Scammers Pretending to Be the IRS
It's Your Turn - Scam A Scammer! 855-474-7596 other numbers in video description
A Scammer! 855-474-7596 other numbers in video description
We Fight For You
Aggressive & Relentless
STOP YOUR WAGE
GARNISHMENT
Get professional help now. Do not take on the IRS or
State by yourself. Our licensed staff will fight for you to negotiate
the release of your IRS or State wage garnishment in a RUSH. Do not go
another paycheck period with the IRS taking your hard earned money away.
Call now for a Free Consultation.MORE INFORMATION ON WAGE GARNISHMENTS
STOP YOUR
BANK LEVY
Act fast or it could be too late. Even though your bank
account was frozen, the bank may have not sent your money yet. We may
be able to stop them before it is too late, but you must call now. Our
experts can protect all your assets. Do not let the State or IRS wipe
out all of your bank accounts, RUSH and call now.MORE INFORMATION ON BANK LEVIES
FREE IRS TRANSCRIPT
INVESTIGATION AND ANALYSIS!
Other
firms call this “Phase 1” and charge up to $1500 for this service – we
charge ZERO. This is America! You have a right to know exactly what the
IRS has on you in their files. Call us for this FREE upfront service, or
you can simply follow this link to get this process started. Results
back within 1 business day.
Get StartedOFFERS IN COMPROMISE
We have saved our clients hundreds of thousands of dollars by successfully negotiating offers in compromises for them. This amazing program allows taxpayers to get a fresh start. Legally reduce your tax liability to a fraction of what is owed. Click on our blog page, and see chart of actual client results on our February 13, 2018 posting. We saved our clients over 2 million in 2016 alone! Click button below to see if you qualify, or call now.
FREE PRE-QUALIFICATION FOR OFFER IN COMPROMISE
We’re NationWide!
Resolve your tax problem with the peace of mind that you are in good hands.
Stay In touch
Recently in Milwaukee, the FBI thwarted a terrorist attack
at a Masonic center in the city. The perp, Samy Mohamed Hamzeh, told
people that he wanted to enter the building with two co-conspirators
(who were actually FBI informants) and "eliminate everyone" as a way to
defend Islam and make the Mujahedeen proud--in addition to inspiring
other attacks throughout the country. He was caught after he purchased
two weapons and a silencer from undercover FBI agents.
Curiously, Hamzeh has yet to be charged with any terrorism-related counts. He is only being charged with owning a machine gun and a silencer.
Curiously, Hamzeh has yet to be charged with any terrorism-related counts. He is only being charged with owning a machine gun and a silencer.
Acting U.S. Attorney Gregory J. Haanstad called it a "detailed plan to commit a mass shooting intended to kill dozens of people."Aside from the fact that this is terrifying and the FBI is lucky they were able to catch this guy before he was able to act on his plan, wouldn't it make sense to actually charge him with terrorism counts? Further, how is this not bigger news? This was a thwarted terrorist attack by a radical Islamist, and it should be called as such.
"(Hamzeh) also said that he wanted this mass shooting to be 'known the world over' and to 'ignite' broader clashes. It is difficult to calculate the injury and loss of life that was prevented by concerned citizens coming forward and by the tireless efforts of the FBI and the Joint Terrorism Task Force."
Hamzeh does not claim a connection to an established, known terrorist group, according to the complaint. At one point he says, "We have our own group, not with Hamas, ... we are here defending Islam, young people together join to defend Islam, that's it, that is what our intention is."
Jeff Cramer, a former federal prosecutor, said a criminal complaint is used to arrest someone and it appears there was urgency to take Hamzeh into custody. Prosecutors still must present the case to the grand jury, when additional charges may be added, including a terrorism-related count, but that will depend on the facts of the case, Cramer said. Such counts generally require approval from the Justice Department in Washington.
The Feds & Media: How the FBI Destroyed Journalism
Published November 10, 2014, filed under MEDIA, Tyranny
Contributed to TLB by: Susanne Posel
James Comey, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) defended the use of an FBI agent posing as an Associated Press journalist in order to install spyware into the computer of a teenager from Lacy, Washington State.
Comey said in an open letter published in mainstream media that the FBI did not “overstep its bounds” while using deceptive tactics during their investigation into the teen who was in communication “online with the” FBI agent.”
According to Comey: “An F.B.I. agent communicated online with the anonymous suspect. Relying on an agency behavioral assessment that the anonymous suspect was a narcissist, the online undercover officer portrayed himself as an employee of The Associated Press, and asked if the suspect would be willing to review a draft article about the threats and attacks, to be sure that the anonymous suspect was portrayed fairly.”
To entrap the student, the FBI produced a fake news report provided by the FBI agent to the Associated Press regarding a “technology savvy student holds Timberline High School hostage.”
The FBI agent made sure the teen saw the article which facilitated the downloading of spyware into the boy’s computer in order to track the child’s online whereabouts.
Kathy Best, executive editor of the Seattle Times commented : “The FBI, in placing the name of The Associated Press on a phony story sent to a criminal suspect, crossed a line and undermined the credibility of journalists everywhere – including at The Times.”
The FBI maintains that “the operation was aimed at preventing tragedy. We were fortunate that information provided by the public gave us the opportunity to step into a potentially dangerous situation before it was too late.”
