Friday, November 23, 2012

Only in Israel: Female Bomber gets Pregnant, turns into a Man in 24 hours!


Only Possible in Tel Aviv: ‘Bombing’ Girl gets Pregnant during Arrest and turns into a Man in 24 hours!



Gazing on twitter noticing this:

Immediately noticing Leibovitch mentions: “HE”?
So i tweet they should upgrade the surveillance wall observing the highly recorded and monitored area of the Defense Ministry in Tel Aviv when all of a sudden some troll gives a response no one said it was a girl.

Oh yes they did!
Fase 1: A GIRL DID IT!

FASE 2! A Female did it! NOTICE: ARRESTED!

FASE 3! WOW a PUBLIC ALERT for a WOMAN

Fase 4 The News HQ tweets A FEMALE ( we’re btw still waiting on a claim of resistance that never came fyi)

FASE 5 HASBARA MOTHER OF A SOLDIER now even states she was pregnant….

I guess Steven Spielberg was on a leave for the script, or it was not escalated into the trolling troopers of zionist hasbara forces for these kind of evolution only happen in Tel Aviv. Where a fly not can shit unseen by undercovers or cameras and especially not at the specific location.

Nothing filmed right. No footage. So who are you fooling?

First there flies a Hezbollah drone unseen for hours over the whole of Israel. Now a bomber walks allegedly aside the Defense building and no video nor footage produced by the Tzahal. I smell some serious holes in security or maybe… it’s just one of Israel’s false flags. I bet my shekel on the latter.
Maybe I am too impatient and need to wait a little while until they doctor some evidence again.

Yet the following is quite miraculous!

Less than 2 hours, and within 24 hours the girl turns into a female “terrorist” bomber who is arrested. Get’s pregnant in the process to undergo within the same limited time a gender change.

Seriously Israel…. Who do you think is going to believe this crappy hasbara?
For the record:
Although on Nov 21, 2012 CloudPillarWar seems to have had psychic capabilities for he incited before: it was not Hamas, It has been Fatah.

Will be continued…. by more hasbara … or another false flag!

But to be very sure I borrowed a glass ball in the meanwhile and had a good gaze as well… oh wait where did I see the face before…..

I RECALL! HERE:
Seems the Israeli undercover rats have a ‘thing’ with sex changes. The info is confirmed my glass ball shows the attacker was wearing the same dress. Case solved.

Yes, the FBI and CIA can read your email. Here's how


Summary: "Petraeus-gate," some U.S. pundits are calling it. How significant is it that even the head of the CIA can have his emails read by an albeit friendly domestic intelligence agency, which can lead to his resignation and global, and very public humiliation? Here's how.

The U.S. government -- and likely your own government, for that matter -- is either watching your online activity every minute of the day through automated methods and non-human eavesdropping techniques, or has the ability to dip in as and when it deems necessary -- sometimes with a warrant, sometimes without.

Gen. David Petraeus, the former head of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, resigned over the weekend after he was found to have engaged in an extra-marital affair. What caught Petraeus out was, of all things, his usage of Google's online email service, Gmail.




This has not only landed the former CIA chief in hot water but has ignited the debate over how, when, and why governments and law enforcement agencies are able to access ordinary citizens' email accounts, even if they are the head of the most powerful intelligence agency in the world.

If it makes you feel any better, the chances are small that your own or a foreign government will snoop on you. The odds are much greater -- at least for the ordinary person (terrorists, hijackers et al: take note) -- that your email account will be broken into by a stranger exploiting your weak password, or an ex-lover with a grudge (see "Fatal Attraction").



Forget ECHELON, or signals intelligence, or the interception of communications by black boxes installed covertly in data centers. Intelligence agencies and law enforcement bodies can access -- thanks to the shift towards Web-based email services in the cloud -- but it's not as exciting or as Jack Bauer-esque as one may think or hope for.
The easiest way to access almost anybody's email nowadays is still through the courts. (Sorry to burst your bubble, but it's true.)

