by Paul Joseph Watson
Infowars.com

CEO Mark Zuckerberg

Citing the need to watch for potential sex offenders, Facebook is using software that tracks private conversations for suspicious behavior and keywords before alerting Facebook employees who then decide whether to pass the information on to police.

The revelation was divulged during a Reuters interview with the social networking giant’s Chief Security Officer Joe Sullivan.

Despite the article acknowledging the fact that Internet-related sex crimes against children are on the decrease, the story cites a barrage of cases where children have been groomed online before revealing that Facebook “users could be unnerved about the extent to which their conversations are reviewed, at least by computer programs.”

The software used by Facebook to monitor conversations works by ­searching “for improper communication” and analyzing “patterns of behavior.”

Words or phrases considered vulgar or an attempt to exchange personal information are red flagged and brought to the attention of Facebook employees, who then decide whether the content is worthy of being brought to the attention of law enforcement.

Too many messages sent without response also sets off an alarm that characterizes the content as suspicious.

The article does not divulge whether or not archives of chat records are stored and for what length of time, but adds that similar software is used by other social networking websites.

On its website, Facebook acknowledges that it shares information about users even in the absence of a court order or other legal request.

“We may also share information when we have a good faith belief it is necessary to prevent fraud or other illegal activity, to prevent imminent bodily harm, or to protect ourselves and you from people violating our Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. This may include sharing information with other companies, lawyers, courts or other government entities.”

Facebook has been caught in a number of privacy controversies in recent years.

Back in February, the company angrily denied a report by the Sunday Times which claimed Facebook was secretly reading texts sent by users of its Android app.

The U.S. government is actively involved in soliciting information from Facebook. Last month, the State Department issued a procurement request seeking tools that can provide “deep analysis of topics, conversations, networks, and influencers of the global social web.”

Privacy advocates like Wikileaks’ Julian Assange have repeatedly warned that social networks like Facebook and Twitter are little more than huge spying databases used by intelligence agencies to glean personal information.

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor and writer for Prison Planet.com.

He is the author of Order Out Of Chaos. Watson is also a regular fill-in host for The Alex Jones Show and Infowars Nightly News.

­by Marvin Ramírez and wire services

Above: Sheriff Ross Mirarimi thanks the support he has received from the community. Below: Eliana López testifies at the San Francisco Ethics Commission. (PHOTOS COURTESY LUKE THOMAS, FOGCITYJOURNAL.COMvention)­

ANALYSIS/OPINION – A marital dispute, that dragged on for six months, pitting the San Francisco political machine against the recently-elected San Francisco Sheriff, Ross Mirkarimi, has been extended until August 16.

At a cost costly trial utilizing taxpayers money, Mirkarimi is being charged with official misconduct for leaving a bruise on his wife arm after an argument. The official action for such a minor incident has made many wonder if there are any ulterior motives on the part of Mayor Ed Lee and his political ‘apparatus.’

After two days of testimony that ended Thursday night, July 19, the San Francisco Ethics Commission will reconvene next month to decide whether to strip Mirkarimi of his position after a solid win in last fall’s election for the position.

“Official misconduct,” as defined in the City Charter, is already a term so confusing and convoluted, that even the commissioners and lawyers involved are not clear to how to prosecute or defend, and whether it even applies to Mirkarimi’s case.

Mirkarimi was charged nearly six months ago with domestic violence against his wife, Eliana López, a native of Venezuela, after Mirkarimi allegedly held her right arm so strongly during an argument, as to leave a visible bruise.

A video taken on the suggestion of López’s neighbor, Ivory Madison, who identified herself to as a lawyer-friend, would be saved as evidence in a possibility of a divorce. Madison called the police against the will of López, causing the arrest of the sheriff, which lead to three misdemeanor domestic violence-related charges.

Mayor Lee consequently brought the official misconduct charges against Mirkarimi after he pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of involuntary imprisonment, which, in his case, seemed to mean preventing his wife Eliana López from leaving the house during the incident, which occurred during a New Year’s argument between the couple. Lee suspended Mirkarimi without pay in March, while according to witnesses, the mayor allegedly offered him another city position – through a third party – in exchange for his resignation, which caused the defense to accuse the mayor of perjury.

Mayor Lee was caught in a contradiction during his testimony under oath in this regard. (The Ethics Commission denied the defense to subpoena the witnesses, including Mayor Lee).

Mirkarimi declined to resign, and instead decided to fight the charges, claiming that the incident was not domestic violence and that it did not amount to “official misconduct,” citing repeatedly that the incident was a private and personal matter between himself and his wife.

To avoid damage to his career and further stress on his family – he and López have a three-year-old son, Theo – and a painful trial, Mirkarimi pleaded guilty to one charge of false imprisonment in March, thinking the matter was settled and he could get back to his new job serving the City of San Francisco, according to sources.