Kathleen Carroll, executive editor of AP said : “This latest revelation of how the FBI misappropriated the trusted name of the Associated Press doubles our concern and outrage, expressed earlier to Attorney General Eric Holder, about how the agency’s unacceptable tactics undermine AP and the vital distinction between the government and the press.”
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (RCFP) wrote a letter to Holder and Comey explaining : “The warrant for such action apparently did not mention that the tracker was delivered as an AP article, with an AP byline “and therefore impersonated a news media organization.” Concerned that the FBI not only failed to follow its own guidelines for such activity, but also did not make clear to the judge who signed the warrant or FBI counsel that the software ‘impersonated a media organization or that there were First Amendment concerns at stake’.”
Mainstream media have joined RCFP in support of exposing how the FBI uses news media to infiltrate the public:
• Association of Alternative Newsmedia
• Center for Investigative Reporting
• Committee to Protect Journalists
• First Amendment Coalition
• Freedom of the Press Foundation
• National Newspaper Association
• The National Press Club
• National Press Photographers Association
• The New York Times Company
• The News Guild – CWA
• Newspaper Association of America
• North Jersey Media Group Inc.
• Radio Television Digital News Association
• The Seattle Times Company
• Stephens Media LLC
• Tribune Publishing Company
• Tully Center for Free Speech
• The Washington Post
The RCFP continued in their letter: “The utilization of news media as a cover for delivery of electronic surveillance software is unacceptable. This practice endangers the media’s credibility and creates the appearance that it is not independent of the government. It undermines media organizations’ ability to independently report on law enforcement.”
Ironically, the FBI have a program targeting teenagers called, “The FBI Teen Reporter’s Workshop” where “selected” high school students in New York are brought to the FBI field office to “learn about how the FBI interacts with the media. In addition to hearing about the overall mission of the FBI and the mission of the Office of Public Affairs, the teens have the opportunity to meet members of the media and to take photos with FBI equipment.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Susanne Posel is a Investigative Journalist and the Chief Editor of Occupy Corporatism and The US IndependentTLB recommends you visit Occupy Corporatism for more pertinent articles and information.
____
Obama says broadband Internet should be regulated like utility
President Obama
calls for tighter regulations -- leaving a little bit of wiggle room --
in an effort to preserve a "free and open Internet."
In a statement released Monday, Obama called on the Federal Communications Commission to enforce the principle of treating Internet the same way, also known as Net neutrality. That means treating broadband services like utilities, so Internet service providers would be unable "to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas."
Obama wades into a contentious debate that has raged over how to treat Internet traffic, which has only heated up as the FCC works to prepare an official guideline. Those rules were expected to be made available later this year, though reports now claim they may be delayed until early 2015. The debate has centered on whether broadband should be placed under Title II regulation under the Telecommunications Act, which already tightly controls phone services.
Proponents believes Title II regulation would ensure the free and fair flow of traffic across the Internet. Opponents, however, believe the onerous rules would limit investment in the infrastructure and new services, and that toll roads of sorts would provide better service to companies that can support their higher traffic volumes. That has created widespread concern that ISPs could throttle service in some instance, intentionally slowing down some content streams and speeding up others.
Some of the major broadband providers have already spoken out against the plan. "Reclassification under Title II, which for the first time would apply 1930s-era utility regulation to the Internet, would be a radical reversal of course that would in and of itself threaten great harm to an open Internet, competition and innovation," Verizon said in an e-mailed statement.
"Today's announcement by the White House, if acted upon by the FCC, would be a mistake that will do tremendous harm to the Internet and to U.S. national interests," said Jim Cicconi, AT&T senior executive vice president for external and legislative affairs, in a statement.
"To attempt to impose a full-blown Title II regime now, when the classification of cable broadband has always been as an information service, would reverse nearly a decade of precedent, including findings by the Supreme Court that this classification was proper," David Cohen, executive vice president at Comcast, said in a statement.
The broadband providers have advocated for a "light-touch" regulatory environment that has been in place, which they argue has been the catalyst for wireless and broadband investment.
The FCC earlier this year saw a vigorous response from the public to its call for comments on its Open Internet proposals, with the FCC's servers sometimes stumbling and crashing under the overwhelming input. The comment window closed in September.
In April, FCC chairman Tom Wheeler came under fire after an early proposal for his rules on Internet access were made available. While Wheeler has said that he fully supports the open Internet, the proposal could allow for paid prioritization of Internet traffic.
"I will say it again, there is nothing in the proposal that authorizes fast lanes on the Internet," the chairman said earlier this year. "It simply asks questions, such as should there be a ban on paid prioritization. But there is nothing in the rule that authorizes it."
At the crux of the debate over Net neutrality is Title II of the Telecommunications Act. The section, which is more than 100 pages long, regulates how common carriers must conduct business across all forms of communication in order to act "in the public interest." Net neutrality supporters say that the language is vague and could be used to sidestep a free and open Internet and give ISPs the opportunity to sign deals with Internet companies that would provide for prioritization of traffic.
Obama, however, said that the FCC should limit some of the regulation relating to rates and "other provisions less relevant to broadband," creating potential wiggle room for further debate on the limitations.
Still, the reference to Title II marks a clear stake in the ground for the White House.
"This is a basic acknowledgment of the services ISPs provide to American homes and businesses, and the straightforward obligations necessary to ensure the network works for everyone -- not just one or two companies," Obama said.
No comments:
Post a Comment