Image and video hosting by TinyPic














Friday, November 07, 2008

The grandeur that is Rahm

"Come, O come Ema-a-anuel... We know you really work for Israel..."

Let's take a further look at Rahm Emanuel, Obama's new gatekeeper. This is from a 2006 Counterpunch story by John Walsh titled How Rahm Emanuel Has Rigged a Pro-War Congress. Walsh discusses the race for Henry Hyde's seat, in a conservative Illinois district in which an anti-war Democrat, Christine Cegelis, was -- at first -- doing surprisingly well.
Enter Rahm Emanuel, chair of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, who dug up a pro-war candidate, Tammy Duckworth. Although she had both her legs blown off in Iraq, she has remained committed to "staying the course" in Iraq (2). Duckworth had no political experience and did not live in the 6th District, but Rahm Emanuel raised a million dollars for her and brought in Dem heavyweights Joe Lieberman, Barak Obama, John Kerry, John Edwards and Hillary Clinton to support her. Despite all this help and with the Cegelis campaign virtually penniless, Duckworth barely managed to eke out a victory by a measly four percentage points.
Duckworth made her national debut when she was given the opportunity to offer a rebuttal to a Bush pro-war address:
AP, in its story on the exchange where Duckworth was supposed to differ with W on Iraq, concluded thus: "She offered no proposal for an immediate withdrawal or a timetable for withdrawal."
This, it seems, is Emanuel's strategy: Present pro-war Dems as anti-war Dems. Criticism of Bush's handling of the war replaces criticism of the war. This is from Walsh's follow-up piece:
However a very recent profile in Fortune (9/25/2006), "Rahm Emanuel, Pitbull Politician," by Washington Bureau chief Nina Easton notes: "On Iraq, Emanuel has steered clear of the withdraw-now crowd, preferring to criticize Bush for military failures since the 2003 invasion. 'The war never had to turn out this way,' he told me at one of his campaign stops. In January 2005, when asked by Meet the Press's Tim Russert whether he would have voted to authorize the war -- 'knowing that there are no weapons of mass destruction' -- Emanuel answered yes.
This stance puts Emanuel in line with Barack Obama's speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004. Careless listeners took the Great One's words as a condemnation of the Iraq invasion; in fact, he offered nothing of the kind. Obama condemned the way Bush prosecuted the war. The Lightbringer said one thing and progressives heard another: That's magic.

Back to Walsh:
The war on Iraq benefited Israel by laying waste a country seen to be one of its major adversaries. Emanuel's commitment to Israel (4) and his Congressional service to it are not in doubt. The most recent evidence was his attack on the U.S. puppet Prime Minister of Iraq, Nouri al Maliki, because Maliki had labeled Israel's attack on Lebanon as an act of "aggression." Emanuel called on Maliki to cancel his address to Congress; and he was joined by his close friend and DSCC counterpart, Sen. Chuck Schumer, who asked; "Which side is he (Maliki) on when it comes to the war on terror?"
On the side of the angels, at least in that particular instance. The invasion of Lebanon was an obscenity.

It is well-known that Emanuel was a civilian volunteer for Israel during the first Gulf War, at which his time his job was to "rust-proof brakes," or so we are told. His history gets odder:
...immediately upon his return from his desert sojourn, Emanuel at once became a major figure in the Clinton campaign "who wowed the team from the start, opening a spigot on needed campaign funds."(3) How did he do that after being isolated overseas, and with no experience in national politics?
After his White House stint, Emanuel worked for Wall Street financier Bruce Wasserstein, where he made quite a pile very quickly -- over $18 million in two-and-a-half years.
Next Emanuel won a seat in Congress in 2002, and by 2006 he was chair of the DCCC. Another near miraculous rise.
In a previous post, I mentioned that the Israelis often say "He had a horse" when someone like Emanuel wows the world with a "near miraculous" rise. If you have a horse, you have a Powerful Someone-Or-Other secretly pulling for you. There's a lot of horsepower behind Rahm Emanuel -- and I don't think the stable is painted red, white and blue.

Congressional wires. Rahm has remarkable knowledge of, and sway over, Congress. That's the main reason why so many inside-the-beltway types have applauded Obama's choice: With Rahm at the helm, the usual White House/Capitol Hill tensions should be kept to a minimum.

