

Quickly after Secretary of Defense James Mattis announced his resignation (in part as a protest against Trump’s decision on Syria) Thursday, America’s paper of record quickly produced a scathing editorial, proclaimingJim Mattis Was Right.”

See the source image

“Who will protect America now?” The Times asked.

The editorial frets about how American troops leaving Syria “hampers morale” of “allied forces like the Kurds.” (RELATED: Trump Explains His Decision To Withdraw From Syria)

“It could also risk getting American soldiers killed or wounded for objectives their commanders had already abandoned,” writes The Times.

Yet almost a year ago, on Jan. 19, 2018, that same editorial board raked the president over the coals for even daring to continue America’s policy of military adventurism.

The Times expressed concern that more American troops beyond the 2,000 initially deployed could soon be sent overseas in a mission without any clear goals.

“Syria is a complex problem. But this plan seems poorly conceived, too dependent on military action and fueled by wishful thinking,” The Times said.

See the source image

While on Thursday The Times worried that leaving Syria could leave the Kurds vulnerable to Turkey, at the beginning of 2018, the paper also believed that the U.S. would be setting up a clash between the minority group and a NATO ally.

“Turkey, which views the Kurds as an enemy, has threatened a cross-border assault. All of this raises the grim possibility that American troops will clash with Turkey, a NATO ally,” The Times wrote last January.

Nowhere in Thursday’s editorial does The Times ever point to an alternative timeline for withdrawal for American forces in Syria. Such an omission is quite startling, considering last January the paper’s chief criticism of sending forces to the region was setting up just another forever-war in the Middle East.

One thing is clear from these two diametrically opposed editorials: The job of The Times isn’t to provide valid criticisms of Trump, but to simply oppose him at all costs.

Alyssa Milano mocks amputee veteran’s massive border wall crowdfunding, gets Twitter-flogged

Capture

Actress Alyssa Milano (L) / Brian Kolfage Jr. (R) © Reuters / Danny Moloshok /Mike Segar

Actress Alyssa Milano waded out of her depth as she slammed the border wall crowdfunding, implying the money should instead go to veterans. She was instantly reminded the campaign was started by a triple amputee vet.

The actress-turned-Democratic firebrand was left red-faced as after she took aim at the crowdfunding campaign to build a border wall between the US and Mexico, now at over $13mn. In a tweet on Thursday, Milano wrote: “Oh, yes! Let’s #GoFundTheWall while not taking care of our veterans. Cool. Cool. Cool.”

Capture

It was not long before the tweet ignited a firestorm on Twitter, as many noticed Milano hand’t done her homework, as the GoFundMe page was started by Air Force veteran Brian Kolfage, a Purple Heart recipient, who lost three limbs in a rocket attack in Iraq.

The campaign, with a designated goal of $1bn, started less than a week ago and has already shot up to be one of the five top GoFundMe campaigns ever.

Milano’s fellow Hollywood celebrity and outspoken conservative James Woods led the backlash against her, pointing out who started the fund.

Capture

Many actual veterans chimed in, tweeting at Milano that they have backed the crowdfunding campaign, while others accused her of preying on the cause she did not seem to care about before.

“Bring Vets up when it’s convenient for you. Any other day you could care less,” one Guser wrote.

Capture

People argued that building the wall and helping veterans are not incompatible tasks and can both be done at the same time.

Milano, one of the most prominent #MeToo movement stars, has been rallying behind virtually every anti-Trump and pro-Democratic cause, often using her Twitter with its 3.48 million followers to spew vitriol at Trump, calling him a “piece of sh*t” and “evil creature” for the treatment of caravan migrants at the US-Mexican border in November.

However, just like this time, back then Milano was accused of hypocrisy and poor research. She was reminded that border agents used the exact same means – pepper spray – to repel rock-throwing migrants at the border when Obama was in office.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Report: Facebook-Owned WhatsApp Used to Spread Child Pornography

Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg declined an invitation to attend the hearing, sending a vice president named Richard Allan in his place

By Tom Ciccotta

Facebook-owned messaging app WhatsApp has a child pornography problem, according to several reports.

According to a report from TechCrunch, mobile messaging application WhatsApp is being used to spread child pornography around the world. The app features end-to-end encryption, which means that WhatsApp, and its parent company, Facebook, do not have access to user conversations.

TechCrunch’s investigation revealed that Facebook could easily do more to police the spread of this content on the platform. Although messages on the platform are private, the names of the groups in which the child pornography is spread are not. A simply scan of the existing WhatsApp groups led TechCrunch’s team to several that blatantly advertise their focus on child pornography.

TechCrunch’s investigation shows that Facebook could do more to police WhatsApp and remove this kind of content. Even without technical solutions that would require a weakening of encryption, WhatsApp’s moderators should have been able to find these groups and put a stop to them. Groups with names like “child porn only no adv” and “child porn xvideos” found on the group discovery app “Group Links For Whats” by Lisa Studio don’t even attempt to hide their nature. And a screenshot provided by anti-exploitation startup AntiToxin reveals active WhatsApp groups with names like “Children ” or “videos cp” — a known abbreviation for ‘child pornography’.

Facebook doubled their content moderation team from 10,000 to 20,000 in 2018. However, WhatsApp is monitored by a separate, smaller, staff that is inadequate for the app’s 1.5 billion users.

In a statement, WhatsApp claimed that they are working to prevent child sexual abuse on their platform. They claimed that they have banned 130,000 accounts for such violations in the past 10 days.

WhatsApp has a zero-tolerance policy around child sexual abuse. We deploy our most advanced technology, including artificial intelligence, to scan profile photos and images in reported content, and actively ban accounts suspected of sharing this vile content. We also respond to law enforcement requests around the world and immediately report abuse to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Sadly, because both app stores and communications services are being misused to spread abusive content, technology companies must work together to stop it.

In early December, Tumblr announced that they would be banning all adult content in an effort to prevent child sex abuse.

Maddow’s latest crystal ball reading: Putin ‘ordered’ Trump to withdraw from Afghanistan

Capture

Rachel Maddow (R) and a US soldier in Afghanistan © AFP / Theo Wargo; Reuters / Shamil Zhumatov

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow – a pioneer of Putin-ate-my-homework journalism – has predictably mused that Donald Trump is considering pulling troops out of Afghanistan on the orders of Russia’s president. The evidence speaks for itself.

In a segment on her critically-acclaimed show, “Watch Me Scream ‘Russia’ Until I Dislocate My Jaw”, Maddow made an adroit observation of seismic proportions: Reports that Donald Trump is mulling a partial withdrawal from Afghanistan emerged only hours after Vladimir Putin said that the US keeps promising to leave the country but never does! In layman’s terms: Putin ordered Trump to pull troops out of Afghanistan, during a live broadcast? It seems Maddow believes that she decrypted their top-secret communications channel.

Capture

Apparently she cannot fathom that there may be any non-Putin related motives for leaving Afghanistan after 17 years. But in August, the MSNBC host accused Trump of “flip-flopping” after announcing that more US troops would be deployed to Afghanistan.

Capture

Capture

So Rachel Maddow opposes sending more troops to Afghanistan – but anyone who wants to withdraw US forces from the country is a Putin stooge. A daunting pickle, indeed.

As Vox pointed out at the time, Trump “spent years railing against the war in Afghanistan and calling for a US withdrawal from the country.” Before moving into the White House, he made it clear to lawmakers that his administration would not send US troops to fight abroad unless “absolutely necessary.”

ALSO ON RT.COMPutin: ‘US right to leave Syria, but no signs of pullout – remember Afghanistan’

Maddow’s other celebrated Russiagate hits include having a stroke – live on television – after discovering that Russia shares a border with North Korea. She also famously revealed that Rex Tillerson was hand-picked by Putin to serve as Secretary of State – you know, the guy who allegedly called Trump a “f*cking moron”.

