Elections Canada wants to buy social media ‘listening’ tool to track threats ahead of 2019 election

September 18, 2018

Excerpt from article-“In a notice of proposed procurement posted on Tuesday morning, the elections agency writes that it needs the new tool to be able to “listen, in near real time, to key influencers to identify potential issues that may affect the election early on,” as well as to “detect, through timely and accurate notifications, potential incidents and trends affecting the integrity of Canadian electoral events in near real time.”

The system must also be able to identify and help connect geo-located incidents and monitor specific hashtags, keywords, handles and accounts.

“The prevalence of social media use among Canadians and the degree to which it permeates their lives makes social media listening and open source research a crucial element for real-time situational awareness of the electoral environment and identification of possible issues that can affect the electoral process,” the agency wrote in the posting.” https://globalnews.ca/news/4460966/russian-interference-canadian-election-how-to-stop/?fbclid=IwAR0CxB7Gm5o6YBwdJjIGwfx8Cf6iFcJwo2AeV-M1IPJbtC-QNJSQGX4pSms

As Orwell’s 1984 Turns 70 It Predicted Much Of Today’s Surveillance Society

Kalev Leetaru Contributor AI & Big Data I write about the broad intersection of data and society.

George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images)

George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four. (Justin Sullivan/Getty Images) GETTY

George Orwell’s famous novel Nineteen Eighty-Four turns 70 years old next month. Looking back on its predictions and the state of the world today, how much did it get right in its predictions of a dystopian surveillance state where every word is monitored, unacceptable speech is deleted, history is rewritten or deleted altogether and individuals can become “unpersons” for holding views disliked by those in power? It turns out Orwell’s predictions were frighteningly accurate.

In 1984, it was the state that determined what constituted acceptable speech in keeping society orderly.

In 2019, it is a small cadre of private companies in Silicon Valley and their executives that wield absolute power over what we are permitted to see and say online.

In 1984, there were just a few countries to which most of the world’s citizens belonged.

In 2019, there are just a few social media empires to which most of the world’s netizens belong.

In 1984, it was the state that conducted surveillance and censored speech.

In 2019, social media companies deploy vast armies of human and algorithmic moderators that surveil their users 24/7, flagging those that commit thoughtcrimes and deleting their violations from existence. Those that commit too many thoughtcrimes are banished to “unperson” status by these same private companies, without any intervention or even in contradiction with the will of the state and without any right to appeal.

In 1984, those who committed particularly egregious thoughtcrimes or had histories of them were banished into nonexistence, all traces of them deleted.

In 2019, social media companies can ban anyone at any time for any reason. Those banished from social’s walled gardens can have every post they’ve ever written wiped away, every record of their existence banished into the memory hole. Those that dare to mention the name of the digitally departed or criticize their banishment can themselves face being banished and their concerns deleted, ensuring the “unperson” truly ceases to exist.

In 1984, the government constantly rewrites and deletes history that has become inconvenient.

In 2019, governments quietly rewrite press releases to remove past statements that proved wrong or to add statements to support their present assertions. Meanwhile the European Union’s “Right to be Forgotten” grants ordinary citizens the ability to wipe clean society’s memories of their past, allowing them to be “reborn” without the burden of their past transgressions.

In 1984, ever-present “telescreens” act as both information conveyor and surveillance device and saturate both public and private spaces with cameras and microphones monitored by the government.

In 2019, smartphones take on this roll, acting as both our window to the digital world and the means through which myriad private companies from data brokers to social media companies themselves surveil our every action. Yet, our world goes far beyond the one imagined by Orwell in which every device from our watches to our refrigerators, our thermostats to our toasters, are increasingly Internet-connected and streaming a realtime documentary of our lives back to these private surveillance empires.

In 1984, it was the state that made use of its vast surveillance empire to maintain order.

In 2019, a landscape of private companies so large it is almost uncountable, monitors, monetizes and manipulates us.

In 1984, the government uses its surveillance state to nudge each member of its citizenry towards a desired state.

In 2019, private companies do the same, building up vast behavioral and interest profiles on each individual user that they then use to nudge them towards the most monetizable behaviors.

In 1984, the government funded the vast empire of equipment and personnel needed to maintain constant surveillance of its citizens.

