JFK: Looking Back to 1963

The assassination of John F. Kennedy, the thirty-fifth President of the United States, took place on Friday, November 22, 1963, in Dallas, Texas, at 12:30 p.m. Central Standard Time (18:30 UTC) in Dealey Plaza.

Kennedy was fatally shot while riding with his wife Jacqueline in a Presidential motorcade.


source

The ten-month investigation of the Warren Commission of 19631964, the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) of 19761979, and other government investigations concluded that the President was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald, who himself was murdered before he could stand trial.

This conclusion was initially met with support among the American public, but polls conducted from 1966 on show as many as 80% of the American public have held beliefs contrary to these findings.

The assassination is still the subject of widespread debate and has spawned numerous conspiracy theories and alternative scenarios.

In 1979, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) found both the original FBI investigation and the Warren Commission Report to be seriously flawed.

The HSCA also concluded that there were at least four shots fired and that it was probable that a conspiracy existed. Later studies, including one by the National Academy of Sciences, have called into question the accuracy of the evidence used by the HSCA to support its finding of four shots.

The Event Continues Investigation to the present day.

PHOTOS

COVERUP?

source

Is Zapruder Film Accurate?

source

RUSH TO JUDGMENT - MARK LANE

Watch MARK lANES RUSH TO JUDGEMENT in Entertainment  |  View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com
source

Tonight's Bright Moon

This was taken from my camcorder


And below is the video

source


Sky show tonight: Full moon, Mars close to Earth

Mercury News
Posted: 01/29/2010 11:48:07 AM PST
Updated: 01/29/2010 02:36:48 PM PST
source

Clouds willing, the sky will put on a show tonight: Both the full moon and Mars will be about as close to Earth as they get.

The moon, which will rise around 5:15 p.m., will be the closest full moon of 2010, occurring during the lunar perigee — the point in its cycle when the moon is closest to earth. It will appear about 15 percent bigger and 30 percent brighter than a full moon at an average distance. Perigeal tides are also a little higher — but only by an inch or so.

As for Mars, it was a tad bit closer to Earth on Thursday, but the viewing is likely to be better tonight: It will be in opposition, meaning it is directly opposite the sun. Appearing as a bright reddish dot to the left of the

Perhaps to avert some of the weird hoopla that accompanied a good Mars viewing opportunity several years back ("it will look as big as the moon!" some people burbled), NASA hosted a live online chat this afternoon about the phenomenon. (The transcript will be posted at http://www.nasa.gov/connect/chat/index.html).

Of course, the wild card for Bay Area viewing is the visibility: Rain is forecast for this evening.

If it's clear, telescopes will be available for the usual Friday night free public viewing at the observatories of Foothill College in Los Altos Hills (9 p.m.-11 p.m.) and Chabot Space & Science Center in Oakland (7:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m.).

And if the clouds don't cooperate? Saturday won't be bad viewing; in fact, the just-past-full moon will rise into darker skies, about 6:30 p.m. The full moons of February and March will also be within a day or so of the perigee, though they won't be quite as spectacular. And Mars will loom large again in a couple of years.

Great White Egrets of Sonoma

Today there were over 20 great white egrets including their young in the wet field along where I walk each day - pretty cool to watch!


source
Music: Brahms Symphany 1 (2nd Movement)

Great Egret

Today's Sonoma Chemtrails

source

MORE: Sonoma Chemtrails

Photo of the Day

This afternoon I walked outside and was greeted with a rainbow so big, I couldn't fit it all in one camera shot! A kiss from heaven...

My Pro-Choice Decision

source

My Pro-Choice Decision


source

Stormy Weather

From Cathy's Camera

Piner Road Santa Rosa Flooding

source

More Storm Damage

source

Photo of the Day

In between storms yesterday around noon facing Sonoma from 8th St East and Schellville Road, a lovely rainbow could be seen.