The 'save as draft' trick

Petraeus set up a private account under a pseudonym and composed email messages but never sent them. Instead, they were saved in draft. His lover, Paula Broadwell, would log in under the same account, read the email and reply, all without sending anything. The traffic would not be sent across the networks through Google's data centers, making it nigh on impossible for the National Security Agency or any other electronic signals eavesdropping agency (such as Britain's elusive GCHQ) to 'read' the traffic while it is in transit.
Saving an email as a draft almost entirely eliminates network traffic, making it nigh on impossible for intelligence agencies to 'traffic sniff.'
And yes, terrorists and pedophiles have been known to use this 'trick', but also sophisticated criminals also use this technique. It eliminates a network trail to a greater or lesser extent, and makes it more difficult to trace.

But surely IP addresses are logged and noted? When emails are sent and received, yes. But the emails were saved in draft and therefore were not sent. However, Google may still have a record of the IP addresses of those who logged into the account.

However, most Internet or broadband providers offer dynamic IP addresses that change over time, and an IP address does not always point to the same computer, let alone the same region or state every time it is assigned to a user. Even then, recent U.S. court cases have found that IP addresses do not specifically point to a computer, meaning even if the authorities were sure that it was Petraeus, for instance -- though IP addresses very rarely give the exact house number and street address -- it would not stick in court.

As is often the case, human error can land someone in the legal spotlight. 37-year-old Florida resident Jill Kelley, a family friend to the Petraeus', allegedly received emails from an anonymous account warning Kelley to stay away from the CIA chief.

But when Broadwell sent these messages, it left behind little fragments of data attached to the email -- every email you send has this data attached -- which first led the FBI on a path that led up to the very door of Petraeus' office door in Langley, Virginia.

Get a warrant, serve it to Google?

There's no such thing as a truly 'anonymous' email account, and no matter how much you try to encrypt the contents of the email you are sending, little fragments of data are attached by email servers and messaging companies. It's how email works and it's entirely unavoidable.

Every email sent and received comes with 'communications data,' otherwise known as "metadata" -- little fragments of information that carries the recipient and the sender's address, and routing data such as the IP addresses of the sender and the servers or data center that it's passed through. Extracting this metadata is not a mystery or difficult, in fact anyone can do it, but if you have the legal tools and law enforcement power to determine where the email was passed through -- such as an IP address of one of Google's data center in the United States.
Email is surprisingly similar to the postal system, especially when it comes to the communication "metadata."
The system is remarkably similar to the postal system. You can seal the envelope and hide what's inside, but it contains a postmark of where it came from and where it's going. It may even have your fingerprints on it. All of this information outside the contents is "metadata."

That said, even if you use a disposable Gmail account -- such as iamananonymousemailsender@gmail.com, for instance -- it's clearly a Gmail account, and Gmail is operated by Google. Sometimes it just takes a smidgen of common knowledge.

Ultimately, only Google had access to the emails. Because it's a private company, it does not fall under the scope of the Fourth Amendment. If the U.S. government or one of its law enforcement agencies wanted to access the private Petraeus email account, it would have to serve up a warrant.

In this case, however, the Foreign Intelligence Services Act (FISA) would not apply. Even the Patriot Act would not necessarily apply in this case, even though it does allow the FBI and other authorized agencies to search email. However, in this case, above all else, the Stored Communications Act does apply -- part of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

The act allows for any electronic data to be read if it has been stored for less than 180 days. In this case, the law was specifically designed -- albeit quite some time before email became a mainstream communications medium -- to allow server- or computer-stored data to be accessed by law enforcement.
However, a court order must be issued before the 180 day limit, and in this case it was. Reporting from London, the BBC News' Mark Ward summed it up in a single sentence:
Once it knew Ms. Broadwell was the sender of the threatening messages, the FBI got a warrant that gave it covert access to the anonymous email account.
And that's how they do it. No matter which way you look at it, no matter how much the government or its law enforcement agencies want the data or the proof of wrongdoing, they must almost always get a court order.

And Petraeus is no different from any other U.S. citizen, U.K. citizen, or European citizen -- and further afield for that matter. What it always boils down to is a court order, and it's as simple as that. It's not ECHELON or an episode of "24" using hacking or cracking techniques; it's an afternoon in a fusty courtroom with a semi-switched on (and preferably sober) judge.