In 2019, the public themselves fund the great surveillance empire that monitors, monetizes and manipulates them. Citizens purchase the latest digital devices, upgrade and maintain them at regular intervals, pay for the power and internet services needed to connect them and grant unlimited rights to their most intimate information to private companies.

In 1984, the ultimate goal of the massive surveillance empire is to sustain and entrench the power of the state.

In 2019, the ultimate goal of the online world’s massive surveillance empire is to sustain and entrench the power of social media companies.

Indeed, the similarities are nearly as endless as the words of the book.

Putting this all together, 70 years after 1984’s publication, it seems nearly every aspect of Orwell’s commentary on the surveillance state has come true. The only difference is that Orwell saw surveillance and control as the domain of the state, whereas in reality the surveillance world we have come to know is one of private companies monitoring, monetizing and manipulating society for nothing more than commercial gain.

In the end, as we rush towards an ever more Orwellian world of surveillance and censorship, perhaps we might all take the time to reread 1984 in order to better understand the world we are rushing towards. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2019/05/06/as-orwells-1984-turns-70-it-predicted-much-of-todays-surveillance-society/?fbclid=IwAR1J4LSxMu-CQKk3YPpc6TwwSEZdZd7sfv85ikgHRg3ervW9n-junPWfOVA#4e54e5ba11de

MARIN: Trudeau once again compromises Canada on international stage

Arwen~ Considering the RCMP’s investigation found that the majority of indigenous women’s deaths and mysterious disappearances were at the hand of those in their own community….that narrative didn’t work for the virtue signalling left nor for some in the indigenous community who choose to blame colonialism for all their woes. Another study ensued until the desired progressive determinations were reached.

Now the idiot Trudeau has labeled Canada on the global stage as perpetrators of committing “genocide”. He has done some vile and disgusting things with his progressive moral crusading…but this has not only put a false label on Canada but also weakened our nation in the eyes of the global community. Can you say Obama-lite? Throwing around words with apparently no understanding of their actual meaning or of the severity of making such a claim, which happens to be false, was nothing more than wagging the dog. October cannot come soon enough…this dangerous mental midget must go.

Andre Marin

Published:June 8, 2019

Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau holds the final report during the closing ceremony of the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls in Gatineau, Quebec, Canada, on June 3, 2019. (REUTERS/Chris Wattie)

It certainly didn’t take long for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to take the bait from Chief Commissioner of the National inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Marion Buller.

Buller irresponsibly stated, in plainly nutty language, in her final report that Canada has and continues to practice genocide as “a continuous policy, with shifting expressed motives but an ultimately steady intention, to destroy Indigenous peoples physically, biologically, and as social units.”

Apparently, we continue to take “proactive measures to destroy, assimilate and eliminate Indigenous peoples.”

As most of the world paid homage to the 75th anniversary of the end of the Second World War, which ended a true genocide of Jews at the hands of Nazi Germany, Trudeau boldly declared that “we accept the findings of the commissioner that it was genocide.”

Talk about being out of step.

So, with that admission of guilt we join the fine ranks of countries like Germany, Cambodia and Rwanda who have historically committed true genocide on a wide scale. What nice company to hang out with.

Retired general Romeo Dallaire was quick to put Trudeau in his place.

He said: “I’m not comfortable with that. My definition of genocide, I read it very deliberately at the start of the Rwandan genocide. And it was a deliberate act of a government to exterminate, deliberately and by force and directly, an ethnicity or a group of human beings. And that meant actually going and slaughtering people.”

Former attorney general Irwin Cotler, a prominent international human rights lawyer warned: “… I think we have to guard against using that term in too many ways because then it will cease to have the singular importance and horror that it warrants.”

Our apology-loving prime minister, who’s apologized for more past misdeeds than any other prime minister in history, may have gained a handful of votes among Indigenous people, but he has once again compromised us on the international stage.

How will Saudi Arabia react when we tweet out, as Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland did last August that “Canada is gravely concerned about additional arrests of civil society and women’s rights activists in #SaudiArabia?” To which a Saudi responded: “Saudi is gravely concerned about the lost souls of the 1000 indegenous (sic) women in Canada.”

Now Saudi Arabia can add that Trudeau admitted to genocide. What an ace in the hole they now have.

What about next time we lecture China on the superiority and independence of our judiciary? All they had to hammer us back was the SNC-Lavalin affair. Now the Chinese will have a field day with our prime minister confessing that we’re a genocidal country.