But how did Emanuel achieve this august position?

I'm reminded of a couple of earlier posts (here, for example) which looked into the strange tale of Foxcom and Jack Abramoff. Forgive a bit of self-quotation:
But you may recall that another Abramoff partner -- congressman Bob Ney, chairman of the House Administration Committee -- arranged for an Israeli communications firm called Foxcom to install communications equipment (which, in this case, basically means wireless connections) in the Capitol building. Ney seems to have done so at the bidding of Abramoff, who received the usual substantial lobbying fee.
By applying a liberal dose of grease, Foxcom managed to edge out another firm whose security arrangements had been cleared by the FBI and the NSA. For some reason, the Israeli company really, really wanted to set up the wireless network used by your congressfolk.

Bottom line: Whatever else he may be, Abramoff is one of those Israel-ueber-alles types. Seems to me that he went out of his way to curry favor with Ney and Savafian, both of whom were awfully well-positioned to help anyone who wanted to "listen in" on both Capitol Hill and the White House.

Am I speculating? Yeah. Is my speculation outside the limits of possibility or probability? Judge for yourself.
Former CIA officer Philip Giraldi thus weighed in on the Foxcom contract:
Telecommunications security experts note that equipment that can be used to enhance or improve a signal can also be used to redirect the phone conversation to another location for recording and analysis. The possibility that someone in the Israeli Embassy might be listening to congressmen's private phone conversations is intriguing to say the least.
Let me quickly state that I have found no hard evidence that Foxcom is a Mossad front. But if someone with Giraldi's background considers the idea possible or even likely, then who am I to disagree?

Similarly, I've seen nothing (aside from a few crankish postings on deep-dish conspiracy sites) linking Emanuel to either Foxcom or Abramoff. A shared loyalty to Israel may offer the only linkage necessary. If private congressional communications are being directed to Emanuel, he would indeed hold great sway over Capitol Hill.
Comments:
Israel spy on their closest ally?

That's crazy, they would NEVER do that!

(cough, cough Jonathan Pollard cough)
 
Tammy Duckworth was not pro war.
 
This site says that she was opposed to the war from the start...

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2006-09/2006-09-28-voa46.cfm

...however, no direct quote proves the assertion. Her Wikipedia bio gives the strong impression that she has offered strong criticism of the war's handling, and has let this criticism be taken as opposition to the war itself.

The weakness of her Iraq position is the reason why many lefties in Illinois preferred Cegelis.
 
I also want to add that I do not feel comfortable criticizing Duckworth, since she is, by any measure, a hero. The Walsh piece references her election to demonstrate Rahm Emanuel's power.
 
Accounts of Emanuel's activities in Israel during Gulf War 1 often underline that it was as a civilian that he volunteered to work for Israel's military at the outbreak of Gulf War 1 and left the country when the war ended.

But does Israel actually allow foreigners to enlist in its armed forces? And does the US allow its citizens to enlist in foreign armies?

So he wouldn't have said he was anything but a civilian...

As for the pro-war being presented as anti-war, one had that to some extent in the UK with the whole BBC angle to the 45 minutes and Chemical Dave Kelly stories.

b
 
Duckworth, I believe, actually lost that election so Rahm is not all powerful.

Considering the Israeli infiltration into our government it is impossible to believe that they haven't "vetted" Obama. In fact maybe they are the ones that anointed him over Hillary--for reasons that are not clear to us poor cave dwellings.

The only way to make sense of this all is to assume that Obama was NOC CIA. I kept thinking about Rezko--why is he talking, why is he talking, all he has to do is clam up and wait until Obama was president. What could they have told him that would make him open up. Then it hit me. Fitzgerald just explained that Obama was working for the "good guys", his job in fact involved keeping his eye on the goings on with Team Rezko. That's why Fitzgerald kept Obama's name out of court. That's why Fitzgerald isn't too worried about that house deal as far as Obama is concerned. And for Obama it was a little perk after years of admirable service. That's why so much of made no sense: Wright's church--Rev. Fahrrakan. That's why he could be BFF with Palestinian terrorist. He was there to keep an eye on them.