That said, it doesn't grant unfettered or unrestricted access to a user's inbox or email account, but when an alleged crime has been committed or law enforcement starts digging around, it allows a fairly wide berth of powers to request access to electronically stored data.

Former assistant secretary to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security Stewart Baker told the Associated Press:
The government can't just wander through your emails just because they'd like to know what you're thinking or doing. But if the government is investigating a crime, it has a lot of authority to review people’s emails.
So there it is. A court order is all you need to access a person's inbox, but sufficient evidence is often required in order to do this -- particularly through the Stored Communications Act, or the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.

It sounds obvious, of course, that's because it is.

That said, if there is reasonable suspicion albeit lacking evidence, or a U.S. law enforcement agency is dealing with a foreign national outside of the United States, that normally requires a secret FISA court order to be granted in order to proceed with the interception of data or warranted access to an email account, for example.

Outside the U.S.: Is it still 'just' a court order?
A simple court order is all it takes and it can apply to anyone in public office or the man on the street holding a sign warning that "the end is nigh."
But it's OK; you're in Europe, or Australia, or Asia. The U.S. can't use their laws against you in a foreign country because, well, you're outside of its jurisdiction. Again, sorry to burst your privacy bubble but that excuse didn't wash with the European Parliament, it shouldn't with you either.

If you're a European citizen with a Microsoft, Google, Yahoo or Apple account -- or any email offered in the cloud by a U.S. company -- which is most consumer email services nowadays -- it is accessible to the U.S. courts and other nations through various acts of law, such as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) or the PATRIOT Act, in which the latter amended much of what the former had implemented in the first place.

("Oh great, he's talking about the Patriot Act again," says everybody.)

It's worth noting a common few misconceptions. Since first reporting this some years ago (and subsequently sparking a trans-Atlantic diplomatic row, whoops) analysts and experts alike, some who are under the thumb of the cloud companies themselves, claim that the Patriot Act -- to use the umbrella, common term -- does not allow the U.S. government or its law enforcement agencies the powers that others (*cough* including me) claim.

Let's just run through a few examples of false claims on top of false claims:

MythFact
The Patriot Act is the magic wand that allows the U.S. government unrestricted access to any data, anywhere, anytime. Untrue.
The Patriot Act gives the U.S. government unprecedented access to data hosted by U.S. companies anywhere in the world.Untrue.
All countries have similar legislation that gives the authorities a means to requisition data on cloud services, to investigate and prevent acts of terrorism.Unt... actually, quite true.
It doesn't give "unrestricted" or "unprecedented" access to date outside the U.S., because for the most part these warrants must go through a special FISA court. The trouble is even though there is some level of accountability via the FISA courts, these sessions are held in secret and there are no public minutes or record to go from, so swings and roundabouts.
Only in exceptional cases where warrants are not issued is when there is an immediate threat to life. But because these courts are secret, there's no definitive and ultimate way to know for an absolute fact that the U.S. authorities don't just bypass the FISA courts and skip ahead with their investigations anyway. (You only really have my word -- and my sources in the U.S. government, such as legal counsels and spokespeople, to go on.)
Pretty much every country around the world has 'Patriot Act'-like legislation. It's just where to look for it.
On the third point, other countries do have similar laws and this should be noted. (I personally thought it was relatively common knowledge, forgive my naivety.) The U.K., for instance, has the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act that can be used to acquire data from a third-country via a U.K.-based firm, just as the Patriot Act can be used on a U.S. firm to access data in a third-country via a local subsidiary.
But in terms of where the major email and cloud providers are based -- the United States, notably on the West Coast -- it means that U.S. law must apply, in spite of foreign laws that attempt to or successfully counteract the provisions offered in U.S. law. Not many major cloud providers operate solely in the U.K., whereas Microsoft, Google, Apple and Amazon are all U.S. headquartered with a subsidiary in the U.K. and other countries.

The lesson here? We're all as bad as each other and no legally or financially reasonable place is safe to store data if you're a massive criminal or looking to stash a bunch of secret or uncouth documents away from the authorities.

As for Petraeus, he may have been careful but in spite of his counter-terrorism knowledge and clever tricks in going under the radar, ultimately there was a weak link in the security chain -- and no matter how far you go to try and cover your tracks, often it always falls down to two things: human error, or sex.