But instead, the mayor charged him with official misconduct, a charge that if found guilty, would strip Mirkarimi from the sheriff position.

Because the judge prohibited husband and wife from seeing or communicating with each other, Mirkarimi and López have not spoken to one another since March. At press time, they were asking the court to lift the protective order so the couple could live together again. Experts predicted that the order would be lifted. Previous Sheriff Mike Hennessy, now retired, many deputies, and a huge segment of the public, including Hispanic and African American community leaders, have come out in support of Mirkarimi.

As previously reported by KPFA, social justice advocates are asking what is to become of San Francisco Sheriff Mike Hennessey’s groundbreaking legacy of redemptive rather than retributive justice if newly elected Sheriff Mirkarimi is forced from office. Upon his retirement, Sheriff Hennessey endorsed then Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi to take his place.

After Mirkarimi’s decision to plead guilty to a misdemeanor in the domestic violence trial, which would allow him to legally remain in office, the San Francisco Chronicle reported this conversation with Hennessey: “My opinion is that he should remain in the job and be given a chance to show what he can do with the office. I think he’s being punished accordingly by the justice system,” said Hennessey, who has been lauded by victims’ advocacy groups over the years for domestic violence services and programs that began under his watch.

While admitting guilt to the crime of false imprisonment is serious, Hennessey said, it should not automatically disqualify Mirkarimi from holding office. “During my time as sheriff, I hired many people with criminal records who have done outstanding jobs for the department.

“Oftentimes, you have to look at the whole issue of rehabilitation and redemption, he added. KPFA Weekend News Host Cameron Jones said “San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee suspended Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi this week, after Mirkarimi brought his costly and sensational trial on domestic violence charges to an end by pleading guilty to a single misdemeanor charge – false imprisonment – which, in his case, seemed to mean preventing his wife Eliana López from leaving the house during a New Year’s argument. López has repeatedly asserted that her husband did not abuse her. Mayor Lee demanded that Mirkarimi resign, even though the misdemeanor conviction does not legally oblige him to do so.

When Mirkarimi refused, Lee launched an untested procedure to force him out. If the City’s Ethics Commission refers a decision to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, it will require 9 of the 11 supervisors votes to oust Mirkarimi. KPFA’s Ann Garrison has this report on the pushback against Mayor Lee, in support of Mirkarimi.

Why is Mayor Lee acting so coldly, heartlessly and without mercy in this case?

­Let’s not forget that the Sheriff position is the highest authority in the county, and the only constitutional authority. The rest are corporate code and statute enforcers.

In other words, money collectors for the international creditors: the international bankers. And I bet you, there is a lot of corruption in the City government, but is hard to prove. Have you noticed why the Sheriff doesn’t go around giving people tickets?

by S. D. Wells

Ever notice when you meet someone who eats mainly organic, who works out often, is financially stable and always in that “sharing” mode, that no matter what happens around them, they stay in that “gear,” that energetic and positive attitude just stays illuminated and seems to levitate over the negativity? Some people just seem to reach their potential every day, in almost every way.

If you haven’t noticed this, start paying attention, because they’re out there, and they are loving life. There is also a reason many people never reach their potential in life, never finalizing that idea that would have made them wealthy, and they’re just kind of “getting by,” not really applying themselves or making the most of their opportunities and gifts. (http://www.fi.edu/learn/brain/exercise.html/)

Believe it or not, a fairly rigid diet of organic food, drinks, herbs, vitamins, minerals, Dead Sea salts and natural spring water enables human beings to reach their ultimate HEALTH POTENTIAL and use more than 15 percent of their BRAIN each day. (http://skeptics.stackexchange.com)

Most people who do not consume these foods, supplements and spring water daily often use the same excuse when confronted with the organic choice: “It’s too expensive.”

This is simply NOT TRUE. Organic food is only more expensive when you shop at stores which either cater to processed food lovers or high end organic/health supply stores. Many mid-size grocers like Trader Joes and local farmer’s markets are quite reasonable, and even Whole Foods offers many organic items at the same prices you would find the “bad” foods at if shopping the big chain grocers like Farm Fresh, Food Lion and Kroger.

Embrace reality and change your habits

Once you come to grips with the fact that organic food is affordable, you have to pull in the reigns on your SALT AND SUGAR habit. Don’t panic!

Your taste buds will return to normal after you come off the high fructose corn syrup and the monosodium glutamate. Once you quit the deep fat fried habit and the super-salted meat and French fries, you’ll start tasting the true flavors of vegetables and fruits again, and realize exactly what it is you’re missing.

