DID the CIA assassinate journalist Michael Hastings?
WikiLeaks’ release on Tuesday of a massive trove of secret CIA documents has reignited conspiracy theories which have swirled since 2013, with revelations the spy agency was attempting to remotely hack vehicles.
“As of October 2014 the CIA was also looking at infecting the vehicle control systems used by modern cars and trucks,” WikiLeaks writes. “The purpose of such control is not specified, but it would permit the CIA to engage in nearly undetectable assassinations.”
Hastings, an acclaimed war correspondent and vocal critic of government mass surveillance, died in the early hours of Tuesday, June 18, 2013, when his Mercedes C250 Coupe apparently lost control and burst into flames before slamming into a palm tree.
Witnesses to the accident, which occurred around 4:25am in the leafy Hancock Park neighbourhood of Los Angeles, said the car appeared to be travelling at top speed and was creating “sparks and flames” before it went off the road.
Just over 12 hours earlier, the 33-year-old BuzzFeed and Rolling Stone contributor had sent an email to colleagues and friends, warning he was onto a “big story” and was under investigation.
“The Feds are interviewing my ‘close friends and associates’,” he wrote in an email sent at around 1pm on Monday, June 17. “May be wise to immediately request legal counsel before any conversations or interviews about our news-gathering practices. I’m onto a big story and need to go off the radar for a bit. All the best, and hope to see you soon. Michael.”
Hastings’ final published article, ‘Why Democrats Love To Spy On Americans’, was highly critical of President Barack Obama and the US government’s domestic spying program, which had just been revealed by NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden.
Hastings accused the Obama administration and its allies in the FBI and Department of Justice of waging a war on “transparency supporters, whistleblowers and investigative reporters”.
I guess it depends. Most of the skins used in our society come from cattle, so as long as people eat beef, there will be a steady supply of leather and it would be wasteful not to use it.
Of course you're talking about furs, and in general I agree that it's a bad excuse to raise animals. Fur bearing animals aren't well adapted to being farmed, since they are quite intelligent and solitary. It seems cruel and unnecessary for them to live and die that way for such a frivolous purpose.
On the other hand, trapping is one of the few forms of income for natives in remote areas of Canada, and with the push to ban fur they've been largely stripped of that income which had enabled them to live a somewhat independent and traditional life. This is a contributing factor to the pervasive sense of hopelessness many natives in remote villages feel, leading to substance abuse and suicide.
Tim Pool is an independent journalist on Youtube.
The young are impressionable and firmly within the mental grip of educational institutions, and those who control them. Since educators have for the most part lived within the sanctuary of educational institutions all their lives, most of them have a tenuous grip on the realities of the larger world and are often quite delusional. As such, they're not the people to listen to when it comes to things like politics. Lowering the voting age would amount to an amplification of the delusional ideas of teachers. If anything, voting age should be raised because it takes life experience for people to break through the idiocy they learned in school and develop sensible ideas about the world.
Well technically it's just macaroni, but you know how donut shops sell donut holes? Spaghetti is macaroni holes. [points at head] Think about it.
Thank you for your very illustrative comment.
If people were raising rhinos and elephants commercially to satisfy the demand for ivory and rhino horns it would be a fair comparison (there would also be a lot more of them), but poaching wild animals is a crime. There are many illegal things people do to make money, I'm not going to defend them.
When you raise animals commercially, who's to say what's okay when it comes to deciding what to sell and what to discard after they're slaughtered? The market is basically the final arbiter of whether your business is allowed to continue or not, right? If you're not making money, you're losing money, and I think you'd probably go broke if you only sold the feathers. It costs money to raise chickens, and feathers aren't worth much compared to the meat, so according to the market it would not be okay to raise chickens just for their feathers, you'd need to sell the meat too.
Spaghetti is macaroni holes.
Reminds me of that Guns n Roses song 'November Rain'
"Nothing lasts forever, even cold November rain."
Most people still don't.
Wow, good Ted talk, thanks for sharing it.
The available evidence suggests that 5G does carry serious public health risks. We have a test group of people who have been exposed to 5G for an extended period of time: TSA personnel who work near airport scanners which use the same frequency range as 5G. They have been reporting that multiple people who work near those scanners are getting cancer.
"The FCC Approves 5G Millimeter Wave Spectrum Frontiers"
"A millimeter wave scanner is a whole-body imaging device used for detecting objects concealed underneath a person’s clothing using a form of electromagnetic radiation. Typical uses for this technology include detection of items for commercial loss prevention, smuggling and screening at government buildings and airport security checkpoints."
"the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) has obtained documents through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) that reveal TSA employees are reporting "cancer clusters" among their own employees who work near radiation body scanners"
Maybe it already is.
It's not the potato that's being criticized, nobody expects a potato to be active, that would be nightmarish.