Finally, when Trudeau wags his preachy finger to U.S. President Donald Trump about his anti-immigration policies, I’m sure Trump will have a blast making Trudeau eat his words. Which is worse, blocking immigration or admitting to leading a genocidal country?

Alas, the consequences of Trudeau’s blunder have already begun. The Organization of American States has written to Freeland to establish a panel to investigate the allegation of genocide against Indigenous women and girls.

Secretary general Luis Almagro tweeted out his letter: “Given evidence of genocide perpetrated against indigenous women and girls in Canada I have offered the creation of an Interdisciplinary Group of Independent Experts (GIEI Canada). It is necessary to clarify these allegations and achieve justice.”

I’ll make Almagro’s job easier. They are not genocide allegations. There is a public admission of guilt of genocide by our prime minister.

The second part of achieving justice will hopefully happen Oct. 21, the date of the next federal election.

Canada is guilty of genocide? https://www.facebook.com/truenorthcentre/videos/467276327417020/

Minneapolis: first Somalian Muslim cop sentenced 12.5 years jail for killing innocent woman

June 8, 2019 9:00 AM BY CHRISTINE DOUGLASS-WILLIAMS

The first Somalian Muslim Minneapolis police officer Mohamed Noor, who “shot and killed Justine Ruszczyk Damond after she approached his squad car, was sentenced to more than twelve years in prison.”

Robert Spencer weighed in about the dire impact of identity politics at play in Noor’s hiring…

This proves the truth of what I have said all along about this case: Mohamed Noor was not competent to be a police officer. If he had not been a Somali and a Muslim, he never would have been on the force at all. Identity politics kills. If there is any lesson to be drawn from the killing of Justine Ruszczyk Damond, that is it. The city of Minneapolis was so eager to have a Somali Muslim police officer on the force that it hired a man who had been found incompetent to hold the job. Even worse, Minneapolis officials did not fire him even when he proved that he was indeed unfit to be a cop.

Fox News has reported that “the former Minneapolis police officer charged in the shooting death of Justine Ruszczyk Damond once put a gun to a driver’s head during a traffic stop and sometimes ignored calls, according to court filings indicating that psychiatrists and training officers voiced concerns about his fitness for duty.”

Not only that, but “[Mohamed] Noor was flagged by two psychiatrists during a pre-hiring evaluation in early 2015. The psychiatrists said he seemed unable to handle the stress of regular police work and exhibited an unwillingness to deal with people.”

The psychiatrists added: “Noor was more likely than other candidates to become impatient with others over minor infractions, have trouble getting along with others, to be more demanding and to have a limited social support network. The psychiatrists said he ‘reported disliking people and being around them.’”

Following the shooting, Minneapolis Mayor Betsy Hodges in a grossly insensitive move toward Noor’s victim,  jumped to the defense of the Muslim community “that the real victims are not those who were killed or wounded, but the Muslim community” and she warned against “Islamophobia”.

“Noor sentenced to 12.5 years for killing Justine Ruszczyk Damond”, KTTC, June 7, 2019:

MINNEAPOLIS, Minn. (KTTC) – A former Minneapolis police officer who shot and killed Justine Ruszczyk Damond after she approached his squad car was sentenced to more than twelve years in prison Friday morning.

Hennepin County Judge Kathryn Quaintance issued the sentence in a Minneapolis courtroom. Sentencing guidelines called for anywhere between 10.5 and 15 years in prison.

Mohamed Noor read a letter to the court minutes before he was sentenced.

“I’ve owed Ms. Ruszczyk’s family for a long time. I apologize…for taking the life of such a perfect person,” Noor said.

“I took great pride in wearing a uniform,” he added.

Members of Damond’s family read victim statements to the judge before the sentencing.
“The day of July 15, 2017, was the last time I felt a since of happiness ,a sense of trust…that everything could be okay,” said Don Damond, who was engaged to Justine.

Part of his statement took the form of a letter addressed to his late fiancée.

“I miss you so much everyday,” he read, holding back tears.

A jury convicted Noor on third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter charges in April after a tense trial. The defense argued he used reasonable force and acted in self-defense….

