Transcript: Corbett Report Interviews Mark and Josh of Piercing the Darkness 2009/09/18

Posted 29 September, 2009

Editor's Note: The following transcription of our recent interview with Mark and Josh of Piercing the Darkness on the information control grid has been provided by the Infowars Wiki.

James Corbett: This is James Corbett of the Corbett Report. It's the 18th of September 2009 in the U.S, where I'm joined by Josh and Mark, the former hosts of Piercing The Darkness, an in-depth investigation of the cyberterror false-flag paradigm enabled by enterprise architecture software. Josh and Mark, thank you for joining me today.

LordsSyndicate: Well, it's a pleasure to be here. Thank you for having us.

Anti_Illuminati: Well, thank you, James.

JC: Well, it's good to talk to you again, Mark, and it's good to talk to you for the first time, Josh. So, for the listeners who are maybe tuning in for the first time, please, can you differentiate your voices, maybe introduce yourselves, and tell us which aspects of the total information awareness control grid do you specialise in?

LS: [laughs] Alrighty, I'll let you go ahead first, Mark.

AI: Yeah, my name is Mark, also known as Anti_Illuminati, one of the moderators of the Prison Planet forum. And little over a year ago, I begun taking the testimony of [Indira Singh] that she did publicly from 2004 and branching out from her research into all of the things that she revealed - all of the connections that she made, and realising, really, how massively intricate of a spider-web of treason and criminality that was involved with the Ptech software. And predominantly, all of my information is sourced and is based on PDF documents from military, government and corporate websites. That's basically the gist of it - I don't have a bona-fide educational background in [the] systems/hardware/software technology aspect of it like Josh does. Basically, I'm the one who has delved into - really digging deep into the information, going through a lot of boring things that may not seem like they have any significance on the surface. But when you really get into it, and you start to see all these correlations - all these relevancies to other documents and other organizations and people - a lot of it tying directly which ends up tying to the people who are talked about by other individuals investigating 9/11 from their angle - from completely different angles, such as Sibel Edmonds and things like that. And basically, I've taken all the documentation and just let people know where they can - you know, I've put links to things where people can look at this.

I've just kind of like taught myself in terms of learning what they are doing - just from continuously reading everything that they are talking about - and understanding the underpinnings of the global police state that they are setting up - and the reason behind that, and trying to find motives for them to have actually carried out 9/11. And the more that you find out about all of this, the more that you know you are on the right track - when you have multiple sources of information that just keep confirming everything that you're looking into. So, Josh, you want to take it from there? Go ahead.

LS: Absolutely. Thanks, Mark. And my name is Josh - I'm also known as LordSyndicate on the Prison Planet forums. Basically, I have come across Anti_Illuminati - Mark - vis a vis the forum itself - having actually made a comment against one of his postings against swine flu that caused attention. Basically, the reason I made that comment - and the comment itself was based upon technical experience I have with IT and enterprise architecture - having dealt with such things for over a decade working for large corporations, primarily large corporations, some government, but primarily large corporations. Most people would call them military-industrial complex - Sun, IBM, Motorola - just to name a few, but, right. A lot of the data and a lot of the material that Mark has presented me basically are things that I know people who have worked with - I have dealt with - I have experience with people who are within four/five degrees of seperation from me. So, I kinda leave it at that. And I have various sources in a lot of various places within different companies - government, etc, and I kinda leave it at that.

[interruption by James Corbett.. some slight confusion]

JC: Sorry, I didn't mean to interrupt there. I just wanted to say that I think Mark made a good comment there where he called the Ptech software an intricate, massive spider web - and it's incredibly complicated to untangle that spider web. And I think you guys have both been doing an excellent job on the Prisonplanet forums - so I would once again encourage my listeners to go to the Prisonplanet forum - and especially in the Phd investigate reports section, where you've just detailed such a massive [amount of] information - and as Mark mentioned, coming from PDFs from the companies and corporations that are part of this.

So, you guys have done so much work to break all of this down, that it's difficult to know even where to even begin. And I certainly have some questions for you guys. But first, I'd like to open it up and let you sort of bring up whatever subject you think is most important at this particular juncture.

LS: I actually have a little introduction - a little statement I'd like to make. It's not only just companies, governments and corporations, but even universities and private, long-profit research organizations that have been a part of this as well. Especially in the case of OMG (Object Management Group) and George Mason University. But we'll get into that in a little bit, basically.

JC: Well, absolutely. That is an important point, I think - that foundations and non-governmental organizations (NGO) tend to get a free ride and a pass when people talk about corporate control and corporate power. Perhaps we do need a different terminology to talk about that.

LS: Right. Well, that's kinda the thing, actually - that people should understand that there shouldn't be a different terminology, because - to quote Eisenhower here, the military-industrial complex is no longer just governments, it's all of these institutions. It's these corporations, these schools, and these profit and non-profit institutions that actually are now in control. You know, making up what is this military-industrial complex that is the ruling hierarchy that leads to the oligarchy.

But, the thing about it is, that is the point - that whole philosophy and that whole ruling Bilderberg oligarchy - everything filters down and you can really - if you been a part of enterprise architecture or an architect for these type of government systems, and I guess you have a knack for it - it's clear as day, basically.

You know, universities take part where one professor or a dean or department head knows what the purpose of said experiment, and they hand them: "OK, we want you to build this program that does this". And all these people on the bottom that are students essentially - they're doing it to get a good grade. And the little worker bees at work - the same thing - they're doing this to get a dollar. So the real differentiation there is the cookie that's given to the end-user, sadly - the cookie being either a dollar or a good grade or whatever form of payment you want to take [it]. So that's basically what I'm trying to say - they use all of these tools, and all of these tools should not be separated, because they have infected all of these parts - of our society, culture, and government.

JC: Mark, you have anything to add?

AI: Yeah, and actually tying into that - I think what needs to be mentioned is - Object Management Group is really one of the sinister organizations behind that. Because - see, what they've been able to do with the type of programming methodology that Ptech is based on, which is called CORBA (Common Object Request Broker Architecture) - it's a way to take the idea of compartmentalizing your subordinates to an extreme, OK? And that's how they keep - it's kind of like, to draw a parallel on something real quick - it's kind of like what Alex Jones talks about when he's referencing the NSA - one of the reasons they spy on anyone is so that they can keep an eye on anyone that may not be corrupt within the government - that may be actually trying to do a good job, and actually catch real terrorists - which would be the false-flag terrorists. And so they can catch them pre-emptively and shut down investigations, like - shut down drug investigations, shut down torture, shut down different things.

Case in point directly in relevance to 9/11, that's precisely the best example of this - this guy was for real - the top counter-terror officer for the FBI, John O'Neill. I mean, he had like the most intel, the most information about Al-Qaeda and bin Laden, and what he was finding out was that Al-Qaeda was run by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). John O'Neill took a team to Yemen to investigate the USS Cole bombing, and he found ties to Israeli MOSSAD. That type of stuff - and what happened? Jerome Hauer of Kroll Associates gave John O'Neill a new job - they basically fired him. He had a briefcase - John O'Neill had a briefcase - they ceased that. They terminated his job, they ceased his documents, because it would have implicated - it was stuff just like Sibel Edmonds in its own way, and it would have exposed hardcore criminality that would have - it would have really brought a lot of the cards down in the house of cards, OK? So they ceased that and lo and behold - they gave John O'Neill a new job at the World Trade Center, starting on 9/11. And he's dead. And it's like - what a coincidence.

That being said, back to what I was saying - the New World Order, see, they don't play games. That's being said by a lot of people, but they really don't. They have every single thing covered, even down to the most minute details - and where leads to is the software architecture. They make sure that all their little lemmings, all their little dumbed-down little people in the government, like at the CIA and even at the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) - they are only - CORBA and the COBRA programming language which Josh will explain - that's what gives them the ability to carry out false-flags and to be able to hide information from people that they don't want them to see [it].