One day someone called him into whatever the CIA uses for an NOC office and said; "Good work. Now we have a new assignment for you. You are going to run to be President of the United States. Oh, and you're going to win.

Note--he would have had to be trained--hmmm, what about those two years he was supposed to be in Columbia living just down the street from Bill Ayers. . .The guy that convinced him to do what Ayers was doing--and join the CIA.

It explains all the in-the-bag news coverage. Anytime anyone got near Obama's past they were told firmly that it was a national security issue and get the hell out. The CIA assets in the press (cough--Anderson Cooper for example--cough, cough.) The editors where told that his election was a national security issue and to not ask any more questions.

To the public for this election they applied some typical mind control techniques, well honed elsewhere. And John McCain? He couldn't bring up any of the Wright stuff and all because he knew Obama was there just doing his job.

As a theory it explains many thing and has led me to conclude that this administration is going to be a lot like Bush's except perhaps, more competent.
 
I think Duckworth was a primary focus of the John Walsh article only because she'd received more publicity than the other 21 center-right Democratic candidates Rahm recruited.

Here's an article that gives details on some of the other races:
http://www.truthout.org/article/special-report-democratic-house-officials-recruited-wealthy-conservatives

Rahm's involvement, recruiting and backing centrist candidates to run against more liberal ones, was in direct contradiction of a DCCC policy to "remain neutral" in party primaries.

In the previous (2004) election cycle, Cegelis, with little money, no party backing, and no local party infrastructure of note, scored 44% percent of the vote and was said to have "helped kickstart local progressive activism".

In 2006, "According to Spidel [campaign manager for the Cegelis campaign], the Cegelis campaign was prevented from accessing Democratic fund-raising and Political Action Committee lists held by the DCCC. Cegelis said that many of the potential donors she contacted had been instructed by the DCCC not to give her campaign money."
http://www.truthout.org/article/special-report-democratic-house-officials-recruited-wealthy-conservatives

Duckworth apparently had no previous involvement with politics. She didn't even live in the district she would have represented. Only 3% of her campaign contributions came from inside the district (Rahm dumped a ton of money on her - her total campaign expenditures were $4,556,495 according to opensecrets.org). Apparently, Duckworth was more conservative than Cegalis across the board (Cegalis was very liberal - supported single payer health care, strong transition to renewable energy, was strongly pro-choice, anti-CAFTA, etc.).

Cegelis publicly opposed the Iraq war before it began.
I did find a Duckworth quote, from when she was running for office, in which she said that "it was my duty to answer the call of my country and I went to Iraq despite the fact that I thought it was a mistake to go there."
http://archpundit.com/blog/2005/12/20/duckworth-on-serving-in-iraq/

Cegelis favored the concept of a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq.

Duckworth was not a proponent of a deadline for withdrawal from Iraq. The Los Angeles Times, quoting Duckworth, reported that she believed the military should not "'simply pull up stakes' in Iraq because it would 'create a security vacuum' and 'risk allowing [Iraq] ... to become a base for terrorists.'"
http://www.truthout.org/article/special-report-democratic-house-officials-recruited-wealthy-conservatives.

After narrowly edging out Cegelis in the Democratic primary, Duckworth lost to Republican Peter Roskam in the general election (Duckworth received 86,572 votes = 48.6%)
(In 2004, Cegelis received 105,367 votes = 44.2%, against Republican Henry Hyde).

Two other relevant articles:
http://chicagofreespeechzone.blogspot.com/2008/11/rahmbo-vs-chicago-peace-movement.html
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2006/11/rahm-emanuel-may-not-have-had-much-to.html
 
Duckworth also ran a campaign that played on emotion while rarely stating exactly where she stood on issues, thereby allowing the voter to project his wishes onto her.

Ret. Army Col. Jill Morgenthaler ran this time around and was soundly defeated by Roskam, apparently because voters in the district that abuts Emanuel's preferred the real Republican over the faux one. Some quotes from her campaign site:

"I also believe that continuing in Iraq with no endgame is wrong for the troops. It distracts us from a higher priority - the global war on terror."