When you consume organic foods, your body and brain function at maximum capacity. Your body is not struggling to digest and filter out toxins, gluten, hormones, antibiotics, fluoride, bleach (white rice, white bread, white flour, white sugar, white pasta), artificial sweeteners, radioactive fish, genetically modified corn and soy, and the list goes on.

When you consume organic foods, your cells aren’t being strangled by preservatives like sodium benzoate, BHA, BHT, and your water isn’t polluted with BPA (bisphenol-A).

When you cut out processed foods and synthetic food agents from your daily intake, your energy doesn’t tap out five to ten minutes into a workout, or a jog.

You last 30 minutes, an hour, and eventually longer!

When you stop buying foods and products that cause cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer’s and arthritis, you STOP DONATING MONEY TO DISEASE, and you begin the repair and refortification of your own system. You stop wastingmoney going to the doctor for colds, flues, viruses, bacterial infections, allergies, bronchitis, cavities, heart disease, headaches, fibromyalgia, irritable bowels, colon polyps, prostate problems, breast cancer check-ups.

Make that change

When you change over to either strictly organic or even mostly organic, you support ‘mom and pop’ farmers and small businesses that don’t pollute the environment. You foster businesses that ARE NOT huge corporations interested in your slow death.

Eating organic foods and using organic products promotes sustainability. On non-organic farms in the United States, 30 percent of the insecticides, 60 percent of the herbicides, and over 90 percent of the fungicides are endocrine disruptors and carcinogens.

These hormone imbalances and toxins in humans lead directly to cancer tumors, make no mistake about it.

Research proves that nonorganic farm workers have unusually high rates of multiple myeloma (cancer of the immune system), stomach cancer, prostate cancer, and testicular cancer. (http://www.lymphomahelp.org/feinsteintestimony.php)

Not a single one of these chemicals, which total over 3,000 in pesticides, are used for ORGANIC FARMING. (http://www.worm-farmingrevealed.com/diatomaceous-earth-food-grade.html)

That is why you should always choose organic. Organic food is healthier, safer, and COSTS LESS THAN TOXIC FOOD, because ­one year, five years and 20 years from now, the bills related to your “health care” are massively reduced and/or non-existent.

Of course, if you don’t work on a non-organic farm, you’re not going to be exposed to that high quantity of pesticides and herbicides, but eating non-organic food adds up quickly, and can leave you grasping for straws and some “miracle” cure for your condition.

by Latin News and Prensa Latina

Manuel Santos

According to Latin News, there was a time not so long ago when Colombia’s President Juan Manuel Santos seemed to have the Midas touch.

He delivered two crushing blows against the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (Farc) with surgical strikes accounting for its leader, Guillermo León Sáenz, ‘Alfonso Cano’, and military commander, Víctor Julio Suárez, ‘Mono Jojoy’; he brought Colombia back to the front rank of regional powers after the country had suffered diplomatic isolation under his predecessor, Alvaro Uribe (2002-2010); and he recovered Colombia’s investment grade rating, which resulted in record foreign direct investment of US$13bn in 2011. Recent weeks, however, have categorically proven that everything he touches no longer turns to gold.

Venezuela gets its Mercosur wish

After a bit of deft maneuvering by Brazil and Argentina, Venezuela will be formally welcomed as a full member of the Southern Common Market (Mercosur, founded by Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay) on 31 July next, reported Latin Briefs.

Lopez Obrador presents Plan in Defense of Democracy in Mexico

The leader of the Mexican left announced today its National Plan for the Defense of Democracy, a struggle by peaceful means requiring the invalidity of the presidential election on July 1st.

As López Obrador stated at a press conference, this plan includes information meetings in public places and the convening of intellectuals, artists, scientists, youth and general public to participate in creative activities in defense of democracy and Mexico’s dignity.

Over 170 meetings are planned between July 29th and August 5th in major public places in the country.

This way, citizens will know, he explained, the way the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) operated “to get the votes and justify the supposed triumph of their candidate Enrique Peña Nieto.”

­He felt that elections were purchased and therefore, he added, it was violated the Article 41 of the Constitution, referring to the elections were neither free nor authentic.

Panama advocates for Lat Am, caribbean digital inclusion

The Summit “Connecting the Americas” of the International Union of Telecommunications (IUT) advocated so that the Latin American and Caribbean governments boost the deployment of bandwidth connectivity in the region to achieve a necessary digital inclusion.

Delegates from 35 countries, convened by the IUT, are attending the meeting, whose objective is to seek a sustainable access to Information and Communication Technologies (ICT).

The digital inclusion supposes the world, particularly indigenous people, those with disabilities, women, youth, and children, can use accessible ICT as a main tool for its economic and social development, experts stated.