Storm Damage

Today's storm ripped through Sonoma County causing trees to fall into two homes along the Russian River.
From the Press Democrat

source

Avoid Debit Card Skimming

Debit-Card 'Skimming' Scams
Friday, January 15, 2010
consumerreports.org
source

Three steps to take to protect your account data from getting into the wrong hands.

Whether by choice or necessity, American consumers are increasingly relying on debit rather than credit cards. Debit card spending has risen steadily, growing from 47.7 percent of purchases made with plastic in 2003 to 58.9 percent in 2008 and it is expected to surpass 67 percent by 2013, according to the Nilson Report, a newsletter that tracks the consumer payment industry.

When you use a debit card, the money is immediately taken from your checking account. While using debit guarantees that you pay as you go, these cards have downsides, including a growing appeal to thieves. "As economic conditions have worsened, there's been a noticeable increase in all types of card fraud," says Avivah Litan, an analyst specializing in fraud detection and prevention at Gartner Research in Stamford, Conn. "But ATM and debit-card fraud is the top area of concern we're hearing about from banks all over the world."

Unlike credit-card thieves, who usually charge merchandise and then resell it to come up with money, people who create counterfeit ATM or debit cards by stealing your PIN and other account data can simply pull cold cash from your bank account. Using a technique known as skimming, they set up equipment that captures magnetic stripe and keypad information when you input your PIN at ATM machines, gas pumps, restaurants, or retailers.

Here's how you can protect yourself:

Don't Type in Your Pin at the Pump

Be especially vigilant at gas stations, Litan says. "Gas pumps are notorious for skimming because they're produced by only a couple of different manufacturers, and if someone gets the key to one from a disgruntled employee, they can insert a skimming device inside the pump where it can't be seen," she says. She recommends using a credit card rather than a debit card when you fill your tank.

If you must use a debit card at the gas pump, choose the screen prompt that identifies it as a credit card so that you do not have to type in your PIN. The purchase amount will still be deducted from your bank account, but it will be processed through a credit-card network, which will give you greater protection from liability if fraud does occur. This is because card issuers typically have "zero liability" policies for both debit and credit cards, but sometimes exclude PIN-based transactions from that protection.

Stick With ATMs Located at Banks

To reduce your risk at ATMs, use machines at banks rather than in convenience stores, airports, or any isolated locations, advises Darrin Blackford, a spokesman for the U.S. Secret Service, which investigates financial crimes involving interstate commerce. "A thief has to be able to attach and retrieve a skimming device to use the data it's gathered," he says. "And that's more likely to happen in nonbank settings where there's less traffic and no surveillance cameras."

That doesn't mean that bank ATMs are immune, however. In August 2008, Wachovia Bank reported that several debit-card "identities" were stolen when a skimming device was placed on an ATM at a branch in Cape Coral, Fla.

"It's often hard to spot skimmers," Blackford says. "But if you notice a change at an ATM you use routinely, such as a color difference in the card reader or a gap where something appears to be glued onto the slot where you insert your card, that's a warning sign you'd want to report to the bank that owns the machine."

Closely Monitor Your Bank Accounts

Check them regularly—preferably online rather than waiting for monthly statements to arrive in the mail. Federal law limits your liability for fraudulent debit-card charges to $50, but only if you report the theft or loss of your card or PIN within two business days of discovering the problem. If you fail to report unauthorized charges within 60 days of the date the statement listing those charges was mailed, you could be liable for any unauthorized withdrawals afterward, including the full value of credit lines or savings accounts linked to your account for overdraft protection.

Visa and MasterCard have zero liability policies that go beyond federal law by exempting debit cardholders from liability in most circumstances when a bank investigation confirms that a transaction is fraudulent. But dealing with debit-card fraud can have a greater impact on your finances than credit-card fraud.