LS: Well, yeah. It's part of the whole RBAC (Role-Based Access Control) ideal which is part of general IT security principles. And, you know, just to comment on what you said, Mark - yes, they conveniently give him a job at the World Trade Center, and just conveniently happen to have - they're seen attending a meeting on the 106th floor that day, which by the look of gosh, he missed, and he was late to. Yeah, yeah - too many coincidences there for that to all be coincidence. [laughs] But basically, here is the point - let's explain a couple of things. For those familiar with IT or even not familiar, here's a little primer - IT security, I should say. Specifically fine-level control, NSA-level security - what we're talking about here specifically, excuse me, goes by vary exacting names on the different distributions that are used, but all of them have been certified as "NSA-trusted operating systems". I'm using this in IT as an example, because it basically - although it is heavily used in IT, it translates throughout and even translates into people and into policy. And the whole core of this - is the idea of 'group policy'. Now, if you're a Windows administrator, this should stick in your head really big. But it's basically a set of rules and definitions as to what you can and can't do on a system. You, as a user, administrator, super administrator, machine administrator, all of these things are of course determined by permissions held in the database. The little database has a little field that tells whatever application: "Hey, you can do X, you can't do Y".

But, the point being is that, RBAC is role-based authentication and it's the idea that each one of these groups has a role in the institution. So, you have entire operating systems built - entire systems - entire organizations built upon the idea that person Y needs to only know enough to function for their job. Their permissions in a computer - their permissions throughout all electronic systems and information systems and access systems - should equate only to what they need to do their job. And this is kind of a simple idea. In practice, it's a lot harder, in a lot of ways, because it involves thousands of lines of code that are built into systems that have the ability to actually secure and allow these things to occur. But the point is that - you know - they're all based on a set of standards, because if you don't have a set of standards, then the end-user or the person or the thing setting the permissions isn't going to have a way to translate them across the board. And this is where they get into a term called 'interoperability'. Everything has to be able to talk both ways - so that these systems can pass data freely. So that, if Joe Blow jumps on this terminal, and logs in as Joe Blow, then he's only going to see what Joe Blow needs to see. If Joe Blow is a nobody, he will get told to go away if it's a secure system of any kind. But say it's a library computer - Joe Blow can log into a library computer and he'll get this [inaudible] and surf the web and [all] that. You can go to a library computer and if you log in with a password that you can actually put into a machine, you know - the Windows login and password - it will authenticate these systems -it will allow you to access these systems - you know, basically core, top-secret systems. Granted, whenever you log out, that terminal will automatically reboot and flash itself - which is, basically, it will clear its memory and wipe itself as per a ??? DOD feature ??? - that actually wipes that machine, so that. You know, they're all Netboot, which means they boot off a network - it has no operating system until it's turned on and it pulls it off over a network cable, like off the Internet basically except it's a LAN.

So Netboot's - everything's wiped and goes to the next user - but while it was under user Y's control - let's say user Y was a local university professor who has top-secret clearance - because not just anybody can walk into a library and do this - there is compartmentalization. Let's make this clear - this is the point of RBAC and the whole point that every single person and every single object has a place in the database - locations are reduced down to a code - a string of numbers, in letters perhaps even - a binary number in the end. And the point is that each one of these becomes a unique identifier for set object, so that set object is only able to allocate its [inaudible]. And this is the whole point behind role-based authentication - and the point behind this - it's a principle called 'fine-grained control'. So if you look at it and see this term, this is what it means - it means the ability to allocate an object specifically only to what it needs to be allocated to. And when it's no longer needed to be allocated to other objects, for that allocation to be able to be removed or even that object to be removed, and have everything else function.

Well, usually, but that's its own piece. Right, the point is - so you have this as a security system and, you know, and basically it prevents General W who is in charge of, say, parashoot troopers, from going and digging into submarining plans for an admiral or something. Basically, it's the general premise behind it - and the premise and theory behind such things have their place and their uses. It's only in their implementation, really, I would say, that things really go wrong and their intention. Yeah, [chuckles], implementation is a long story. OK. [chuckles]

JC: Mark, would you like to expand on that point?

AI: Sure.

LS: Alright, go ahead guys.

AI: OK. In reference to the interoperability - what this - another thing you have to look at is - the idea behind this in one respect is - giving your pawns - the New World Order is giving the people that work for them the illusion of administrative control - so that they'll think that they are in charge or whatever. But really, the people above them will always be in charge - they'll be able to override even the 'administrator' and they won't know that. What's an application of this? What am I talking about? What we're talking about here - this is what they're doing with the idea of the smart grid. This is how they're transforming all of the electric power plants - distribution, power distribution centers - across the United States, and they're going to do this globally.

When you have anything that is - and this whole agenda what I'm talking about - it applies to a lot of different things - it applies to cybersecurity too. So I might sound like I'm jumping between two different topics, but it's easier to show the relevancy by doing that. Because this is their whole agenda, I mean - they're taking everything over...

LS: [interrupting] it's all interconnected, it's all interconnected. Definitely Mark. Go ahead.

AI: OK, here is another way of saying this. The guy who was the former head of Cybersecurity, Rod Beckstrom. In his own words - and he wrote a book on this too - touting the advantages of decentralization - on how a starfish represents decentralization where if you cut off one of the legs, it regenerates - it has true resiliency. And the antithesis is the spider - this is his book 'The Starfish and the Spider'. Now this is key - let me explain this - now, Beckstrom himself was not really like an IT guy per se - [Josh tries to interrupt] Josh can go into that in a second, but - here's what I'm saying. The reason why Beckstrom resigned is because he saw - and if you look at this, if you look into these people, you'll see like - why does this name keep coming up? Ask yourself this question when you read anything - look for the same thing to come up all the time, like particularly in this case the CSIS (Center for Strategic and International Studies).

You've noticed that the Obama administration - if you read just a bunch of articles about what's going on - you're going to see the Center for Strategic and International Studies come up all the time, because that's a leg of the Council on Foreign Relations/Bilderberg, and they're totally embedded in the government. I mean, they're openly in the government now, OK? So you have the CSIS that is - they're the ones that originally hired Rod Beckstrom, and Beckstrom resigned because he was freaking out - and he was like saying: "What the hell? You guys are trying to centralize everything. This is a total takeover - you're removing real security here and you're setting this up for a disaster." OK, that's what - when you read all the stuff about that - that's why he resigned. Because he was like: "These guys are like - they came out of the woodwork and it's like: 'We're in full takeover mode. If you don't like what we're doing, you're fired, get out of here'". That's what's happening - there's all these top people - there's a nuclear weapons naval officer that resigned, I mean - there's all these different people - some National Reconnaissance Office chief - there's all these different people that are leaving in key government positions, because they don't want to be anywhere near the fallout when all of this stuff comes down.

LS: Oh no. Exactly. Yeah, precisely, as I was saying, one of my favorites was that Joint Chiefs Admiral who resigned over Iran, that's I think one of my faves today. There's some interesting character. He worked for a company and basically ran the whole Blackhat convention after his partner, whose name escapes me - I believe this person was David [Maynard] - but basically, the reason why he is [inaudible] because of all the trouble he got himself into. These guys were real old-school hackers. Not that they are what the movies make them out to be - these are people who basically make things work. If they can't make it work, they'll figure out a way. And if they can't figure out a way, then usually it's because the product they were given was garbage. That's its own story - and even then - nah, that's its own story.

Basically, his partner left and was forced to no longer work for the company and do consulting for one of the largest security companies in the world, especially in the U.S., is because he continually revealed all of these exploits and all of these backdoors and all of these systems that companies just didn't want to be public. And it's interesting, in fact, because - you know - companies like Cisco and specifically Apple - and this is one of the biggest ones - this is a great one - this is really what put a lot of [inaudible] Beckstrom as CEO and later the chairperson because they just figured that he would just go along and be a lackey after they saw what a tough time Apple gave his partner.

Which is basically - they discovered that all of Apple's WiFi cards - running the Atheros chipset - and all of their laptops - which still to this day, I believe, may be an issue. Well, the latest release of the OS, I have not checked, so I can not verify, but it affected all versions of the last release - and so, it [inaudible] basically [laughing]. And the problem is - the WiFi chipset itself - all you really need is a box the size of a remote control for your cardoor, and all it has to do is tell the chipset: "Pick me up!". And it grabs this piece of code and installs it. And it becomes a bug - a trojan - that infects your entire computer and allows the attacker to do whatever they want - and even e-mails the attacker, sends the attacker SMSes or that sort of thing - so that they know how to access your computer remotely - even e-mails some of it if you want it that way. And they revealed that this was possible on all Apple chipsets - Apple placed a legal gag order on him and the company - and basically, [chuckling] tried to shut him down, and waged a propaganda campaign against David [Maynard]'s personal character rather than even addressing the exploit. They did this for a course of three months. And at the end of it [chuckling], finally claimed they fixed the problem. And as I have said, the problem has existed, and it even exists in the iPhones. So [chuckling] if you have WiFi in your iPhone, and you're in a coffeeshop and somebody has one of these things, everything on your iPhone belongs to them as well. But [chuckling], excuse me - I'm getting over a little bit of a cold, but - the iPhones are their own piece of work.

But, point being, that basically they discovered this - and Apple waged a campaign against him, had him gagged for literally twelve months - that he could not speak about it. When he was finally able to talk about it, he explained what the exploit was - and Apple claimed they fixed it, yet it was still exploitable. And Beckstrom and he both agreed that his partner should resign and he should take the company because of the amount of garbage that Apple was throwing at them. And at this point, he took that place, and started basically - ran last year's Defcon congress - 2008 and 2007. There we go, little iffy on the date. I know Beckstrom ran 2008 - I want to say it happened in 2007, but iffy on the date there. As I highlight, sadly, I like to say - I tend to forget things like dates, and I've forgotten more things than some people have ever learned, and I hate to say that, but yeah [chuckling]. I had people telling me that, 'it seems like', and I'm like: "Yes, sadly". And so, Beckstrom took over the company - and roughly, yeah, basically it was 2007. A year later, [chuckling] he was elected head of Cybersecurity because he was running the Blackhat conferences and the Blackhat security group, basically. Well, Beckstrom himself was more of a PR guy and he was more the ethics group - he wasn't that much of a hacker but he was definitely an ethical guy and that was the thing. And so, you know, that's why his partner really liked him and basically, that's why they worked together and why it worked out so well - because they were both really ethical guys, and one of them was really talented in hacking and one of them was really talentein PR and publicity

And so, Beckstrom took over the company - and roughly, yeah, basically it was 2007. A year later, [chuckling] he was elected head of Cybersecurity because he was running the Blackhat conferences and the Blackhat security group, basically. Well, Beckstrom himself was more of a PR guy and he was more the ethics group - he wasn't that much of a hacker but he was definitely an ethical guy and that was the thing. And so, you know, that's why his partner really liked him and basically, that's why they worked together and why it worked out so well - because they were both really ethical guys, and one of them was really talented in hacking and one of them was really talented with PR, publicity and, you know, that sort of thing - and that PR person was Beckstrom. And hence, the government saw this and thought: "Well, let's make him Cybersecurity head. He's great with, you know,computer security PR; we've never seen a guy who can make so many people in a room take this cyber security stuff seriously. Oh my god! He's got all these people taking this stuff like - really into it!"

AI: Because his position was legitimate. His enthusiasm came from a legitimate drive - like, you know, like the way you would implement cybersecurity. He didn't have the motive for setting it up for false-flags and so forth.

LS: Exactly. Exactly.

AI: And I've gotta mention something. This has to get on the air. I just want to make sure this doesn't get forgotten here. There is a very huge piece of news that I'm gonna reveal right now, and this is - all I can say is this - I hope that anybody who relays this show back to Jay Rockefeller - I hope he enjoys it, OK? Because I've got a little message for Mr. Jay Rockefeller, alright?

Now, I'm gonna read you a quote about something. Just check this out. This is from an article that is pertaining to the creator of the backdoor PROMIS software. The ability for you to log into it and retrieve any information at will. This was a quote from an article pertaining to him - it was very obscure, I had only found this after searching for like over a year - after over a year of already looking into PROMIS, only then did I end up finding this. So here it goes:

"The most startling revelation in Riconosciuto's discussion is that the PROMIS software wasn't "bugged" by any ordinary means (say, by providing a secret telephone line access). Instead, it utilized a radical new technology Riconosciuto developed that actually enabled the "bugged" computer to broadcast without wires or phone connections - signals which could be picked up at a remote site, say from an Elint satellite..."

which is electronics intelligence, a satellite. I'm going to pause for a second - satellites are like at least 180.000 feet up in the air, OK?

"The software modification forces the computer to produce non-sinusoidal waveforms called Walsh functions, waveforms different from radio waves or other kinds of transmission media. "All the files were read out, all the files were broadcast constantly," Riconosciuto said. He added that the technique has vast commercial applications, and will "allow wireless computer networking, with very small amounts of power, over very large distances"."

Now... that information that I just read to you was from an article where it talks about - he did a demonstration [Michael Riconosciuto], who is still in prison, he's still alive, on trumped up...

LS: Just to say this and you can go. It's all based on ELF Tesla technology - micro-outage long distance transmissions over extreme low frequency. Continue.

AI: OK. Michael Riconosciuto was on a German television show, OK? There were several - I think it was 4 different scientists that confirmed his findings. So there's an actual video of this somewhere - back at the time when this took place, it would have been on a VHS analog if it was recorded - so if someone has a digital copy of it remains to be seen. I'm trying to find out if I can get a copy of the video from the creator of the actual PROMIS software himself, Mr. Bill Hamilton of the NSA, Software Engineer. Now, incidentally, I have someone that acts as liasion between myself and Mr. Hamilton. I forwarded him this information - the creator of the PROMIS software - I forwarded him what I just read to you - and he confirmed it to me. Bill Hamilton of the NSA confirmed to me that what I read to you is a fact, OK? So you know what that means? You know what that means? That means that every bank - you know, you look at the stuff that happened with BCCI - there's another quote I'll read to you later about systematics - that they went around and they sold themselves to all these different banks and said that: "Just hand over your control over everything to us - let us install our software - it will work wonders, we'll take care of everything". And they did this stuff in the '80s - this is how they transfer all the funds, and where all your - you know, like I said before, and it's been talked about by many different people - where all the shadow banks of covert banks and so forth - this is how all of this was done, and all of these different systems have this on it today - and what this means is this. Let's just highlight all the nuclear facilities, everything you can imagine that has a computer - the bioweapons labs, the Joint Strike Fighter location - where they work on that with MITRE Corporation that was on TV - where they claimed that Russia hacked into it and downloaded four Terabytes of data. Or that medical facility that they claimed that somebody held for ransom for ten million dollars.

LS: I was just gonna say: in order for people to understand that, because that's kind of a jump ahead, is - you need to understand the premise of how everything's built - everything is built with interoperability backdoors. The entire system is designed so that people can get into them. Let me just - basically, the point is that PROMIS itself was built as a way into everything from the backend - so that people could untraceably get into things, as Alexander Levice liked to call. Basically, Ptech was built - which is in the later stages of PROMIS - so that we would know their weaknesses, we would know what they were, we would know how to exploit them, and where they were... [chuckling] and you know, this is key. Not only are these things here, but we know how, where, and what every single piece of this does. And it all ties back to one central system - kind of like a marionette - kind of like - everything is controlled by this string. This string works the arm, this string works the leg, this string caps the medical database, this string caps the banking database, this string caps the FAA- right.

All of these strings - one would begin to ask themselves: "Don't they need some massive supercomputer intelligence for this?" Well, I invite you all - go now to top500.org and look at the most powerful supercomputers there. These are grid computers - computers made up of thousands and thousands of nodes. Hundreds of thousands, some of them. Spread across cities - they have the intelligence of cities. In fact, the current ones now run at about 1 trillion times the capacity needed by this computer put out many years ago, the NEC Earth Simulator. I cite this one, because it was interesting - in the fact that it was able and capable of running at minimum in its inception three concurrent simulations of everything - weather, cultural, biological patterns of evolution of the entire planet, based upon all of the history, courses of probability completely from X number of days to how many number of years in the future they wanted to run it. I think they had accurately at the point of debuting it - say they had, like, a 250-year calculation on that initially. That's what they say - what the program run - the prototype, the beta test - said that they could do. Initially, they had 250 years ahead on everything prior - calculated perfectly and co-simulated, and run three copies.

AI: Let me get back to what I was saying, Josh.

LS: No, let me finish. The point is that - this system of computers can run three copies of the entire Earth. The computers they have now are between one to three hundred thousands more powerful, and they're all owned by the NSA, DOD and the Department of Energy. And I'll leave it at that, and you can continue.

AI: Yeah, the point I was trying to make is that... OK, there's multiple facets to it, but let me just get one important thing out. What I was trying to say is that: the way that they can use it, it's not a cyberissue, it's not a cyberhack or attack or whatever. They can have all these people worried about cybersecurity, and like - 'Oh, somebody getting - which implies going over your standard wireless 802.11X or whatever or your Ethernet cable'. No, no, no.. the National Reconnaissance Office could have a satellite access a machine and they can download or delete or add any data to that machine from space, OK? You understand what the implications of that are? Now, that's not the only thing here. This is not like a one-trick pony here or whatever. I'm highlighting this, because nobody's talking about it - nobody knows what I just told you - predominantly, nobody knows what I just said.

The point of that is too - it makes the whole thing about cybersecurity a fraud - because, you know, what's at the extreme end of their technology in terms of how they can access a computer remotely. And if you think - there's other corroborating stuff that shows that this is not a joke. I found a document from Wright-Patterson Air Force Base that shows Air Force planes scanning cities with some type of scanner to access their computers. There's a new bill that's being introduced into either the House or the Senate - it pertains to farmers. You know what it does? You know how like they're going to have home inspections for carbon taxes? Well guess what this bill does? This forces you that you have to have a government enterprise architecture on your computer to catalog your fruits, vegetables and livestock - and if you don't have it, you're going to get fined until you get out of business and you'll go to prison. You're going to be forced to run Ptech on your machines - Homeland Security has a thing they're coming out with called 'Software Assurance'. You know what 'Software Assurance' is? It's full-spectrum dominance over all software. They're going to make all open-source software illegal - anything that you'll want to run. Like in Finland, there was an article not long ago, that Linux was illegal, or they tried to make it illegal in Finland. They're going to take over everything. You're gonna run their systems, you're gonna allow the government to access your machine at will - if you don't do it, you're going to prison. You understand that? That's what these guys are doing, OK - that's how insane these people are. You're not supposed to have the freedom to be posting stuff on the Internet and to be reading about what they're really doing - they don't want you to be doing that. And you people better wake up about what their intentions are - before you know it, they're going to have people coming into your house, telling you what to do. And I mean, it's - hey what in the hell are we letting it get to this point for. It's... it's just off the charts.

Now, the other thing I want to mention is in 2006 - the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) publicly stated that they wanted to have all hardware manufacturers have a deliberate backdoor into them for the FBI/NSA to spy on the American people. You should type that into Google, you'll find that there was an article on Wired.com - this was done under the CALEA (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act) law - not sure what that stands for.

JC: [filling in] Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act 1994.

AI: There you go. OK. That's the thing - people need to wake up. The government's pretending they give a damn about cybersecurity - excuse me? And you're saying that all these routers are deliberately backdoored - who do they think they're - if they're backdoored, that means they're not secure - but yet you're claiming you're about security, but everything's backdoored, and - if that's not enough, you can access this stuff from space and you can attack, you can unlock... try this out - here's a scenario for you, right. How about this: let's say that you're in the satellite and they go: "Oh, there's a lovely Level 4 bioweapons lab. Let's unlock all the doors right now with the enterprise architecture that's on here, boom, all the doors are unlocked, all the weaponized ebola gets out, 50.000 people die, let's blame it on some guy who hates - you know, was saying that Obama was not a U.S. citizen - let's tie it in with that. Let's say it was a 9/11 Truther that did it - that somehow unlocked the bioweapons lab and killed everybody. OK, we need the military to intervene.

LS: Yes, that's plausible and possible. That's a good demonstration of what is possible, OK. It's possible for them to do this. Meanwhile, their goal here is - the perfect false-flag, the perfect patsy. Meaning - they want it perfect - so that you don't have any loose ends. You see, that's the problem they have always foreseen with all of these false-flags: tying up loose ends.

AI: And that's where the OODA loop comes into play.

LS: Well, of course, but - the whole system is based on that. The whole system is based on the OODA Loop - which comes from a General, a General named John Boyd, who was part of the Air Force, quite famous, quite well known. He invented - once could say 'discovered' or 'invented' - a system known as the OODA Loop. And go to Wikipedia, search now - they have an amazing description of it - one of perhaps the best I've seen thus far along the line, which is even better - being that it's Wikipedia. I'm not a big fan of Wikipedia, mind you, but for once, they're almost spot on. Few things there are. But um, [chuckling], another good one if you ever want to have fun is Skynet - and then subcategory 'Satellites'. Yeah - that's one interesting little topic right there. [inaudible] does exist - not to a degree, but that's its own story. Like I say, go read the Wikipedia page if you really want to dig into that and scare yourself tonight. Yeah, it's compartmentalized - run by MI5 via ?? World Skynet Now, Telus at Canada. But the OODA Loop is a process - it stands for Orient... I forget the exact [acronym]...

JC: Observe, orient, decide, act.

LS: Thank you. Excellent. Perfect. [chuckling] And the idea is that you take old [information] - that which is passed, all of your knowledge, and everything you're doing - and you put it into the planning phase of your change. And the idea is that all of your personnel, as they are learning about its past history and all of its possible futures - they take all of its possible futures and they give that to them as well. And - you know - that is called Observe. This is the observance phase - look at everything - past, present, future.

Orient means - to figure out how to take your project or what you're going to do and align it so that it is successful. Now, decide basically means to come up with your decisions based upon causality - particularly, you really want to look at causality here. I want to step back and quote one of my favorite authors here [inaudible], Frank Herbert, [inaudible] which is a ten-thousand year extension of Zen into the future.

So, the idea basically is that, you cannot look at the answers in any situation, you can only look at the questions. The questions will give you the ability to analyse the situation, because they're the only things that remain constant in every situation. Every situation will have a set of questions. These questions can be used to create a decision. And you take these questions at every pass, you analyze them, OK, and you come up with decisions based upon [audio noise] - not the answers to your questions, but the solutions to your goal. Everything that you create, you see, must be in relation to your goal. And your goal is the key - this goal is your change. Everything is focused on the goal. And the other key part here is that every one of these individuals are compartmentalized and even hypnotized by this process to the effect that they feel that they are merely acting to create and plan for the change, you see. They are, in fact, in reality, making the change, but in their minds they only see that they are planning or working to test or implement systems to eventually make the change. Now, this becomes important on go-live date, which we'll discuss in a minute and give you an exactingly perfect parabel here. The point is that - you make these decisions based upon all of the questions that your team has that are your problems. You develop solutions for these problems, and that is when you act - and action is your go-live.

And the best way to describe and sum up this whole process that even - anybody should be able to understand is basically: when you rig a building to bring it down, or a demolition - a team goes in after the architects have been talked to, and they look at the architect drawings, and they have an architect come in, and they go to a demolitions expert, and these guys talk - and they ask questions. And they say: 'Well, if we do it this and this and this way' - they come up with a solution, right? And they sent a team out - and the team rigs the building. And the team basically is making the change while they're rigging the building. Because when the button is pressed, the change is already been made - nobody's going to sit back and head to the building while it's exploding - one should hope not, mind you [chuckles]. And you know, you can't - really. So it has to be exacting and perfect. So they go in, they plan, they address all this, they evaluate what they've done, they may even write a computer simulations. You know - CAD (Computer-aided design) everything, virtual - maybe even run models, and then prototypes, as one could call them. And then finally, everybody is ready to make the change - go-live date. The building is rigged, everything is done, everyone is out of the building, the fire department is down the street, you're sitting there and you're the manager who gets to press the button, and you have the countdown, and you press the button, and the building dissolves, and everybody realizes that they actually just made the change, and the building dissolves in front of them - you know, as many seconds as it takes in free fall thanks to the vacuum of the explosives. And that's basically the OODA Loop put into practice.

JC: Absolutely. Go ahead, Mark.

AI: And that is one of the fundamental cornerstones on how the global elite had to come up with a new type of warfare after the Cold War to create the so-called War On Terror, which is creating terrorism - using the OODA Loop to come up with the inception of something called - well, several different things, all inter-related very signficantly - called 'network-centric warfare', 'effects-based operations', 'military operations other than war', and 'asymmetric warfare'.

LS: Let's not forget - let me add to this - agile methodology. Which is the idea that the OODA Loop is obsolete - and the OODA Loop is obsolete because people are able to decipher it. Therefore, we must couple it with enterprise architecture which allows it to scale for all situations. And this is what they have dubbed 'agile methodology'. Anyhow, continue.

AI: Exactly. And incidentally, it's like a - as an inside sick joke to their own people, that's what's shown in that one video that we looked at from some defense contractor consortium or affiliate. They showed the towers coming down, and they showed the word 'agile' superimposed over that. It's like: "You'll never figure out what we mean by that, hah hah!"

LS: Coalition Warrior Interoperability Demonstrations. Well, they're basically one of their predecessors. It was actually at that point known as, I believe, C4ISR.

AI: Here is the thing that kinda helps see people the full scope of this - what are the real-world implications of what we're talking about? Let me step back and read you a quote from "The Report From Iron Mountain^[1]" from the 1960s - which was top secret and it was leaked, and they tried to discredit it by saying it was satire and it was just made up and everything else. Well, most of it has already come true.

A short quote that I want to read that is in reference to all this - you'll see where I'm going with all of this:

"No serious consideration has been given, in any proposed conversion plan, to the fundamental nonmilitary function of war and armaments in modern society, nor has any explicit attempt been made to devise a viable substitute for it."

You see, keep this in mind - this is, like from the '60s, and this is when they were trying - before they had the idea of creating the Al-Qaeda bogeyman - this is before they came up with that. Even back in "The Report From Iron Mountain", there's the precursors to the current global warming scam - there's a plethora of...

LS: Well, that is to create the global pandemic, the global holocaust in order to allow the bankers to maintain control, and that is the key here. And all of this is dedicated to the one purpose. And people often ask: "Why", or "How?", or "For what reason?", and it all comes back to this: when you look at the fact that there are these very few people, who merely get off on the fact that they can literally control and do whatever they want - you know, terraform a planet - sadly, at this point it's this one. But yeah, and that is the point - and this is what makes them happy - this is the only thing that makes them happy anymore - is this extreme, psychotic behavior. That they print the money; they give the jobs; they are the people who snap their fingers and get whatever they want, because people are afraid to say "No", because you either end up dead, in a gutter, without a job, blacklisted, entirely - you know - having lost going from a three-storey house in the suburbs with four kids, a dog and a cat to living in a gutter and everything is dead. And that's why so many people are willing to fall in line and do what they say. And that's why so many people are willing to - you know - break. When you have the ability to not only rewards, but to offer extreme forms of torture and pain, you'll be surprised how many people will break, and it's very sad. And I'll let you go from here, Mark.

AI: Right, or - again, I urge everybody to look into this individual. There's a lot of - when people are looking into the global crime syndicate - I mean, people today, more than ever, because of everything that is happening - I mean, you know, there's a massive wake-up. It's about time - it should have been going on a long time ago. People are thirsting for real information. If you want some real information, you can look into Michael Riconosciuto. And one of the reasons why he's so significant is because - even before William Cooper - in a scanned official document that has an accompanying scanned US Certified mail postage sticker, OK - he swore, or there's a document he had his attorney submit to the federal government - I don't know if it was the FBI and some other, or maybe it was Congress as well - he warned he had actual intel of The Base. He warned that: "The Base is going to carry out a large-scale attack in the United States", talking about "Al-Qaeda". But he knew who Al-Qaeda was. He warned about a terror attack - he warned about 9/11. You know when he warned about it? In February 5th of 2001. So that's about eight months before 9/11 - he warned about it.

And they basically ignored him. And then, after the attacks happened, the FBI had the - get this, Michael Riconosciuto was a scientist for the Central Intelligence Agency. The FBI had the audacity to call him - this is before the age of the Internet, basically. Well, [correcting himself] I think this was, um..

LS: This was in the...

AI: In the '80s, excuse me, in the '80s they called him a conspiracy theorist. Before, yeah, before the age of the Internet, I was just thinking [to myself]: "9/11. That's not before the age of the Internet.". But anyways, they had the audacity to say that he was a conspiracy theorist, OK? That just goes to show you how ridiculous they are. So, you have that - and there's a website with all his documents - it's michaelriconosciuto.com. You can read all about that stuff. All that stuff about Tim Osman, the Bin Laden CIA name where they met at the Cabazon Indian Ranch, and all that stuff. And all the bioweapons engineering and all of that...

LS: And a nice corroboration of all of that, and a nice corroboration of who Tim Osman was. Of interesting note is Bob Baer - his book, Syriana, and other books of his actually talk about his dealings with Tim Osman - Osama Bin Laden - throughout the years. He himself has positively identified Osama Bin Laden as Tim Osman, and as being a CIA operative. And if you look at the [George Clooney] movie, the guy who tortures the fall guy, who tortures Bob in the movie, that's supposed to be actually Osama if you read the book, and I'll leave it at that. So that corroborates all of that, if you go by Bob Baer who was a CIA section chief - if you believe him^[2]. And a lot of people should, because he knows what he's talking about. And I'll leave it at that.

AI: Actually, since - I want to make sure I mention this. This is just one week after 9/11. It was brought to my attention - something very interesting that I was actually surprised to see still up on the Internet, and of all places on YouTube. Apparently, in 2002, and Josh can comment on this, because he saw the video, because I sent it to him - Dan Rather did a report on Ptech featuring Indira Singh and the CEO of Ptech, Oussama Ziade, as well as James Cerrato^[3].

JC: Absolutely, in fact we have that in an article^[4] that we put up about Jonathan Elinoff from coreofcorruption.com, who released a news archive of 150+ videos dating back to the 1970s, including that particular video, which was a CBS report from 2002 with Dan Rather reporting on Ptech. But that was based on Joe Bergantino's reporting for WBZ TV, out in Boston. And Joe Bergantino is working directly with Indira Singh on that reporting, and Dan Rather picked up on it on the national news later on when they did the raid of Ptech. But it turns out, of course, that on the day they raided Ptech, they declared that the source code was completely safe.

LS: Right, of course they did, yes. [chuckles] Oh geez.

JC: But then it comes out that in fact Ptech had been informed beforehand about the raid, so you can take it for what it's worth, which is exactly nothing.

LS: Bingo. It was all wiped and therefore, yeah, of course it was completely true - all they picked up were a bunch of completely blanked harddrives. Yeahhh [laughing].

AI: You know what's really interesting - and I'm not the one to have made this observation initially. Through a lot of different areas of research into 9/11, you'll see various segments of that - that are heavily infiltrated or attacked or made issues by COINTELPRO. When's the last time you've seen any COINTELPRO on Ptech. I haven't seen any. Isn't that interesting? They don't wanna touch that one. Not even the people at Omnicom, Rendon, Lincoln groups and all the other little psy-ops - they don't talk about Ptech, do they? I wonder why. Isn't that interesting? Maybe it's because it's so hardcore, that if you even - it's kind of like Charlie Sheen with his '20 Minutes With The President' - they're not bringing that up in the mainstream media - because if they even do that - people can then immediately look into it and it will immediately expose that they're total liars. There are certain things that you just cannot effectively create disinformation, because it's too fragile - it doesn't have enough characteristics to it that enable them to run a good psy-ops on it, so they just ignore it. It's just basically common sense - the most important information is the information that is not being told to you on the television.

JC: Well, that's a key point, and I'm sure you see how Michael Chertoff on CSPAN^[5] was directly questioned about the six 9/11 Commissioners who themselves called the 9/11 Commission a 'fraud' and a 'cover-up', and he not only failed to answer that question, but then immediately tried to tie that in to Holocaust denial and questions about Obama's birth location - as if they're somehow related to the topic. Because they cannot address topics like that. So you point out that with Charlie Sheen, for example, they simply ignore the issue. With John O'Neill, he was attending a high-level counter-terrorism conference, and he had his briefcase stolen from the conference. They blamed it on him, and they trumped up those charges to get him out of his position at the FBI. He ends up getting the job with Kroll and Jerome Hauer and dying on 9/11. You have Indira Singh, who effectively gets railroaded and gets some of the information out, but is now basically in fear for her life. You have people like Riconosciuto, who is put in jail with trumped up charges. You have Rod Beckstrom, who ends up getting to the point where has to resign his position, because he won't go along with it^[6]. Time and time and time again, we do have whistleblowers on the inside who are trying to get this information out, but they are prevented from doing so, which is why it's important for people who are listening to this broadcast to realize - that it's the people on the outside who are piecing this information together that are the ones who are going to be able to make the difference in the system. Because the insiders will always be either set up, or put in jail, or killed - whereas the people who are working on the outside of the system actually have a chance of cracking this system.

LS: Ah man, thank you, yeah, totally agree. Thank you James, that was wonderful. Yeah, I couldn't agree more. Yeah, because it's you the people that will make the diference, that's the thing. All of the stuff that I know - I can't, I couldn't - that is one of the great things that meeting Mark did for me. It's basically - I can say a lot of things about certain things, but I can only comment on things as far as he has documentation for. I can't comment on things that are confidential, because I like my family. I'm sorry, but I pick my battles. I kinda leave it at that. That's the thing - realize that, you know, there are a lot of us who are whistleblowers - there are a lot of us who try and get information out - and if we were compromised, yeah, we could blow it all out there and smoke all this out there. The sad thing is, parts of it would be easily discredited, because you have a system that has plausible deniability. Everybody knows that shredders and digital shredders do wonders to erase data in the right hands in the right minds. Granted, there are other techniques, but that's its own story. But the point is that, basically, we risk our lives to get what we can out there. If we were to put it all out there initially and get ourselves killed, then you wouldn't have this information out there.

AI: 40 minutes left.

LS: Yeah, I was just merely going to say: it's kind of like the golden goose idea - it's more effective for us, the patriots, to do what we can in our spot. Anybody can - and anybody can do what they can in their spot, and know that they're capable of. And that is key. And yeah - and that all of us, if we work together, we'll be able to take them out, we'll be able to actually do something. Because if we're actually working for our own goals that they cannot fathom, cannot predict the outcome for, then we win. The key to beating an OODA Loop is knowing that you're being forced onto their OODA Loop, and then coming up with a system that counteracts it that they cannot observe. And that is the key - and once you do that, it's broken. You've broken the cycle - and they can no longer observe you, and therefore they can no longer orient, or make proper decisions, and therefore their actions will always be skewed. And this is actually the secret, and I haven't ever actually revealed this on air before - but this is the key secret to beating the OODA Loop - once you realize that the only way that they can stop you is to observe your actions, if you stop allowing them to observe you, then they have no data, and they lose.

AI: And not to cut you off, but that's exactly why they want their full blown situational awareness. That's why they want cameras everywhere - that's the purpose of all their surveillance - is they want to make sure they have data to use against you all the time, 24 hours a day - that's the secret behind the police state right there.

LS: Absolutely, absolutely. That's the key - that's why they build centralized databases. That's why they expanded TIDE (Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment) to multiple locations across the country and gave it, you know, a quarter of a million nodes for location. [laughs] That was interesting, yes - massive supercomputers based upon the world's fastest Sun processors at the time. I'll leave it at that - and even that is bordering on things that I shouldn't have said. But yes - all of this is processed by massive grids, massive computergrids, that monitor everything - monitor everything you do. There's a great site out there called cryptome.org. The owner of this site has been battling the federal government for many, many years - well over a decade now. His site focuses upon TEMPEST - [spells name] - all of those are acronyms. Perhaps, James, you can help me with that, yeah...

JC: I'm unfamiliar with that one, sorry.

LS: Not familiar with TEMPEST? OK, it's basicaly - OK, yeah, I'm going online but I'm talking with my modem at the moment. Basically, TEMPEST has to do with electronic emissions - it's telecommunications emissions. It's the idea that - you know - and it's been proven, it's all based upon sound physics, as well as Tesla physics. Even you know things that are common electronic engineering physics, physical principles that everything has its harmonics, everything therefore is able to actually be monitored in such a way. And the FCC has literally published two sets of regulations. These regulations are put out by NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), which is now being put out essentially by DISA (Defense Information Systems Agency). For those unfamiliar, I believe it's disa.mil [chuckles]. [checks site]. They are basically responsible for security policy for everything.

AI: Defense Informations Systems Agency.

LS: There you go.

AI: Let me interject real quick: TEMPEST is "Transient ElectroMagnetic Pulse Emanation STandard".

LS: Thank you.

JC: Well, actually, Wikipedia is telling me that it isn't an acronym, but several acronyms have been suggested, including "Telecommunications Electronics Material Protected from Emanating Spurious Transmissions", "Transmited Electro-Magnetic Pulse / Energy Standards & Testing", "Telecommunications ElectroMagnetic Protection, Equipment, Standards & Techniques", but I think people get the idea.

LS: Yeah. And it actually is an acronym. It is an FCC internal policy.

AI: They don't even want to admit it is an acronym. [laughs]

LS: It is an acronym, it does exist, it is part of NIST's statements, it is also part of Air Force Intelligence field manuals, and part of DISA white papers. Basically, it refers to exactly what actually Mark quoted - and in the military sector, it refers to the securing of these, the procedures that must be undergone in order to protect all systems from TEMPEST emanations and TEMPEST spying.

In the civilian sector, there is a little tag on every piece of electronic that you have if you live in the United States, and oddly enough, if you live in Canada, there is one that is - oddly enough -contradictory, and really oddly enough, the policies are. Which is interesting - because in Canada, and this is interesting, not to get off too much of a tangent, I want to sum this up quickly - Canada has the opposite public sector rule as we do. In fact, their public sector rule matches their military rule, which matches our military rule - all devices should be secured and noone should be able to monitor them. However, if you noticed, the FCC regulation - which wasn't decided upon by Congress of any kind - means that it really shouldn't be a law, even though it's enforced like one. We all know the FCC is its own beast, and they get preferential treatment to do anything they want.

I mean, you know, nobody says that they own the bandwidth or the airwaves - Congress never voted on this specifically. Granted, it's open to interpretation - but there are a lot of things that they do broadly without approval from Congress that definitely fall outside of that realm - this is definitely one of them. The right to basically say that all devices must accept and emit radiation - they may not emit harmful radiation, and they may not emit radiation that cancels out radiation sources that they would emit naturally. So basically, what this means in common language, and it's worded in such scientific language that the average guy is going: "What the heck does that mean?". He's scratching his head, going: "I feel like a caveman!". Basically, it boils down to: your device must emit emanations that are readable by a TEMPEST blackbox. A TEMPEST blackbox is a box built to basically scan for various frequencies. You can built one with equipment from a hardware store, and a bunch of tubes if you can - from all online catalogues, you can order the transistors. Yes, I highly recommend the tubes, because you're going to build yourself an oscilloscope, and the tubes will not have the gates that are built into the actual microchips. Microchips have frequency gates, and if you actually care enough and know enough about this, you'd realize that the bandwidth rating on a chip is usually a lot more limited than the bandwidth you will find on a tube.

Now, [chuckling], basically, that said, I actually have friends who work for private sector companies who run TEMPEST trucks for the military - in Germany. Yes, they do this overseas - where they run through neighborhoods, they watch what you're watching on TV, they watch you, they watch you through your TV. Because by the very design of the TV, it's actually two-ways - just like the lens of your eye. If you were to step inside your eye for a moment and take a look at the lens, yeah - you would of course have a picture of everything outside of that. If you look at the front of your eye, you see all of the room reflecting on the front of your eye. You know, it's that mirror thing that happens with various light differentials. Anyway - you know, that said, this piece of information - the only thing that was ever really required for this image to go back to somebody or to be able to be seen. The only problem they've ever had with getting this image off off the back of the tube remotely is - is that you have to have the frequency of the broadcast on the tube - the electron guns have to run the picture at exactly the x number of frames per second. Now, since they all run at about 50 to 70Hz, that's pretty easy. So you tune your device to pick up sympathetic hormonics on these frequencies, and you literally can tune in to every TV in the neighborhood.

In fact, in Los Angeles, back in the '90s, there were a number of crackdealers and gang mobster kingpins who were going down, and some of them actually got televised on local public access channels that put out court cases, in which the mobsters were like: "How the hell did you get that footage up," deleting expletives and summarising here, mind you. And, you know, they were like, well, your house was bugged, we had surveillance warrants. And they were like: "But we checked the place for bugs. There were no bugs", basically. And they said this: they had professional people go in there, with counter-intelligence that scan for these bugs, and it's pretty easy. It all boils down to TEMPEST - and as I've said, I have friends who work for companies who do this. You can spy on somebody through the television, you can hear them through their radio. You don't need to have a camera, you don't need to have a paper phone - it's all there if you want. As I've said at the very beginning of this whole piece, if you really want to really understand this, go to cryptome.org^[7] and read everything he has on that site, because he has done the most excellent job of explaining it all. If you can't find his site, google or search for "TEMPEST timeline", and he lays it out over a timeline, as from its creation and inception of the concept all the way to current.

JC: Alright. Mark, do you want to expand on this?

AI: Yeah, um... not specifically to what he is saying, necessarily - the broader - something in reference to the broader scope of the show thus far. There's a slideshow from people that were collaborating together that do research for Homeland Security, basically. This particular slide - it's just a diagram of all the different types of surveillance implementations that they - this is from 2002, of all things - this is so Orwellian that you would think it's newer or something, it's just so off the charts...

LS: [interrupting] And nobody would actually expect... A lot of the technology behind all of this comes from Tesla and is over a hundred years old. And noone would really suspect that, because it's so suppressed in the common market.

AI: Let me just give you this link. Go to tinyurl.com/lbemte. That is by a guy named Tod S. Levitt. The whole document is basically a document about 'situational awareness' - what we've been talking about. The New World Order talking about their need to spy on everybody, so that they can exploit that information against the public to basically have control over everyone and to be able to do whatever they want. The important thing about that is - that guy was working with Dr. Levice, and there's actually videos - that site that you're gonna go to - there are actually videos where Dr. Levice introduces him.

Now, to shift over to something else - I think we need to stay focused here on the cyberthreat thing - the false flag that they have. I'm going to read an article...

LS: [interrupting] Let me just comment on why TEMPEST actually makes a big difference here. The point behind bringing up TEMPEST is - the point is, it has been hardened over the course of over a hundred years - from the inception of technology and communications, they have had counter-communications, and the ability to try and intercept that communications. It's just the idea of spy vs spy. And the idea is, basically - you can monitor, but at this point, it's not only the monitoring - it's gotten to the point that it's not only monitoring and even remote monitoring, but it's also remote control by the enemy. And it gets into the Air Force - the entire hack-hack-back scenario where millions of times per day, they have hundreds to thousands of soldiers sitting in front of terminals trying to hack every system in the world. And those that try to hack them back, they hack into and exploit, and are given orders that any system that tries to hack you back, or attack you back, or defend itself, is the enemy - and you're allowed to do whatever is necessary in order to neutralize it - including destroying the system and wiping its data, no matter who it belongs to. And they do this daily, every day.

AI: Right. And even more insane than that - but let me - I've already said this - let me go into something else before you comment, so I can get this out there.

LS: Yeahyeah, I'm sorry, go ahead.

AI: Yeah, because we have covered this before. And the National Academies with all their criminals meeting together in their little conference talking about using kinetic responses to cyberattacks, and even nuclear. The gist of what I was saying - and this can be summed up as - the New World Order needs a massive 9/11 2.0, because too many people are waking up and they are freaking out. Rightfully, from their point of view. And we need to stop them, so let's just set off nukes.

what they're basically saying is: "Well, if China or North-Korea - that was already debunked, that particular thing that happened a couple of months ago - or Russia, they can say that if somebody attacks - allegedly attacks - US government interests through a cyberattack, then by default we can just respond with a nuke. If Russia hacks into some computers at the Pentagon, oh, let's launch a nuke and take out Moscow. This is what they have actually talked about - people from MITRE Corporation were there, big surprise, the same people...

LS: Basically classifying the Internet.

AI: Yeah, the insanity of it is - is that - and this is so disgusting - where they come off with this mentality like this - Vice Admiral Nancy Brown, Director C4I Systems Joint Chief, is like all enthusiastic about: "Oh, it's so great - the Internet has been declared a warfighting domain. It's so great, we can fight on there." Who the hell are you fighting? There is no enemies to fight there. You're fighting - this is the other thing too. Booz-Allen Hamilton and Science Applications International Corporation and other companies like that - they and the NRO and so forth - they run - what he's talking about is 'red' and 'blue' teams, folks. This is exactly the type of stuff that you saw at the Potomac - the boat that they said: "Oh, it was initially reported that it was firing while Obama was walking by"^[8]. Those are red and blue team drills being run under Northern Command - that's what that is, and that's what 9/11 was - you had red and blue teams, and there were other teams, too - there was yellow, whatever color they want to designate. Like at the Potomac, there was a green team, which was representative of the general public, their reactions and so forth.

LS: Per the documents - I mean, the documents that you, Mark are stirring across the Phd section of the Prison Planet forums - basically, they have primary teams and situational teams. And primary teams are the primary controlling faction, and situational teams can be assigned designations of compartmentalization for set situation as to better effectively manage them.

AI: Exactly.

LS: And I'll let you continue there.

AI: OK, this other tinyurl code is to a YouTube video, as in reference to a news article, and it's very significant. It's tinyurl.com/mjrmh4. That's a video by an FBI agent. I want to read you this article. It's called - and now get this, you can't make this up - this is from 2006, and the title is "FBI Hopes 'Digital Enron Will Boost Cybercrime Awareness"^[9].

"Though the FBI is gradually making progress in prosecuting online criminals, the agency is still waiting for a major, newsworthy case like the Enron scandal to bring cybercrime to the forefront of public attention. Only after such an event could the necessary reforms be made to allow authorities to effectively battle online criminals, FBI special agent Shana Boswell-Crowe said. Fighting cybercrime requires..."

Listen to this:

"Fighting cybercrime requires an Enron-like scandal to force the hand of legislators, the FBI argued Friday."

She says:

"My theory is that computer crime is kind of like white collar crime before Enron," Boswell-Crowe said during a presentation at the McAfee Avert Labs Day in Mountain View, Calif. 'Large Event' Needed White collar crime used to be the bank [employee] sifting some money off, or some corporate guy who was going to get rich anyway," Boswell-Crowe went on. "I do not think that [cybercrime] has had its day. There has not been something that's large enough to generate large-scale awareness. Awareness is increasing, but we have not had that large event that makes people think: 'This is really bad.'"

Mymy, poor FBI - you mean there is not a natural thing that would naturally occur - that's just like PNAC (Project For a New American Century), that's just like Operation Northwoods...

LS: I only have ten seconds to say, and I say it only because most people dont' realize that on 9/11, billions of dollars changed hands due to electronic transactions that occurred. They were all forged - they all appeared in secure systems, that all had remote anonymizing access. You know, you're supposed to be able to track who buys x share of something. Why couldn't they track them that day? And they were anonymized, and even to the dismay of those who committed to the attacks - hard drives were pulled from Pentagon and the FCC offices in Building 7. And there's a great article in Wired that showed they recovered data - and even on the recovered data, they were still unable to properly identify who placed those put options that day. I'll leave it at that - that's huge. If you realize what it takes to infect the Dow Jones Industrials to such a degree and backdoor it, then you know, then you might believe that Kevin Mitnick was the world's greatest hacker, but you did have something, but, yes, that's one topic I might talk about in a minute or two. I'll let you continue, Mark.

AI: Right. And another thing to point out - very significant - a lot of people don't know this either. The US CERT, which is the Computer Emergency Response Team, who by the way, the director - her name was Mischel Kwon - she resigned^[10]. So here you have the cybersecurity head resign, you have the NRO chief resign, and then you have the director of the US Computer Emergency Response Team resign not too long ago. Check this out at us-cert.gov - they have a little box here - these are all the different critical threats that they're alerting about. This goes back several years, OK? This goes back - well this is from 2004. It says: "Diebold GEMS Central Tabulator Vote Database Vote Modification"^[11]:

"A vulnerability exists due to an undocumented backdoor account, which could allow a local or remote authenticated malicious user modify votes. No workaround or patch available at time of publishing. We are not aware of any exploits for this vulnerability."

GEMS Central Tabulator Vote Database Vote Modification... haha, and they categorize it as a Medium risk. I mean, the thing is about this, is that... I believe it was Michael Corbin's interview with Indira Singh^[12], and I have not been able to find documentation on this. But anyway, Indira Singh actually said that at one point, US-CERT also publicly acknowledged - I can't remember if it was in specific reference to PROMIS or Ptech - one of the other - that they said that that was a national threat to security. The US-CERT actually sai that - where did that news go?!

LS: It got shoved under the rug. Shoved under the rug like the raid on the possible cybersecurity chief's house, where they framed his assistant for possible embezzlement. Yeah, I know you remember that, that was a great set of posts on the Prisonplanet forum. But yes, exactly - you know, and it goes back to PROMIS. Now, what is PROMIS? You know, I mentioned a guy named Kevin Mitnick, who is your movie buff or computer cyber buff - you might have seen Hackers 2.

It's about a man named Kevin Mitnick, who in reality was a very arrogant, loudmouth person. Being very nice there, calling him a person, because I have friends of mine who knew him very, well, personally. The very interesting thing about this individual is that he happened to cross friends who were able to hack their way into the university system. And they got a hold of this one guy who worked for the university and worked for Sun and Nokia. And he got hold of a piece of code that he had written for PROMIS that would allow law enforcement to, you know, basically listen and scan cell signals. So you know, once in the days of analog phones, finally it got revealed that if you had a scanner and a crystal modulator that could modulate the crystal frequency, you too could listen into anyone's conversation. All you needed was the code that would give the crystal the right frequency - which they called the 'Nokia code', the N-code. [laughs] Excuse me. In the movie, they call it the 'Nokiatel code'. So he discovers this, and in the process of having obtained access and his friends having pulled everything off the guy's harddrive, and using his very elite hacker skills to wipe his presence from being here - and don't worry, we won't get into how that was done - so Mr Mitnick took credit for this, and he got a name and - he ended up having to be on the run, because he liked to talk about things he said he did, and these things were things that his posse of friends did, but he wanted to take credit for them. Some people, you know, they like to be in the limelight. And apparently, he is very much one of those people. He now works for a government security agency - he does whatever they tell him, but that's its own story.

As per the movie, it's sort of - the national manhunt, having people help him out, at the time that he figured out and they figured out that the only way for him to figure out what he'd really gotten - because he ended up finding a piece of software that they couldn't get into - it was some crazy encryption that was beyond government. And what he had found was the core of PROMIS. What he had found was its very source code in a ZIP file by one of its many original authors. And so [chuckling] he set about trying to crack it. He actually managed to acquire the authorization that granted him access to an [SGI] Origin series supercomputer on NC-REN. NC-REN is the North Carolina Research and Educational Network. It is a prototype for the National GiG - it's the prototype for the GiG. It is basically a giant network that allows all of these massive supercomputers to talk to each other. And this thing was created back in the '90s. Being from North Carolina, and having some friends who built some things, I have some access - pretty interesting system. It's still the cutting edge - I kinda leave it at that.

So basically, to make this short: the thing about it was, he used this system to try and crack the encryption on this [PROMIS], which he couldn't. He used an entire state's worth of resources and computers for a total of something like over a week to try to crack this program, and he wasn't able to do it, but they used his attempts to crack it to trace him. And they of course busted him, and according to the movie, maybe his attempt got out there, maybe it didn't. It's unlikely that it ever did, and in reality, he failed miserably, and was busted by a bunch of police officers, and FBI - who threw him into federal prison for a number of years before he got out to work for the government. But what he had in his possession and was known to have into his possession was the very source code behind PROMIS. And the movie gets into it, it talks about it - they say that the guy developed it all by himself, just for himself - just for cracks and giggles. [chuckles] When in reality, it was developed for varying concerted government projects. And it was the system that allowed you to get into any system. It wasn't a virus, as he says, you know - it was the backdoor to everything. And the reason this works - is because everything was built in mind to have a skeleton key.

Back in the old days, they built a castle, and they put locks in these things when they had lock technology. So every door would open with a specific key, but there was always a skeleton key that would unlock every door. And this is the way that they built things, and they carried it over into computers. And that is what PROMIS is - it's the skeleton key to all the sheets.

AI: Alright. I'll just talk, we're almost out of time anyways. [inaudible] I have a whole bunch of questions, BTW, that are being forwarded directly to Michael Riconosciuto, from me, that Mr Hamilton is going to submit to him. I want to find out things that there's no information on - one of the things that I mention that is very interesting, is that in a sworn affidavit before a jury, Michael Riconosciuto testified 20 years ago that he created threat-emitter technology, to inject false radar images onto radarscopes. The way it was worded, was that - it could make a jet-liner appear to be a bird, to have the radar signature of a bird, or vice-versa. Now, that's very interesting, that you have that, when part of 9/11 being executed was false radar injects. I'm wondering: "Is his development of threat-emitter technology - was that something integrated into PROMIS that Ptech had handed down to it?" That's an interesting point right there. And I'm going to find out.

When you can actually pin down things and find out absolute facts on a lot of this stuff, it proves their guilt even more. One of the important things - and I was gonna mention this earlier - when you look at - and this is why they want to kill the Internet. Folks, the reason why the New World Order wants to kill the Internet, is because it allows - people more and more are becoming completely immune to lies and disinfo pertaining to all the stuff that's happening. A lot of people - they're getting so astute that they're immune to that. And the collaboration and the information that's available on the Internet is so incredible that it's basically giving the people the collective power of the New World Order's intelligence for the civilians - for the people who are interested in their inalienable rights, peace and not murdering people, raping kids and stuff like that - and poisoning everyone's water and everything. But - they're using the Internet as a true investigative tool - like a skilled forensic examiner or a homicide investigator. You collate all these pieces of information - and hey, the criminals are getting so exposed.

There's an interesting little point regarding 9/11 about something called the National Military Command Center - I just recently found this out. The National Military Command Center plays a role as a go-between between the Federal Aviation Administration and NORAD for communications links. That comm link was dropped - it was dropped. You know what's interesting? You know who designed the National Military Command Center for the Pentagon? Dr Alexander H. Levice, the same guy that worked on Ptech.

LS: [interrupting] Yes, getting back for just a moment. Yes, exactly. [chuckling] Wow, so many things I could say there - wow - if only I had so much more time. Yeah, exactly. Alexander Levice and he designed the entire system. OMG (Object Management Group) which was basically written with his stamp of approval under the consignment of the Department Of Defense by proxy of a company called EDS (Electronic Data Systems). EDS started out as Ross Perot's company, and was acquired by Dick Cheney, and became a wonderful front company for the government basically to insert itself in every form of information technology. They hold the bid process rights essentially to all the government contracts that are technology-related - so if you're Northrop Grumman or Raytheon, you are going through EDS to get your contract, 90% of the time, and EDS is also giving you personnel, because they're the people to supply personnel from companies like IBM, Sun, and many others. And they are essentially the eternal middle men. They are the management company - they are the company that is kind of like the Know-It-All. They are the overseers. They have been appointed as such, because they have been compartmentalized enough and they have been built specifically to manage said assets directly for the company owners - well, owner originally in the case of Ross Perot; owners in the case of now. Which is why, whenever Ross Perot died [Ed: He isn't dead to the best of my knowledge], and when Ross Perot was becoming senile, they were able to take over and gain control of his corporation, because they realized - this man had built this impressive network of corporate consulting services.

Basically, they had their hands in almost all of the major bluechip IT stocks, and all of the big companies back in the day, and they would offer consulting services. They would get some of the best consultants, bring them in, and that's what they did, and that's what set them up for set position to be in set position so that they could do what they do.

JC: OK, guys, I'm sorry. I hate to do this - I know we have so much more to talk about, but I'm afraid we have reached the end of our time, so if you could just take a minute to summarize your points. I'm afraid we have to leave it here for today.

LS: Absolutely. No, not a problem, and I apologize for being so drawn out. I just want to say that - it's hard for me to summarize a lot of this stuff very quickly - because it's taken me most of my life and several years' worth of experience to amass a lot of the knowledge that I have through experience, so it's hard to condense it very quickly. I thank you all for bearing with me and listening to me..

AI: And in closing, I will just add that I recommend everybody look for a document online and read it. It's a document - it's titled 'Military Transformation: A Strategic Approach'. It is by Arthur K. Cebrowski , Director Office of Force Transformation. He is one of the architects of the fraudulent War on Terror - on of the main people for the New World Order to - he's basically the father of 'network-centric warfare', which is the war against the people using all these computerized systems, which is now future-combat systems. And this video that I mentioned last time regarding Ptech real quick: vimeo.com/5770472^[13] - very educational video. Shows the New World Order admitting their operations. Look how much money is [being spent] running commercials on the smart grid for TV. That is not something that is good - it is for total enslavement. It's another implementation of eugenics. It is fraudulent. Learn about it, expose it. Let them know they're liars. I mean - if you know anyone that works at a power company, let them know that the smart grid is complete BS - and find the documentation that shows how it's going to make things worse. They can make things more insecure and set everything up where it can be knocked offline easier. And they can just exploit that - they can charge you double or triple the amount of money for your electric bill, and there's nothing you can do about it.

That's all I have to say. Thanks for having us on, and keep exposing these criminals, because - they hate the truth, and that's why they're trying to shut it down. Let them know that we're not afraid - we don't care what they try to do to intimate the public. They cannot win, because criminals never prevail in the end. It's that simple.

JC: That's well said. Their weapon is lies, and our weapon is the truth, and our weapon is much stronger than theirs could ever be. So thank you once again, Josh and Mark, for coming on and helping me to help to expose this. Piercing In The Darkness, once again.

And once again, I want to encourage my listeners to begin delving into this subject at the Prisonplanet forum, where you can follow their work as Anti_Illuminati and LordSyndicate. Alright guys, thank you very much for joining me and please keep me updated with your research as it comes along.

LS: Yeah, thank you James, it's been our pleasure. Thank you very much - and everyone out there - keep up the fight, we thank you for listening. Thanks for the pleasure- good night.

Audio Downloads

Corbett Report - Interview #099 - Mark and Josh of Piercing the Darkness

References