IUT general secretary Hamadoun Toure recognized the Panamanian initiative of “Internet for Everyone” that seeks to achieve free access to people’s networks.

by Thomas R. Eddlem
New American

The United Nations is polishing up a global Arms Transfer Treaty (ATT) this month in a New York convention that would create a global registry of private ownership of firearms. This treaty — which would also mandate creation of a national collection agency for those guns and is contrary to the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment — has the long-standing and enthusiastic backing of the Obama State Department, headed by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“Conventional arms transfers are a crucial national security concern for the United States, and we have always supported effective action to control the international transfer of arms,” Hillary Clinton noted as early as October 14, 2009. Clinton boasted that “the United States regularly engages other states to raise their standards and to prohibit the transfer or transshipment of capabilities to rogue states, terrorist groups, and groups seeking to unsettle regions.” Of course, that speech was delivered at the same time the Obama administration was transferring some 2,000 small arms to Mexican drug gangs in the “Fast and Furious” gun-walking scandal.

The State Department website nevertheless absurdly continues to boast that “The United States has in place an extensive and rigorous system of controls that most agree is the ‘gold standard’ of export controls for arms transfers.”

In view of such obviously false public statements, one may question the sincerity of Obama State Department promises about “redlines” to the UN ATT, which supposedly protect the Second Amendment: “The Second Amendment to the Constitution must be upheld. There will be no restrictions on civilian possession or trade of firearms otherwise permitted by law or protected by the U.S. Constitution.

There will be no dilution or diminishing of sovereign control over issues involving the private acquisition, ownership, or possession of firearms, which must remain matters of domestic law.” The Obama State Department also promises “There will be no mandate for an international body to enforce an ATT.”

So America’s Second Amendment rights are safe, right? Hardly.

The draft of the treaty prepared earlier this year by the UN Preparatory Committee (PrepCom) explains that the treaty is aimed at crime control as well as rogue militias in developing nations:

The majority of conflict deaths are caused by the use of small arms, and civilian populations bear the brunt of armed conflict more than ever. Also, small arms are the dominant tools of criminal violence.

The PrepCom report of February 2012 — despite protestations by the Hillary Clinton’s minions — is not limited merely to international transfer of firearms. The draft treaty covers “transfers” as well as imports and exports of firearms:

The international transactions or activities covered by this Treaty include those listed below and defined in Annex A:

(a) Import;

(b) Export;

(c) Transfer…

In this matter, the 2012 conference is merely following the goals of the 2001 UN Programme of Action on small arms, which required national gun registries and collection agencies for those guns once they’ve been registered. The 2001 Programme of Action requires nations:

To ensure that comprehensive and accurate records are kept for as long as possible on the manufacture, holding and transfer of small arms and light weapons under their jurisdiction. These records should be organized and maintained in such a way as to ensure that accurate information can be promptly retrieved and collated by competent national authorities.

To develop and implement, where possible, effective disarmament, demobilization and reintegration programmes, including the effective collection, control, storage and destruction of small arms and light weapons…

The UN is still seeking this kind of broad control over private firearms ownership, and UN General Assembly resolution 66/47, adopted December 2, 2011 in advance of this month’s conference that it seeks to ban “The illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in all its aspects.” [Emphasis added]

Moreover, the 2012 PrepCom report uses broad bans on any transfer of firearms:

A State Party shall not authorize a transfer of conventional arms if there is a substantial risk that those conventional arms would: Be used in a manner that would seriously undermine peace and security or provoke, prolong or aggravate internal, regional, subregional or international instability.

­Some 56 or more U.S. senators have written a letter to President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton opposing the UN global gun registry, according to the National Rifle Association. Senatorial opposition began with a July 26, 2011 letter claiming that “the establishment of any sort of international gun registry that could impede upon the privacy rights of law-abiding gun owners is a non-starter.”

The U.S. State Department already has a State Department Office of Weapons Removal and Abatement that could be used as a control agency for domestic controls on firearms transfers.

The case in Syria today, where perfectly legal small arms in the hands of the government are crushing a largely disarmed civilian population.

It was also recently the case in the genocide in South Sudan, which recently won independence from Sudan — ending the genocide — after using “illicit” small arms in an independence effort.

In the 1994 Rwandan genocide, the “illegal” and “illicit” guns would have been those owned by the victims. And in Rwanda, the United Nations helped to facilitate arms deals to the government forces and was complicit in the genocide of some 800,000 innocent Tutsis. Gun control in Rwanda was so effectively implemented — in part with UN “peacekeeper” assistance — that much of the genocide against Tutsis was carried out by Hutu-aligned government forces with machetes — not guns!

Since the UN has traditionally backed genocidal governments over the victims who use “illicit” guns to defend themselves, it’s not surprising that human rights violator Iran is one of several regional chairmen of the UN ATT convention.