"Bringing our troops home does not mean disengaging from the region. ....I believe we must join with our allies to finish the job in Afghanistan, hunting down terrorists, helping the Afghan people stem the drug trade, and providing them with assistance to rebuild their country."

She had a job in Illinois as Homeland Security Advisor for Blagojevich and, in that capacity, wrote a letter advocating for one of Rezko's companies that intended to train Iraqis for jobs protecting a power plant that Rezko and Aiham Alsammarae planned to build in northern Iraq.

Morgenthaler served in Iraq as media spokeswoman and, while there, she wrote a blog that has since disappeared.

Former blog: www.supportusamilitary.org/Morgenthaler.html

Some quotes from that blog:

"LTG Sanchez has been a true leader. He stayed calm, focus and on mission as Abu Ghraib broke and stayed a story ad infinitum/ad nausea."

"As people get upset about Abu Ghraib, one thing that should never be forgotten: these are men who have murdered Americans and would continue to murder Americans if given the opportunity."

I wouldn't be surprised to learn that Emanuel played a big part in picking Morgenthaler as the DCCC-endorsed candidate.

OT, but hilarious or cookie-tossing depending upon your pov, HSN is offering a Barack Obama coin set where you can get coins totaling $2 for only $24.95 plus shipping. Seems appropriate. It's just the thing for any Obots on your Christmas list as the coins offer colorized pictures of Obama along with some of his slogans. My favorite features a smiling Obama on a JFK half dollar with the words "The Promise of Change" floating over his head.
 
"The invasion of Lebanon was an obscenity."

Thank you!

djmm
 
Bet your getting quite a bit of traffic (and ad-clicking) now that infowars has linked (and mirrored) at least two of your Rahm articles.

Where's the vitriol? ...where's the love?
 
I let Terry's stupid comment through in order to make a point that I have made before, but which I apparently must repeat every so often.

I know that a lot of dunderheads out there want to believe that bloggers like myself are in it for the money, but we aren't. Only a few "big boyz" who got into the game early are able to make a living at this.

Terry, you probably have a ridiculous idea as to how much the Google Adsense ads bring in. The terms of the contract disallow me from mentioning numbers, but the number is so low that I feel I can chance giving a ballpark figure.

It comes to about 30 bucks a month. About the price of dinner for two at El Torito, if we don't get drinks.

All other ads on this site are unpaid.

So why do I run the Adsense stuff, even though it is a tad unsightly? Way I figure it, I'm helping Google. Google owns Blogger, and running the ads is my way of paying for the use of their service.

So I really do not give a damn if that fruitcaks Alex Jones links to one of my stories. Frankly, I wish he wouldn't.

You should also know that I have NEVER asked anyone to link to my site. Indeed, I have actively asked or demanded that the larger sites DE-list Cannonfire.

Raw Story and HinesSite used to link to me. I wrote them -- repeatedly -- telling them not to mention me.

Why did I do such a thing? After all, most bloggers beg and plead to be listed in a place like Raw Story. I didn't want Larry Johnson to link to me, back when we were on speaking terms, and he made the offer. You know why?

Because I am sick of shit-heads like YOU, Terrikins. I am sick of being accused of being in it for the damn money.

Yet no matter what I do -- NO MATTER WHAT I DO -- jackasses like you keep thinking the same way and making the same ignorant accusations!
 
By the way -- you can write to Brad Friedman and Larisa Alexandrovna, and they will confirm what I am about to tell you: I have turned down ALL offers to write for money, to write for other sites, to lecture, to speak on the radio.

So tell me, Terrikins, just what more can I possibly do to get creeps like you to stop accusing me of having impure motives?
 
One last point. Since Alex Jones, in his wisdom, reprinted my entire piece, few people clicked through to my site. The comments left by his readers on his site are not just silly -- they are flabbergastingly weird and stupid.
 
I found it suspicious when I saw two links pointing here from infowars rss, and after having clicked through to both, I saw none of your trademark "conspiracy nutcase" shtick. Being a regular reader, I have on many occasions witnessed a post that started with you pointing to the fact that so and so had linked to one of your articles, right before you proceed to give 'em hell for something they said.

I care not how much you make, how many ads or paypal buttons you deem is necessary. Content is king. And I'll keep coming back, despite the fact that you're the grumpiest SOB on the interwebs.
 