When you're a victim of unauthorized charges on a credit card, you won't be out any money while the disputed charges are being investigated. But when a thief steals money from your bank account using a counterfeit debit or ATM card, that cash won't be restored to your account until the bank conducts its investigation and classifies it as a case of fraud. Some victims of debit-card skimming scams who have contacted the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, a nonprofit consumer advocacy group, about their experiences report that while banks in most cases replenished the stolen funds, some of them had no access to the money for several weeks while bank investigations were conducted.

Today's Sonoma Photo

Q. Where?


A.Sonoma Skypark Airport

Sonoma Picture of the Day

What REALLY Happened on Sept 11, 2001?

http://www.prlog.org/10481408-911-qui-tam-case-filed-in-us-supreme-court.html

9/11 Qui Tam Case Filed in US Supreme Court

29 December 2009 – Ridgefield Connecticut/Clemson South Carolina – The Qui Tam Case of Dr. Judy Wood – Court of Appeals, Second Circuit Docket Number 08-3799-cv), United States District Court (SDNY) Docket Number: 07-cv-3314 has been filed in the US Supreme Court in a petition for writ of certiorari.

Publicly available information about the status of the petition can be found at the Supreme Court's website at: http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/09-548.htm

Below is a summary of the nature of Dr Wood’s Qui Tam Case, for full details, see Dr Wood’s Webpage: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.shtml'

In 2005, a number of reports were issued by NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) which were the result of a study, mandated by congress, to "Determine why and how WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed ...". In April 2007, Dr. Wood, with the help of a Connecticut Attorney Jerry Leaphart, lodged a “Qui Tam” complaint against some of the contractors NIST employed to produce these reports. This complaint followed an earlier "Request For Correction" (RFC) with regard to the same NIST WTC reports, establishing her as the first to address the fact that this report did not even contain an analysis of the collapse of the WTC towers.

http://ocio.os.doc.gov/s/groups/public/%40doc/%40os/%40ocio/%40oitpp/documents/content/prod01_004678.pdf

In the original RFC, Dr. Wood stated that “NIST cannot make a statement that the World Trade Center towers came down in ‘free fall’ on one hand”, and then say “that doing so is a form of collapse.” Dr Wood concluded from her study, that a new type of Directed Energy Weapon was used to destroy most or all of the WTC buildings. This weapon appears to utilise “field effects” in its operation – it is fundamentally different to known types of directed energy weapons, such as lasers and masers. Dr Wood’s Qui Tam submissions do not discuss the use of “ray beams from space” (a term which has been used to mis-represent what the case focuses on). The case discusses many, many pieces of evidence which indicate the presence of field effects in and around the WTC complex on 9/11 - including pictures of girders which are bent and deformed in unusual ways – and because the towers turned to dust, the effects on the girders cannot be explained as being caused by a “gravity-driven collapse”. In Dr. Wood’s submission, certain effects on metals and on objects near the WTC are also considered – such anomalous dust effects, flipped cars, and cars which are “toasted” – but show damage inconsistent with a hot fire. Anomalous rusting and effects seen in the Deutsche Bank building are also noted. Dr. Wood’s later research has also documented the presence of Hurricane Erin, which was closest to NYC at about 8am on 9/11, but was not widely reported.

Dr. Wood also points out that some defendants in the Qui Tam - such as Applied Research Associates (ARA) - are developers and/or manufacturers of Directed Energy Weapons systems or components. This therefore would be one example of a “conflict of interest” in producing a truthful report. Dr Wood’s case states that ARA and other NIST contractors exhibited “wilful blindness” when they produced their part of the NCSTAR reports.

Dr. Wood has demonstrated that the Twin Towers did not burn up nor did a significant portion of them “crash down”; they turned to powder in mid air. Fire alone cannot turn a quarter-mile tall building to powder in 8-10 seconds. The respondents herein knew or should have known this and they therefore engaged in actionable fraud within the meaning of the FCA. Contrary to what some have assumed, the case is not one which identifies or attempts to identify the perpetrators of the destruction of the WTC complex.