Sharia police state? Saudi husbands can track wives’ travels electronically



AFP Photo / Amer Hilabi
AFP Photo / Amer Hilabi

Saudi Arabia introduced an electronic tracking system that alerts men by text message when their wife is leaving the country, even if they are traveling together. The system was swiftly condemned by activists and Twitter users.

Saudi women – banned in the country from driving, denied the right to travel without their husband’s consent and required to wear a veil from head to toe – are now to be monitored by a new electronic system that tracks cross-border movement, AFP reported.

Woman in Saudi Arabia are not allowed to leave the ultraconservative kingdom without the permission of their male ‘guardian,’ or husband, who must give his consent by signing a register known as the ‘yellow sheet’ at the border or airport. Now, husbands will receive a text message to remind them even if they’re traveling outside the country alongside their wife.

The move was quickly condemned and ridiculed on Twitter, which has remained an island of free speech in the repressive Islamic nation:

“Hello Taliban, herewith some tips from the Saudi e-government,” one user wrote.
“If I need an SMS to let me know my wife is leaving Saudi Arabia, then I’m either married to the wrong woman or need a psychiatrist,” user Hisham wrote.
“Why don’t you cuff your women with ankle bracelets too?” user Israa joked.
User Raza Ahmad quipped, “Good going Saudi Arabia, what’s next chastity belts?”
“The authorities are using technology to monitor women, it would be better for the government to busy itself with finding a solution for women subjected to domestic violence,” columnist Badriya al-Bishr said, criticizing what she called the “state of slavery under which women are held.”

Saudi Arabia is the only country in the world where women are not allowed to drive. In June 2011, female activists lead by Manal al-Sheif launched a campaign to defy the ban. But many were arrested and forced to sign a pledge that they would never drive again. In a similar incident in November 1990, 47 women were arrested after staging a demonstration in their cars.

King Abdullah, seen by the West as a cautious reformer, granted women the right to vote and run in municipal election beginning in 2015. Also, the newly appointed chief of the religious police commission – which enforces Saudi Arabia’s severe version of Sharia law – Sheikh Abdullatif Abdel Aziz al-Sheikh, banned members of the commission from harassing Saudi women over their dress and behavior.
But these signs of a more lenient attitude towards women have done little to dent a widely repressive and patriarchal culture. The kingdom enforces strict rules governing interactions between the sexes, and the many restrictions placed on Saudi women have led to high levels of female unemployment, estimated to around 30 percent.

Suicide rates among young Saudi women are also some of the highest in the world, with many attempting to take their lives “when they realize that their right to choose with their own free will is denied,” an anonymous female doctor in the Saudi city of Riyadh said in a 2011 interview.

“Saudi women are treated as minors throughout their lives, even if they hold high positions, there can never be reform in the Kingdom without changing the status of women as equals to men,” liberal activist Suad Shemmari told AFP.
Muslim women walk in the rain (AFP Photo / Awad Awad)
Muslim women walk in the rain (AFP Photo / Awad Awad)

Pregnant baby girl born in Saudi Arabia






27.11.2008

An outstanding incident took place in the medical practice of Saudi doctors. A year-old girl turned out to be pregnant. Doctors said that it was the first incident in the history of modern medicine. Arab media outlets discuss whether the removal of the fetus from the baby girl is going to be considered a murder.
It turned out that the mother of the pregnant baby originally had two embryos during her pregnancy. One of the embryos began to develop in the uterus of the other child. In spite of the fact that doctors describe the incident as unique, there can be other similar examples found in history.



A 36-year-old farmer had the embryo of his twin brother removed in the town of Nagpur, India, in 2006. The man asked for medical help only after his swollen belly hampered his breathing.

Doctors were certain that the man had a gigantic tumor in his belly. However, they found fragments of human genitalia, hairs, limbs and jaws in the patient and finally removed a weird underdeveloped creature having legs and arms with long nails.

In 2002, Indian doctors found a fetus in the body of a six-month-old boy. The dead fetus, which surgeons removed from the boy, weighed one kilo, whereas the boy himself weighed 6.5 kilos.