I may be the grumpiest SOB on the web, but I can apologize when necessary. I'm sorry I took you for one of the many, many people who have accused me, over the years, of being in it for the money. That accusation bugs the heck out of me because there is no money.

My landlords, especially those who have met me in eviction court, have a very clear idea of just how much bloggers make. Nobody else does.
 
Laura McGann, a TPM Muckraker reporter sometime ago wrote an article describing having evidence that an important Bill in Congress was changed prior to being signed and after being accepted by Congress. Somewhere in the process specific legalese was added unknown to anyone. Having read the article and having a lot of experience with computer issues, I posted a comment, then later followed up with calling Ms McGann. However for whatever reason, our communication ended and any links to this article disappeared. Somewhere I have the link to the article and back then noticed it was being blocked.

Also, all the computer stations on my company network were contaminated when I had my office by specially designed confiscation software. Everything generated off of my system(s) including incoming email were confiscated, repackaged into small mini-files and sputtered out through the internet to awaiting servers in California. However what's interesting is these servers are part of a conglomerate of very large companies. All confiscated data seemed to be separated into different groups from where it originated and was sent to separate IP addresses. To me, this provided auto filtering of text characters.

I monitored what they were doing to me for a long while. It was unbelievable. Finally after preparing printout logs of activities that included IP addresses, I prepared a letter and tried giving it to the Cook County Police. I had already an investigation underway and tried handing this off to the Sgt involved, but he did everything he could to run away from me. I was stunned that even with hard evidence, they didn't want anything to do with it. Included were my hard drives from network workstations complete with versions of their data gathering system built in to Windows for a review. But they wanted nothing to do with it.

Who ever this group was/is, they have a very high skill level. It's
enough to override any well built low level sniffing firewall software which is difficult to built. Anyone who has had experience building "driver" software knows the level of difficulty involved.

I tried everything commercially available but nothing worked. They were able to defeat everything well enough to where your machine reported it was working and nothing ever was reported. This ended my ability to log their activity.

Any commercial extraction software never worked. The only software that worked for me was "hacking" and "snooping" software built by hackers. The hacking snooping software tools require skill and it takes time and is tedious to use. I had success with using this.

I noticed that their software came into my system through the internet normally in one file. My office at that time was being broken into on a regular basis, say multiple times a week. Their software was either manually placed or may have been imported automatically. Back then it was easier to notice intrusion but today's higher speed machines makes it more difficult to spot intrusion.

I assumed their file came in as a self opening EXE file. When they ran it the EXE file, it exploded into many files and auto installed while you operated your system. I noticed that DOS windows briefly appeared while their software installed low level files. When my laptop became so corrupted with their software it hardly ran, I wanted to get away from the Internet so I could look around my hard drive. Try finding a quiet place away from the internet to do this? Its nearly impossible but I found going to a Mall to work. However the Malls run facial recognition software and not more than 30 minutes later I started to be harassed by people who had been causing trouble for me while I drive and was forced to leave. But while there I was able to find "Process Function Icons" that seemed to run deletion and other routines. I tried to keep some of their snooping software intact and renamed some of the folders and icons. This is how I noticed that once invoked, their software would immediately remove their code leaving no trace of existence.

Another area:
Many people have "Homeports" for using the Internet at home. Also, Comcast has cable boxes, one for each TV. What's really in them is suspect from all the testing I've done for years. Please remember my life's experience in a family involved with Rezko, Obama, a huge drug system and more.

I'm currently down to three computers; simple Desktop without any internet port(s) or wireless electronics; partially cleaned up laptop without any wireless and internet port electronics; and an older (2001) HP hand held computer without any wireless or Internet port electronics. All are constantly being entered through some sort of wireless link. Files have been changed, stolen and deleted on a regular basis. My handheld's battery as an example is constantly being drained at a rapid rate when intrusion is noticed. From testing, I believe this is coming from the Homeports and/or the ComCast cable boxes. I know the wireless reach typically is about 150-200 feet plus with each home having one, geographically a matrix is available that provides access to someone else’s computer in another area, even if it's the house next door. Researching makes me thing that it's possible that leapfrogging across homeports/cable boxes from one home to another can provide access into someone's computer a long distance away. I've been dealing with this for more than 10 years and the last half dozen years, it's been nearly impossible to do anything electronic. This isn't limited to my living area either. Visiting friends as an example, I've noticed the same problem at their homes. While traveling up to the Upper UP MI to visit family as an example, I had the same problem there as well.