In June 2008, Judge George Daniels of the Court of the SDNY dismissed Dr. Wood’s case, but Dr. Wood asserted that the court’s ruling did not address the evidence discussed above (the ruling can be read at the website above). A decision was therefore made to lodge an appeal and another round of submissions took place. Following submission of extensive documentation, oral argument of the case took place on 23rd June 2009, in the Ceremonial Courtroom (9th Floor), at 500 Pearl Street, Manhattan, New York City.

On July 13, 2009, the United States Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit, issued an 11 page decision in which it affirmed the lower court's decision dismissing Dr. Judy Wood's Qui Tam case. (This was slightly amended on 16th of July.) In common with the first ruling, analysis done on behalf of Dr. Wood led to the conclusion that the appellate court had not properly addressed the arguments presented in the appeal. An interesting point was raised because the “False Claims Act” (FCA), which relates directly to all cases like those initiated by Dr Judy Wood, was enhanced – and those enhancements applied to all cases which were pending as of June 7, 2008. The Second Circuit acknowledged on the one hand that the FCA had been amended, but on the other, it did not take those amendments into account in its ruling.

An important development occurred in early December when Attorney Jerry Leaphart wrote to the United States Department of Justice, National Security Division and to existing United States Department of Defense Military Commissions defence counsel for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM), who is accused of conspiring in the “officially described” 9/11 plot. Jerry Leaphart’s letters outlined the evidence in Dr. Wood’s case and which has been put into the public record via NIST and other governmental sources. In a legal sense, this essentially raises “reasonable doubt” (to put it no more strongly than that) in regard to the official story of 9/11 and therefore could be used in Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s defence as “exculpatory” information which the government must provide to KSM’s defence counsel.

For more information, please use the details below.

Jerry Leaphart, Jerry V. Leaphart & Assoc., P.C. 8 West Street, Suite 203 Danbury, CT 06810 phone - (203) 825-6265 , fax – (203) 825-6256, e-mail: jsleaphart@cs.com

Dr. Judy Wood/Qui Tam Case: http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.shtml

NIST’s filings of the RFC’s and responses can be found at:
http://www.ocio.os.doc.gov/ITPolicyandPrograms/Information_Quality/PROD01_002619

WeCU and Crimethink

In the 1949 novel by George Orwell, "Nineteen Eighty-Four", the Big Brother government attempts to control not only speech and actions, but also the thoughts of the people, labeling disapproved thoughts with the term thoughtcrime or in Newspeak, "crimethink".

So today, here's an interesting article on the reality of this previous science fiction activity!

Mind-reading systems could change air security

By MICHAEL TARM, Associated Press
Fri Jan 8, 6:22 am ET
source

CHICAGO – A would-be terrorist tries to board a plane, bent on mass murder. As he walks through a security checkpoint, fidgeting and glancing around, a network of high-tech machines analyzes his body language and reads his mind.

Screeners pull him aside.

Tragedy is averted.

As far-fetched as that sounds, systems that aim to get inside an evildoer's head are among the proposals floated by security experts thinking beyond the X-ray machines and metal detectors used on millions of passengers and bags each year.

On Thursday, in the wake of the Christmas Day bombing attempt over Detroit, President Barack Obama called on Homeland Security and the Energy Department to develop better screening technology, warning: "In the never-ending race to protect our country, we have to stay one step ahead of a nimble adversary."

The ideas that have been offered by security experts for staying one step ahead include highly sophisticated sensors, more intensive interrogations of travelers by screeners trained in human behavior, and a lifting of the U.S. prohibitions against profiling.

Some of the more unusual ideas are already being tested. Some aren't being given any serious consideration. Many raise troubling questions about civil liberties. All are costly.

"Regulators need to accept that the current approach is outdated," said Philip Baum, editor of the London-based magazine Aviation Security International. "It may have responded to the threats of the 1960s, but it doesn't respond to the threats of the 21st century."