The anomalous phenomenon is known as fetus in fetu. Such incidents are extremely rare: an embryo inside an embryo may appear once in 500,000 pregnancies. The phenomenon always occurs at an early stage of pregnancy. As a rule, the fetuses die in mother’s womb.

It may also happen that a child with a fetus inside survives the entire pregnancy. In this case the embryo continues to live inside its owner’s body like a trapped parasite. 

A fetus in fetu can be considered alive, but only in the sense that its component tissues have not yet died or been eliminated. Thus, the life of a fetus in fetu is inherently limited to that of an invasive tumor. In principle, its cells must have some degree of normal metabolic activity to have remained viable. 

However, without the gestational conditions attainable (so far) only in utero with the amnion and placenta, a fetus in fetu can develop into, at best, an especially well-differentiated teratoma; or, at worst, a high-grade metastatic teratocarcinoma. In terms of physical maturation, its organs have a working blood supply from the host, but all cases of fetus in fetu present critical defects, such as no functional brain, heart, lungs, gastrointestinal tract, or urinary tract. Accordingly, while a fetus in fetu can share select morphological features with a normal fetus, it has no prospect of any life outside of the host twin. Moreover, it poses clear threats to the life of the host twin on whom its own life depends. 

Kennedy, King Lear and unspeakable Illuminati agenda





By Nicolas Bonnal

Kennedy, King Lear and unspeakable Illuminati agenda. 48593.png
The assassination of Irish-catholic President Kennedy, fifty years ago, is the biggest and cruellest provocation of all time, for it came in a time when everyone had a television and thus the possibility to be assaulted and insulted by a monstrous conspiracy. We were all watching our TV (his burial is my first TV souvenir, and what a souvenir!), and we were assisting a barbaric and absurd attack that was devised to be inexplicable since its very beginning. Hundred of books on this silly matter will explain nothing, they will just drown the fish. We were doomed to be dumb; we were doomed to be eyes wide shut in front of the first globally watched performance of the Illuminati.

Illuminati means here a mix of secret services (according to Lord Byron an agency is a demoniac group of devilish spirits, see Manfred), warmongers and media conditioners, magi that have replaced the spies, actors and false monks of the baroque times (read again the three musketeers!). They could take hence the power and manipulate the reality as they would. And they used a war-slave like Oswald, (as they used sex-slaves like Marilyn), to create a Bin-Laden like image of false villain. They can use a Manchurian candidate, a soviet candidate, an Arab candidate.

As my readers know, Shakespeare gives us the keys of devilish modernity which appeared by the end of the sixteenth century: Hamlet, Macbeth, the Tempest are thus full of hidden messages. This time it is in King Lear, and the words evocate an agent named... Oswald:
I know thee well: a serviceable villain,
As duteous to the vices of thy mistress
As badness would desire.
Oswald is thus diagnosed: a steward used in false flag attacks, a serviceable villain who will be charged of all crimes, like Bin Laden whose name means... loaded in German (actually The Bin Laden family came to Yemen from Spain where they spoke the ladino dialect).
Conspiracies are related to technology improvements: hydraulics, optics and typography are thus the keys to understand the dawn of baroque era. I won't comment the tools of our time.

King Lear and Oswald, King Lear and McLuhan: the play is important to Marshall McLuhan, the catholic theoretician of the galaxy Gutenberg. And with the symbolic assassination of the first Irish-catholic president, we entered into the new electronic galaxy, leaving behind the Gutenberg galaxy. Since this murder, we are in the abominable matrix of the ever-flowing images, ever-manipulated events and never-explained scandals. 

This is mere baroque witchcraft, as described by the Great William or Frenchman Pierre Corneille in his play the comical illusion or of course the great Spanish poets (Life is a dream, as put Calderon). At this already post-Christian time, peopled with astrologists, garden kooks, lenses-makers (distorters of reality) and alchemists, we discover that "we are such stuff as the dreams are made off". This is the secret of Shakespearian sadness. We are victims like Hamlet of a fake reign of appearances (they told his father the king died alone during a nap!); the victims of the "baseless fabric of vision", IE the mainstream media industry and control system whom everybody believes more and less.