A friend had a lot of trouble with areas of HealthCare involving caring for her elderly and ill mom. After encountering huge problems she needed to write a letter describing detailed events as in a dairy to the State Healthcare attorney. While preparing the letter in her laptop, we experienced so much trouble that I had to take drastic measures to make sure we could print it. Whomever it was, was trying to modify and delete many areas of our letter. When it came time to print, they did many things including redefining her printer to stop us from printing. Preserving the letter as we wrote it was primary, then trying to print it was another hurdle.

I still have my workstation hard drives safely stored complete with the IP addresses for a criminal investigation. Back then, I was able to trace some of the IP addresses back to an organization that eventually stopped me from identifying who owned what IP address.

Some of my research in the ongoing high tech snooping problems I've been dealing with suggest a wide range of involvements with one having a possible Israel link.

Marty Didier
Northbrook, IL
 
More to add to my above post and this will be again different….

I have a very wide experience and depth with technologies. Today’s ongoing release of new gadgetry is attractive to us all but along with it, is a need to deal with the complexities surrounding making it work. However beyond just making it work, is an unknown of what extra capabilities exist within each unit. I guarantee that there are many surprises here for us to learn about. Another point to realize is who needs to use this extra capability and why?

At my house and friends house we both have video players. We used to call them VHS players, but now the players include a DVD as well; ComCast cable (we have a digital converter and my friend has (3) ComCast boxes); computers, electronic phones and the multiple units of the same ComCast remote. My friend has three TV’s each with their own ComCast box and separate remotes.

Realize that I’ve been publishing for years on the Internet, talking to everyone and having discussions with law enforcement about my past experience while in a family for more than 26 years who is directly involved in the current high level corruption, a huge drug system and other unbelievable criminal situations involving a Political Mafia. The marriage experience proved to be an education but the time during the divorce and afterwards including up to today continues to make my life a living hell. Hence, I’m constantly harassed by ways most people would find very difficult to believe. My friend lost a friend of 10 years due to him being murdered at the same time I was being setup for the same thing back in 2002. Hence, both of us have been the focus of ongoing criminal activities for years.

For some time, at my home and friend’s home, there have been ongoing complaints of our entertainment centers not working properly. Being able to fix problems means you have to make the problem repeat itself. In this case, the problems differ and occur inconsistently with varying degrees of complexity. But I’ve noticed that the problems occur following when publishing revealing information about the criminal activities I’m familiar with.

My friend left for California a little while ago for a three week trip. While gone, she asked me to housesit. While there I continued to publish on the Internet and encountered more problems with her entertainment system. I wasn’t able to watch any videos rented from Blockbuster, the video and TV remote weren’t working properly and importantly the problems weren’t consistent from one day to another, the SONY 40” flat screen HD (new about a year) wasn’t responding to certain commands from the buttons or remote and the video player(s) (she has two stacked upon each other) acted like they didn’t want to work at all. I need to mention that the TV shows to have water damage that doesn’t appear to be part of the problems I’m dealing with.

The inconsistency to me was a clue that maybe what I was seeing was funny business rather than dealing with broken equipment. I started by testing and trying to get the equipment to at least play like normal again. This took days. What worked was to unplug each unit. Leaving the equipment unplugged forces the power to completely drain from each unit. If you leave the equipment plugged in with turning it off, the screwy control data inside won’t disappear. The unit internal power supply will keep the problem alive. When the power is restored, the control ROM has to restore the control data back to normal, just like a home computer. But the video players took two full days of being unplugged before they came back to normal again. This suggests they were the target of the funny business and/or their power system bleeds off at a very slow rate. I should add that the two video players are stacked on top of each other with the ComCast box on top of both of them. The group sits inside a cabinet underneath the TV. The TC is on top of the cabinet and each group is about 2 feet away from each other.