Here's a look at some of the ideas that could shape the future of airline security:

MIND READERS

The aim of one company that blends high technology and behavioral psychology is hinted at in its name, WeCU — as in "We See You."

The system that Israeli-based WeCU Technologies has devised and is testing in Israel projects images onto airport screens, such as symbols associated with a certain terrorist group or some other image only a would-be terrorist would recognize, said company CEO Ehud Givon.

The logic is that people can't help reacting, even if only subtly, to familiar images that suddenly appear in unfamiliar places. If you strolled through an airport and saw a picture of your mother, Givon explained, you couldn't help but respond.

The reaction could be a darting of the eyes, an increased heartbeat, a nervous twitch or faster breathing, he said.

The WeCU system would use humans to do some of the observing but would rely mostly on hidden cameras or sensors that can detect a slight rise in body temperature and heart rate. Far more sensitive devices under development that can take such measurements from a distance would be incorporated later.

If the sensors picked up a suspicious reaction, the traveler could be pulled out of line for further screening.

"One by one, you can screen out from the flow of people those with specific malicious intent," Givon said.

Some critics have expressed horror at the approach, calling it Orwellian and akin to "brain fingerprinting."

For civil libertarians, attempting to read a person's thoughts comes uncomfortably close to the future world depicted in the movie "Minority Report," where a policeman played by Tom Cruise targets people for "pre-crimes," or merely thinking about breaking the law.

LIE DETECTORS

One system being studied by Homeland Security is called the Future Attribute Screening Technology, or FAST, and works like a souped-up polygraph.

It would subject people pulled aside for additional screening to a battery of tests, including scans of facial movements and pupil dilation, for signs of deception. Small platforms similar to the balancing boards used in the Nintendo Wii would help detect fidgeting.

At a public demonstration of the system in Boston last year, project manager Robert Burns explained that people who harbor ill will display involuntary physiological reactions that others — such as those who are stressed out for ordinary reasons, such as being late for a plane — don't.

The system could be made to work passively, scanning people as they walk through a security line, according to Burns.

Field testing of the system, which will cost around $20 million to develop, could begin in 2011, The Boston Globe said in a story about the demonstration. Addressing one concern of civil libertarians, Burns said the technology would delete data after each screening.

THE ISRAELI MODEL

Some say the U.S. should take a page from Israel's book on security.

At Israeli airports, widely considered the most secure in the world, travelers are subjected to probing personal questions as screeners look them straight in the eye for signs of deception. Searches are meticulous, with screeners often scrutinizing every item in a bag, unfolding socks, squeezing toothpaste and flipping through books.

"All must look to Israel and learn from them. This is not a post-911 thing for them. They've been doing this since 1956," said Michael Goldberg, president of New York-based IDO Security Inc., which developed a device that can scan shoes while they are still on people's feet.

Israel also employs profiling: At Ben-Gurion Airport, Jewish Israelis typically pass through smoothly, while others may be taken aside for closer interrogation or even strip searches. Another distinquishing feature of Israeli airports is that they rely on concentric security rings that start miles from terminal buildings.

Rafi Ron, the former security director at Israel's famously tight Ben Gurion International Airport who now is a consultant for Boston's Logan International Airport, says U.S. airports also need to be careful not to overcommit to securing passenger entry points at airports, forgetting about the rest of the field.

"Don't invest all your efforts on the front door and leave the back door open," said Ron.

While many experts agree the United States could adopt some Israeli methods, few believe the overall model would work here, in part because of the sheer number of U.S. airports — more than 400, versus half a dozen in Israel.

Also, the painstaking searches and interrogations would create delays that could bring U.S. air traffic to a standstill. And many Americans would find the often intrusive and intimidating Israeli approach repugnant.

PROFILING

Some argue that policies against profiling undermine security.

Baum, who is also managing director of Green Light Limited, a London-based aviation security company, agrees profiling based on race and religion is counterproductive and should be avoided. But he argues that a reluctance to distinguish travelers on other grounds — such as their general appearance or their mannerisms — is not only foolhardy but dangerous.