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2019/06/minneapolis-first-somalian-muslim-cop-sentenced-12-5-years-jail-for-killing-innocent-woman?fbclid=IwAR22RJQ5wWtuNWdwmRBG62_OEsMizOWjWNzdots__5twqiIpdZB0tmDlt-k

Navy confirms investigation after tweet showing sailor with ‘infidel’ arm tattoo

HMCS St. John's

HMCS St. John’s, one of Canada’s Halifax-class frigates, heads through the fog as it returns to port in Halifax on Monday, July 23, 2018. Ottawa will spend $183 million on the upgrading and maintaining of underwater sensors for the Royal Canadian Navy’s frigates. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Andrew Vaughan)

The Canadian Press 
Published Friday, June 7, 2019 

Arwen~ Canada has its own “morality police”…the left and the perpetually offended snowflakes.

Excerpt: The tweet by Rob Hutten, which was taken down Friday afternoon, said: “Saw a navy guy in Tim’s today in uniform & HMCS Fredericton hat sporting a huge ‘INFIDEL’ tattoo on his right arm, stylized in the shape of a machine gun. The message is clear, and scary as hell.”

Reached for comment Friday, Hutten said he was offended by the tattoo and felt he had to publicize it because it was on the arm of an Armed Forces member. Hutten said he didn’t talk to the man, who was standing with a couple of his friends at the time.

He said he has since been told by two people on Twitter that the sailor was the victim of an improvised explosive device in Afghanistan and got the tattoo because he was angry at the time.

“I have no hard feelings about this guy if he’s not an Islamaphobe,” Hutten said. “I don’t want him fired, but he shouldn’t be wearing that tattoo in public.”

Read article in its entirely herehttps://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/navy-confirms-investigation-after-tweet-showing-sailor-with-infidel-arm-tattoo-1.4456769?fbclid=IwAR3603VN8tozvmAMYt6xw5fxRNI6A9OhXHQ6hdyb_6LBw02qtPZ5WUDutH4

Iran deploys 2,000 new ‘morality police’ units to quell hijab rebellion

The move comes amid a growing backlash by women in the Islamic Republic, hundreds of whom have been arrested for taking off their hijabs in public

A woman without a hijab is confronted by Iran’s “morality police” in a photo posted on social media in February 2018.Twitter

The Telegraph Ahmed Vahdat

June 8, 2019

Iran has deployed 2,000 new morality police units in reaction to what officials call an “increasing defiance” of the compulsory wearing of hijabs.

The units – called “resistance groups for verbal and practical response to bad-hijabi women” – were launched recently in the northern province of Gilan as part of a pilot scheme. They each have six women with the power to arrest and detain those deemed to be flouting strict veiling laws.

The move comes amid a growing backlash by women in the Islamic Republic, hundreds of whom have been arrested for taking off their head coverings in public in protest at the law.

A campaign called “White Wednesday” that encouraged women to wear white and discard their hijabs has also gained support, much to the consternation of conservative clerics.

While Iran has had various forms of “morality police” since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the decision to increase numbers as well as introduce all-female brigades, is a sign that authorities are adopting a tougher approach.

Mohammad Abdulahpour, the commander of Gilan province’s Revolutionary Guards unit, has said that the survival of the Islamic revolution depends on the full implementation of Islamic traditions and that “the issue of hijab is not a simple matter, but rather a serious political and security issue for our country.”

“The enemy is heavily investing in changing our nation’s culture to adopt a Western lifestyle,” Abdulahpour told the local Tasnim news agency.

Cleric Rasoul Falahati, a provincial representative of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, condemned women who defied the hijab. “We do not wish to show a violent image of our religion, but models and promoters of vile fashions not only defy the hijab,” he said, “but are nowadays appearing almost naked on our streets.”

Police have also installed cameras on the Iran’s highways to photograph female drivers who remove their hijabs once they leave the town centres.

Women’s rights defenders across the country have joined an unprecedented protest movement against veiling laws.

The enemy is heavily investing in changing our nation’s culture 

They began taking to the streets last year, silently waving their headscarves on the ends of sticks. In response, they suffered a backlash from the authorities, facing violent assault, arrest and torture, with some jailed after what human rights groups called unfair trials.

Nasrin Sotoudeh, a prominent human rights lawyer, was sentenced in May last year to seven years in prison after defending the protesters.

Both Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s president, and Ayatollah Khamenei support a softer attitude toward women who do not properly follow the dress code, although hardliners opposed to any such easing still dominate Iran’s security forces and the judiciary.