I wasn’t concerned about any EMF properties with the newer electronics as in the past but am describing what I was working with so everyone knows. All cables are typical commercial heavy insulated with ground shielding. Outside the house aren’t any power lines or electric to influence the entertainment system. The nearest house is a neighbor on the west side and their living room is about 60 feet away. Another near neighbor is across the street at about <200 feet away. The next neighbor is >400 or more feet away. My friend’s house is a try-level with a Comcast box and Homeport in the upstairs master bedroom, another Comcast box in the lowest level underneath the Master bedroom at the opposite end of the house from where I’m conducting my testing in the family room.

I should mention that there was “reasonable” success with taking my desktop into my friend’s basement for purposes of trying to determine is I can isolate the intrusion. I say reasonable only because it was only a session test and maybe I should have spent more time trying to determine if it really was a sound solution or not. Intrusion can only happen when someone else wants to intrude. It’s possible my systems have Trojans that notify the intruder that I’m operating my system and in this case, I was successful with using the computer in the basement. But the experience proved that the higher I went in the house, the intrusion was guaranteed to happen. On this note, I’ve questioned the Cell system but feel it’s less likely as the ComCast box appears more likely.

Having unplugged all the equipment and finding that with only restoring power to the TV and one video unit after two days of no power, I was able to successfully watch a rental video movie. I’m still publishing on the Internet every day. The SONY TV remote now works. I restored power to the ComCast box leaving it on top of the video player stack. After keeping a daily diary report on my desktop of findings including explaining my interests with what to do next, a day later, the video player stopped working. The player remote didn’t work, the SONY remote started acting up with some commands not working and these problems weren’t the same as before. My friend has reported in the past as well as the experience at my home that the remote buttons weren’t working correctly. This means a variety of things were happening including what appeared to be a redefinition of the buttons you normally use. My friend had complained one time that every remote button she used would turn off the TV. Increase the sound means the TV turns off and so on.

So after making the equipment work properly I now am experiencing trouble again. I took the troubled video back to Blockbuster and they ran it on a video player. Their player is much older than the one I was working with so to me, it showed my player technology version shouldn’t be part of this problem. It’s something else.

I went back and unplugged all the equipment again for two days. The SONY video players appear to require two days to bleed off their power so they will be smart again. This restored the ability to play a DVD again. The SONY TV remote was working again. The SONY Video remote was working again. I didn’t have the heart to repower the ComCast box again and was happy with just watching movies. It’s also important to realize that the cable box sits on top of a stack of twin same model SONY video players. The top video player seems to get hit the worst when it’s not working properly.

I looked at ComCast’s cable box patent sometime ago. Wired.com had a few articles on their design too. With my knowledge and experience with technology be forewarned that something sinister may be going on here. I believe the ComCast boxes have more interesting technology built inside than just for watching cable television or to provide users with the Internet. In electronics with circuit boards all someone needs to make an antenna is to provide a copper foil loop physically dimensioned for a specific frequency backed up by processing electronics and now you have a wireless link. Another possibility is to use RFID technology as that is readily available and small in size and is included in IC sized chips for placement on circuit boards. It’s really not that difficult if you understand what this is about.

And again I need to mention that with all of my three remaining computers, none of them contain any electronics to support a wireless link, yet all three are continually being broken into while I’m using them. For me, the biggest surprise is my handheld HP computer. It’s an old one from around 2000. It has built in Windows CE; backup button battery; older version of flash memory; touch screen; older empty accessory slide-in port (PCI version 1) and one “unused” USB port. The battery is healthy but exhausts quickly when there is intrusion. This means their technology method of intrusion is a huge power drain.

If needed, I can offer model numbers and more specifics if requested.

Marty Didier
Northbrook, IL
 
Marty,

I'm a software professional and what you're describing doesn't make a lot of sense. Why would they loose so much time hacking your computers ?

What you're describing is the equivalent of "There's voices in my computer".
 
Anonymous : 6:54 PM,

Sorry Pal, but for a lot of this, I have witnesses and hard core proof and have personally been a software professional. Maybe there is something you don’t know?

Marty Didier
Northbrook, IL
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?


























Image and video hosting by TinyPic



Image and video hosting by TinyPic


FeedWind



FeedWind




FeedWind