"When you see a typical family — dressed like a family, acts like a family, interacts with each other like a family ... when their passport details match — then let's get them through," he said. "Stop wasting time that would be much better spent screening the people that we've get more concerns about."

U.S. authorities prohibit profiling of passengers based on ethnicity, religion or national origin. Current procedures call for travelers to be randomly pulled out of line for further screening.

Scrutinizing 80-year-old grandmothers or students because they might be carrying school scissors can defy common sense, Baum said.

"We need to use the human brain — which is the best technology of them all," he said.

But any move to relax prohibitions against profiling in the U.S. would surely trigger fierce resistance, including legal challenges by privacy advocates.

PRIVATIZATION

What if security were left to somebody other than the federal government?

Jim Harper, director of information policy studies at the Washington-based Cato Institute, a free-market-oriented think tank, says airlines should be allowed take charge of security at airports.

Especially since 9/11, the trend has been toward standardizing security procedures to ensure all airports follow the best practices. But Harper argues that decentralizing the responsibility would result in a mix of approaches — thereby making it harder for terrorists to use a single template in planning attacks.

"Passengers, too, prefer a uniform experience," he said. "But that's not necessarily the best security. It's better if sometimes we take your laptop out, sometimes we'll pat you down. Those are things that will really drive a terrorist batty — as if they're not batty already."

Harper concedes that privatizing airport security is probably wishful thinking, and the idea has not gotten any traction. He acknowledges it would be difficult to allay fears of gaping security holes if it were left to each airline or airport owner to decide its own approach.

--- end ---

So being the good investigative reporters, let's read up on WeCU Technologies:

WeCU Technologies Ltd.

WeCU Technologies Ltd.
C/O - InnovoTech , 7 HaEshel St
Caesarea
38900
3598
Israel
Caesarea
Fax: 972-4-623-1744
Telephone: 972-4-623-1704
Email: innovoeg@bezeqint.netCompany
General information
Year Established: 2006
Website: http://www.wecu-technologies.com/
Key figures
Number of Employees: 3

About us
WeCU has developed a method and system for screening and indicating individuals with hidden intent, wherein the system comprises: a) a working place for fulfillment of at least one stated assignment; b) a stimuli exposure block configured to exposure at least one stimuli to said working place within at least one exposure timeframe while said timeframe is contemporary with individual's fulfillment of at least one stated assignment and said stimulus does not require an active direct reaction from the individual and is intended to cause a psycho-physiological reaction; c) sensors and measuring tools block configured to register individual's psycho-physiological characteristics giving rise to registered parameters; and a processor configured to compare the registered parameters or derivatives thereof with a test criterion and to facilitate indication of hidden intent in case of predefined discrepancy.

SOURCE: http://www.export.gov.il/Eng/_Articles/Article.asp?ArticleID=9468&CategoryID=998&Page=1

--- end ---

MORE: http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showConnection.php?id1=7974&id2=3214

BLOG COMMENT:
So in spite of this ominious possibility, I refuse to submit to the controlled news media fear mongering and rather, put my trust in the LORD. Perfect love casts out fear, so I choose to love my enemies as God has not given me a spirit of fear, but of power, love and a sound mind. Yes, as a follower/believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, I have the mind of Christ and so do you, if you are born-again (see John 3).

Ever Heard of Smart Dust?

Received this email today - thanks Debra!

Cathy, found your blog today, and was moved to send you a link to this video... i have been watching/researching for two years now, and of all the "reasons" why this is being done, this vid makes the most sense.... so far

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-v5_TdZ4f7Q

or search youtube for "smart dust"

great work, by the way - i have some shots in napa valley and around lake mead and some recent shots in az, if you are interested, let me know.

Debra



source

Today's Sonoma Photo

At the corner of Napa Road and Eighth Street East, snapped this pic early this morning.