But I get back to Kennedy. As I already asserted, he was murdered the 11/22 in front of a Masonic temple, in Dallas, a town situated on the 33rd parallel like Los Alamos, Bermuda, Tripoli, Damascus, Baghdad, Tibet, Nagasaki and other unlucky places of strategic and occult importance. 

The ritual importance of his abject and "inexplicable" murder has been admirably described by James Shelby Downard and Michel A Hoffman II in their master essay King Kill 33; the readers may read easily this great text on the web. It underlines the phenomenon of Aphanism practiced at high level of evil politics: the disappearance or the dismemberment of a dead body belonging to a VIP during a peculiar autopsy. It has been practiced since... Osiris.

But what was the meaning of this logical and ritual murder for the Illuminati? A sacrifice is said propitiatory when it helps evil, when it paves the way for new crimes and interventions and wars anywhere. And the shifting of the sixties prepared the decay of the white Christian western cultures, with the infamous lemma "sex, drugs and rock'n'roll". This meant the decline of European and white American births, the end of moral criteria and the beginning of the end of our industries and of our culture with high standards. We entered into the dark dominion of subculture, underground and soft Satanism (sometimes not so soft), except in the soviet-protected area. There they preferred Shostakovich to the Beatles, while birth rates remained high at least until perestroika and the overture to the west.

The assassination of President Kennedy (whose perfect family had astounded general de Gaulle) supposed too the dominion of the "unspeakable", to take the words of writer James Douglass, that is the secret services, the hidden CIA and the hardliners of what was left of America, turned into the heart of a destructive, alienating and global matrix. Lyndon B. Johnson, a high-degree mason, took the power, corrupted his youth, demoralized his country, launched the wars, and practiced a rabid anticommunism in Vietnam (3 million dead under the bombings!), Bolivia and elsewhere. He covered the infamous and conscious attack by Israeli forces of the US ship Liberty in 1967 and imposed silence to the Navy officers and their families who vainly fought then for their rights. Damned Johnson from Texas too was here denaturise his people with the nationality and immigration act, and so progressively distort the body and the soul of his country, as a black magus would do. But this is why the ritual murder of Kennedy was decided for, and infamous Warren commission was thus designed to designate the villain.

Damned Lyndon (think of Kubrick, again) B. Johnson who betrayed America would be thus nicknamed by Shakespeare:
his is a slave, whose easy-borrowed pride
Dwells in the fickle grace of her he follows.

Johnson is now replaced by Obama whose Illuminati controlled-agenda is worse than Bush's!
As Mr Douglass says, Obama is not a new Kennedy; pitiful Obama is arguably the new Johnson, acting for the anti-white and anti-Christian minorities in America and for the sect of totalitarian oligarchs (the same gruesome gangs who hate Vladimir Putin) all around the world. Just open your eyes and minds to get what's going on anywhere.
Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day nor
The hour wherein the Son of man cometh.
John, 25, 1

Israel Has Turned Propaganda Into a Game, And It’s Pretty Gross



To help spin the good spin in its current stoush with Hamas, the Israeli Defence Force has launched a program called IDF Ranks. Which is, essentially, a game about being a mouthpiece for the Israeli Defence Force.

It's aimed at young internet users, both inside Israel but especially internationally, who are told that by signing up they'll be joining "the ultimate virtual army", and be rewarded with promotions and medals for jumping on social media and spreading the good word about... well, war.
...

Enlisting the common man to do your propaganda work is a trick as old as war itself, but this kind of candy-coloured "gamification" is certainly new. And more than a little gross. Regardless on your thoughts on the conflict at large—as an Australian I'm about as distanced from the whole thing as you can be—I'd hope most people could see the problems, or at least poor taste, in making a game out of "spreading the truth" about one side's role in a war in which real people are dying.

IDF Ranks – Become The Ultimate Israeli Virtual Soldier!

Have you ever wanted to join the military and fight to defend Israel? Well, now you can, with IDF Ranks — embedded directly in all IDF social platforms!

IDF Ranks promotes YOU for your activities around IDF-related material. Your every action — commenting, liking, sharing and even just visiting — rewards your efforts, as well as helps spread the truth about the Israeli army all over the world.

Click Here For The Game: http://www.idfblog.com/2012/07/02/idf-ranks-become-the-ultimate-virtual-soldier/