Imagine Maddow’s on-air meltdown if Trump really does withdraw troops from Afghanistan.

Like this story? Share it with a friend!

Psyop which saw Democrats pose as Russians ahead of Alabama poll swept under carpet (VIDEO)

Psyop which saw Democrats pose as Russians ahead of Alabama poll swept under carpet (VIDEO)

A $100,000 Democrat psyop to fake Russian interference in an Alabama election was brushed aside by the US media as nonconsequential. But the alleged Russian operation of similar cost is treated as a Pearl Harbor-like attack.

The controversial social media operation, launched to undermine Republican candidate for Senate Roy Moore, was exposed by the New York Times this week.

The newspaper said it was an experiment which had little if any consequence on the outcome of the 2017 vote, which Democrat Doug Jones won by a less than 2-percent margin.

ALSO ON RT.COMTwitterstorm as bombshell Russiagate report suggests SEX TOYS penetrate US democracy

 

RT’s Murad Gazdiev wonders why a false flag operation involving Russia is not a bigger scandal for the US media. After all, they eagerly reported Russia’s alleged interference in the 2016 presidential election, which is claimed to have a similar budget, as a major crime or even an act of war on par with Pearl Harbor.

Watch the video and take a guess.

 

Facebook Allows Terrorist Who Beheaded Canadian Tourist To Keep Account & Actively Post

By Laura Loomer
Capture

An investigation has been launched in Canada after it was revealed that one of the Abu Sayyaf militants who beheaded Canadian tourists John Ridsdel and Robert Hall, in the Philippines is still actively posting on the social media site.

Screenshots captured on Facebook page of Bhen Tatuh appear to show the jihadis holding the decapitated heads of the Canadian tourists, as well as pictures with the ISIS flag and a suicide vest.

Capture

Capture

Facebook, which has made an active effort to silence Conservatives, Jews, and Christians, was unavailable for comment as to why they are allowing jihadi killers to use their platform to post terrorist propaganda.

Trending: SHUT DOWN: Trump Tells Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan He Won’t Sign Their Weak Stop-Gap Measure

Something must be said about how Facebook has found it necessary to ban Conservative Jewish journalists like myself, Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and other Conservatives like Alex Jones, Gavin McInnes, Tommy Robinson, but if you’re a terrorist, you’re allowed to use Facebook. Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood, Louis Farrakhan, and Iranian dictators who chant “death to Israel” and “death to America” all have verified Facebook and Twitter accounts.

Are freedom loving Conservatives a bigger threat than Islamic terrorists who are decapitating innocent young women?

Last week, Facebook banned  Yair Netanyahu, the son of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for a post critical of Islamic terrorists.

How is it that a Jewish Conservative journalist and the Israeli Prime Minister’s son get banned on social media for posting facts about Islam, actual Islamic terrorists are allowed to post pictures of themselves beheading innocent people?

Through their pro-Sharia terms of service, Facebook and Twitter are clearly signaling that it’s ok to be a terrorist, but not ok to be a Conservative, or a Jew.

Capture

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been made aware of the Facebook posts, but as usual, he has sided with terrorists over Canadians and has yet to condemn Facebook.

Perhaps Mark Zuckerberg and Trudeau will be confronted and asked about their jihadi fetish someday.

As you can see, something is very wrong with this “Silicon Valley Sharia.”

Read More about “Silicon Valley Sharia” here.

Freedom Caucus Seizes House Floor To Fight For The Wall

See the source image

By

The Freedom Caucus took the House floor Wednesday night to demand $5 billion in congressional funding for President Donald Trump’s border wall.

“The time to fight is now” declared Jim Jordan of Ohio, who joined with North Carolina’s Mark Meadows in the late-night effort.

The Freedom Caucus sent a clear signal to the commander in chief President Donald Trump: if you veto the “stopgap” bill that kicks the can down the road a few pointless months, then we will have a Christmas season government shutdown. And isn’t time we start saying Merry Christmas again in this Country?

