Secret U.S. Government Watchlist Forces
Company To Place Hold On Orders
Paul Joseph Watson
February 25, 2014
Australian David Jones told his order had been delayed due to name being flagged by database
A secret U.S. government watchlist is forcing companies to place orders on hold, according to an
Australian named David Jones, whose name was flagged up as suspicious when he tried to purchase
computer parts. After Jones processed an “innocuous” order with Element 14, a large distributor of
electronic and computer parts in Australia, he arrived at the company’s trade counter to pick up the
goods only to be told that his order had been placed “on hold”.
After confirming that the hold was not due to the parts being restricted or suspicious in any way, Jones
was told, “that it wasn’t the parts that had been flagged, it was my NAME that was flagged. And they
said it was a US government watch list of some description.”
Staff told Jones that the system was designed to only flag up suspicious names, no matter how
common, and they didn’t have to be linked to a specific address. The “hold” was cleared and Jones was
given the parts within 5 minutes. The incident prompted Jones to recall that numerous previous orders
had also been mysteriously placed on “hold” with no explanation.
Jones notes that the system is “yet another stupid procedure forced upon the world and corporations by
the US government,” because all it takes to clear the “hold” instruction is for an Element 14 employee
to press a button.
“An Australian subsidiary, owned by a UK parent company, listed on the UK stock exchange, has an
ordering system that automatically matches generic names against some secret US Government watch
list, and flags those orders and puts them on hold, for parts that are already stocked in Australia, are
likely not made in the US, and likely have come from the main UK warehouse. Call me stupid, but
something doesn’t seem right with that,” writes Jones.
The fact that the orders being put on hold relate to computer parts serves as a reminder of a recent
revelations concerning how the NSA works with the FBI and CIA to intercept physical deliveries of
computers and other hardware in order to take the laptop, “to a secret workshop where it could be
discretely fitted with espionage software before being sent on its way.”
The operation and maintenance of U.S. government watchlists is notoriously ham-fisted. The no fly list
is merely one component of a 500,000-750,000 strong government “watch list” that has ensnared
people like the late former Senator Ted Kennedy, former presidential candidate John Anderson, and
many others including a Vermont college student, a retired Presbyterian minister and an ACLU
employee. In 2012 it emerged that an 18-month old daughter of two New Jersey-born Americans of
Middle Eastern descent was also added to the list.
The list has generated innumerable false positives which has led to widespread condemnation,
especially given that the government has refused to amend its mistakes. A judge recently ruled that the
no fly list was unconstitutional, but the federal government is fighting tooth and nail to keep it in place.
CNN journalist Drew Griffin was put on a TSA watchlist after he filed reports critical of the federal
agency. Activists have also been arbitrarily placed on watchlists in order to prevent them from
protesting at certain events.
Snowed Out In The Police State
February 24, 2014
Majority Balk At Idea Of Government Policing
February 25, 2014
But a sizeable portion are not fazed at threat to freedom of the press
A large majority of Americans stand in line with the First Amendment, saying that it is not the role of
the government to monitor the output of news organisations. However, according to a new poll, almost
30 percent did not express that view. The survey, conducted by Rasmussen, found that 71 percent of
voters were unhappy with the notion that the government should police the media. The question was
raised in response to a White House plan to place spies in newsrooms, details of which were leaked by
FCC Commissioner Ajit Pai last week.
A further 76 percent, according to the poll, said they were at least somewhat concerned that the FCC’s
proposal to analyse news content could lead to state controlled news that pushes government agendas.
Almost half said they were very Concerned that this could occur.
However, 18 percent said that they do think it is the government’s job to monitor news output, with a
further 11 percent saying they were not sure. That means that close to a third of Americans either do not
understand, or do not care about the notion of a free press, a right enshrined in the US Constitution.
Even more respondents to the survey, 38 percent, indicated that they would be happy to see government
mandated “equal commentary”, in other words a “fairness doctrine” mandate that all stations supply an
equal amount of conservative and liberal political commentary.
Only 49 percent said that such a government mandate was disagreeable. More Democrats favour the
idea than oppose it, while a majority of Republicans and Independents oppose the idea.
FCC Commissioner Pai told Fox News that journalists and news industry leaders are worried about
being subjected to government coercion regarding the plan which the government agency described as
part of an effort to meet the public’s “critical information needs.”
“A lot of folks that I’ve heard from from the
industry are telling me that they are worried
about the inadvertent coercion that might
happen if the FCC says ‘look we’re just
asking questions’,” said Pai.
The FCC has since backed off the plan, which
would have dispatched researchers working
on behalf of the federal agency “to grill
reporters, editors and station owners about
how they decide which stories to run.”
Judge Andrew Napolitano described the plan
to have bureaucrats monitor newsrooms as a
“radical new era of tyranny”.
Majority Balk At Idea Of Government
Policing The News VIDEO BELOW
Man Assaulted By Maryland Police For Filming
February 25, 2014
Police claim man’s First Amendment suspended for legally filming
In cellphone footage uploaded to Vimeo, a large group of police thought to be from the Baltimore
County Police Department can be seen arresting two people as a massive crowd watches from the
sidewalk. As the video’s author quietly films, one officer spots the camera and immediately
“Get out of my face,” the officer bizarrely says after walking up to the camera.
Despite being surrounded by countless people, the cameraman is specifically singled out as more police
approach and begin demanding he leave the area.
“Get the hell out of here!” a second officer says. “You diverted my attention!”
Attempting to assert his Constitutional right, the cameraman is suddenly assaulted as the second officer
begins pushing him down the street.
As the cameraman walks away from the scene, a group of officers continue to follow, clearly upset that
they are still being legally filmed. Another officer corners the cameraman and begins to threaten him
with jail time, refusing to point out any illegal activity or crime committed. “We’re not f*cking around,
do you understand?” the officer says. “Walk away and shut your f*cking mouth or you’re going to jail.”
Again attempting to find out what crime he has committed, the cameraman’s arm is suddenly twisted
behind his back as the enraged officer continues his threats.
“I thought I had freedom of speech?” the cameraman asks.
“You don’t, you just lost it,” the officer states.
Although the Supreme Court has continued to uphold the right to film police, First Amendment
violations seem to be on the increase as cameras become more commonplace.
Just last week, a Florida woman was assaulted by police for trying to record her own traffic stop.
Despite an officer claiming her actions were illegal, her charges were quickly dropped after spending
the night in jail.
The week prior, a New York man was harassed and assaulted by police for filming from 30 feet away.
Although officers attempted to delete the man’s footage, their police report was soon found to be false
after the encounter was retrieved from the phone.
As some police become increasingly hostile to the First Amendment, others set the example by
defending it. In 2012, Sheriff Stan Lenic became an internet sensation after refusing to detain activists
legally filming at New York’s Albany International Airport.
Man Assaulted By Maryland Police For Filming Arrest VIDEO BELOW
BECAUSE THERE'S A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND