In Which The Telegraph Smears Tor

Been a long time since I talked about the Telegraph here.  But yesterday, I came across this particular piece of bullshit reporting from that 'journalistic' organisation, and felt compelled to say something.

That headline above, is frankly...a lie.  First off, Tor is a network, or a technology, not a browser, even if the browser download is the way in which most users will experience Tor these days.  The browser download, being a simplified bundle of the core Tor & proxying software with a modified version of Firefox.  Secondly, the study in question doesn't in any way speak to to the 'overwhelming use' of the Tor browser, but specifically to the use of the so-called Dark Web.  Back to the Telegraph...

There is an "overwhelming" amount of illicit and illegal content on the dark web, a new study shows.

That statement might seem self-evident. But the Tor browser - also known as the dark web or deep web - was created to protect the anonymity of vulnerable people online. It is a web browser just like Google Chrome or Internet Explorer, but it masks the identity of who is browsing and what they're looking at.

The Tor browser is perhaps known as 'the dark web or deep web' -- by fucking idiots !  The so-called 'dark web' is a fear-mongering slur utilised by the government for any services over the internet that in any way bypass conventional IP/HTTP routing, and thus implicitly threaten governmental control and surveillance thereof.  Tor is one of many services that can be used for such means, in this case, via the use of .onion addresses, that are only routeable via the Tor network.  It is not the only technology providing such hidden services, the hidden services are not the primary purpose of the Tor network, and in fact, the hidden services component was a much later addition to Tor.

Don't believe me, that the hidden services, the 'dark web' are not the primary purpose of the Tor network ?  Well, let's look at the study in question, shall we ?

The Tor architecture provides two services – anonymous browsing (property 3), and hosting of anonymous information exchanges (property 5) – through one piece of software, the so-called ‘Tor Browser’. Although distinct, both services employ roughly the same protocols and rely on the same distributed infrastructure. But that is where their mutual dependency ends. There is no technical requirement for anonymous browsing and anonymous hosting to be bundled. Indeed, browsing is overwhelmingly more popular than hosting. Most Tor users have never visited any hidden website at a *.onion address; hidden services account for around 3–6% of overall Tor traffic.²⁷ Most users instead use the software merely to browse the internet's conventional address space more securely or anonymously. An analogy illustrates the significance of anonymous browsing. Alice, who lives in a small town, wants to buy a pregnancy test, but doesn't want to be seen doing so by the shop owner, Bob, a friend of Alice's father. Rather than simply going to the store, Alice wears a mask, walks a detour, and pays in cash. Bob will not be able to identify her or trace her. Alice's privacy and anonymity are assured. Anonymous browsing is not part of the ‘dark web’; it is a legitimate and laudable service that Tor provides.

This is from the very study upon which the Telegraph's scary misleading headline is based.  It says right there that most users have never visited any .onion 'dark web' sites at all, and that hidden services account for around 3–6% of overall Tor traffic.  Three to fucking six percent !  Hell, I've been familiar with Tor since long before there was such a thing as a 'Tor Browser', and I don't think I've ever visited or had reason to visit any hidden 'dark web' sites via Tor myself.  Because...why the fuck would I ?  Tor's primary purpose is, and always has been, simply to provide a modicum of anonymity in browsing the Internet, and the vast majority of users are most likely using Tor in entirely legitimate ways, in entirely legitimate pursuits.

In fact, the US government has repeatedly promoted the use of Tor for such purposes as enabling dissidents and human rights-activists living in authoritarian regimes, to communicate freely, bypassing restrictive governmental policies and controls, to promote liberal Western-style values.  The US government continues to this very day to provide a vast amount of the funding for the Tor project, and to utilise the network itself, and the Tor software was originally in fact invented by the United States Naval Research Laboratory & DARPA.

That's right, this evil evil 'dark web' software, the users of which the Telegraph apparently wishes to smear, was created by, and continues to be funded by the government of the United States of America.

So, in case you're not familiar with how Tor works, and is used by, as noted above, the vast vast majority of its users, here are some illustrations from the EFF.

Tor doesn't provide uncrackable security, certainly not for the likes of the NSA or other US govt. security agencies, and that much more certainly not when they have been involved in its creation and funding of its development from day one.  It simply obfuscates the path of traffic through a random series of nodes, making it difficult for a would-be adversary to monitor the traffic, without control of, and therefore the ability to monitor traffic through, all the nodes in question.  It isn't that inherently secure, even if you trust that the US government hasn't inserted its own backdoors into the system, and any one relying solely on Tor to run, say an international drug-smuggling operation, without detection, would be very stupid indeed.  Of course, the vast majority of users aren't doing anything of the sort.

Back to the Telegraph...

In the first study of its kind, researchers at King's College London found that 57 per cent of sites on Tor facilitate criminal activity, including drugs, illicit finance, and extreme pornography.

The findings are not unexpected - if anything that figure is lower than expected. Tor has been associated with child pornography, gun trading and murder long before now. 

"We expected something along these lines," said Thomas Rid, professor of Security Studies at King's College London and co-author of the study. "Previous studies have established that it's a pretty nasty place."  

Scary, scary fucking stuff indeed !  Child pornography, murder, drugs, extreme pornography !  Sounds pretty nasty huh ?

Did we mention that the 'dark web' sites in question were a product of a secondary (and not inherently illegitimate*) function of Tor, not even utilised by the vast majority of Tor users ?

Tor offers anonymous browsing to people across the world. Users in countries with strict censorship laws, like China or Iran, can use it to access mainstream sites - like Facebook - securely. Rid and Moore found that the vast majority of material on Tor was not just illegal in places like China or Iran, but in more liberal jurisdictions too.

Here, in the same fucking paragraph, the Telegraph conflates the anonymous browsing (such as use of fucking Facebook), which is the sole usage of the vast majority of users with the hosting of illegal materials on so-called 'dark web' sites.

The sites included marketplaces for drugs, fire arms and weapons, and explicit, illegal pornography. The study found a "near-absence" of Islamic extremist sites on Tor.

"Militants and extremists don't seem to find the Tor hidden services infrastructure very useful. So there are few jihadis and militants in the darknet," said Rid. "It's used for criminal services, fraud, extreme, illegal pornography, cyber attacks and computer crime."

Know why that is ?  Because, they're not fucking stupid !  Because they know full well, that if the US government wants to find them on an US-govt-designed and funded network of mild anonymity, it can, and will.  The US government could crush the Tor network any time it wanted to, but insofar as a) Tor isn't any meaningful threat to security-services, b) Dissidents in foreign competitor states utilise Tor, and c) Agents of the US govt. itself utilise Tor, it has no compelling reason to do so.

What the US government, and its proxy poodle in Westminster, would like to do, is utilise fearmongering rhetoric about 'terror' attacks, to convince the public, and technology-companies, that it is in the public interest that the privacy of Western citizens be intentionally compromised, via the dilution of encryption technology, and the building of government-accessible backdoors into common security software.  The sort of breathless hyperbole in which right-wing publications such as the Telegraph specialise is perfect for such a purpose.

Rid and Moore commend Tor for offering vulnerable people access to anonymous browsing. But they said Tor needs to work harder to encourage its community to build a safe and legitimate browsing experience.

Did they say that ?  I must have missed it...

"The developers made Tor for a different purpose - they wanted security, not crime. It's up to them to change the direction," said Rid. "It's up to them to have a sensible discussion about ways to reduce crime, to get more legitimate users in." 

Now here, I can only assume the quotation is the result of an interview (what, the Telegraph doing actual reporting...like actual journalists ?), as I don't see such language in the report.  Regardless, this is shit.  We've already established that the vast majority of usage is merely anonymous browsing (which is, in the authors' words, 'a legitimate and laudable service that Tor provides'), and how the hell can Tor's developers be held responsible for the content provided by the 'hidden services' on their network, without fundamentally compromising the relative anonymity that is the whole raison d'etre of the Tor network to begin with ?

Is the argument that as the functionality of hidden services could theoretically be used for ill purposes, that it should be removed ?  The same is true of the anonymous browsing functionality, innocent as the vast majority of usage may be/probably is.  The same is true of all technology.  Hell, in the US, special constitutional protections are given to the ownership of tools (i.e. guns, firearms), whose primary if not sole purpose is to murder living beings.  But the fact that a subset of the functionality of a mildly anonymising technology might be used for illicit purposes, that...that is a reason for ripping apart what little guarantee of privacy is currently available to us on the internet ?

Tor's example will no doubt be used in the encryption debate that is circulating around the snoopers' charter, according to Rid and Moore. 

"Tor's ugly example should loom large in technology debates," Rid and Moore conclude. "The line between utopia and dystopia can be disturbingly thin."

This is just...WTF ?  Wait, why am I still quoting the fucking Telegraph ?

The other quandary is how to deal with darknets. Hidden services have already damaged Tor, and trust in the internet as a whole. To save Tor – and certainly to save Tor's reputation – it may be necessary to kill hidden services, at least in their present form. Were the Tor Project to discontinue hidden services voluntarily, perhaps to improve the reputation of Tor browsing, other darknets would become more popular. But these Tor alternatives would lack something precious: a large user base. In today's anonymisation networks, the security of a single user is a direct function of the number of overall users. Small darknets are easier to attack, and easier to de-anonymise. The Tor founders, though exceedingly idealistic in other ways, clearly appreciate this reality: a better reputation leads to better security.⁸⁵ They therefore understand that the popularity of Tor browsing is making the bundled-in, and predominantly illicit, hidden services more secure than they could be on their own. Darknets are not illegal in free countries and they probably should not be. Yet these widely abused platforms – in sharp contrast to the wider public-key infrastructure – are and should be fair game for the most aggressive intelligence and law-enforcement techniques, as well as for invasive academic research. Indeed, having such clearly cordoned-off, free-fire zones is perhaps even useful for the state, because, conversely, a bad reputation leads to bad security. Either way, Tor's ugly example should loom large in technology debates. Refusing to confront tough, inevitable political choices is simply irresponsible. The line between utopia and dystopia can be disturbingly thin.

Less oblique, less misleading, less blatantly crass government-propaganda.  Still crap.

But, now I'm getting into the realm of disputing the report's findings & conclusions, which wasn't where I started, with the Telegraph's blatantly misleading headline.  So, let's step back a bit...

See those results above, from Google News ?  The bottom three accurately characterise the report's findings, and the subject thereof.  Only the one at the top from the Telegraph manages, unintentionally or not, to completely conflate the lesser functionality of 'hidden services' with the wholly legitimate purpose of 'anonymous browsing', and to smear the vast majority of Tor users as a result.  Fuck, I hate the Telegraph...


* Imagine say Iranian or Chinese dissidents, wanting to not merely communicate freely over Tor, without detection of government authorities, but also wanting to provide a stable hosting source of shared documentation within their groups.

The Statesman Tribune: I Can Haz Fake News-Organisation Also

Oh, look, themarketbusiness.com has competition.  And they even know how to calculate 15 + 2.

Good to see, especially as the last article I read from themarketbusiness.com looked almost semi-literate.  I wonder if I should just take a quick peek over there, to...

Oh dear.  Any hoo...The Statesman Tribune...That's a fine traditional name, isn't it ?  Bet they've been around for years and years, since...<checks domain records>...er, since February.  Well, long enough to have the one piece of breaking news (it is just the one that cycles in the banner over and over) three months ago about smoking.

And now, they have an important story to share about a private mission to land on the moon.  Let's include it here in its illiterate entirety, given that it does after all appear to be entirely ripped off from this actual news-story on Space.com.

California-primarily based firm Moon Express, which goals to fly business missions to the moon and assist unlock its sources, has signed a 5-launch cope with Rocket Lab, with the primary two robotic liftoffs scheduled to happen in 2017.

These uncrewed launches — three of that are firmly on the books, with the opposite two non-obligatory in the meanwhile — will blast Moon Specific’ MX-1 lander into area aboard Rocket Lab’s fifty two.5-foot-tall (sixteen meters) Electron rocket. The purpose is to check out the MX-1 and its techniques, ensuring the spacecraft can land softly on the moon, transfer in regards to the lunar floor, seize samples and return them to Earth.

Wait, I thought they were called 'Moon Express' ?...

“The holy grail of our firm is to offer, to show, a full-companies functionality — not simply touchdown, however getting back from the moon,” mentioned Moon Categorical co-founder and CEO Bob Richards, who introduced the brand new launch deal in the present day (Oct. 1) on the Area Expertise & Funding Summit in San Francisco.
If the MX-1 nails its touchdown on the primary mission, “we will be impressed to strive a pattern-return,” Richards informed Space.com. “I do not know if we’ll do this on the second mission, however I positive hope we’re making an attempt it by the third mission, if all goes that nicely.”

They changed their name again ?  Oh, and maybe you should delete the reference to Space.com, so it's not so obvious whence you plagiarised this shit...

The 2 non-compulsory launches present some insurance coverage for Moon Specific in case the primary three flights do not go totally in line with plan, Richards mentioned.

The contract places Moon Specific in place to probably win the Google Lunar X Prize, a $30 million competitors to land a privately funded robotic spacecraft on the moon by the top of 2017. The primary workforce to do that — and have the craft transfer 1,640 toes (500 m) and beam excessive-definition video and pictures again to Earth as nicely — will win the $20 million grand prize. (The second crew to perform these objectives will get $5 million; one other $5 million is obtainable for assembly sure different milestones.)

1,640 toes !  I think the police may have 164 or more homicides to investigate.

Sixteen groups stay within the operating for the Google Lunar X Prize, so the result stays very a lot up within the air. For instance, one staff, Astrobotic, signed a contract in 2011 to launch its lunar lander aboard a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket. Astrobotic representatives have stated they plan to launch in 2016.

The three.9-foot-huge (1.2 m) Electron rocket is designed to ship a 330-lb. (one hundred fifty kilograms) payload to a solar-synchronous orbit 310 miles (500 kilometers) above Earth, based on Rocket Lab’s web site. The 2-stage rocket will not be operational but; industrial launches are scheduled to start in 2016, say representatives of the corporate, which is headquartered in California however has a New Zealand subsidiary. (Moon Categorical may have the choice of launching from Rocket Lab’s vary in New Zealand or from a web site in the US.)

Websites can launch rockets now ?!  Hook me up with that functionality please.

“Rocket Lab is happy to start working with Moon Specific to launch its spacecraft and to offer assist to such an bold mission,” Rocket Lab CEO Peter Beck mentioned in an announcement. “Moon Categorical has used superior orbital mechanics to allow this mission from low-Earth orbit.”

Electron is kind of an inexpensive choice so far as orbital launches are involved, with every liftoff costing simply $four.9 million. Falcon 9 launches, for instance, value about $60 million every.

“We predict the collapse of the value to get to the moon goes to allow a complete new market — type of just like the four-minute-mile of area,” Richards mentioned.

The MX-1 landers that blast off atop an Electron will probably be comparatively small, constrained by the rocket’s dimension.. However the MX-1 is scalable, Richards stated, and will be modified as wanted to assist the corporate obtain its formidable objective of opening up the moon and its sources to industrial use.

“Because the market responds, we can present the platforms to help the market,” Richards mentioned. “We’re beginning small; we’re beginning with the newborn steps.”

So Space.com publishes a perfectly decent article on private lunar exploration, and The Statesman Tribune turns it into utter gibberish, in which they can't even be bothered to notice the fact that their translation-software mangles the name of the company involved multiple times.

Seriously, what's the market here ?  Who are the audience ?  ESL learners who want to avoid mastery of the English language at all costs ?

And don't these guys ever get sued for plagiarism, when they simply run other organisations' news-stories through translation-engines, and publish them as their own ?

I hate the Internet, in case I haven't mentioned that before.

Stick a Fork In It Already

So, I guess in between the endless repeats of Forensic Files, the onetime 'CNN Headline News' likes to occasionally pretend to still be a news-organisation.  And this is the result.

Bring back Ted Turner !  All is forgiven...


Update: Well, this explains a lot.

Your Completely Insane Baseless Headline of the Day

Courtesy, of the Independent no less...

The changing nature of the British jobs market has broken the link between unemployment and crime, according to new research.

The phenomenon – which saw rising joblessness matched by increased burglaries, thefts and robberies during the Thatcher years – ended in 2005, according to an analysis of crime and employment statistics.

The latest research suggests that growing trend of employers to adopt part-time working and zero-hours contracts has meant that communities are less blighted by mass unemployment and less likely to resort to crime.

The findings explain in part why Britain was not hit by a crime epidemic following the 2007-8 financial crisis which led to unemployment rising above eight per cent for the first time in more than a decade but saw a continuing long-term decline in crime.

Here's the link to the full story.  See if you can find anything there to support that supposition.

The story does mention the likely role in preventitive technology in reducing crime, though that only addresses the question of means.

Here's a hint from the other side of the Atlantic at a more likely causative factor:

But no-one seems to want to take that line of enquiry seriously, and we're going to be still debating this shit for decades to come, and still pushing Dirty Harry-style get-tough rhetoric on crime even as London sinks into the Thames and DC & NYC into the Atlantic.


Quick Update: Oh yeah, here's this from the Independent in 2007: Ban on leaded petrol 'has cut crime rates around the world'

Banning lead in petrol is responsible for declining crime rates in Britain, the United States and other countries, startling new research suggests.

The astonishing conclusion threatens to overturn current thinking on crime and punishment....

Published in the peer-reviewed journal, Environmental Research, the study reports a "very strong association" over more than 50 years between the exposure of young children to the toxic metal and crime rates 20 years later when they are young adults.

And it says the association holds true for a wide variety of countries with differing social conditions, law and order policies...

Britain – one of the last to get rid of the toxic metal – is one of the latest to enjoy a decline in crime.

But, someone seems to want to tell a very different story today, and link falling crime-rates to zero-hours contracts of all things.  Ladies & Gentleman, your Independent newspaper.

Ted Rall on his Favourite* Subject

* For obvious reasons, may not actually be his favourite subject.

Cartoonist Ted Rall's Firing from the LA Times: How You Can Help (Even if you don't personally like Ted Rall)

Links to petitions & letters to the LAT, links to encourage various media-outlets to cover the story, or to just buy Ted's books or donate directly here.

Update: So apparently, Ted is reviewing his legal options, but perhaps more importantly whether he can afford the costs of what could be a difficult legal battle.  So if you'd be willing to support him with that, you could let him know so in the comments here.

Not the North Pole ! What will that Dastardly Vlad Do Next ?

Ah, the Daily Express, my number-one source in determining the major threats to our civilisation, to our way of life, to our survival.  That paragon of journalistic integrity and accuracy.  Do tell.  Do tell.

Vladimir Putin: Russia owns the NORTH POLE - and the UN needs to give it back to us!

VLADIMIR PUTIN has made his most audacious land grab bid yet after claiming that Russia owns the NORTH POLE.

Not content with just spreading his power base into Ukraine, the eccentric president has now submitted a bold claim to a large portion of the Arctic.

Russia has long had eyes on the Arctic ice, which it is thought could contain vast reserves of oil, precious gems and minerals. 

Putin recently announced plans to bolster the country's naval presence in the region, sparking fears that the country could attempt a military-led land grab.

Those would be the plans would they to restore a fraction of the former Soviet presence in the region, at a time when all interested parties are staking their claim to the far North, and at least one Western oil-company is actively planning to drill in the Arctic ?  I can't imagine why they would be doing that.

Now Russia has submitted a claim to the UN for a large swathe of Arctic ice covering an astonishing 500,000 square miles, parts of which have already been claimed by Denmark. 

Gasp !

Russian officials claim tectonic plate maps show that the disputed territory is part of Russia's "continental character".

...

In a statement outlining the claim, the Russian government stated: "The outer borders of the continental shelf in the Arctic Ocean is based on the scientific understanding that the central Arctic underwater ridges…have a continental character."

Moscow will now ask the UN Commission on the Limits and the Continental Shelf (CLCS) to rule on the boundaries of the contintental shelf in the Arctic Ocean. 

They asked a UN body specifically tasked with advising on continental boundaries to...advise on continental boundaries ?!!  The cads !  The bounders !

Denmark’s submission to the commission, made on behalf of Greenland, was the first attempt to claim outright ownership of the North Pole. 

Wait, what ?  Back up just a second there...Denmark did what ?

That has provoked the response from Putin, who would be unwilling to see potentially lucrative lands falling into western hands. 

When Denmark submitted its bid in December 2014, a leading expert on Arctic sovereignty predicted that Russia would retaliate. 

Er, *cough* Crimea *cough* Eastern Ukraine *cough*.

Canadian professor Michael Byers said: “It is ironic that the only country that right now could be said to be acting provocatively in the Arctic is Denmark. That is out of character with the country’s tradition of constructive diplomacy." 

Erm, what was our headline for this article again ?  I don't recall any mention of Queen Margrethe or Mister Rasmussen.  Weren't we talking about a certain Russian fellow ?

Under UN rules states are entitled to claim the continental shelf extending to 200 nautical miles from their coast. 

The Danish government expects its claim to be processed by 2027 after spending more than £31million in research. 

Canada has also said it will try to extend its territorial claims in the Arctic to include the North Pole, although it hasn't yet fully mapped its claim....

The monsters !  Oh wait, Canada isn't an officially designated villain in this story, is it ?  Canada's actions are inherently benign then.

...Last month Russia announced that its navy will deploy a fleet of new icebreakers to the Arctic tasked with sidestepping traditional Nato security patrols. 

We're politicising ice-breakers now ?  When did then happen ?


I dunno, this shit is hilarious, but what percentage of the idiots reading the Express will just see the headline and believe it implicitly without even bothering to read the story ?

What percentage, as evidenced by certain comments on the story, will click on the link, not bother to actually read the story, and then, despite not having read the Express' own words on the matter, post a comment publicly, based solely on the hyperbolic headline ?


Meanwhile, the Express also has a highly perceptive story to offer in which they note that all-out nuclear war between Russia and the West would create a 'dystopian future where London ceases to exist'.  No !  You don't say !  Illustrated throughout with images based upon some stupid movie (30% rating on Rotten Tomatoes, baby !), that basically involve taking pictures of actual London, and simply blackening them a little, and adding some smoke & fire.  Despite their own 'futurologist's rather generous comment in the article that 'If anything, [the images] were a little optimistic. Things like The Shard on fire, if you had a Third World War it would be a pile of rubble - it wouldn't be on fire.'  Er, no shit.


What would we do without such fine journalism ?

The Awesomest Thing Ever

This new picture of the International Space Station against the Moon is the awesomest thing ever, right ?

Wait, that's actually from 2010.  Oh, right, here we go...

No, sorry, that's from 2014.  How about...

Nope, 2011.  How about...

Nope, 2009.  Maybe...

2014 again.  Surely, the next one...

Yer fuckin with us now arsehole...  Okay, okay...for realsies:

Seriously, not to be an asshole about it.  Just that I see this kinda shit in the news* all the time, think, hang on a minute, are you sure no-one has never shot that before, and...

The picture is awesomely cool...even if it's not the first.


* Not sure if that was one of the sites I was thinking of, because a certain mobile browser lost all my tabs...again.

Megyn & Ann Take Apart the Lefty Media

Oh, and I almost forgot.

Wait for it...

The evil Marxist lefty news-media would...never...frame Ted Cruz in a halo like their hero Obama !


So I guess this photo, which I used three months back, was purely a product of my own imagination ?

Megyn & Ann were outraged at this messianic portrayal of Ted at the time, one might presume ?.....

So We're Publishing Placeholders Now ?

This is an actual 'story' published by actual 'Fox News'.  Just look at the headline, and then read the content -- no wait, you can't.  Because there isn't any.  Jeb set to announce his run, Hillary said something over the weekend, then some random shit going on in the world.  And that's it.  Pure meaningless content-less click-bait:

Hillary Clinton versus Jeb Bush

By Clint HendersonPublished June 15, 2015 FoxNews.com

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton speaks to supporters during a rally, Sunday, June 14, 2015, in Des Moines, Iowa. Seeking an army of volunteers, Clinton is trying to build an organizational edge in Iowa as some of her lesser-known Democratic rivals clamor for attention in the state that tripped up her first presidential campaign. (AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

Jeb Bush set to announce he’s running for President today.

1500EDT -- Fmr FL Gov Jeb Bush announces his decision to run for President. Miami-Dade College - Kendall Campus, Miami, FL. LIVE

Hillary Clinton held her largest rally of her campaign for the Democratic nomination so far on Saturday on Roosevelt Island. Clinton making income inequality a huge part of her campaign. Clinton saying, “These Republicans trip over themselves by promising lower taxes for the wealthy and fewer rules for the biggest corporations without any regard on how that will make income inequality worse.”  She also said “I’m not running for some Americans, but for all Americans.”

Hillary also weighed in for the first time later that day on the big trade deal that failed in the House on Friday. She says Democrats’ concerns should be addressed, but didn’t say she’s support a final deal. Today she’s holding events in New Hampshire. Ed Henry reporting.

1000EDT -- Hillary Clinton participates in a forum with Granite Staters on early childhood education. Rochester, NH. POOL LIVE via LiveU

1115EDT approx -- Hillary Clinton hosts a launch party. Carter Hill Orchard, Concord, NH. LIVE

A woman accused of helping two escaped murderers will be in court today. She’s charged with supplying the men with tools to help them escape from the upstate New York jail. They’ve now been on the run for 10 days. Molly Line and Peter Doocy reporting.

Garrett Tenney reporting on the growing outbreak of Bird Flu devastating the Midwest.
Severe weather expected today across much of the country including thunderstorms, flash floods and more.

There were two horrific shark attacks in North Carolina. Two attacks on teenage swimmers within 90 minutes of each other on Oak Island. Both teens losing limbs. We’ll talk to a shark expert.

The U.S. military conducted airstrikes in Libya and may have killed an Al Qaeda leader who was behind an attack on a gas plant in Algeria that left 35 dead. Four members of a Libyan terror group linked to the Benghazi attacks may also have been killed.

The New York Times reporting the United States is sending major military equipment into several Eastern European countries considered under threat from an increasingly aggressive Russia. A Russia military leader today says it’s the most serious military escalation since the Cold War. The U.S. will sent heavy equipment to Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, Romania and Bulgaria.. and maybe Hungary.

Greece stocks continue to plunge.. down another 6% today on fears no deal on a bailout is imminent, and Greece could default. Amy Kellogg reporting. 

That's the whole thing minus the 'Sponsored Stories' & 'More from Fox News' crap.  Every time I think the news-media can't fall any further, they keep proving me wrong.  Even the Beeb's main news-page is turned to wall-to-wall clickbait-y garbage these days.  And they don't even need advertising.  They literally get to tax an entire population of sixty-four million or so on the basis of owning a television-set, and then pretty much use the money as they see fit.

Just what are we supposed to do with this garbage ?  You said Hillary Clinton versus Jeb Bush...So, are you going to compare their platforms, compare their respective campaigns, look at strengths and weaknesses, consider their history, including potential political baggage ?  You could even go with the obvious question of whether Americans want to create new presidential dynasties in the Bushes & the Clintons.  But, no.  Nothing.

I just clicked refresh...again...because there has to be more than this.  There Just Has To Be.

I'd almost settle for a meaningless cartoon.  In fact, to the Googlez, and...

There.  Cartoonist Blzeeez or whatever his name is just provided more insight into the election than fucking Fox News.  See it's all hip and relevant and shit because there's this teevee-show called Game of.....


Update:

Going on a week now, since Jeb!'s announcement, and still...nothing...Just vacuous meaningless shite.  Delete this garbage already, Fox !

Always...Priorities

Around the world, children are starving, children are dying of preventable diseases.  Children are being forced into child-labour, into slavery, even being forced to fight as soldiers.

Meanwhile, in the west, a certain toddler from an ever-so privileged family goes on an outing with his parents...and it's front-page fucking news (in mainstream publications no less).

Look at the little boy rolling down a hill.  Marvel in wonder as he kicks a ball !  See him running with his little toy-car in his chubby little fists...  But it's newsworthy, because one day, if our species hasn't completely destroyed itself before then, the adult this child may one day become could get to wear fancy-dress and pretend-rule over the people of a portion of a couple of small islands in the North Sea.

I will give the Telegraph & Times credit for one thing though: Not being the Daily Mail.  Because they apparently felt this particular combination to be appropriate:

There's a certain .gif out there on the 'ole Internetz that I could post here, that to put it mildly, starts with someone banging their head against a desk.  I'm going to refrain...this time.

I Guess The Indie Really Wants to Make Sure I Read This Story

Not really interested...  <Scrolls>

Still not...  <Scrolls>

WTF ?  <Scrolls>

C'mon, dammit !

Well, It's the Weekend, So We Can Just Phone in any Random Crap, Right ?

Time to read the Telegraph...Referendum, booooring.  Global realignment of power between the US and China...pass.  Tom Cruise...ew.  What's that fourth item ?

But, but, surely that's...That's...The general election was just...

Why the hell am I looking at a photoshop of the former Deputy Prime Minister and former head of the LibDems with his wife & the Camerons over the caption "I'll be there for you..." ?

Is this some shit you had hanging around from before the elections, and you couldn't be bothered to update ?

Okay, okay, the 'content' will explain, right ?  <Reads the utterly unfunny pointless drivel that follows>

Nope.  What follows has nothing to do with Friends, nothing to do with the Cleggs, nothing to with 'SamCam', and is in fact nothing more than some cheap stereotypes and cliches seguing eventually into a bolted-on mention of Sepp fucking Blatter.  Please tell me you didn't pay Mister Thomas for this shit.

More importantly, please tell me you stole that image off the internet.  No, wait... Please tell me that your unpaid intern from Albania stole that image off the internet.

I mean, you do want to be taken seriously, don't you ?  You've only been running an online presence for over twenty years now.  You were fucking pioneers on the web !  We were still using the Mosaic web-browser when you launched the Electronic Telegraph FFS !

Aw, whadda I care ?  Go ahead, keep shitting all over yourselves Telegraph.  Think those cheques are going to keep coming in from the Tories indefinitely ?


Oh, in case you actually wanted to read this shit (their shit, not mine, not that my blather isn't that), and didn't believe me about how bad it is.  Well, sure: Don't say I didn't warn ya.

Stay Classy, JPost

What ?  We're just sayin'.  And if you click on the link, the Title specifies 'Not Just News.'   I'm willing to bet that a large part of JPost's readership wouldn't even see or acknowledge what is so very fucking wrong with that shit in the middle of the image above.  I try to keep an open mind.  I really do.  And then I see shit like this.  And I just give up...

Felix Kiprono is in love, and the young Kenyan lawyer is aiming high.

According to the daily newspaper Nairobian, the object of Kiprono’s affections is none other than President Barack Obama’s daughter, Malia.

Just how far is Kiprono willing to go to snatch the girl of his dreams? According to the Nairobian, he is prepared to offer the leader of the free world a dowry of 50 cows, 70 sheep, and 30 goats.

"People might say I am after the family's money, which is not the case. My love is real," Kiprono told the Nairobian newspaper.

Just how smitten is Kiprono with Malia Obama?

"I got interested in her in 2008," he said. "As a matter of fact, I haven't dated anyone since and promise to be faithful to her. I have shared this with my family and they are willing to help me raise the bride price."

He said he plans to deliver a letter to the US Embassy in Kenya to officially declare his intention.."

Ours will be a simple life. I will teach Malia how to milk a cow, cook ugali (a starchy dish) and prepare mursik (a sour milk) like any other Kalenjin woman," he said

Update: Apparently CNN & The Indy. also 'reported' on this non-story.  Which I guess, makes it okay...er, No.  No, it doesn't.  Our modern news-media is such a fucking disgrace.

Yes, I Clicked on Stupid Fucking Clickbait from Politico...

I don't even like Hillary, but WTF is this ?  Is it her fault that her party (well, the one she ended up with, via Bill) is so complacent and flaccid ?  That they haven't the imagination to come up with an alternative to the last election's choice between Barry & Hill ? That they have failed so utterly in encouraging young talent to rise up through the ranks and become established in the media and in the public imagination ?  That they, like the Republicans with McCain & Romney, are so willing to accept the idea that a name-brand politician should be somehow entitled to the nomination, because it's 'their turn' ?

What exactly should Hillary do, instead of 'un-running' for President ?  (I'm assuming here I guess that not running at all, and contributing to society in a way more fitting her talents is not an option...)  And as for 'the press must now cover the Clinton 2016 slow lane the best they can', well fuck them.  The press doesn't have to do shit.  How about having their anchor (if such a position still exists) going on camera during prime-time (again, if such a thing truly still exists), and reminding the public that it is still more than eighteen fucking months till the election, and trying to find actual meaningful non-horserace news to cover in the interval ?  What other country runs or covers elections this way ?  But then, what would the likes of Politico do ?  How would they survive ?

And fuck whatever editor chose the picture of Hillary above.  a) For the bleeding fucking obvious, and b) for the criminal waste of blank space.

themarketbusiness.com: I Can Haz Fake News-Organisation?

Maybe I should have gone with the story about the cat-hunting vet...

Okay, what happened is, I clicked on a story because I just couldn't make head nor tail of the headline.  And still couldn't understand a fucking word of what I was reading.  And thought for a second or two, that it was just the science-y stuff going over my head, but no...it's just utter fucking gibberish.

Analysts of the School of Manchester have discovered a new study that light shadow dramatically affects how animals only report what time of day it is, like the shadow exchange comes from within the biological clock of the brain itself. The physiology of animals and pets habits modification according to what time of day it is, why there is the threat of arrest or time to go hunting.

The research study was published Friday in the journal PLoS Biology, and also shows how the researchers examined the changing light at dusk and dawn to see what tone represents a particular time of day. And, while it has been recognized that there are changes in the intensity of light as the sun rises and sets, the study group research found that golden light is bluer compared to the one on the day. Electric task of brain clocks computer mice were also analyzed, since subjects are shown various aesthetic stimuli and found that their nerve cells were much more aware of color from blue to yellow adjustments in contrast adjustments to brightness .

The next step was to develop a model that simulates daily sky shade and light settings. When computer mice were placed in the sky substitute for several days, your body temperature were higher just after sunset, as the sky a dark blue lit. If the sky brightness is altered, but the actual shade, computer mice were much stronger before sunset, verification that her biological clock was not in sync with the regular cycle of day and night.

To ensure that this change in the temperature level was undoubtedly due to a change in the clock, scientists analyzed SCN slices from mice associated with heaven synthetic experiment. “One of the surprising aspects of the clock,” Brown says, is that “when you take it out of a pet and put it in a meal, the cells remain to shoot.” By measuring the distance of throw in some sliced, the scientists could bring if the clock running fast or reduced. The cells of mice that do not see variant delayed shadow behind those who did, a confirmation that the change in the level of peak physical body temperature was due to the clock, the group reports today in PLoS Biology.

Visits brownish human potential applications in this work. “What this opens the possibility of improving existing alreadying ways to deal with jet lag or things like seasonal depression disorder,” he says. A technique for dealing with jet lag is a light box that immerses a traveler to intense light to deceive his / her watch. Including shade for light could provide much better results, says Brown. The new finding may even change our understanding of why the vision shadow developed. Analysts suggest that it could have been a much better means for pets to set their clocks in a world where clouds could minimize glare from light yet still allow colors radiate through.

And no, it's not just this one story; there's page after page of this crap, on every news-story imaginable, all written in the same unintelligible style that looks like someone ran this garbage through a sub-standard auto-translate and back a couple of times.  Lack of apostrophes and misuse of pronouns are dead giveaways.

Although I am sorta liking the sound of 'heaven synthetic experiment', and 'brownish human potential applications'.

Here's some more clippets from the headlines on themarketbusiness.com:

Good Ship Miliband on the Grauniad

Just ponder for a moment this image of Ed Miliband on the front page of the Guardian:

Feeling seasick yet ?  Worried you might be about to slide out of your chair ?

What might the Guardian be trying to tell us ?  Think this wasn't a considered editorial decision ?  This ain't the Telegraph.  They don't just pick photos at random.  Maybe there weren't any other pictures to choose from ?  This particular photographer only got the one photo from this particular event ?  Sound likely to you ?

Thankfully, Getty Images is publicly searchable, and...

So, yeah.  But, it's not just the tilt.  That extreme cropping has a lot to do with it as well, especially the way the Labour logo gets cut off at the bottom.  Of course, the Getty version of the photo was already a tight crop, and the ratios of the Guardian image and Getty's are different, not that that problem couldn't have been avoided by simply choosing one of the other photos on offer.

In fact, let's do...just...that.

And...

Well, minus the watermark, obviously...