“Mr. President, we’re going to back you up if you veto this — back you up. If you veto this bill, we’ll be there, more importantly, the American people will be there. They’ll be there to support you. Let’s build the wall and make sure we do our job in Congress,” said Freedom Caucus heavyweight Meadows.

Latest: President Trump: ‘Walls Work…They Work Better Than Anything’

“The president, many, many months ago said he would not sign another funding bill unless we gave him wall funding. What did this House do? It passed the bill to fund the Department of Defense and passed a short-term C.R. And said we are going to have that fight after the mid-terms,” said Meadows, who called out loser outgoing speaker Paul Ryan directly.

Here’s what Jim Jordan had to say:  “Everyone knows the old line. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. But we’re going to have to change that line — we’re to need a new one. The new line should be Fool the American people four times, shame on Congress.”

FACEBOOK ADMITS GIVING OUT ACCESS TO YOUR PRIVATE MESSAGES

Facebook Admits Giving Out Access to Your Private Messages

Another privacy scandal erupts

Infowars.com – DECEMBER 19, 2018

Facebook says it gave other companies, such as Spotify and Netflix, access to millions of people’s private messages.

The social media giant admitted to the practice in response to a report that Facebook shares private data to partner companies as part of its third-party integration, which allowed users to use their Facebook credentials to login to other web sites and apps.

Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg (R), and Joel Kaplan (L), Vice President, Global Public Policy at Facebook, leave the Elysee Palace after a meeting with the French President on May 23, 2018 in Paris, France. On the eve of VivaTech, French President Emmanuel Macron brought together some of the world’s leading technology names for the Tech for Good event. (Photo by Aurelien Morissard/IP3/Getty Images)

Facebook wrote in a blog post:

Did partners get access to messages? Yes. But people had to explicitly sign in to Facebook first to use a partner’s messaging feature. Take Spotify for example. After signing in to your Facebook account in Spotify’s desktop app, you could then send and receive messages without ever leaving the app. Our API provided partners with access to the person’s messages in order to power this type of feature.

This practice, however, triggered a firestorm over the definition of consent, especially after Facebook’s former privacy chief Alex Stamos said that integration wasn’t to blame:

Screen Shot 2018-12-19 at 4.33.43 PM

Screen Shot 2018-12-19 at 4.34.33 PM

Interestingly, according to Business Insider:

According to internal Facebook documents seen by the Times, Spotify could see the messages of more than 70 million Facebook users a month. The Times reported that Spotify, Netflix, and the Royal Bank of Canada could read, write, and even delete people’s messages.

Importantly, both Spotify and Netflix told the Times they were unaware they had this kind of broad access. Facebook told the New York Times it found no evidence of abuse.

Zero Hedge also reported:

Amazon was granted access to users’ names and contact information through their friends, while Yahoo! was able to view streams of friends’ posts as recently as this summer despite Facebook promising that it had stopped this type of sharing years earlier.

What’s more? China’s Huawei and Russian search giant Yandex – accused last year by Ukraine of funneling user data to the Kremlin – had access to Facebook’s unique user IDs.

[…]

Facebook was able to circumvent a 2011 consent agreement with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) which barred the company from sharing user data without explicit permission, because Facebook considered the partners extensions of itself – “service providers that allowed users to interact with their Facebook friends.” This allowed the company to grant such unprecedented access to everyone’s information. The partners were reportedly prohibited from using the personal information from purposes outside the scope of their agreement, however there has been little to no oversight.

Yesterday, Infowars reported that the NAACP was joining a long list of ideologically-diverse groups that were boycotting or otherwise moving away from Facebook.

“Over the last year, NAACP has expressed concerns about the numerous data breaches and privacy mishaps in which Facebook has been implicated,” wrote NAACP President Derrick Johnson. “And since the onset of the Silicon Valley boom, we have been openly critical about the lack of employee diversity among the top technology firms in the country.”

“Now, the time has come for our collective actions to emulate the severity of mistrust we have in Facebook.”

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